“Dr Janet Hall” bills herself as an INFOTAINER. Bedwetting, sex therapy, smoking cessation, public speaking, business confidence, computer coaching, tantrums, eating disorders, social commentary, she does it all.
You can read her newsletters here. Check out “October 2007 – Why would Shane Warne Risk Losing His Family?“. Emphases are mine.
Multiple affairs! Public Exposure! Why would Shane Warne take the risk that he would lose his family? “Men in power are run by their testosterone levels. It’s what pushed them to claw their way to the top and it is associated with a high need for sexual domination and release. The need for domination makes it easy for these powerful men to be driven to have sex with multiple partners. This is made easy by the available women (I call them predators) who offer themselves for sex. These women love to seduce and be dominated by a strong man. The sexual act somehow creates a halo effect for the woman where she feels she has absorbed some part of his power. She feels smugly superior to all the other women who would want to be intimate with this man because “she has been chosen”.“¨
“¨The man may be able to get away with his little adventures, so long as he does it in private. When his sexual exploits are made public however, it makes a fool out of his wife and she may have to really consider her future in the relationship. It’s a challenge to her love for him but most of all a challenge to her level of self-love. She must ask herself if she can still respect him after what he’s done. If she takes him back, she may be giving him the message that it will be OK if he did it again in the future. How can she respect herself if she compromises her values? I guess it all depends on what she does value – if it’s her self-respect she may leave… if it’s the fame and fortune she’ll stay.
The men in this portrait? Dominated by hormones. Victims of predatory women. They can’t help it. Poor fellows. It’s all very evpsych, isn’t it?
But the women? Predatory. Seductive. Competitive. Obsessed with a female hierarchy based purely on male sexual partner status. Completely man-centric in every way. Foolish for having a cheater husband. And if a woman makes the difficult decision to stay with a cheater and try to work through their problems? She’s automatically a gold-digger with no self-respect. Possibly because she weighs the same as a duck.
And all this because one arsebalaclava broke his vows, cheated, and lied. But it’s not really his fault, oh no, poor testosterone-addled beast. His foolish wife and his scheming mistresses drove him to it.
Gad, we’re just soaking in it.
Categories: gender & feminism, relationships
What happened to the coffee warning on that one?
That was an extremely well placed line, as spluttering vented enough pressure so that my head didn’t explode in Dr Janet Hall’s direction.
Oops. I thought I was more likely to get BOMPed than spluttered, but you never can gauge these things.
Dumb as Warne is, and having no way of knowing (any of us)Mrs Warne’s motives, we still come back to the women who whom he gallivants.
They know he’s married, they know he’s a chump, they know that he has the attention span of a spermatazooa and yet, and yet… they stilldo it.
Women are their own worst enemies.
Excuse my ignorance, but what is an “arsebalaclava” Judging from context, it doesn’t sound complimentary.
Splutter from me too and a monty python flashback to go with it.
Amphibious, I hereby bestow upon you the MissingThePoint award for the month.
Have you heard the epithet “asshat”? Imaging someone wearing their backside for a hat. “Arsebalaclava” just takes it all one step further.
“Have you heard the epithet “asshat”? Imaging someone wearing their backside for a hat. “Arsebalaclava” just takes it all one step further.”
Thanks. I couldn’t figure out how the Charge of the Light Brigade figured into the insult – had to resort to Teh Google to find out balaclava was a hat.