Tag Archives: relationships

You Hope They Serve Beer in Hell?

I asked the students to raise up their free reading books.  I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell the title said.  By some guy named Tucker Max.  Hmmm, interesting, I thought.  Curious metaphor.  If the author does believe in hell, I said, he is tragically misinformed about it.  He probably doesn’t.

Over the past few years I’ve encountered the book frequently because many of my students were reading the book for free reading time.   Every student has told me that it’s a good read, so I left it at that, content, ignorantly so, in the knowledge that they were at least enjoying reading.  I had no clue what was actually in the book, nor did I know who Tucker Max is.

After recently reading The New Dating Game, an article by Charlotte Allen about the hookup culture, and doing a little snooping around,  I am no longer confident in my ignorance.

Turns out, the book is basically about Tucker Max and his, umm, “adventures,” mostly involving the opposite sex and certain bedtime activities.

So given the content of I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell, I was right: Tucker Max doesn’t believe in hell…well, he is still misinformed about hell, though in a different way.  But I digress.

I’ve seen the book around enough that I decided to address it in class.  Time to pick that fight.  Yes, risky. But I’m like that.  Still, I approached this cautiously, by asking some questions after I saw a student reading the book in class:

  • What ideas are advocated in the book, about the good life, happiness, “liberation,” etc?  For those that had trouble with this, I simplified it: fill in the blank–according to Tucker Max, the good life/happiness means _____________.  According to Tucker Max, “liberation/freedom” for a woman means _______________.
  • Are these ideas true and worthy of embracing?
  • For those that saw no point in the discussion:  why is thinking about a book in this way important?  If you don’t pause to think about what you imbibe for entertainment purposes, who is really controlling the puppet strings?
  • Who, really, does this hurt?

“Why go there?” you ask.  Simple: first, its not like I came looking for any of this.  Students brought the book into my class, and lit brought into my class needs to be addressed.  I could just censor the book with no explanation, but the “nothing to see here” line without explanation probably wouldn’t help.

Secondly, the hookup culture is alarmingly common currently.  Peruse the nightlife in any college town or any urban area for that matter, and you’ll find scores of twenty, thirty, and even forty somethings of both genders prowling for a hookup.  There’s even a new genre of literature that frequently pops up on best seller lists: Pick-up-Artist lit.  The male equivalent of chick lit, it actually has a practical application: its goal is to coach men on how to get any chick into bed.  There was even a reality show on VH1 that ran for a few years based off this lit, called, somewhat obviously, “The Pickup Artist.”

It gets better.  I recently read of an incident at Yale where a frat surrounded a sorrority and shouted, “no means yes! Yes means anal!”

I simply ask, “Should our culture be concerned about this?”  Yes, of course.

“But reading a trashy book by Tucker Max and laughing at his adventures is one thing, but boys shouting their mysogyny at the top of their lungs is another.  The two have nothing to do with each other.” you say.

False.  The two are intimately connected by a culture at large that winks at and even encourages the type of behavior in both scenarios.  For one, winking at the Tucker Maxes of the world as having “innocent fun” makes possible the sinister chant of the Yale frat boy.  For another, recall the quote: “Sow a thought and you reap an action; sow an act and you reap a habit; sow a habit and you reap a character; sow a character and you reap a destiny.”  How do you sow your thoughts?  Easy: what you imbibe for entertainment.

Thirdly, why should we be shocked at the Yale boys?  It is exactly the destiny that we as a culture have wrought. With a thousand “small” things like the Tucker Max book, we pave the way.  “We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst…We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful.”  We are a hyper-sexualized culture, and this comes through in countless ways.

Events like the “Yale boys incident” are the culmination of a culture that adopts an attitude about sex that says its merely a bodily function to be enjoyed, no commitment necessary.  Its the culmination of a culture that adopts a ”boys will be boys” attitude regarding hookups and taking advantage of inebriated girls, who are often all too willing themselves.  It is the culmination of a culture that teaches its girls that true “sexual liberation” means giving into one’s worst instincts, and “equality” means the “freedom” to act like a manboy at his absolute lowest.  It is the culmination of a culture that insists right and wrong are merely relative personal choices, and one man’s personal choice to do what he thinks is cool is just as good as the next person’s choice.  It’s the culmination of a culture that thinks the young cannot resist their urges, so we might as well teach them how to be “responsible” with those urges (once the first lesson is taught, the second is a forgotten afterthought, however. Anyone ever try on the novel thought that we should actually expect the young to keep it in their pants until marriage?), and its the culmination of a culture that says that there is no objective purpose to life and there is no greater cause than the self.

Is it any wonder that adolescents flock to sex to escape their boredom?  This is simply the modernist-sexual-revolution rooster coming home to roost.  Forgive the pun.

Some might dismiss this, saying that every generation is wild, and this is merely the old generation putting down the new.  They are only partly right. Every young generation has its daliances, but one big difference here is the degree…this seems to be “youth gone wild” on steroids.

Spending your teens sneaking out at night going steady with your heart throb, or going out on the town swing dancing and having a few drinks underage is one thing….spending not only your teens, but your twenties and thirties having a split personality where you are a professional during the day, but a raging drunk at night who opens her legs for the hottest looking anonymous alpha male or a male who prowls around looking for one of these gals is a horse of a dif’rent color.  Sure, I guess there were some like this back then–we’ve all heard the Fitzgerald-like stories–but the numbers now are of much greater proportion.

You might also balk at me including women in my assessment of blame, but there’s plenty of blame to go around, and some honest soul searching is in order for both genders.

For society at large, for winking at the Tucker Maxes of the world and believing that this is merely a temporary stage with few long-term hangovers.

For the men (dare I call them men?) who have foolishly equated manhood with being a pick up artist.  For the dads who’ve left their sons vulnerable to such a lie because they have either been absent or have passively let the culture teach the boys what manhood is.  For the male friends that laugh at their buddy’s stories of adventures, as if treating a woman like she’s a condom to be discarded when done with is even remotely ok (“what if that was your daughter?” is a question I always feel like asking, and often do.)

For the women who’ve bought into the rather warped view of liberation of Radical Feminism that I mentioned above…yep, for some academics, today’s “liberated woman” is what they’ve been shooting for.  This is simply what you get when you try to remove the stigma of being promiscuous.  If you doubt that’s the message of many on the college campus, just check out Yale’s “Sex Week.”  There’s many a college sponsoring similar activities.  Read something by Naomi Wolf.  She’s got lots of little gems for you.

While there may be a student group or two in the mix advocating for chastity, the overwhelming message is clear, and the aforementioned student group is usually seen as kind of an oddity.  Definitely not a group worthy of praise.

An aside: it’s ironic, you know.  You’d think that they’d advocate for equality by telling men to knock it off, instead of telling women to “go ahead.”  Perhaps that’s just me.

There are plenty of “health centers” on college campuses designed to help students avoid things like STD’s when it comes to their sexual choices, whatever those choices are.  But where are the centers on campuses designed to help the many who want to live chastely, but who feel pressured by a hypersexualized culture to give in?

Back on topic, here. To a society that insists this is a harmless temporary stage: what, I’m supposed to believe that you can spend your 20′s and part of your 30′s sleeping around, then suddenly flip a switch when you’re 35 and become an honorable husband/wife and father/mother?  Such a thought is the height of stupidity.

Purposely delaying marriage to later in life is like cutting off your nose to spite your face.  I can understand when people say that most in their 20′s simply aren’t mature enough, but the common solution to that–”have fun now.  Marriage is a drag.  You can get married later” strikes me as an odd way to bring someone to greater maturity.  Protracted adolescence protracts the problem.

“Consent” is as far as this society is willing to go when it comes to moral instruction.  That is a tragically low bar.

To a culture that has nothing to offer the young in terms of objective meaning, purpose, and a solid metaphysical ground in which to put down roots: this is really the bottom line.  When the self is number one, the empty self is what results.

To the pickup artists: you’re a tool.  When you die, your only legacy will be a list of women you’ve slept with, and a list of boys who you have taught to do the same.  Perhaps a VH1 show.  That’s it.  What an utter worthless and banal life.

Even if the fun lasts past the morning, you have gained an orgasm, but lost the source of your strength.  You have traded a life well lived for a subjective feeling that’s here today, gone tomorrow.  You have no ability to self restrain, and you are sowing habits that erode your ability to sacrifice for a greater good.  Plus, when your own daughter or sister falls for one of these predators, just remember: you had it coming.  You reap what you sow.

To the passive, feminized dads and the absent fathers (whether in body and/or mind/emotion): you matterYou can put a stop to this.  Don’t leave it up to your wife.  She is willing and able, but shouldn’t have to do it without you.  You must bear the majority of the burden and duty to lead your son into manhood and give your daughter the male attention she craves.  If you don’t know what a man is, learn.  It is never too late to grab an older male mentor who has character you respect, sit at his feet and learn.  Engage your family.  Sit them down at the dinner table every night, eat a meal with them, and talk to them.  Monday Night Football can wait.  If you remain passive, they won’t get it from mom…they will get it from Lil’ Wayne, guys like Tucker Max, or the first predatory alpha male to take them under their wings.  The ball is in your hands; you must run to the goal line.

To the ladies: I guess saying “falling for” isn’t the right word, as if it was akin to “tripping,” because many of the women who engage in the hookup scene actively throw themselves at these guys.  Check out the following summary of a girl who recently slept with Tucker Max (she posted the story online):

Next to her story she posted a photograph of her with Max that she had a friend take at the bar. The photo shows a rosy-cheeked strawberry blonde who, although no Scarlett Johansson, is no Ugly Betty either (her C-cup bustline, much in evidence both underneath and spilling over her strapless top, doesn’t hurt). She is also grinning from ear to ear, her smile as wide as a cantaloupe slice. Max, mugging for the camera, has his arm draped proprietarily, if not exactly affectionately, around her shoulder as she leans into his chest. No disapproving peers, either. When Courtney left her apartment to meet Max at the bar, her roommates called after her, “Make sure to bring him back.” She and Max rode off to the inn “with everyone at the bar waving and giving the thumbs up.”

Remember: you teach people how to treat you, and you teach the culture how to treat your future daughters.  Admittedly, most who get caught up in the hookup culture don’t actively start out that way, but they do end up there by a thousand small steps.  Sow a thought, reap a habit…by now you know the rest.  My daughter and your future daughter will have to live in the world you help to create.  Therefore mind your thoughts and actions.

And lest I leave anyone out, to me: I remember some years ago being so desperate that I actually flirted with buying the e-book of one of these pick up artist fools. How stupid!  Those guys’ confidence was paper-thin.  Why did I even think of going for that?

And: this is a sober warning to me to love my own daughter by spending time with her.  That is how kids spell “love.”  T-I-M-E.  That is, afterall, how I reacted to the “New Dating Game” article above: I put the article down, and played with my daughter.  It all reminded me of the Chris Rock line: “fellas, if your daughter grows up to be a stripper….you failed.”

Maiwwage

Wintery Knight tipped me off to the following exerpt from a blog on marriage:

Couples in crisis often reach the point where they decide they are just two poorly matched people. This precedes the decision to leave the relationship and go in search of that “right person.” Unfortunately, the odds of a successful marriage go down for each attempt at a new marriage. Psychiatrist and author of The Secrets of Happily Married Men and The Secrets of Happily Married Women and The Secrets of Happy Families, Scott Haltzman, MD, says in truth, they are correct; we all married the wrong person.

“My basic philosophy is we have to start with the premise when we choose our partner that we aren’t choosing with all the knowledge and information about them,” says Dr. Haltzman. “However, outside of the extreme scenarios of domestic violence, chronic substance abuse, or the inability to remain sexually faithful—which are good arguments for marrying the wrong person on a huge scale, and where it is unhealthy or unsafe to remain married—we need to say, ‘This is the person I chose, and I need to find a way to develop a sense of closeness with this person for who he or she really is and not how I fantasize them to be.’”

That choice to work on the relationship can lead to a more profound, meaningful experience together. Dr. Haltzman offers the following tips to help us reconnect or improve our bond:

◦Respect your mate for his/her positive qualities, even when they have some important negative ones.

◦Be the right person, instead of looking for the right person.

◦Be a loving person, instead of waiting to get love.

◦Be considerate instead of waiting to receive consideration.

To underscore the last couple of points, Dr. Haltzman says many people will put only so much effort into a relationship, then say, “I’ve done enough.” But very few of us will do that with our children. “Instead, we say despite their flaws, we wouldn’t want anyone else; yet, our kids can be much more of a pain in the ass than our spouses.”

Finally, he advises, “Have the attitude that this is the person you are going to spend the rest of your life with, so you must find a way to make it work instead of always looking for the back door.”

Doug Geivett, one of my former professors, comments:

Fourth, we should commit to having a successful marriage, and let go any idealistic notion of being married to just the right person and having a perfect marriage.

Fifth, we should welcome a different conception of the values and rewards of marriage than what is so widely assumed today.

Right on.  He goes on to point out that this does not mean you shouldn’t get married nor does it mean that your marriage to the wrong person can’t succeed or that any person is a good person to marry.

This is a good antidote to the “soulmateism”–the belief that there’s “the one” out there especially made for you and that it is your destiny to meet and wed–that is the spirit of the age today.  IMO, soulmateism is a bunch of bunk.  Dropping that view, as well as dropping the “I’ll ‘settle down’ get married someday later in life after I’ve ‘had my fun’ and made my career” attitude currently en vogue today will make for a generally better life.

Can You Change Someone You Love?

Can you change someone you love?

A friend of mine on Facebook brought up that question recently.  He saw a book at the store that gave a resounding “yes” answer to that question, so he took a picture and posted it on FB in order to ridicule the concept.  His answer was that it is “simply not possible.”

I know my friend’s hesitancy, for many who get into co-dependant relationships tend to think they can change their significant others.  How many times have we shaken our heads at the girl who gets involved with the loser man-boy because she thinks she can change him into husband material?  It is obvious to us that she is making a losing bet, but not so obvious to her (or maybe it is obvious to her but she’s just in major denial because the sex is good.).

There is another side to the question, however, that my friend and the others who commented on his status missed.   His words that changing someone you love is “not possible” reflects an overly individualistic attitude that is harmful if taken to its logical conclusion.

I replied to his status by noting how my wife has changed me for the better.  She loves me, and has spoken much grace, truth, and love into me, and has made me a better man.  Just the other night I sat and reflected with her on how her giving me grace and bearing with my follies has made me more patient.

What if I really believed that “changing someone you love isn’t possible?”  Chances are, I wouldn’t be open to her influence in my life.  I’d just focus on me improving me and I’d be totally oblivious to how her love could change me, and vice  versa.  It would be a shame if my wife bought into the slogan in question; she then wouldn’t be open to me speaking into her life.  What’s more, she wouldn’t try to influence me for the better, thus depriving me of much goodness and beauty.  If one of us believed, it would deprive us both.

There are many other relationships like this; for example, one job a dad has is to mold his sons into men of character and his daughters into women with inner beauty…in other words, he’s supposed to change them.

The point here is that if either person in a love relationship (friends, spouses, brothers and sisters, etc) buys into the slogan, it deprives both of much joy.

Somewhat ironically, “changing loved ones” is one motivating factor of interventions.  When an addict is out of control and won’t stop binging on his addiction, his loved ones often gather together, with a professional counselor, and stage one last attempt at stopping the destruction.  They all agree to stop enabling the addict and draw a line.  If the addict doesn’t agree to stop the behavior and seek professional help, there are often big consequences such as certain family members cutting off contact.   What else is all this if not an attempt to change the person they love?

Changing loved ones is also a concept built into the 12 steps.  I used to be a part of a 12 step group.  One of the practices built into the group was accountability relationships.  From time to time, the members of the group would make phone calls to “check in” with each other.  If the other person was about to break sobriety and engage in their addiction, the job of the other person on the line would be to talk them out of it.  If one person was rationalizing or making excuses, the other was not supposed to just go along with that: s/he was supposed to hold the other accountable.   Both myself and other guys in the group even, at times, arranged for the other group members to administer certain consequences and boundaries if we couldn’t keep straight.  This was all done with the prior agreement of all involved, but suffice it to say, we were all agents of change in the lives of the others in the group.

In sum, I can recognize my friend’s hesitancy.  There comes a point that if the other is resistant, it is best to let dead dogs lie.  However, contrary to what he said, change is certainly possible and, at times, it is necessary to strive for.

For the Single Ladies (and Guys)

Recently, Boundless blogger Suzanne Hadley Gosselin asked a few interesting questions.  I’m gonna pose them here; who knows, could yield some interesting comments!

If you are a single guy, what do you wish the girls around you knew? If you are a single woman, what do you wish you could tell guys?

One request: be honest!  No need to just parrot what you think makes you sound spiritual.

International Wedding Date Line

I found this funny…and somewhat accurate!

On the East Coast where I live now, at least among most of my friends, getting married is something you do after college, after grad school, after your 30th birthday, after your second solo climb of Mount Everest, after you successfully balance your checkbook for 16 months straight, after, after, after. In other words, getting married at 26 is pretty much like getting married as a fetus.

In the Midwest, at least in the rural Illinois town where I grew up, getting married is something that you do before you begin to think of buying property, before your single-person routines make you stubborn and inflexible, before your metabolism slows enough that a white wedding dress would make you look like a rhinoceros. Optimal marriage age: 20 to 23. Getting married at 26 is like filing your tax returns on April 16.

Have you seen this difference in attitudes about marriage age?  What do you think about it?

HT: Boundless

Better the Second Time Around

For some reason, oftentimes, the second watching of a film is more enriching than the first.

Such was the case last night, as I watched Coyote County Loser at its Orange County premier.

This is not the first time I’ve commented on the film.ccl
To tell you the truth, since I’ve watched it before, I really didn’t feel like going.  It had been a long, tiring day at work, I had another long, tiring day at work to look forward to the next day, and I had a wife I wanted to see.  In the last three weeks, I’ve gotten married, moved into a new place (we still have quite a few boxes to unpack), my wife got a new job, and I got a new job (well, 2 new jobs, sorta).   Add in all the other “to dos” that comes along with a new marriage (getting new bank account, changing insurance, etc), and I’m just flat worn out.  I even told the producer that I’d have to leave before the end of the film.  All this wasn’t because the film sucked (it didn’t…more on that in a minute), but just because I had cashed in my chips long before I arrived.

But I ended up staying the whole time.  I even gleefully (yes…gleefully) stayed for the whole Q&A afterwards.

Why?  There were no Michael Baysian-like special effects for me to visually gorge on.  I was not treated to Lord-of-the-Rings-esque cinematography.  What kept me in my seat was the story.  My soul was enriched from the get-go.  The film caused me to pause and examine my life.  When that happens, I’m hooked in.

One  such “examination” was this: I saw a lot of myself in Jack, the love-em-and-leave-em heart throb from LA.  No, I know I’m no Fabio.  Here’s the deal: for much of the film, he was too busy chasing his next big shot to be able to love anyone.  That would require him to actually slow down and downshift few gears, which he had no intention of doing.  That’s a lot like me; I’ve been so busy lately (actually, it’s not just lately–it’s a constant in my life), for instance, I’ve been desiring but neglecting to write a letter to my grandpa.  I thought a while ago, “That’d be nice.  I need to communicate with him more, cherish him in deeper ways.  A letter would really touch him, I think.” But I keep putting it off.  Like Jack, I’m zipping around with a wink too much to slow down enough, and I’ve been like this well before all the recent change.  If I don’t put people before the process, I’m gonna end up neglecting and hurting those I care for most.

There were a few motifs in the film that I missed the first time around.  Actually, they are so obvious and central in the film that I feel kinda embarrassed to say I missed them the first time around.  I caught the main idea of the film: Jack’s view of relationships is totally based on feeling, while Lauren’s view is based around a list of “must haves.”  Jack thinks love is a game; Lauren thinks love is a savy business transaction.  They find out both their views are horribly wrong–a “legacy” couple–married for 48 years–shows them the main ingredient that starts and keeps love alive: commitment.  Over the years, the commitment and sacrifice the couple practices and embodies transforms Fred, the husband, from a shy, awkward farm boy into a confident, joyous romancer.

Perhaps the most notable thing I missed, though, was the car motif.  Lauren, the female lead, compared men to cars, claiming that just as you must have a list of what you need in a car when vehicle shopping, so you must have a list of requirements for a man.  She called this the “non-negotiable checklist.”

That much I caught the first time, but what I missed was the motif.  Cars are all over the place in the film!  Lauren’s truck consistently breaks down, mirroring the men she takes to task; Jack drives a snazzy sports car that runs out of gas in the beginning of the film; Lauren gets her knowledge of car repair from her dad–when she was young, her dad had a prized antique car (shown in the film), and working on it was the only way Lauren could gain time with him; a car salesman sponsors the radio station Lauren works at, and she visits the salesman when her truck dies; heck, the “loser” himself even sells junk car parts at a salvage yard, and he wins a loaded pickup truck when he wins the “date” radio contest.

Pretty much all the cars in the film, though, leave the characters feeling empty.  Lauren’s truck is a source of constant frustration, and the old car her dad prized is the source of bitter memories.  When the loser wins the truck, it just didn’t feel right–yeah, it was a sweet ride, but Lauren’s heart was crushed in the process of him winning it.  It is not a coincidence, I’m sure, that Jack and Lauren finally connect over a horse-back ride, which is the antithesis of a car.

All this points to the vacuity of Lauren’s view of love.  Her comparison between men and cars is ludicrous, condescending, and leaves both parties feeling empty.  Sure, it keeps women from being hurt, but it keeps them lonely too.  As C.S Lewis once said,

To love at all is to be vulnerable. Love anything, and your heart will certainly be wrung and possibly broken. If you want to make sure of keeping it intact, you must give your heart to no one, not even to an animal. Wrap it carefully round with hobbies and little luxuries; avoid all entanglements; lock it up safe in the casket or coffin of your selfishness. But in that casket- safe, dark, motionless, airless–it will change. It will not be broken; it will become unbreakable, impenetrable, irredeemable.

Lauren’s view, by the way, is not just spouted by frosty psychologist radio hosts in indie movies–it’s all over the place in our culture.  Ever hear someone compare their boyfriend or girlfriend to a car when it comes to sex?  “We need to find out if we are sexually compatible before we get married.  You wouldn’t buy a car without test driving it first, would you?”

So…I’m a car that you must test drive before you commit?  If that’s not condescending, I don’t know what is.

Jack’s view, however, isn’t any more correct or noble.  It is just as vacuous.  The emptiness of his view comes through loud and clear through another motif: women themselves.  This one is not as prominent as the cars motif, but it’s there.  Every woman that Jack “loves and leaves” ends up bitter.  His agent, for example, gives him hell for him doing just that.  Only when he truly commits to a woman can she feel truly loved, as is the case when he cares for his cancer-stricken sister.  Commitment is in him; he just has to apply it in the area of romance to truly embrace what love is all about.

The man in the “legacy” couple reminds me of my grandpa.  After 56 years of marriage, my grandma passed away.  They had commitment down pat, and therefore they had love too.  As the name implies, they left quite a legacy because of that.

When Fred, the husband in the couple, broke down after Maggie’s (the wife) death, I saw my grandpa right there.

Which reminds me: I’m gonna go write that letter now.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

I highly recommend Coyote County Loser.  It is showing at Cinema City Theaters in Yorba Linda until Sept 10.  For tickets and show times, go to Coyotecountyloser.com

Quote of the Day

To love at all is to be vulnerable. Love anything, and your heart will certainly be wrung and possibly broken. If you want to make sure of keeping it intact, you must give your heart to no one, not even to an animal. Wrap it carefully round with hobbies and little luxuries; avoid all entanglements; lock it up safe in the casket or coffin of your selfishness. But in that casket- safe, dark, motionless, airless–it will change. It will not be broken; it will become unbreakable, impenetrable, irredeemable.

–C.S Lewis