Rotundus.com

The first feminist thing about our wedding was the nature of the proposal. I do not believe that men have to propose to women, but neither did I feel comfortable proposing myself. If he had said yes, how would I ever have believed he wanted it as much as me, rather than saying yes to keep me quiet? After many conversations about whether we would get married, and, in fact, after we had provisionally booked our venue, I insisted on a proposal. He duly went away and planned my nonsurprise, popping the question on a hill overlooking our beloved London, followed by a fancy dinner.

Source: My Feminist Wedding in the Times Online

Frankly this sounds like some sort of complementarian view of marriage of marriage wrapped up in a feminist label. How does requiring a man to propose to a woman (in this case the author of the article) represent a feminist viewpoint? (I'd argue that what she demands or doesn't demand of others in society is basically irrelevant here).

On the other side of the spectrum, note the following observation from page 190 of Jean Twenge's book Generation Me:

I wasn't entirely certain what the pattern would look like - after all, weren't the 1980s a more conservative decade than the 1970s? In 1991, Susan Faludi had argued that there was a Backlash against feminism during the decade of Reagan and the Moral Majority. So would attitudes toward women slide backwards during the 1980s?

Nope. Attitudes about women's roles continued to become more egalitarian throughout the 1980s and into the early 1990s. Although Faludi was right that the media in the 1980s was not profeminist, young people seemed to ignore this. The change over the three decades was also substantial. The average 1990s college woman had more feminist attitudes than 87% of her counterparts in the early 1970s, and the average 1990s college man had more feminist attitudes than 82% of early 1970s college men. What was once the province of hippies and radicals had become mainstream. At least the attitudes had, even if the labels hadn't. As Paula Kamen found in her 1991 book Feminist Fatale, young women believed in feminist values but rejected the label "feminist" (prompting the frequent statement, "I'm not a feminist, but ...," after which the young woman makes a strong statement about equality between sexes).

The feminists are complementarians in disguise, and the complementarians are feminist. I'm confused.

I'm pretty sure that I've mentioned caffeinated soap before, but now there's another new variety of soap to try:

(Available from PerpetualKid.com)

I came across this idea once before, but it was brought back to my mind recently by a presenter at TED:

So, several years ago, I decided to look into the brain and study this madness. Our first study of people who were happily in love has been widely publicized, so I'm only going to say a very little about it. We found activity in a tiny little factory near the base of the brain called the ventral tegmental area. We found activity in some cells called the ApEn cells. Cells that actually make dopamine, a natural stimulant, and spray it to many brain regions. Indeed this part, the VTA, is part of the brain's reward system. It's way below your cognitive thinking process. It's below your emotions. It's part of what we call the reptilian core of the brain, associated with wanting, with motivation, with focus and with craving. In fact, the same brain region where we found activity becomes active also when you feel the rush of cocaine.

... I've also come to believe that romantic love is an addiction: a perfectly wonderful addiction when it's going well, and a perfectly horrible addiction when it's going poorly. And indeed, it has all of the characteristics of addiction. You focus on the person, you obsessively think about them, you crave them, you distort reality, your willingness to take enormous risks to win this person. And it's got the three main characteristics of addiction. Tolerance --you need to see them more, and more, and more -- withdrawals, and last, relapse. I've got a girlfriend who's just getting over a terrible love affair, it's been about eight months, she's beginning to feel better. And she was driving along in her car the other day, and suddenly she heard a song on the car radio that reminded her of this man. And she -- not only did the instant craving come back, but she had to pull over from the side of the road and cry. So, one thing I would like the medical community, and the legal community, and even the college community, to see if they can understand, that indeed, romantic love is one of the most addictive substances on Earth.

Source: Helen Fisher studies the brain in love (@ TED.com)

Last week I was chatting with a Muslim guy about the system of arranged marriage which still dominates within his country of origin. Certain specifics I might disagree on, but overall I think I can agree - and that modern brain science demonstrates - that the system of dating as currently practiced in most of the Western World is likely to produce poor marriages.

When coming from other sources, addiction or intoxication often leaves you legally incapable of entering into a contract and/or permitted to invalidate the contract once no longer intoxicated. (Sounds suspiciously like Western divorce law.)

Yet the reasons given in reports as to why a father's access should be restricted or denied often seem arbitrary, to put it mildly. One applicant had cancer which, said the report, 'could be upsetting' for his child. A man might be said to 'lack sensitivity' or be 'over-enthusiastic' or even 'father-centred' - for which tendency one man was denied all contact with his child. In one case, it was noted disapprovingly that a father had told his son he preferred Scrabble to Monopoly and thought hyacinths smelled sweeter than roses. This was seen as 'taking the lead in contact' - a form of emotional abuse, according to the reporting officer. One father wore a black shirt which 'could be intimidating'. Another stood accused of 'losing his temper with customs officials in a French airport in the 1990s' and was therefore said to have an 'unfortunate disposition'. One report could find no reason why a child should not see more of his father but went on to conclude: 'Nonetheless, the mother must be concerned about something.' The father's contact was limited to two hours every six weeks.

- Excerpted from "It's never father's day" in The Observer (emphasis mine)

... or for a little more:

I know of reports that recommended cessation of contact because the fathers in question "didn't act right" during a game of snakes and ladders, because their children fell asleep in the car on the way home from a contact visit, because they made lumpy mashed potatoes for tea, or because they were likely to upset their children on account of suffering from cancer.

- Excerpted from "A secret world of suffering children" in The Independent