Does anyone actually know what "erode their masculinity" means? Does the penis actually shrink? Or do they suddenly shudderingly come "to" and exclaim "My God! Are those my dirty pants on the floor? I'm so terribly sorry, I'll just go and stick them in the washing machine!"
"You book the theatre tickets, organise dinner with friends and remind him to have his hair cut this weekend."
Oh my mistake, I thought this was a relationship piece - evidently it's about caring for people in sheltered accommodation.
"But new research shows busybody wives to try to micro-manage their husband’s social lives may be storing up problems."
Hold on - if I buy the theatre tickets and organise the dinner - the response needs to be "thank you so much, I really appreciate you taking that stuff on".
"US scientists found men who do not have enough spare time to spend with their own friends, can feel less attracted to their partner."
Thanks for the detailed and specific information: US scientists. I know them. Jim and Sandra right? How much spare time is "enough"? Am I supposed to ring his boss and cancel his overtime? Who gave me this power? And who the fuck are his "own friends"? Am I not allowed to make eye contact with these people? And sure some people "can" feel less attracted and some "can" feel more attracted and some "can" wonder who the hell wrote this research and whether we should really be referring to them as a "scientist".
"They say wives who have steadily cut the ties with their husband’s old friends in favour of having dinner parties with other couples can erode men’s feelings of masculinity and lead to conflict within the relationship."
Really ladies if you want to "erode" your man's masculinity a simple point-laugh-"Oh my God, it's tiny" will suffice. Less washing up.
"The authors said there is nothing wrong with the wife doing most of the organizing of their social activities – as women tend to be more organized."
Of course there's something wrong with the wife having to do most of the organising. What's wrong is THE WIFE HAS DO MOST OF THE ORGANISING. That's what's commonly known as NOT FAIR. And really? Women just "are" more organised or women just are more likely to have a load of unpaid administrative work dumped on their lap while men watch Match of the Day? Aren't you scientists? Do you want to give us a reference for the biological predisposition of women towards social scheduling work?
"But they said reducing his contact with his friends to the point that all your socialising is done together can be dangerous."
Dangerous like shark attack dangerous? Anyway don't men love a bit of "dangerous" in the bedroom?
"It suggests wives should encourage their husbands to spend time alone with male friends – even the ones they don’t like."
Seriously? I'm now expected to try and talk my husband into going out drinking with blokes he doesn't like. How the hell is that going to help anyone?
"Professor Benjamin Cornwell, of Cornell University added: ‘There is a bit of a gate-keeper aspect that probably troubles some men."
Oh not Jim and Sandra then... Here's his CV - he's written eight papers which have been published in such illustrious journals as Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses and "has appeared live on Chicago Tonight". And men, listen, if you're unhappy about your wife's gate-keeping, why not keep your own gate?
"‘They key issue is whether it reduces his contact with his friends while it increases hers – for example she alters his social schedule to the point that his contact with his friends increasingly occurs in the context of couple’s dinners."
Ewww couple's dinners! Keys in the middle eh? Next thing you know someone comes round to read the meter, there's a terrible misunderstanding, ends up with vol-au-vents everywhere! Seriously couple's dinners are ace if YOU LIKE THE OTHER PEOPLE and shit if YOU DON'T. Thats all there is to it. Couples are people too you know?
"‘A man’s ability to play a round of golf or to have a few drinks with a friend who has only a passing acquaintance to his wife or girlfriend is crucial to preserving some independence in everyday life."
Well a man's ability to pick up a fucking telephone should probably kick in then. And is this actually science? Spending time away from someone preserves your independence from that person? Really? And if you wanted independence, why are you in a relationship where your wife tells you when to get a haircut?
"‘If he has to bring his wife along every time they meet, or his wife starts monopolising that friend, that’s when problems may arise.’"
So it's normal and healthy to not want to introduce your wife to your friends or to hope they don't get along? The words "not even slightly" spring to mind here.
"The researchers analysed data from the National Social Life, Health and Aging Project, a 2005 survey of 3,000 people in Chicago, who were aged 57 to 85."
Data from 6 years ago. And from then until now no-one noticed.
"They found the risk of erectile dysfunction was almost doubled in the group whose wives had the most contact with the couple’s shared friends, even allowing for related health conditions in this age group such as diabetes, heart problems and obesity."
Oh so this "eroding their masculinity" does mean "droopy cock"! Ha ha ha. And - look out "scientists" here's a quick newsflash: so you adjusted for diabetes, heart problems and obesity ... did you adjust for the fact that if you're senile enough that someone else has to remind you to get a haircut, erectile dysfunction is nature's way of telling you not to get it out in the grocery aisle.
"Men in their 50s and 60s were at the highest risk of this, suggesting the older men in the study had different priorities for socialising."
Yeah it's mostly group sex over 80 isn't it?* Maybe what these numbers were suggesting is that you were jumping to ridiculous conclusions based on a relatively small sample size of out of date data about highly subjective questions and a big ol' dose of wishful thinking. Just saying.
"Around 25 per cent of the men surveyed experiences ‘partner betweenness’ – when their partner becomes as close to one of their confidants as they are, in at least one of their relationships with a friend."
If your partner hasn't become really close to at least some of your friends - here's the skinny - you're not actually in a relationship. Or if you are it's going to end any time they take away your broadband.
"Prof Cornwell added: ‘We were surprised at how powerful the effect was – the equivalent of having prostate problems. For these younger men, partner betweenness more than doubled the risk.’"
Really? If I was you I'd be surprised how easy it is to plant a suspiciously poorly researched story into the mainstream press just cos it has the word "erection" in it and a deeply misogynist overtone.
"Co-author Edward Laumann, a professor of sociology at the University of Chicago said: ‘He needs to have someone to talk to about the things that matter to him – whether its football, politics, what car he is going to buy or worries about his health or his job."
But first he needs a haircut, right? Can he not tell his wife these things? She's probably too busy embroidering doilies for the next couple's night.
"‘The important thing is that he can let it all hang out and know that what he says isn’t going to get straight back to his wife.’"
I'll have to say I can back them up on this point - my man hates it when I find out what he thinks about football. It makes his dick fall off.
"Last week research from six African countries revealed women who wear the trousers at home may pay for it in the bedroom."
Oooh new "research"! From new "scientists" right?
"They could find themselves waiting 100 times longer for passion than those who share household decisions – about shopping and the weekly budget – with their husbands, according to a study from Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore."
They "could" yes or they "could not". Also the Daily Fail's editors "could" all be screwed up fuckwits with limp dicks. Just saying - they COULD. Now more info on this report is available online here and again our trustee "scientists" (a different lot this time) are missing one great big point. The report says women who make household decisions reported less sex. Yes, I understand. Maybe, just maybe, that's because those who make household decisions are MORE LIKELY to also make decisions about whether or not to have sex. Less marital rape? How awful. And THINK THINK THINK before you call yourselves scientists. The report covers the following six countries:
Oh I added in some numbers there - did you notice? - those are the percentages of the population with access to contraception in those countries. Can anyone think of a reason why a woman without access to contraception might not want to have sex? Gosh it's just as well these scientists are super-smart eh? Hate to see them miss something really fucking obvious.
So in case you missed it lets just recap: Hey ladies, want more sex with the guy you have to remind to get a haircut? Why not arrange for him to out drinking with some people he hates? That should help.
Seriously. Mainstream paper. I guess they chose to cover this "story" instead of updating their coverage of the Wall Street protests or the dismantling of the NHS? Ho hum.
*If you found my blog by googling "group sex for the over 80s" I wish you all the luck and love in the world but you will find no helpful links here. I assume the relevant website is called "Greydar"! [bows, accepts rapturous applause, leaves]