Herman Gooden and I enjoy a scant separation of a degree or so.

My eldest's best friend is Mr. Gooden's son's girl friend. Of all my kid's friends, my eldest's best friend is my favorite.

Some time ago, my daughter's best friend told me that her new b/f's dad had all kinds of books, like I do, and reads a lot, and thought we'd both probably get along famously.

Perhaps, I thought.

Later, I found out it was Mr. Gooden she was speaking of.

Actually, I like Mr. Gooden's work when he's talking about our town, London. He does have quite a feel for it, and a knowledge that outstrips mine.

But everyonce and a while he lets slip a view that perplexes me. This one isn't his worst, but I find it mind boggling how such a well read person can deliver consistantly ill concieved views.

In keeping with the London Free Press and Church Bulletin editorial policy, perhaps Mr. Gooden, who makes his living as a writer-- no small accomplishment in my books-- felt pressure to adopt the fundy line that 3 or so percent of the London population is, but the London Free Press and Church Bulletin tries to portray as the majority.

So, often we find gays and feminists responsible for the societal ills Mr. Gooden identifies. Not quite as virulently and insanely as his mentor, (I'm guessing) Rory, "the mummy" Leishman, but still.....

Oh, Mr. Gooden and I did meet once, fleetingly. It was over books at the semi-anual City of London book fair. I complimented him on his son, who I've met. I got a rather unceremonious brush off. Maybe, like me, he was intent on combing the books for that rare gem. Maybe he's tired of people recognizing him from his London Free Press and Church Bulletin photo, (not easy, actually) and button holeing him on this or that column. Maybe he saw my copy of Gore Vidal's "Smithsonian", and figured I was one of those gay guys that was the scourge of his earth.

I dunno. Opinionated as I am, I had no intention of boring him to death. Just, you know, dad's who know of each other's kids talk.

He hurt my feelings.

I mean, what are we to do with this but laugh?

quote:

---

Both books examine the grotesque distortions and tragic repressions of the feminine principle that can occur when women put their deepest yearnings and instincts on ice for a decade or two.

There's a flip side to this dilemma when mothers, who've taken time off to raise children, often have to grope their way back onto the career track. On balance, however, I believe that to be the less hauntingly painful situation of the two.

---

Nyee hee hee hee hee. And there we have it, grils. Your choice of "hauntingly painful" destinies in this life -- just the two, mind.

A life-lesson about the kind of melodrama this guy trades in: you can always have it if you want it ... but who wants it?

[ April 20, 2002: Message edited by: skdadl ]

quote:

---

While Stewart controls her own spectacularly successful publishing and broadcasting empire and oversees the development of a product line of house-ware gizmos, she's such a steely and repellent control-freak in her personal life her ex-husband and only child have fled her presence. She may control Martha Stewart Living Inc., but nobody can stand living with her -- no matter how shatteringly beautiful her house may be.

---

I like Martha Stewart. I think Martha and I could get along splendidly. I see here stuff for sale, and actually if you look around, it's very good value for the money. All of her kitchen pieces are made first with an eye to utility, and then to style. I'd rather pay a few extra dollars for a "Martha Stewart" kitchen utensil that will look okay, and last a lifetime, than a few less dollars for a utensil that doesn't do what it's supposed to, or breaks after a couple of years.

......and yes, I've mentally pictured Martha in a black corset, knee high lace up stilleto leather boots, holding a whip......

But then, who hasn't?

Wasn't it Sheila Copps who said we're just gonna have to wait for some of them to die off?

quote:

---

Later this month when the feminist holiday, Take Your Daughter to Work Day rolls around, career women who have children might restore some balance to this situation by taking their daughters to a maternity ward instead. Just as a reminder of another apparently overlooked option.

---

Yeah, because we don't have enough teenage girls romanticizing pregnancy and having babies, dreaming of them as a quick route to independence and a source of unconditional love and acceptance.

[ April 21, 2002: Message edited by: Michelle ]

The article was a cautionary one, claiming that the recent trend of high-profile women having successful pregnancies well into their 40s was a fluke, and that most women have trouble conceiving at that age and that women had better tailor their ambitions if they want a family. Fuck the career, get knocked up early and often was the message I got.

I'd be horrified if I didn't know that this particular backlash is pretty good evidence that women are successfully making inroads into the previously male-dominated realms of power.

As if there's a shortage of younger men to "breed" with...

And anyway, it sucks that the choice not to have children is more acceptable for men than it is for women. Nobody warns a man married to a woman his age that he's going to be bitter and unfulfilled if they don't have kids -- it's focused on the female partner.

And unfortunately, older men often ARE considered a "catch" depending on what their economic situations are like. When I was 15, my parents divorced, and my father was in his 40's. He joined a singles organization (well, a single parents' organization, but really it was more of a dating club - oh come on, Dad, you know it was ) where women from their 20's to their 60's threw themselves at him. He was single, had a daughter that was, for most intents and purposes, not an energy drain since I was older, he had a good job that paid well, and of course, he was a very nice person (which most people are). But you can bet that if he was a nice, 40 year old unemployed person that he wouldn't have had half the success with the younger women that he did.

It just strikes me as kind of nuts.

Personally, as a younger woman who did want to have kids, I wouldn't date an older man whether he had kids or not -- I figured if he didn't have any by 45 yrs old, he didn't want to, or if he did, he was probably done with all that kid stuff. And I think that that's usually the case.

And I also agree that the woman gets all the flak for everything domestic within a marriage. If the house is messy, it's the woman who gets the hairy eyeball. If they don't have kids, the woman gets the third degree. I'm just saying that I think the reason this is so is because people have this idea that women are unfulfilled unless they catch a man and have kids with him, and because there's this idea that it's much more socially acceptable for an older man to date much younger women.

I know lots of women who take great pride in saying, "Oh, I like older men. Guys my age are so immature." I used to say it too. But then I realized, after being in long-term relationships with men who were 9 years and 11 years older than me, was that girls like me who were looking for "mature" men are often looking for men to give them direction, or to be the dominant one. And often older men who go for younger women are looking for exactly the same thing - a younger woman is much easier to manipulate or dominate just because she hasn't been around as long as he has, and doesn't have the experience he does in relationships and life in general.

Although I do know a couple with a 27 year age difference, and they're great together. But also vastly the exception.

I guess the part that burns my butt is the concept that women are not capable of fulfillment without having children... I don't think that's true. Women can be as fulfilled as men can when they decide not to have kids. The attitude is kind of a holdover from the good ol'days when a woman's place was "in the home". I really think we should be past all that by now.

I'm not sure that men who are middle aged and childless feel it's okay. I know a couple of them at work, and conversations about such things are clipped-- a good signal from a guy that it is in fact something that bothers him. I can't say if it bothers them more, or as much as it bothers women in that circumstance, but I don't think it isn't significant.

quote:

---

And unfortunately, older men often ARE considered a "catch" depending on what their economic situations are like. When I was 15, my parents divorced, and my father was in his 40's.

---

That's my situation. In the early going after my separation, I had several conversations with women that got to the asking for date, or phone number stage, and felt I was lead to that part in the conversation.

I never took any women up on that. And even if I wasn't seeing someone, I doubt I would even now, a year and a half after my separation, accept invitations for dating.

And, I am honestly worried that even with this very special person, things that happened in the past in my previous relationship with my ex, is going to colour...taint is the better word...my current one.

There's just too much going on. I avoided organizations that put divorced/separated people together under one roof just for that reason. I'm not a vain man, I don't think, but for the wrong kind of woman I might be viewed as a "catch".

I'm in no shape to be taking on an emotional or financial dependant. I have enough trouble not being one myself at the moment.

There are, I know, young women who, for whatever reason are attracted to men in my age bracket. My ex's eldest niece is one such as that, and my neighbor's daughter (now in her late 30's herself) has never dated or married a guy who didn't have grey hair and a weather beaten face, at least from what I've seen.

It must be flattering to a guy my age, but honestly, I can't see needing that. I have three young ladies who need all my mentoring energy now, adding another who really should be getting it first hand from life is a vanity and a sapping of energy that should be devoted to my kids.

I'm fortunate, lucky indeed. There was a time I was adrift and I don't really know where I would have ended up. Probably alone, I should think, either forever or a very long time.

But someone came along that is about my age, smarter than me, independant, responsible, infinately interesting and imaginative, and attractive. She's given me a glimpse of what is truely important, what is valuable, and a hint at how great life can be with someone who stands beside you.

With all due respect to younger ladies, I'm glad I never got involved with one. For their sakes as much as mine. And, I have to say that depending on how you interpret the word "catch", I'm glad I've steered clear of women who would consider me to be one. Again, for their sakes as much as mine.

Was it Bittersweet in another thread that introduced me to the Jungian concept of meaningful coincidences?

I finally found an old copy of Robert Heinlien's "Time Enough for Love" on the weekend.

quote:

---

I'm not sure that men who are middle aged and childless feel it's okay. I know a couple of them at work, and conversations about such things are clipped-- a good signal from a guy that it is in fact something that bothers him. I can't say if it bothers them more, or as much as it bothers women in that circumstance, but I don't think it isn't significant.

---

I didn't mean to imply not having children was any more or less significant for men than women. It's just that it's expected to be, for some reason. Does anyone question the decisions of a childless male coworker? Talk about how he was too focused on his career, and how much he's going to regret that?

You know, I think the decision to be a parent is a really individual thing, and has little to do with gender. I know men who've always wanted children (my spouse, for example), and women who never have, or only sort of wanted to and decided they didn't want them enough. And I think people of both genders are equally capable of being fulfilled (or unfulfilled) without children in their lives.

It just irks me that women are required to want children...

In Mr. Gooden's world, I think he has to believe that it is, and feels a need to perpetuate the societal pressures to conform in this regard.

I would think a healthier society would allow people to do what they believe is best for them, without social stigmas attatched to it.

I'm still astonished at how someone as well read as Mr. Gooden claims to be can at times have such a limited vision.

[ April 23, 2002: Message edited by: Tommy_Paine ]

quote:

---

I would think a healthier society would allow people to do what they believe is best for them, without social stigmas attatched to it.

---

quote:

---

Bingo!

---