Having seen some episodes of “Sex in the City” I wouldn’t be particularly interested in reading a book by one of the writers of the series.

However a study can ask a woman about her relationships with other men that she knows, and if she has no permanent relationship with a male at present then she may report that men won’t “commit” to a relationship with her. Include the men in the study and they might say that they simply don’t like her, which gives the matter a fuller perspective. However many of these studies normally leave out men and so the distorted results.

There is little time for “getting to know” someone, particularly for a male. For a male, forming a relationship with a female has now become very high risk, and if it was a financial investment then no worthwhile financial advisor would recommend it. Some countries still retain a system of alimony, but there is also palimony as well. If there is a marriage and a divorce then the husband will loose most assets. If there are children involved then there will be child support payments which is almost universally paid by the father, although he may not be able to see the children that often, or have any say in how the child support money will be spent.

For a male, the risks are now too great to spend time “getting to know” a woman they do not like at first. Those are the new rules.

Bad news girls! Just because a guy asks you out, rings you up or chases you everywhere doesn't necessarily mean he likes you as a person either. He might just think you're easy!

Timithy, you're the last of the true Romantics.

Yes I agree Cranky.

I probably am a romantic, and also a realist in these "changing times".

It is iromic that the article mentions Germaine Greer as being an expert in beauty. She has been travelling countries for years collecting pictures and drawings of near naked young boys and has now included them into a book for other like minded people.

You are of course right, Timithy.

But this book is a real worry especially in light of comments made (including this article). It implies that women really don’t know these very simple common sense things. Although I haven’t read the book (and don’t plan to of course), I assume the advice is written from a male perspective that I can relate to (i.e. agree).

If so, then one wanders how decisions about a marriage partner are made. If we assume it is a joint decision at least (i.e. the woman didn’t jump for the fist guy that “was into her”, and vice versa), then the fact that at least 70% of marriages are dissolved by women (less then 30%, by men), does NOT make any sense. After all this advice, how is it that they get it sooo wrong, sooo often!

Is it precisely because men don’t read such advice, that they remain more committed to their family, or is it that because they don’t, they somehow become less desirable over time? “Official” statistics don’t help – we are led to believe it is because of unequal housework, violence, and other such “excuses” that, from all our personal experience, media exposure, all anecdotal evidence published in qualitative studies, just doesn’t add up.

If marriage and divorce decisions are made on the basis of advice received from these types of books, girly magazines, Sex & The City and Oprah, then perhaps some serious reassessment is required. It is clearly not working in the best interests of families and children. These decisions carry serous social implications and huge consequences for the children and their fathers. The criteria must be wrong, and following someone else’s criteria is no excuse!

What justification can we give to divorced fathers for not allowing them time with their own children? “They’re just not that into you”? What romance do people expect from men who know their children can be told “he’s just not that into you”?