Book review video on "You Still Don't Understand"

Bernard Chapin has a great video on Richard Driscolls's book, You Still Don't Understand:Typical Differences between Men and Women.

You can watch it here.

It's about time...

It seems that a men's advocacy group has been started at the University of Chicago:

A group of University of Chicago students think it's time the campus focused more on its men.

A third-year student from Lake Bluff has formed Men in Power, a student organization that promises to help men get ahead professionally. But the group's emergence has been controversial, with some critics charging that its premise is misogynistic.

Others say it's about time men are championed, noting that recent job losses hit men harder and that women earn far more bachelor's and master's degrees than do men.

"It's an enormous disparity now," said Warren Farrell, author of "The Myth of Male Power" and former board member of the New York chapter of the National Organization for Women. He noted, among other things, an imbalance in government and private initiatives that advance the interests of women and girls.

Any group for men or run by men is going to be said to be misogynistic--kind of like anyone who disagrees with Obama is a racist. It's just part of a trend to shut anyone down who disagrees with the politically correct agenda and doesn't willingly submit to the socialist/radical feminist agenda. Luckily, young men like Steve Saltarelli who is president of the group is not listening. The tide is turning.

IT guys and marriage

Psychoanalyst Stuart Schneiderman sent me a link to an article he was interviewed for on IT (mostly) guys and marriage. The title of the piece, "IT People Are From Mars: Why Your Marriages Are From Hell or Headed There" is (I suppose) a take-off on John Gray's book, Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus. Apparently, IT people are from another world when it comes to communicating with their spouses.

Eleven men and one woman were asked about what they wished their spouse knew about their job. This is what the men said:

Most of the 11 other respondents' answers to my question expressed some frustration with their jobs or with their marriages, or both. (The one woman who responded to my question wrote about the guilt-trips her kids lay on her for having to work long hours.) Their responses boiled down to the following five themes:

1. I don't want to discuss the details of my workday when I get home.


2. Don't call me at work unless it's an emergency.


3. If I don't return your phone call, it's not because I'm mad at you/don't love you. It's because I'm busy.


4. IT management is not a 9-to-5 job. It's complicated, demanding and stressful.


5. I'm not a tech support person, and I can't fix all of the family's home technology problems, especially when I'm at work. I spend my time on strategic issues and networking with other C-level executives.

The men in the article are seen as the "bad guys," that is, they are seen as uncommunicative and insensitive to their wives--and blamed for their shortcomings. The summary of the piece makes this clear: "your answers spoke more about your communication mistakes at home than they did about your spouse's shortcomings. Read on for advice on how to fix this before a nasty crash."

Perhaps these IT men are a bit uncommunicative or perhaps they do have stressful jobs. But can you imagine if the same author interviewed women who were raising five kids and having a stressful time of it? Say the husband was calling home for some spousal care on the phone in the middle of three of the kids having a temper tantrum. Do you think anyone would be sympathetic to his plight and blame the wife for her communication mistakes? I rather doubt it.

Grand rounds is up

Grand Rounds is up. Be sure and check out the post on the debate about how to treat ADHD at the Child Psych blog. It has some useful information.

Does having daughters really make fathers more left wing?

That's what a study in the Daily Mail says (via HotAir):

In an unpublished article to be submitted to an economics journal, the researchers wrote: ‘This paper provides evidence that daughters make people more Left-wing, while having sons, by contrast, makes them more Right-wing.’

Professor Oswald said: ‘As men acquire female children, those men gradually shift their political stance and become more sympathetic to the “female” desire for a larger amount for the public good.

Some of the commenters to this article aren't buying it:

What total drivel!

I have two daughters and never could they persuade me to follow the left wing trash of the Labour party.

But then; I'm just to the right of Genghis Khan.

What a load of rubbish!
Who comes up with this nonsense?
Oh yes it's Labour's think tank!
No wonder the country is in la la land.

My mother raised me "left wing", and I came to my senses and abandoned it when I became a wife and mother with a mortgage. And I don't get my political views from nitwits like "brangelina".

Good for them.

Older workers 'going Galt' by retiring early?

It seems that many older workers are retiring early rather than staying on the job (thanks br549):

Reporting from Washington-- Instead of seeing older workers staying on the job longer as the economy has worsened, the Social Security system is reporting a major surge in early retirement claims that could have implications for the financial security of millions of baby boomers.

Since the current federal fiscal year began Oct. 1, claims have been running 25% ahead of last year, compared with the 15% increase that had been projected as the post-World War II generation reaches eligibility for early retirement, according to Stephen C. Goss, chief actuary for the Social Security Administration....

The ramifications of the trend are profound for the new retirees, their families, the government and other social institutions that may be called upon to help support them.

Though the article points out that early retirement has its drawbacks (naturally, the concern is for women--who may have to learn to live on less if hubby gets lower benefits) my guess is that anyone close to early retirement figures it's now or never, given the possibility that Social Security benefits will be cut down or dry up in the near future.

Also, instead of paying income tax from their job, these older workers will now be sucking off the government tit (though to be fair, many put in more money than they will ever get back). It's even better than going Galt, it's becoming a moocher instead of a producer. Now that producers are punished and moochers rewarded, I can see the appeal.