I posted this link on Twitter, but I figured it should go on the blog as well. The article discusses the health and financial benefits of monogamy in relationships and even in sports.

Source: WSJ

My dad died of cancer on May 20, 2011 one week before his 57th birthday.  Tomorrow will be the worst Father’s Day ever because it will be my first one without him.  There are numerous things that I could remember him for — his corny jokes, his level-headedness, his undying devotion to God — but the thing I will most remember him most for will be his role as a husband and father.

Many people complain about their father being there, but I never had that problem.  My dad died before my parents’ 28th wedding anniversary and he was 100% faithful.  He did not have a “porn stash” and had tunnel vision for my mom.  Even in his sickest days, he would still flirt with my mom and they would go on dates.

Now that I am engaged, I can only hope that some of what made my parents’ marriage so special will work for me.  I made my fair share of mistakes in the past, but I eventually figured things out… and largely with the help of my dad.  He instilled in me things that I should be looking for in a wife and helped me identify signs that the person you are with is “the one.”  My dad knew what he was talking about — he met and married my mom in 10 months.

I could go on and on talking about my dad, but there is no way I could ever express everything in one post.  The point I am trying to convey is that when I say that it is possible for a man be 100% faithful, I had living proof.  And I hope to be an inspiration (or counterpoint) to anyone who thinks that it is not possible.

R.I.P. Dad

We see powerful men falling all the time, but Professor Sara Lipton reminds us that historically powerful men were men that could resist temptation and men who got caught up with women were deemed weak.  This paragraph provides a great synopsis for this insightful article:

This conception of masculinity is relatively new, however. For most of Western history, the primary and most valued characteristic of manhood was self-mastery. Late antique and Roman writers, like Plutarch, lauded men for their ability to resist sexual temptation and control bodily desire through force of will and intellect. Too much sex was thought to weaken men

I firmly believe in the concept of self-mastery or the concept that we can control of our actions.  No one can make a man cheat.  While it is true that no one is perfect, we should all aspire for perfection.  Unfortunately, it seems as though today’s “leaders” want to control the budget without even being about to control their own lives.

Source: NYTimes

Op-Ed piece I was trying to get published last week:

They say “Boys will be boys.” This statement presupposes that ways of man cannot change. Of course, men can change if we are forced to. Ever watched “Mad Men” and thought “Wow, things have really changed since the 1960s!” Well, you can thank the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and nearly 50 years of accompanying jurisprudence for that.

The problem is, however, government only has limited jurisdiction to control the acts of individuals. There are laws against making sexist comments in the workplace, but there is no law against cat calling on the street.

And there is certainly no law prohibiting married men from sexting via SMS or on social-networking sites (unless it’s a government issued phone like former-Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick). In fact, the law is moving in the opposite direction–states are decriminalizing adultery (which is the proper course of action).

Public opinion does not seem to regulate behavior either. There are countless elected officials who have been reelected notwithstanding a sex scandal. Or if he leaves public office, he can always get a show on CNN like Eliot Spitzer.

So that’s the dilemma society is faced with: we have to find a way to change men in areas where they cannot be forced to change.

Because there is essentially nothing to force men into fidelity, men must independently do our part to fight temptation, especially in the digital age. It was relatively difficult to receive a message from your mistress by “snail mail.” Now we can send and receive private messages from an assortment of devices in real-time.

The biggest externality of instantaneous communication is the lack of forethought that goes into a text or tweet. We process information very quickly and have all sent messages without thinking (After all, Twitter is basically an external hard drive for our brains).

Accordingly, it does not surprise me when smart people do extremely stupid things. Fidelity is not about intellect, it is about discipline. Today’s committed man is one who takes steps to remain committed. It is not possible to be a passive monogamist anymore. Men, even those who are not on social-networking sites, are faced with online perils every day.

I fear that we are just seeing the beginning of Adultery 2.0 because the ways of man are not keeping up with the changes in society. As the world becomes more ripe for trouble, men have to resort to more “drastic” measures to prevent oneself from getting in trouble. I placed drastic in quotations because the methods for fighting temptation are not that drastic at all.

Out of all the ways to stay out of trouble, I believe staying away from private communication is the easiest and most effective. That’s part of the reason why I like Twitter so much; if you send a message to someone, ALL of your followers will see it. Although you can send a private direct messages (like Rep. Weiner tried to do), you are still limited to 140 characters.

I am a firm believer that every message that could be written on someone’s Facebook wall or as a public tweet should be. There’s no reason why a guy in a relationship should send “so how was your day?” as a private message or a DM. Further, context is significantly more important in written language. The reader’s impression (i.e. that of the significant other) and not the senders intention is what matters. Moreover, while men may not necessarily make smart decisions in a public forum, we are more likely to consider the consequences of our actions than when acting clandestinely.

Many people challenge my public-communication solution by invoking “privacy” concerns, but to that I say 1) our notions of “privacy” largely began with the cell phone (remember the days of worrying about mom picking up the phone while you were sweet talking?) and 2) the vast majority of “private” conversations we have are not private at all. If something were truly private, you probably would not send it in a text message because you would not know if the intended recipient received it. I also cannot think of any seriously private message that I have received on a social-networking site.

My approach may be “drastic,” but I cannot think of another practical way to change the ways of man. While I realize that I cannot stop all men from cheating, I can at least help people think before sending lewd Twitpics to all their followers

People often think that power and status causes powerful men to cheat.  However, according to Ronald Levant, a psychologist at the University of Akron, “Power is a facilitator [and] it provides opportunities to men with certain appetites but seldom changes personality in any fundamental way.”

This research is in line with common sense.  As stated by the article:

arrogance generally precedes power, not the other way around. For all their professed suspicion of autocrats, people tend to cede authority precisely to those individuals who want it most. Studies of group behavior suggest that the overconfident, outspoken individuals are the ones who tend to become the leaders. And the experience of being at the top only reinforces the person’s sense of control and self-centeredness

We are shocked when powerful men cheat, but we often forget that men who desire to be at the top are often driven by selfish desires.  This, of course, is not to say that all people at the top are self-centered.  Certainly, there are morally upright people who become politicians and CEOs and retain their sense of ethics.  The key is identifying these individuals before we bestow ge responsibilities upon them.  This is difficult, as everyone put their best foot forward when they seek a promotion.

Related articles

• A Sexist Pig Myth (nytimes.com)

I read a recent article on Salon entitled “Why I’m Still Hot for My Wife.”. Naturally, I jumped at the opportunity of reading an article written by a man on the value of monogamy. The author crucified Arnold Schwarzenegger and Dominique Strauss-Kahn and talked about his 36-year marriage and how he has enjoyed making love to his wife over 3000 times. Good so far. Then he says that he had two “tepid” flings, but told his wife about it? I had no idea where that came from.

There’s nothing wrong with cheating and realizing the error of your mistake. There is something wrong with a person who’s cheated in their own relationship and yet attempts to be the voice of monogamy.

I’ve never cheated on my fiancé. And I never will. If I ever cheated on her, the Manogamy Movement would be shut down immediately because it would be a lie. I believe that it’s possible for men to be in a lifelong, 100% committed relationship. Not 99%. Not a relationship in which you cheat and promptly disclose that information.

I realize that I’m taking a bold stance. I would like to have more people blog on the site, but it’s hard because I can’t be faithful for someone else. Moreover, people act differently behind closed doors.

That’s my challenge, bringing together men who will advocate for monogamy AND who are 100% committed. I know we’re out there and I’m going to make sure we get a voice (and stop letting the guy from Salon purport to represent us).

We all know the facts surrounding the Arnold Schwarzenegger and Dominique Strauss-Kahn stories.  This post is not going to revisit their indiscretions at all.  However, Slate had a really good article (well, they always have good articles, but I’ve digressed) in which they challenge the notion that the French have more lax attitudes toward sex than in America.  According to the article, there seems to have been a role reversal and Americans may have more lax attitudes.

I’m not here to debate the merits of this argument.  I did, however, find the discussion on America’s “Infidelity Plus” standard intriguing.  The author suggests that Americans only care about infidelity when it also involves 1) deceit or 2) a crime.  Indeed, this seems to be the case and many public figures are starting to figure out that their best bet is to cheat and immediately come forward.

Deceit and criminal activity certainly make infidelity worse, but why should we treat infidelity, by itself, as no big deal?  Infidelity starts with the mind and manifests itself through action.  While the fact that a man comes clean before he gets caught is admirable, people should still question why he cheated in the first place.  Our Infidelity Plus standard is even more ridiculous when you consider the fact that coming clean before getting caught is seen more as a way to preserve one’s career than a genuine showing of guilt.

Source: Slate

I’ve always thought that engagement was just a step before marriage. I figured that once you get engaged, it’s a foregone conclusion that you’ll get married. After all, calling off weddings only happens in the movies, right?

Wrong. I’ve learned since I’ve become engaged that people call off weddings all the time and it’s perfectly okay. In the past 5 days, I’ve had three people inform me that their spouse or their father was engaged at the time they MET the person they ended up marrying.

In fact, that’s the point of an engagement. Marriage is a lifelong commitment; if you realize you’re not ready for it, you need to jump ship before it’s too late. Most likely, there were signs that you should’ve jumped ship before you got engaged, but engagement certainly forces couples to think whether they want to spend the rest of their life with that person. If someone, especially someone you just met, can make you question whether you’re making the rift decision, you clearly need to call it off.

I’m willing to argue that more people should call off engagements. If people focus on their feelings instead of that dream wedding or what people will think if they call it off, I know that there will be fewer divorces. Many people know they have serious doubts going into marriage and still go through with it. Of course, these problems never go away and will inevitably rear it’s head when things are really permanent.

I hate to say it, but dating and engagement is about being selfish. You need to marry the person that makes that gives you tunnel vision. Don’t stay in the relationship because you know the other person will be hurt. Just hope they find someone else who will treat them even better. Ultimately you’re doing them a favor because you are not the one for them.

There’s a saying that good girls like bad guys. That simply is not true. Good girls, like all women, like a confident guy. However, bad guys usually are more confident than good guys.

When I say bad guys, I mean guys that are going to treat a woman badly. They’ll sleep around on her and take her for granted.

Women date these guys because they actual speak up. You’d be surprised at how many beautiful woman walk down the street and receive stares, but no offers for a date.

Bad guys speak up because they don’t fear rejection. You ever notice how you have more confidence when you’re meeting women on Spring Break or dealing with a woman you don’t even like? Your mentality is, “I don’t really care, I’m just here to have fun and have nothing to lose.” Bad guys treat every woman this way because they just see the next lay.

Good guys have their precious pride to lose. Good guys plan to take said woman on dates and treat her like a queen. No guy wants to approach a woman and get rejected. Accordingly, good guys don’t approach women out of fear of this possibility. This leads to a bunch of missed opportunities and more opportunities for bad guys.

This is not the way women want it. They want to find their prince charming; they don’t want a guy that only sees her as a sexual object. They want commitment, not someone they can’t trust. They want a good guy.

The first step to dating your dream woman is getting over the fear of rejection by understanding the second step: approaching her like a gentleman. Women sense the type of guy they’re dealing with based upon his approach. If a guy approaches her like a lady, she’ll turn him down like one, and if a guy approaches her like she’s a streetwalker, she’s going to be abrasive and hurt your feelings (as she should be). I approached many women in my dating days and NOT ONCE did a woman turn me down with an attitude. It’s all about speaking up and being a gentleman when you do so.

Bravo has struck gold with their Real Housewives franchise. There’s a show in Atlanta, DC, New Jersey, New York, Orange County, Beverly Hills, and most recently Miami. The premise behind the shows is pretty much the same: camras follow rich women that hate each other. If that weren’t enough, VH1 has gotten in on the action and has Basketball Wives, Football Wives, and now Mob Wives. Go figure.

Chris Harnick hits the nail on the head when he describes the Bravo Shows as “soapy reality show[s] featuring absurd real women.” The folks over at the Good Men Project listed Reality TV as one of the 10 Worst Things to Happen to Women This Millenium.

I think it’s fair to say that all men hate that their women love these shows. Here’s why.

• Men don’t like golddiggers. We don’t mind spending money on women, but what we really want is a woman that we know will be there for richer or for poorer. By watching these shows, women seem to think that that’s how they should be living and if they are not living that lavish lifestyle, they are settling or missing out. And it’s somewhat of a slap in the face to the man that is doing his best to provide for his family. We’re doing the best we can.
• All the women do is argue. Bravo and VH1 don’t just cast anyone for these shows. They cast people that are crazy because they want viewers. EVERYONE acts crazy when a camera is in front of them, so you know what happens when you put a camera in front of a crazy woman.
• (At least in the case of Real Housewives of Atlanta and Basketball Wives) These women aren’t even married. The title of these shows is quite the misnomer.
• By watching a person live their life (that’s it), you’re making a person that’s already well off even richer. At least professional athletes have a talent. What do these women do other than eat at fancy restaurants, shop, throw charity events, and try to start a clothing line? Why is that worth watching?
• The shows are mind-numbing. I understand that people want to unwind after a stressful day at work, but what you watch shouldn’t be too removed from who you are. After watching a show with a bunch of idiots, esp. Jersey Shore, it’s only a matter of time before people question your competency.
• Many women don’t realize that these women don’t actually live as depicted in the shows. This is closely-related to my first point, but many women don’t realize that these shows aren’t reality at all. Jezebel has reported a couple of times on how these women are actually broke. They even created a convenient bankruptcy index of women on these Real Housewives shows.

The takeaway is that instead of worrying about how other people live, viewers of these “Wives” shows should make the best of the life they have. I promise you, you’ll be much happier once you realize how awesome your life is.

Related articles

• The ‘Wives’ Are Taking Over! Which Spouses Should TV Document Next? (tvsquad.com)