Another medical report I am not buying. News reports now say "research" shows if a man is not faithful, it may be due to his genes. His DNA dictates brain chemicals which influence response and bonding with a woman to keep him faithful. Come on. Not many wives are saying, "Oh, you poor dear. You couldn't help it, could you."
Think of the outcome if we believe this report:
Think of the outcome if we believe this report:
Men better prepare for medical screening before girls will seriously date them or marry them. Pharmaceutical companies will want to research how to chemically treat this deficit. (Note to self. Buy stock in that company.) When I was growing up we believed they put "salt peter" in the food at Catholic boys' schools. I asked my son if those rumors are still around and he gave me a funny look. I don't think he had heard of it but I knew of some boys in the 60's who wouldn't eat the mashed potatoes.
There would be new business opportunities for screening kits women can buy to surreptitiously check out the guy. Maybe you could use a strand of hair like mothers' do to screen for drug use?
Picking at daisy petals and saying, "He loves me, he loves me not" would have less significance.
Meeting the parents would have new meaning. Take a look at their behaviour. If the prospective dad is charming, watch out.
We'd need support and counseling groups for young men who want to marry but have philandering fathers. Can Dr. Phil handle the onslaught?
How come we are only screening the men? Aren't there unfaithful women out there too?
I'll answer Matt Lauer's question, "If he strays, can he blame it on his genes?" Matt, he may try to blame it on some thing but it's still called sin. It is not what is in his genes, it is what isn't in his jeans. In the meantime, I bet not many moms are going to name newborn sons Levi.
No comments:
Post a Comment