Yesterday I watched Dr Phil on TV try to analyse why a beautiful young girl wanted revenge on her cheating lover.
The 18 year old girl was gorgeous and naive. Her lover was a 36 year old bachelor. She had found out that he was having sex with three other women during the same time he was dating her. His defense was that he had made no formal engagement proposal while dating her. As for dating younger women - it was because "older women carried too much baggage." He had no qualms about having multiple sexual relations simultaneously - and cited the reality series "The Bachelor" who did the same thing in front of million of viewers, before choosing the partner he would marry.
Cuts to the audience during the interview showed a lot of women listening to the conversation. Most of them looked inwardly confused. Their smiles at Dr Phil's humor over the situation were strained.
Dr Phil was in the bachelor's corner. His only reservation was that he felt the guy should have been more forthcoming about his other liaisons while dating the girl. He gave the girl a hard time about wanting revenge and told her that she should drop the guy and her feelings of rejection and move on.
The irony of the show (completely missed by the good doctor) was that he was analysing the behavior of a man, complaining that older women were too messed up to date, while at the same time being the sexual predator who callously preyed on the feelings of impressionable young women and in the process was directly responsible for gradually turning them into the baggage-laden garbage that he would not date when they were older.
The show reinforced my view that American sexual morality is skating on a very thin edge. The unhappy faces of the women in the audience reminded me of the fact that the women's lib movement has a price to pay in their fight for sexual freedom. There are times when I wonder if the price is too high. The ever-climbing divorce rate and broken homes seem to support my view.
A century ago, if that naive young girl had been my daughter or my sister, it would have been within my rights to label the man as a cad and a scoundrel and shoot him in a duel. I have three beautiful young daughters of my own. Maybe I am old-fashioned, but I am not so sure if my feelings about men who prey on young women for their private enjoyment have changed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
As a woman, my first response to this would be "Yes!" At last a man that stands for old fashioned chivarly!
But I wonder if laying part of the burden of increased sexual immorality at the door of the womans lib movement will resonate negatively with pro-women thinking women. Obviously the increases of divorce, abortion, single mothers, and other things aren't happening coincidentally after the womans lib movement. I do not agree with any of these, but at the same time women fought hard for these rights. Must we give them up? At the same time I wish a man in my family had the right to challenge a male offender for my honor. But that would be having my cake and eating it too, wouldn't it? I cannot be however sexual I want and then tell my brother to shoot a man that has offended me.
Is the old fashioned way the way to go? In the idea that sex shouldn't be bantered around the way it is, yeah, I agree with that all the way. But if you're talking petticoats and bonnets, you might have some resistance. ;)
Otherwise I like the way you addressed this.
Post a Comment