Get PJ Media on your Apple

Helen Smith

Helen Smith is a psychologist specializing in forensic issues in Knoxville, Tennessee, and blogs at Dr. Helen.

“Why would you ever choose to be with someone who is not excited to be with you?”

Interesting article over at MarkManson.net:

Let me ask again: Why would you ever be excited to be with someone who is not excited to be with you? If they’re not happy with you now, what makes you think they’ll be happy to be with you later? Why do you make an effort to convince someone to date you when they make no effort to convince you?

What does that say about you? That you believe you need to convince people to be with you?

The article is over a year old but it seems like decent advice.

Posted at 1:00 pm on October 23rd, 2014 by Helen Smith

Why Would Any Man Vote Democrat?

I read an interesting article by Gordon E. Finley, Ph.D., & Dianna Thompson entitled “Why Would any Man Vote Democrat?”

The most presciently under-appreciated and intentionally ignored book in gender politics was published by David Paul Kuhn in 2007 and titled “The Neglected Voter: White Men and the Democratic Dilemma.” The message is in the title. White men have fled the Democratic Party in droves, for good reason – and why shouldn’t they continue to flee in 2014,— while keeping an eye on 2016?

For those not afraid of being “bullied” by the Democratic left, there are a half dozen long-ignored but critically important problems facing the nation’s males that should bring all voting-age men to the polls in 2014 – perhaps men’s last chance for hope and change before the ice age possibly returns in 2016. Consider six interlocking sets of issues.

First, ask what have the last two Democratic administrations done for boys, men and fathers? Because of “The Woman’s Vote” and his powerful feminist base, Democratic President Obama has given us a Cabinet-level White House Council on Women and Girls. Despite extensive and repeated calls for a gender equivalent White House Council on Men and Boys, Democratic President Obama has refused even to consider the multitude of problems facing males in today’s economy and society.

The authors go on to name other reasons that men should not vote Democrat including family law reform, health, education, and the affirmative consent movement. They make some good points.

For the average man in the U.S., do you think it makes sense to vote for Democrats?

Related: PJ Lifestyle Daily Question today, “Who Are the Racists in America?,” and “Are These 6 Habits Holding Men Back? From What?

Posted at 1:01 pm on October 21st, 2014 by Helen Smith

6 Habits that are Holding Men Back?

I stumbled on an article over at the site returnofkings.com and had to read what 6 habits were holding men back (via vivalamanosphere). The author of this particular post is an “engineer and personal trainer known for his bestselling books on men’s fitness and self improvement.” Okay, so what does this guy think is holding men back?

1. Watching Porn
2. Eating Shitty Food
3. Playing Video Games
4. Watching TV Shows
5. Browsing The Internet
6. Living With Your Parents

I am not sure how I feel about this list. All of us, men and women engage in some of these habits. If these habits are making a man’s life worse, then maybe it is holding him back but maybe some of these habits are making his life better for one reason or another. Maybe watching porn is calming for some men or entertaining. Maybe a guy is living with his parents to save for a house and have a better future. Maybe, some guys are surfing Facebook to connect with old friends or visiting Reddit to find like-minded souls who understand men’s rights. Maybe a guy is playing video games to escape a society that thinks little of men who play video games. So what?

We can all make a list of things (habits or otherwise) that might be holding men back. Here’s a few:

1) Shitty laws that rob men of their due process

2) A relationship with a Borderline girlfriend or wife

3) Listening to negative comments from men or women about men

What are some more things that are holding men back?

Posted at 12:53 pm on October 19th, 2014 by Helen Smith

“It is impossible to overstate the growing weirdness of the college sex scene.”

Heather Mac Donald has an article at the Weekly Standard on campus sexual assault:

Sexual liberation is having a nervous breakdown on college campuses. Conservatives should be cheering on its collapse; instead they sometimes sound as if they want to administer the victim smelling salts.

It is impossible to overstate the growing weirdness of the college sex scene. Campus feminists are reimporting selective portions of a traditional sexual code that they have long scorned, in the name of ending what they preposterously call an epidemic of campus rape. They are once again making males the guardians of female safety and are portraying females as fainting, helpless victims of the untrammeled male libido. They are demanding that college administrators write highly technical rules for sex and aggressively enforce them, 50 years after the proponents of sexual liberation insisted that college adults stop policing student sexual behavior. While the campus feminists are not yet calling for an assistant dean to be present at their drunken couplings, they have created the next best thing: the opportunity to replay every grope and caress before a tribunal of voyeuristic administrators.

The ultimate result of the feminists’ crusade may be the same as if they were explicitly calling for a return to sexual modesty: a sharp decrease in casual, drunken sex. There is no downside to this development.

As I read over the article, I thought about an episode of the Fresh Prince that I was watching last night. Will Smith was at college working in the bookstore and hitting on every female student that he saw. At one point, he blocked the door to a classroom so a good-looking woman could not get in as he tried to get her to go out with him. He didn’t take no for an answer and he was relentless even once they entered the classroom until the woman’s huge boyfriend picked him up, chair and all and moved him to the back of the room.

Nowadays, the girl could easily turn Smith into the college administration for “discipline.” If he had sex with her, he could be charged with assault or worse. Of course, it’s Will Smith and he’s cute and women will give him a pass. But what about the less cute, successful guy? What will these “Victorian” laws do to him?

Posted at 7:04 am on October 18th, 2014 by Helen Smith

Tips on Life from Adam Smith and What’s Wrong with Being Hated?

I am reading Russ Robert’s new book How Adam Smith Can Change Your Life: An Unexpected Guide to Human Nature and Happiness and it is quite informative. Roberts is an economist at the Hoover Institution at Stanford and he delved into Smith’s less famous book to gain insight into life and human nature and shares it with readers in simple, straightforward style:

Adam Smith may have become the patron saint of capitalism after he penned his most famous work, The Wealth of Nations. But few people know that when it came to the behavior of individuals—the way we perceive ourselves, the way we treat others, and the decisions we make in pursuit of happiness—the Scottish philosopher had just as much to say. He developed his ideas on human nature in an epic, sprawling work titled The Theory of Moral Sentiments.

Most economists have never read it, and for most of his life, Russ Roberts was no exception. But when he finally picked up the book by the founder of his field, he realized he’d stumbled upon what might be the greatest self-help book that almost no one has read.

In How Adam Smith Can Change Your Life, Roberts examines Smith’s forgotten masterpiece, and finds a treasure trove of timeless, practical wisdom. Smith’s insights into human nature are just as relevant today as they were three hundred years ago. What does it take to be truly happy? Should we pursue fame and fortune or the respect of our friends and family? How can we make the world a better place? Smith’s unexpected answers, framed within the rich context of current events, literature, history, and pop culture, are at once profound, counterintuitive, and highly entertaining.

By reinvigorating Smith’s neglected classic, Roberts provides us with an invaluable look at human behavior through the lens of one of history’s greatest minds.

I was most interested in the sections on being “loved and being lovely.” Smith says “Man naturally desires, not only to be loved, but to be lovely.” The author interprets this quote as “Smith means that we want people to like us, respect us, and care about us and take us seriously. We want them to want our presence, to enjoy our company.”

Smith also says that we dread being hated and hateful. Perhaps this explains why people are so afraid when it comes to politics. If you have the wrong political bent these days, you are seen as hateful and hated. Most people don’t seem to be able to tolerate being hated. Being hated is no fun, but pretending to go along with the PC crowd that is ruining our country has to be worse. Smith believes that true happiness comes when we earn the admiration of others honestly “by being respectable, honorable, blameless, generous, and kind.”

Yet how can you be those things in a society that does not value these traits? Our society rewards extroversion, hypocrisy, political correctness at all costs, and phony fads. How can one be genuine, authentic, and truly kind in today’s world? To do so is often to be hated, something Smith says that we dread. Is being hated that awful? Maybe we need people in this society who are strong enough to be hated in order to make significant positive changes in politics and society.

Posted at 6:03 am on October 17th, 2014 by Helen Smith

Men on Strike?

Marriage rates hit a new low:

New data shows more young people are waiting to marry – and there’s no shortage of opinions on why that’s happening.

According to the latest available census data, the percentage of U.S. adults who have never been married has hit a new, all-time high.

In 1960, about one in ten adults over the age of 25 fell into that category.

By 2012, the number had jumped to one in five.

Of course, the article linked above mentions the economy, social taboos on being single lifted and the federal government penalizing marriage and subsidizing singles but no mention of Men on Strike.

Posted at 11:58 am on October 14th, 2014 by Helen Smith

Be Ashamed of Kooky Radicals, Not Vegetarians

I read with interest and understanding the article by PJM’s Zombie entitled “I am Ashamed to be a Vegetarian”:

I’m a vegetarian. I haven’t eaten meat in 20 years.

Up until this morning I was OK with my dietary choice.

But then I saw this video just uploaded by “Direct Action Everywhere,” a radical vegetarian activist gang, and now I am ashamed. Ashamed to be associated with them. Ashamed that everyone I meet must think I’m some sort of anti-meat revolutionary. Ashamed that mean-spirited lunatics have hijacked my personal food preference and turned it into rallyng cry for passive-aggressive bullying….

The difference between me and Direct Action Everywhere — which actually encapsulates the difference between my brand of “conservatarianism” and all types of progressivism — is that when I don’t eat meat, I don’t eat meat; but when a progressive doesn’t eat meat, she insists that nobody else eat meat either.

I don’t care what you do. But a progressive wants to boss you around.

It’s all very cutesy and pathetic when they employ juvenile attempts at emotional manipulation to get their way — but it quickly becomes brutal coercive totalitarianism when people like this get into positions of power.

To protest their protest, I may eat some chicken today. Just a nibble. To prove I’m not like the vegefascists.

I used to be a vegetarian too. From the age of 12 until 24, I ate no fish, chicken or meat. What was I thinking? Apparently, I wasn’t. Today, my diet consists mainly of meat and protein and I feel much better. Like Zombie, I never thought it was up to me to tell others what to eat, that was a personal decision. It seems like vegetarianism is now a code word for angry leftist and that is a shame. These totalitarians are filled with anger and have found a politically correct outlet to wield power over others.

That said, there are some aspects of the diet that are healthy and if people want to stop eating meat or eat less, why not? But now that it is filled with political connotations, it is easy to see why Zombie is ready to eat chicken in protest of the kooks in the vegetarian world. However, the shame should be targeted at totalitarians who force their views on others, not run-of-the mill types who simply want to try out vegetarianism for reasons other than politics. It is too bad that a simple diet change is now a symbol of kooky radicalism.

Are any readers here vegetarian? If so, do you have reasons other than politics for your decision?

Posted at 6:33 am on October 14th, 2014 by Helen Smith

Feminist Hysteria: Infantilizing or Empowering? You decide.

Ashe Schow has an an interesting article at the Washington Examiner: “Feminist hysteria is causing the infantilization of women:”

When did female empowerment become female infantilization?

Women once were encouraged to be strong and independent, to brush aside insensitive words and actions and to emerge stronger. But now, politicians, pundits, even celebrities are feeding an outrage machine by telling women they should be offended by anything and everything….

This shift toward telling women they need help at every stage of their lives (remember the Obama campaign’s “Life of Julia”?) might raise funds for feminist causes or gain votes for politicians, but it’s not empowering. It’s infantilizing.

People often tell me that feminist dogma often backfires and makes women look ineffective. But looking ineffective is not a problem for many women. They see it as an asset and it is a form of power. Denying personal responsibility for themselves may be infantilizing to the majority of women in this country in a moral sense (yes, people should take responsibility for themselves) but in the current political climate, it is empowering. Society helps women when they plead for help and seem/look helpless. Even white knights are rushing to help women in need for whatever reason, whether just or not. Society rarely helps those who help themselves these days.

Women and their political sycophants keep men in their place by yoking them with one rule and law after the next and women wield this power to hurt men in marriage, divorce and relationships. The political class gains power by serving up this revenge and being rewarded with votes from both the hysterical feminists and other women who believe they are getting the short shaft and the media perpetuates the game. The only way to break this vicious circle is to make it costly to women who want assets and power over men and the political class who throw men under the bus in order to get votes. The white knights are another problem, one that makes it all the more difficult as women, white knights and the politicians together are a strong support group for feminist hysteria.

Many men have gone on strike in response but the withdrawal of male affection may not be a high enough cost for women as the government has now stepped in as surrogate husband.

What do you think would have to take place for women and the political class to change the way that they treat men in this country and in turn to create laws and a political climate welcoming to both men and women?

Posted at 12:25 pm on October 9th, 2014 by Helen Smith

“I feel angry and betrayed by the Education Department….”

So says the father of a 10 -year-old boy who was seduced by a 47-year-old teacher:

A primary school teacher who wanted to have sex with her 10-year-old student, and had his name tattooed on her chest, has walked free from court.

County Court judge Mark Taft said he was at a complete loss to understand why mother of eight Diane Brimble, 47, had engaged in “such utterly inappropriate conduct which must dismay every parent”.

“You breached the trust reposed in you by [the boy's] parents who properly expected that a classroom teacher would care for their son in a professional manner,” Judge Taft said on Thursday when sentencing Brimble on a two-year community correction order and 200 hours of unpaid community work….

“She tried to manipulate [the boy] to think that she loved him and that his parents did not. This hurts me to the very core,” the father said.

“I feel angry that if it was a 46-year-old man and a 10-year-old girl that it would most likely be a different outcome … I feel angry and betrayed by the Education Department who did nothing to remove this evil woman from other children,” he said.

“To think a woman would get a tattoo with my child’s name as a sign of her undying love for [the boy] baffles me. I would like Brimble to endure the pain of removing name forever.”

Whatever women do sexually to boys or men is viewed as a mental health problem to treat. Note the difference when it comes to men coming on to young girls.

Posted at 6:16 am on October 9th, 2014 by Helen Smith

Are Cell Phones the New Cigarettes?

I thought about this question as I read this CNBC article about people cutting back on food, healthcare and other items in order to afford their cellphones:

Nearly half of Americans have cut back on spending, including for travel, food and health care, in order to afford their technology.

The CNBC All-America Economic Survey found that 49 percent of the 805 respondents economize to afford technology. The nationwide survey, with margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percent, found the top way to save for technology, chosen by about a third, is to cut back on traditional entertainment such as movies and restaurants. But 20 percent report cutting back on clothing, 11 percent purchase less food and 10 percent have reduced spending on health care….

When it comes to which technology is the most important, Americans clearly choose the cellphone. Asked which bills they definitely would pay if they ran into hard times, 39 percent said they would make sure to get a check in the mail for their cellphones, compared with 28 percent for Internet services and 20 percent for pay television, such as satellite or cable. But just 46 percent felt totally committed to paying their credit card bills, just five points above the response for paying for cellphone bills.

By contrast, 92 percent say the definitely would pay their mortgage or rent bill and 90 percent would make sure to pay the utility bills. Seniors were the most committed to paying the cable bill.

It used to be that people with less money were always talking about how broke they were but always seemed to have plenty of cash when it came time to buy cigarettes or booze for that matter. Now, people have money for the iPhone 6 Plus and less for food and health care. With so many people giving up smoking, the addiction has turned to technology. And face it, the government and tax payers might spot you on food and health care but that new iPhone? Probably not as likely, though still somewhat of a possibility.

Posted at 12:02 pm on October 7th, 2014 by Helen Smith