That ad was parodied by Monty Python: [link]

Huh. I've never seen that. I love the picture of the LAPP-GOCHMASTER!

He also says that every man goes through a "heroic" effort every day to not cheat on his wife

Which is -- I don't even need to say this -- insulting as hell to men. It reduces them to nothing more than a brain stem and a 6-inch (if they're lucky) piece of equipment.

And/or rapists.

SRSLY? Dude has a low opinion of his own nasty self, is what I think.

He's arguing in favor of marital rape. Why would you assume these hypothetical "other women" have any greater say in the matter than the hypothetical wives?

I wouldn't go quite that far. He seems to regard sex as his just due for being the awesome Lord of the Manor he imagines himself to be, and it doesn't sound like he's above wheedling and whining until he gets his way. But I think it does a disservice to women who are actually physically forced into the act by their husbands to equate their situation to ones who make a decision to have sex with asshats like the writer in order to shut them up.

Personally, I think the hypothetical woman involved with him should tell him the heroic effort is a nice thought, but no longer required, and let him go grace some other unlucky woman's bedroom with his majestic presence.

But I think it does a disservice to women who are actually physically forced into the act by their husbands to equate their situation to ones who make a decision to have sex with asshats like the writer in order to shut them up.

If you're subjected to constant whining/wheedling/begging/demanding, and you cannot get him to leave you alone, it's DUBIOUS consent -- at best -- if you have sex with him just to shut him up.

Physical force is not the only means by which men rape women.

Wouldn't that totally depend on when you went to sleep?

I think cortisol is one of those light-triggered hormones, so the amount of sleep doesn't matter. But then, the time isn't actually the issue either.

Oh. And now I'm looking at the link in that article, and the "peak at 7 AM" is based on a study of six people. From 1976. (I don't think the actual study was claiming this fact should be extrapolated to all of humanity.) And the other two links are to articles from 2006 and last March. So, wow, Wired. Way to be cutting-edge.

Also, he seems to think that there's some sort of epidemic of women constantly refusing to have sex with their husbands. Like, not just once in a while, but that, in most marriages, it happens pretty regularly that the husband wants to have sex and the wife says no. Now, I've never been married, but it doesn't seem likely to me that this is the norm of married life.

Also, the reason he cites pretty frequently for why a woman might not want to have sex is that she's tired from taking care of the kids. It seems like a better solution to this problem would be for the husband to take over some of the childcare stuff, like bathtime and tucking into bed, thus leaving the wife some time to rest, and thus not be too tired for sex. His solution is that the wife should have sex even though she's tired.

I can't agree that trying to influence someone's choice, even in annoying ways, is the same as removing their ability to choose.

God, he wrote a Part 2.! Seriously, feministing and pandagon link. For myself wouldn't say that is rape, necessarily, but closer than I want to um, come to it. Yucch. And like I said,there's more.

I can't agree that trying to influence someone's choice, even in annoying ways, is the same as removing their ability to choose.

Me neither. I have been known to importune and push a bit to get my way and if J gives in, I don't see it as taking away his choice. If not for some determined endless annoying on my part, he never would have seen Dr. Who or listened to Crowded House. On my side, I only eat salads because he nags me incessantly feels deeply about it.

I can't agree that trying to influence someone's choice, even in annoying ways, is the same as removing their ability to choose.

I said *dubious* consent. I didn't call it rape. I didn't call it removing someone's ability to choose. Let's get that very clear.

There are a lot of gray areas when it comes to sex and power. When you say "yes" not because you want to be intimate with someone else, but because "no" is disregarded, I, personally, consider that dubious consent.

A "no" can be disregarded in ways other than physical violence. Sometimes your only choice is to give him what he wants so he'll leave you alone.

And a choice that some women might be comfortable making -- okay, I'll have sex with him, then I can get some sleep -- might make other women deeply uncomfortable.

My opinion. Everyone is entitled to theirs, and I respect that other people think it's fine to nag and cajole and wheedle a partner into sex. I don't. My. Opinion.