Jezebel, the women-focused website with a penchant for feminism and cute animals, recently declared the beginning of a new era with the eye-catching headline: “New Trend: Men Wanting Babies, Women Wanting Freedom”. The article, and a similar one in New York Magazine, proclaims an end to supposedly long-standing paradigm in which maternally driven women have been forcing men into reluctant fatherhood. Men, apparently, are now the ones pushing for children.
With 26 seconds left on the clock, the Seattle Seahawks were one yard from a touchdown that could have made them the Super Bowl champions for the second year in a row. But when Malcolm Butler intercepted Russell Wilson’s pass at the goal line, near-certain victory turned into certain defeat; Seahawks fans were left feeling crushed and, at that moment, each and every Patriots fan felt like a champion.
“I really love Valentine’s Day!” said no unattached person, ever. And why shouldn’t the holiday be depressing for singles, when everyone else is basking in the glory that is romantic love. While this feeling is understandable, it’s not exactly rational; being in love is no more wonderful, and probably quite a bit less so, on Valentine’s Day than it is on any other day of the year.
Amid complaints that American Apparel management has perpetuated a highly sexualized work environment, the clothing retailer has moved to prohibit romantic relationships between personnel. That move should satisfy concerned shareholders, who have recently witnessed the ousting of CEO Dov Charney for alleged sexual misconduct, but it might also limit the firm’s access to the young, attractive workers that are such a big part of the American Apparel brand.
On Sunday night, as confetti rains down on the University of Phoenix Stadium, there will be millions of elated sports fans declaring “We Won!” Challenge theory predicts that the fans of whichever team wins will be looking for something more than high fives after the game.
Here is a question you might never want to ask the person you love (but that maybe you should): If we were no longer together, do you think you would be happier? My guess is that you think you already know the answer to this question. But if new economic research is anything to go by, you probably don’t, and not knowing could put your relationship at risk.
Last week, Quebec Health Minister Gaétan Barrette tabled a bill that, if passed, will prohibit women over the age of 42 from having access to in vitro fertilization (IVF). While the purpose of the bill, on the surface at least, is to lessen financial strain on the health care system, this particular section of the bill will achieve a different outcome; it will reduce the number of births to Quebec women who rely on the use of donated eggs to conceive.
As a Canadian, I would like to take this opportunity to say, I am sorry. Last week one of our own chose to frame the punishment he recieved from his employers for his personal conduct as nothing more than discrimination against those with non-traditional sexual preferences. According this man, his accusers are women with whom he sought consensual, if perhaps unconventional, relationships who later sought punish him with their allegations. In a lengthy online missive, he argued that his particular sexual preferences are a human right, and as such he should be protected from professional discipline based on his sexual behavior.
Almost one half of all Americans between the ages of 25 and 34 have never been married, while the majority of those say that they hope to marry one day (61% with absolute certainty). This suggests that there are millions of men and women in this age group who are working towards the goal of finding that one true love.
If you are wondering this week what, exactly, is the purpose of Valentine’s Day then I have the answer for you. The purpose of Valentine’s Day is to assure your romantic partner that all the time and energy that he or she is investing into your relationship is not being wasted, and to give them enough confidence to continue investing in your relationship into the future.
The Bachelor Canada is holding a casting call in my hometown this week, inviting singles to take one “Last chance for romance!” Men who are not tapped to be the next bachelor, or women who are not one of the 25 lucky ladies, need not despair; the format of the show creates an environment in which finding lasting love is extremely unlikely.
A former colleague once quipped about the guilt he experienced as we approached the end of the term; many grandparents, he feared, were about to have their lives shortened by grandchildren not yet prepared to write their final exams. Academics are naturally skeptical, perhaps a bit unfairly when it comes to what is known as “dead grandmother syndrome” – the observation that there is a spike in the death of grandmothers the week before final exams.
I will be the first to admit that “Why do mothers care more about their children than fathers?” is not a very pretty question. But, before you answer with an angry “They don’t!”, note that it has been consistently shown that money given to mothers is far more likely to be spent in a way that benefits their children than is money given to fathers.
When we choose to become parents we know that we will have to sacrifice sleep, that we will have to give up our independence, and that we will have to put the needs of others before our own; we know that there are some costs to having children that cannot be measured in dollars. But, when the calculating costs of having children should we also include the cost of losing the love of our spouse?
I’m single…and totally bored with articles complaining about the questions singles are asked by concerned friends and family (see for example, “I’m Single… and Totally Bored With These 5 Questions”). For several decades, the supposedly offending questions have not changed: Why aren’t you married? Are you being too picky? Are you gay? How will you take care of yourself when you are old and grey?
In a piece published at Salon this morning, Anna March argues giving men the option to deny child support will improve the economic conditions under which women are raising children. That claim might seem counter-intuitive, but the argument is entirely consistent with economic theory. The problem is, the way that people behave “in theory” is often quite different from the way they behave when faced with real life choices.
Would you be happy to have an openly lesbian, gay, or bisexual manager at work? Do you think someone who is homosexual can change their sexual orientation if they choose to do so? Do you believe it should be illegal to discriminate in hiring based on someone’s sexual orientation?
You know that moment in a relationship when you realize that it probably isn’t going to last? I had such a moment many years ago when the man I was dating revealed something about his personal situation that I knew would eventually be the death of us. He told me that despite having owned his own home for fourteen years he had opted to never pay down a single cent of his mortgage.
This has been a week of questions about rape. Dr. Phil started it all off by asking his followers their opinion on having sex with drunk girls. This encouraged many to question what (or, if) he could have possibly been thinking when he insinuated that the acceptability of having sex with drunk teenaged women was subject to debate. That response led Tracy Clark-Flory at Salon to ask a whole series of questions; important questions about how we think about rape, many of which have no clear answers.
“If basic needs are not satisfied, human beings cannot function”, according to economist Nick Drydakis in a working paper that tests his hypothesis that workers who have sex more frequently are better workers and, as a result, are rewarded with higher wages.