Sunday, December 23, 2012

Obama seeks scaled-down 'fiscal cliff' agreement

President Barack Obama pauses as he speaks to reporters about the fiscal cliff in the Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House in Washington, Friday, Dec. 21, 2012. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

President Barack Obama pauses as he speaks to reporters about the fiscal cliff in the Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House in Washington, Friday, Dec. 21, 2012. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio, speaks to reporters about the fiscal cliff negotiations at the Capitol in Washington, Friday, Dec. 21, 2012. Hopes for avoiding the "fiscal cliff" that threatens the U.S. economy fell Friday after fighting among congressional Republicans cast doubt on whether any deal reached with President Barack Obama could win approval ahead of automatic tax increases and deep spending cuts kick in Jan. 1. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

(AP) ? President Barack Obama has scaled back his ambitions for a sweeping budget bargain with Republicans. Instead, he's calling for a limited measure sufficient to prevent the government from careening off the "fiscal cliff" in January by extending tax cuts for most taxpayers and forestalling a painful set of agency budget cuts.

In a White House appearance Friday, Obama also called on Congress to extend jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed that would otherwise be cut off for 2 million people at the end of the year.

Obama's announcement was a recognition that chances for a larger agreement before year's end have probably collapsed. It also suggested that any chance for a smaller deal may rest in the Senate, particularly after the collapse of a plan by House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, to permit tax rates to rise on million-dollar-plus incomes.

"In the next few days, I've asked leaders of Congress to work toward a package that prevents a tax hike on middle-class Americans, protects unemployment insurance for 2 million Americans, and lays the groundwork for further work on both growth and deficit reduction," Obama said. "That's an achievable goal. That can get done in 10 days."

Maybe, maybe not. The latest plan faces uncertainty at best in the sharply divided Senate. GOP leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who wields great power even in the minority, called Friday for Senate action on a House bill from the summer extending the full menu of Bush-era tax cuts. He promised that it will take GOP votes for anything to clear the Senate, where 60 votes are required to advance most legislation. Democrats control 53 votes.

Boehner, giving the GOP weekly radio address, said, "Of course, hope springs eternal, and I know we have it in us to come together and do the right thing."

Earlier, Boehner said Obama needs to give more ground to reach an agreement and that both he and Obama had indicated in a Monday telephone call that their latest offers represented their bottom lines. "How we get there," he added, "God only knows."

Congress shut down for Christmas and Obama flew to Hawaii with his family for the holidays. But both men indicated they'd be back in Washington, working to beat the fast-approaching Jan. 1 deadline with an agreement between Christmas and New Year's.

Obama announced his plans after talking by phone with Boehner and meeting with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who had previously pinned his hopes on an Obama-Boehner agreement and is wary of dealing with McConnell.

At the White House, Obama projected optimism despite of weeks of failed negotiations. "Call me a hopeless optimist, but I actually still think we can get it done," he said.

Boehner spoke in the morning, describing the increasingly tangled attempts to beat the Jan. 1 deadline and head off the perilous combination of across-the-board tax hikes and deep spending cuts.

"Because of the political divide in the country, because of the divide here in Washington, trying to bridge these differences has been difficult," Boehner said. "If it were easy, I guarantee you this would have been done decades before."

Obama said that in his negotiations with Boehner, he had offered to meet Republicans halfway when it came to taxes and "more than halfway" toward their target for spending cuts.

It's clear, however, that there's great resistance in GOP ranks to forging a bargain with Obama along the lines of a possible agreement that almost seemed at hand just a few days ago: tax hikes at or just over $1 trillion over 10 years, matched by comparable cuts to federal health care programs, Social Security benefits and across federal agency operating budgets.

Obama said he remains committed to working toward a goal of longer-term deficit reduction to reduce chronic trillion-dollar deficits while keeping tax rates in place for nearly everyone.

"Even though Democrats and Republicans are arguing about whether those rates should go up for the wealthiest individuals, all of us ? every single one of us ? agrees that tax rates shouldn't go up for the other 98 percent of Americans," Obama said, citing statistics associated with his promise to protect household income under $250,000 from higher tax rates.

Neither the House nor the Senate is expected to meet again until after Christmas. Officials in both parties said there was still time to prevent the changes from kicking in with the new year.

The week began amid optimism that Obama and Boehner had finally begun to significantly narrow their differences. Both were offering a cut in taxes for most Americans, an increase for a relative few, and cuts of roughly $1 trillion in spending over a year. Also included was a provision to scale back future cost-of-living increases for Social Security recipients ? a concession by the president that inflamed many liberals..

GOP officials said some senior Republicans such as Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., the most recent Republican vice presidential nominee, opposed the possible agreement. But No. 2 House Republican Eric Cantor of Virginia has joined arms with Boehner.

Boehner stepped back and announced what he called Plan B, legislation to let tax rates rise on incomes of $1 million or more while preventing increases for all other taxpayers.

Despite statements of confidence, he and his lieutenants decided late Thursday they were not going to be able to secure the votes needed to pass the measure in the face of opposition from conservatives unwilling to violate decades-old party orthodoxy never to raise tax rates.

The retreat came after it became clear that too many Republicans feared "the perception that somebody might accuse them of raising taxes," Boehner said.

Boehner also said that last Monday he had told Obama he had submitted his bottom-line proposal.

"The president told me that his numbers ? the $1.3 trillion in new revenues, $850 billion in spending cuts ? was his bottom line, that he couldn't go any further."

That contradicted remarks by White House press secretary Jay Carney, who said on Thursday that Obama has "never said either in private or in public that this was his final offer. He understands that to reach a deal it would require some further negotiation. There is not much further he could go."

Associated Press

Source: http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/89ae8247abe8493fae24405546e9a1aa/Article_2012-12-22-Fiscal%20Cliff/id-2761388838de41ad8c1a35136dc5c93b

voting hours election results Doug Martin Barack Obama & Joe Biden Am I registered to vote Voter registration Election

Facebook Poke Vs. Snapchat: What?s The Difference?

poke-v-snap-iconsToday, Facebook launched a new mobile app called Poke. It's strikingly similar to a new photo-sharing app that's taken the blogosphere by storm, called Snapchat. Both Snapchat and Poke let you send pictures or videos which are then destroyed within a matter of seconds. But the social network has officially launched its competitor, and the differences are few but important.

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/l9T3s7SdK4k/

wwdc heart attack grill madden 13 cover dalai lama tamera mowry slow jam the news madden cover

PFT: Vick says his prime is still ahead of him

Redskins' Hall fights through the block of Cowboys' Phillips as he tackles Murray during their NFL football game in LandoverReuters

With 32 more games in the regular season, the playoff picture is coming into focus ? but in some cases that focus is blurry enough that you need to squint.

So if you?re having trouble keeping all the scenarios straight, we?re here to help.

Below we list every team that?s still in playoff contention, where they stand in the playoff order, and how their paths to the playoffs look over the final two weeks of the season.

AFC

Already clinched playoff berths

1. Texans: Clinch home-field advantage throughout the playoffs if they win one more game.

2. Broncos: Clinch a first-round playoff bye if they win out.

3. Patriots: Clinch the No. 3 seed if they win out, need help to get a first-round playoff bye.

4. Ravens: Clinch the AFC North with one more win.

Control their own destiny

5. Colts: Clinch a wild card with one more win.

6. Bengals: Clinch a playoff berth with a win over the Steelers on Sunday.

7. Steelers: Clinch a playoff berth with two more wins.

Need a lot of help

8. Dolphins: Can reach the playoffs if they beat the Bills and Patriots, and the Steelers beat the Bengals but lose to the Browns, and the Bengals lose to the Ravens in addition to losing to the Steelers, and the Jets lose at least one more game.

NFC

Already clinched playoff berths

1. Falcons: Clinch home-field advantage throughout the NFC playoffs with one more win.

2. 49ers: Clinch a first-round playoff bye with two more wins.

3. Packers: Clinch the No. 3 seed if they win out, need help to get a first-round playoff bye.

Control their own destiny

4. Redskins: Clinch the NFC East if they win out.

5. Seahawks: Clinch a wild card if they win one more game.

6. Cowboys: Currently behind the Vikings in the NFC, but clinch the NFC East if they win out.

7. Giants: Currently behind the Vikings in the NFC, but clinch a playoff berth if they win out.

Need some help

8. Vikings: Would be a wild card if the playoffs started today, but even if they win out they need either the Giants to lose once or the Seahawks to lose twice in order to make the playoffs.

9. Bears: Can reach the playoffs by winning out and having both the Giants and Vikings lose once, or either the Giants or Vikings lose once plus the Seahawks losing twice, or a couple of more complex scenarios. Basically, the Bears lose most tiebreakers and therefore will likely need to finish 10-6 while the other NFC wild card hopefuls finish 9-7.

Need a lot of help

10. Rams: Technically still alive but would need to win both remaining games while the Vikings, Bears and Giants all lose out, plus either the Redskins or Cowboys lose in Week 16 and then the team that loses in Week 16 wins the Week 17 Cowboys-Redskins game.

And there you have it. A Rams-Dolphins Super Bowl is still possible.

Source: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/12/21/michael-vick-my-prime-years-are-ahead-of-me-im-just-getting-started/related/

robert griffin iii dontari poe space shuttle nyc monkeypox nick perry 30 rock live nfl draft picks 2012

Saturday, December 22, 2012

Tucker Place Subdivision in Warner Robins GA 31088

Tucker Place Subdivision in Warner Robins GA 31088

Tucker Place Subdivision in Warner Robins GA?is located off South Houston Lake Road and only 20 minutes from Robins AFB.? This Warner Robins subdivision has mature trees and primarily one and ?two-story brick and vinyl homes.

A snapshot of the Warner Robins real estate market shows 1 home has sold so far in 2012 for $185,000 (full price) and was on the market for 224 days. ?Currently, there are no homes for sale in the Tucker Place Subdivision.

The?Houston County Public Schools?for this subdivision are Shirley Hills Elementary, Warner Robins Middle, and Warner Robins High School.

Visit?Homes for Sale in Warner Robins?to preview a complete list of Warner Robins real estate or call me at (478) 960-8055 for all your Warner Robins Real Estate needs.

Tucker Place Subdivision in Warner Robins GA 31088

Statistics represent ONLY single family homes in Warner Robins GA (Source: CGMLS).?? Information is deemed reliable, but not guaranteed.

?

About Anita Clark Realtor

Anita Clark has written 882 posts on this blog.

Anita Clark Realtor+ sells Warner Robins Real Estate and provides community information as a service to the public. You can contact her at (478) 960-8055 or via email at anita@cbssk.com.

Source: http://sellingwarnerrobins.com/2012/12/tucker-place-subdivision-in-warner-robins-ga-31088/

Kenneth Branagh Lupe Ontiveros London 2012 China muhammad ali Opening ceremony London 2012 Google Fiber Olympics Schedule 2012

Friday, December 21, 2012

Communications Officer Wanted at Kofi Annan Foundation, Geneva ...

Deadline: 2 January 2013
Open to: Master?s degree in communications, journalism, public relations holders with knowledge of current affairs, particularly of political and global development issues
Remuneration: Is subject to Swiss social charges and taxable under Swiss/Geneva law

Description

The Kofi Annan Foundation is an independent non-profit foundation, legally incorporated in Switzerland in 2007 chaired by the former United Nations Secretary-General. The objectives of the Foundation are to support Mr. Annan in applying his unique experience and moral authority to help address global issues, to build and preserve peace through mediation and conflict prevention, and help to ensure that the benefits of globalization are equitably shared through poverty reduction, good governance, human rights and the rule of law.

The Foundation provides institutional capacity for Mr. Annan in a number of ways:

  • It provides the analytical and communication capacities for Mr. Annan?s advocacy, outreach and interventions on critical issues, with particular emphasis on Africa.
  • It provides substantive, logistical and follow-up support to Mr. Annan?s mediation and peace-making activities.
  • It manages Mr. Annan?s association with a number of organizations, in which he is actively engaged.

Responsibilities

Under guidance from the Executive Director and senior advisors of the Foundation, the Communications Officer will be responsible for the following tasks:

  • Support the development and implementation of media and outreach strategies for the Foundation, engage key partners and constituencies, and be responsible for positioning the Foundation?s activities, projects and advocacy in the communications arena. This will include developing messaging, website content, and the production and dissemination of public information materials for all Foundation activities.
  • Draft articles, speeches and talking points for the Chairman as required.
  • Help track issues of key concern to the Foundation using a wide range of open source media.
  • Advise and support the Foundation on public information issues, methods and approaches including use of new media and digital platforms.
  • Be responsible for liaison with the media, including responding to enquiries, organizing media activities, and media monitoring.
  • Support media appearances and interviews by the Chairman and Foundation staff, and serve as spokesperson for the Foundation.
  • Be responsible for communications budgets and associated reporting requirements, including assessment of impact of communications strategy.
  • Work with the Foundation?s communications service providers to ensure appropriate support in the implementation of the Foundation?s communications strategy.
  • Perform other duties as assigned.

Competencies

  • Up-to-date knowledge of current affairs, particularly of political and global development issues.
  • Solid understanding of the media and proven ability in news gathering, fact-checking, writing and editing to deadlines.
  • Ability to produce and edit written communications in a clear and concise style.
  • Ability to conceptualize and coordinate the production of multimedia materials.
  • Discretion and sound judgment, and ability to prioritise activities and assignments.
  • Ability to tailor language, tone, style and format to match audience.

Education

Advanced university degree (Master?s degree or equivalent) in communications, journalism, public relations or related area. A first-level university degree in combination with two additional years of relevant working experience may be accepted in lieu of the advanced university degree.

Work Experience

A minimum of eight years of progressively responsible experience in journalism, public information or related field is required. Previous experience writing in English in a deadline-driven newspaper or similar media outlet would be an asset. Experience in producing public information or advocacy materials for different audiences, and with an international or intergovernmental organisation is required. Ability to conceptualize and produce multimedia content for Internet-based platforms, including social media would be an advantage, as well as previous experience in providing communications support for fundraising purposes.

Languages

Excellent written and spoken English is required; good working knowledge of French an advantage.

Remuneration

Compensation is competitive and commensurate with skills and experience. Remuneration is subject to Swiss social charges and taxable under Swiss/Geneva law.

How to apply

Please send your CV together with a letter of motivation in English by e-mail to HR@kofiannanfoundation.org by 09h00 CET Wednesday, 02 January 2013. Please state ?Communications Officer? in the subject of your e-mail. A written test will be part of the recruitment process. All applications will be acknowledged, but only short-listed candidates will be contacted. Please understand that we cannot respond to phone enquiries.

The official website of Kofi Annan Foundation.

Please note that Mladiinfo does not give scholarships or any financial support, but only informs about different opportunities. Click on the direct link to the official page above to apply for the program.

Source: http://www.mladiinfo.com/2012/12/21/communications-officer-wanted-at-kofi-annan-foundation-geneva/

palmetto rob lowe sanctum the notebook duke basketball miranda july joe paterno near death

Girl Talk: Motherhood & The Tragedy At Sandy Hook Elementary

I am not a mother. This fact has kept me from expressing my heartbreak over the shootings in Sandy Hook. In the aftermath of this horrifying event, I?ve watched countless friends ? mothers, all of them ? post wrenching status updates on Facebook. I?ve read them, feeling oddly ashamed inside. These moms talked of compassion for those poor little children, of the need to step up to the plate as adults, of the fear they have for the future, of roiling anger toward the government, and of utter helplessness. They posted pictures of the beautiful young faces lost to this insane tragedy. They urged others to take a stand, and to hold their own children close.

The same thoughts streamed through my head. Tears welled in my eyes, too. I texted my siblings and begged them to hug and kiss their little ones for me.

But something was silencing the part of me that wanted to join these moms in their outrage. I felt it wasn?t my place. How could I know, after all, what kind of fear these parents were expressing? How could I possibly relate to their protective instincts? I am not a mother.

But I desperately want to be one. I?m 36 years old. My husband and I met 14 years ago, and our route to marriage was a circuitous one. Once we got to that state, though, just over two years ago, we could not wait to start a family. We had both been ready for a long time. We were practically crib shopping. The months went by, and nothing happened. We soon realized that we were not going to be instant parents, just because we wanted to be. It was ? and still is ? a tough pill to swallow. Our struggles with infertility have taken the usual tolls: stress, jealousy, fear, anxiety. Every month that passes with our dream unfulfilled, we try to keep a positive attitude as female friends? bellies grow and we slowly get ever so slightly older.

My husband has the beautiful ability to see our future, and it includes children and a happy home. I don?t have quite the same steady view. Sometimes I can?t picture our children at all. Those are the worst moments. And the scariest. But other days I can see them clearly. I see us going to the library, eating pancakes, and playing outside together. If I let myself, I can believe the truth, which is that I identify as a mom. My body is aching to carry a child, to nourish her and love her as she grows into who she is going to be. I dream of putting her in cozy outfits and tickling her tiny toes. I imagine reading Beatrix Potter to her and letting her turn the pages.

I want these dreams to come true with every fiber of my being, but I have to wait.

So in the meantime I sweep my nephews into my arms and cover their sweet heads with an endless supply of kisses. I pick up my nieces and hug them with arms that don?t want to let go. I marvel at their perfect skin and their effortless ability to live in the moment. I?m struck by their innocence, by the innocence of every child in this world. They are sacred, strong, and vulnerable.

The murders in Newtown, CT, shook me to my core. I wanted to tell someone, or everyone, that I was devastated and couldn?t bear to watch the news. But what do I know about what it feels like to have a child? What could I offer to parents who have lost theirs in such an epically horrific way?

I felt like I should just be quiet, and pray for the moms and dads who have been forced to walk that cruel and unnatural path.

I am not a mother. But I will be, someday, and I want to be part of this dialogue. How could we let something like this happen? What kind of world do we live in, when little children are the victims of senseless laws and overlooked illness? I want to help. And yet I feel helpless. I can?t hold a child of my own, and I can?t do anything to bring back those whose lives have been taken.

So I whisper to my baby who hasn?t arrived. I tell her she is important. She is beautiful just as she is. She is a good person, and she will always be loved. I tell her I?ll try to protect her. These are the only things a mother can do.

Source: http://www.thefrisky.com/2012-12-21/girl-talk-motherhood-the-tragedy-at-sandy-hook-elementary/

saturday night fever glamping forgetting sarah marshall taraji p. henson irs shuttle discovery biggest loser

Friday Weird Science: The evolutionary psychology of the romance ...

The handsome stranger clutched her shoulders, supporting her as she swooned. The suddenness and violence of the robbery and her rescue disoriented Beverlee, and for a few moments she did not know where she was. But as she began to be conscious of her surroundings, she was increasingly aware of the tall, firm man she leaned against, of his? big hands clasped around her shoulders, warm through the thin linen of her chemise.

She looked up hesitantly through her lashes, and into the dark, deep eyes of her rescuer. As their eyes met, a shock seemed to pass through them both. He leapt backward, and for an instant Beverlee felt the loss of his touch, the coldness where his hands had touched her.? But the moment passed, and gathering himself, her rescuer spoke.

"Christmas" he said, flatly. "Bride baby cowboy doctor secret lady." And each word sang deep in Beverlee's spirit, tapping something deep in her she hadn't known existed: the desire to find a long term mate that would provide food and shelter while she had loads of babies.

-from the romance novel I will someday write.

Ahh, romance novels. Can't live with 'em, don't want to live without 'em.The genre of romance, of bodice-bustin' babes and their brawny bonafide boytoys, has been around, well, for at least as long as the written word, and most likely long before that. Tristan and Isolde, Guinevere and Arthur/Lancelot (I hope there was middle ages slash-fic of that, btw), Scarlett and Rhett, and the many improbably named men (my personal favorite was "Devilyn") and women (I bet there really IS a "Beverlee" already) of 18th century style bodice rippers.

mcmullet

(LOL!!! I am so naming my next dog "McMullet")

Romance novels are incredibly popular, despite their often hilarious covers (and heck, if you've got a Kindle, no one ever needs to know!).? If you go by the definition of a romance novel as "a romantic relationship is driving the story forward", then everything from 50 Shades of Grey to Twilight to Jane Austen counts.

And boy do we love them all. So much so that in 2007 we spent 1.3 BILLION US dollars on them (other genres didn't even crack a billion). Lots of people read them, estimates are that at least 1/3 of US women have read at least one (even if a good number of us, myself included, mostly do it to point and laugh). .

But why DO we like them so much? Why do people crave cheesy serial romance? Some have suggested that it's because the stories reflect our desire to nurture. Some have suggested it's an acceptance of patriarchal bondage.? Some have suggested outlets of female resentment. No one has yet suggested the appeal of cheesy stories combined with nice dresses and soft-core porn. The authors of this paper, however, think it's because these book "address evolved, sex-specific mating interests". In other words, it's evolution, baby.? Evolutionary Psychology.

Cox and Fisher. "THE TEXAS BILLIONAIRE?S PREGNANT BRIDE:? AN EVOLUTIONARY INTERPRETATION OF?? ROMANCE FICTION TITLES" Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 2009.

According to evolutionary psychology, men and women possess sex-specific needs.

That is, due to biological sex differences, women conceive children
whereas men do not. Across cultures, women tend to be the primary caregivers, although? men often provide paternal support (Bribiescas, 2006). Furthermore, women have notably? lower limits on the number of children that they can have, as compared to men. These? differences have led evolutionary psychologists to propose that women tend to seek commitment from their mates, and prefer mates who have a propensity to accrue resources (e.g., Buss, 1989) since they will need these resources while they tend to the
children. Therefore, we propose that a better interpretation? for the success of Harlequin romance novels is that the books are addressing women?s sex-specific, evolved, mating? interests. To test this hypothesis, we analyzed the titles of Harlequin romance novels.

So basically, women want stable baby-daddies, and therefore we should find this in the titles of the romance novels. After all, you have to assume that romance novel publishers do a ton of market research, they want to develop titles that will sell. And if women are indeed seeking male providers, the titles that sell will predict this. Since potential purchasers only look at the front of a romance novel for about 7 seconds before they decide whether or not to buy it, the authors figure it has to be the title they are basing their decision on (though the hilarity of the usually shirtless man and fainting, scantily-clad woman on the cover might also be additional factors).

But these authors think it's the titles, and that words in romance novel titles will reflect a desire for stability, babies, etc. So for example, women should feel more of a desire for reproduction, and words referencing pregnancy and babies should be frequent. Women should also be seeking out male providers who will support them, so there should be a lot of themes of wealth in the titles as well. Thirdly, according to evolutionary psychology, women should be seeking long-term relationships specifically, so there should also be references to things like marriage. Finally, women should prefer attractiveness...so there should be a lot of references to male hotness.

The authors analyzed over 15 THOUSAND Harlequin romance titles, from 1949 to 2009.? From these, they got the top 20 words used in the romance novel titles:

They note that some of the words they anticipated ("husband", "child", "doctor", "bride", etc) did appear in the top 20, especially those relating to things like babies and husbands. But they did NOT see any references to wealth (unless, I guess, you count "octor"), or to physical attractiveness. And I don't think anyone has ANY idea why "Texas" and "nurse" are in there.

The authors try to relate some of the professions listed to things like resources (doctor for example), and others to physical hotness (um..."cowboy"). And if you look at the top 20 professions listed, there are also many relating to traditional female roles (nurse, midwife) and males bringing home to bacon (doctors, princes, knights, and...pirates. Pirates were definitely in there).

Finally, the authors analyzed the data from the titles to show two particular themes. The first was a theme of commitment, references to weddings, brides, husbands, fiancees, etc. The second theme was reproduction, with lots of reference to children, pregnancy, sons, daughters, etc. After that, themes got a little less relevant, with things like Texas (wtf is UP with Texas and romance novels? I guess Massachusetts is just too prosaic?), resources (references to money), medical, Christmas (?), royalty, and professionals (like CEOs. Because we ALL want to read "A CEO takes over...my loins".

The authors conclude that romance novel titles indicate what women are after, and that they vote with their money to show what they want. And what they want is the long term security of a well-endowed (with MONEY, obviously) man to father their children. Doctors are big because they are secure and provide money. Cowboys are big because of their physical prowess.

So ladies, if you're reading romance novels, you are clearly doing it for the doctor, babies, princes, and cowboys. These words speak deeply to your very DNA and require you to pursue all that really matters in life: financial security and a good father to your children.

The big issue I have with...well with the very hypothesis this paper is based on, is this: WHY would people, who the authors acknowledge are already in stable relationships, be unconsciously seeking out, um, other stable relationships? After all, other studies have shown that women who read romance novels are actually MORE likely to be in a long-term romantic relationship than those who don't read them. They already have their stable (possibly providing), man. And according all the OTHER evolutionary psychology I've read, women seek out these nice stable providers, and then they seek racy boytoys on the side who will provide them with dominant high-impulsivity children. IF this is true (and that is a rather big "if", I would make it bigger but WordPress won't let me), then why would we be spending zillions on romance novels which focus entirely on...the stable things we probably already have?? Shouldn't we be focusing on love'em and leave'em?

The second issue relates to professions. If you break it down by profession...well of COURSE some of them will be lucrative, and of COURSE some of them will be traditional female roles. You will also notice that most of the professions referenced are either money-making, highly respectable, or, you know, cowboys. But not all money making professions are on there. Where is "financial analyst"? Where is "drug lord"? Additionally, they authors did not take into account whether the profession referenced in the title belonged to a male or a female (there are, after all, female doctors, CEOs, and consultants).

Third issue: the analysis of the data to reveal different themes, which the authors assume all reflect a woman's desire to find financial security and a long-term father to her children. While some of them may reveal that, the words they chose are not always indicative. For example, they talk about the word "son" as being reference to reproduction, but is that REALLY the case? Most romance novel titles with "'son" in them will not be things like "for the sake of my son". Rather they will be things like "the son of a cowboy", "The duke's wayward son", etc. References to "baby" are just as like to be "Be my baby" as they are to be "father my baby". Not exactly a reproductive message. And in their references to resources (things like wealth and heirs)...well romance novel titles are often things like "the wayward heiress", "the wealth of a duchess", etc. Sure, they refer to resources, but not in the sense of seeking them from a man.

Fourth, if women really are voting with their money for romance novel titles of specific types...why did this study analyze ALL the romance novels from the last 60 years?! Why not look at the top ten sellers from each year? Wouldn't that give a better perspective on how, exactly, women are voting with their money? Market research is all well and good, but if "The texas billionaire's pregnant bride" doesn't sell, then it doesn't mean much for evo psych. The theme of Christmas, for example, came out as extremely significant, because each year Harlequin releases a pile of Christmas novels.? Not because people BOUGHT them, but because they were produced. It says nothing about why, or even if, women are exceptionally attracted to Christmas.

Finally, there is? no escaping the fact that all of these romance novels are designed around very strict cultural lines. The women are always traditionally beautiful (or if not, there is always something that is mysteriously sexy about them). The men are always, ALWAYS handsome. Everyone is successful and everyone gets married. Are these things we seek because our evolutionary psychology tells us we need them? Or are they things we seek because society tells us that that is what is good, what is right, and what is required to make someone a good person? I think this study can't possibly separate that out. You can't pull romance novels out of their cultural context, which means you can't get down to the evo psych. You can only get down to what the culture we are in expects us to want: doctors, babies, and cowboys (not necessarily in that order).

So maybe it should go like this:

"Christmas" he said, flatly. "Bride baby cowboy doctor secret lady." And each word sang deep in Beverlee's spirit, tapping something deep in her she hadn't known existed: the cultural trappings of her entire life, telling her that we all need babies, all want a wedding, and all need a doctor to provide for us.? And, of course, that Christmas is irresistibly sexy. Beverlee smiled. She always had wanted a cowboy for Christmas.

-from the romance novel I will someday write.

Source: http://scientopia.org/blogs/scicurious/2012/12/21/friday-weird-science-the-evolutionary-psychology-of-the-romance-novel/

adrienne bailon yelp stock honda classic news channel 5 nashville weather jason varitek andrew breitbart dead