New book on marriage 'rules' has no place on modern woman's book shelf

YOU may remember the ’90s dating guide, The Rules, which contained all sorts of stern advice on how to snare a man.

The advice was not to talk to a man first and when you do snag a date, always be the one to end it (and keep him gagging for more, apparently.)

There was a lot of old nonsense about phone calls. You were advised not to call him and to rarely return his calls.

There was the tip to never accept a date for Saturday on or after Wednesday. The thinking there is that you have such a full social life (‘cos you’re so popular) that really, the guy is not always your priority.

The whole premise of the book, a best-seller translated into 29 languages, was to treat men mean and keep them keen.

This is based on the idea that men like the chase and that women should hold themselves in high regard – a prize for the eligible guy they want to be with.

But women must play a hard game, resisting capitulation and being disciplined about the amount of time they should spend with the guy.

In an age of so-called equality between the sexes, this sort of approach to conducting relationships is bordering on the masochistic. Do you really want to hold back and stick to old-fashioned rules such as letting the guy always pay for dinner or whatever on a date?

The authors of The Rules, two American women now in their sixties, believe that Meghan Markel applied some of the rules for dating a celebrity by saying she didn’t know who Prince Harry was. Rubbish. She was a fan of Princess Diana and couldn’t but know about the prince – and his relationship status.

But I don’t think Meghan would be so dumb as to follow the updated book, The Rules Handbook, which will be published in September. To call it anti-feminist is an understatement.

It’s possibly the most retrogressive book that will hit the shelves in decades.

It’s very much in the style of those 1950s handbooks that advise wives to don a pretty ribbon in their hair, pour a stiff drink for their hubbies when they come home from work, and serve up a delicious and apparently hassle-free meal.

Because, as every girl knows, the way to a man’s heart is through his stomach. Makes you sick, doesn’t it?

The authors, Ellen Fein and Sherrie Schneider, were interviewed recently in The Daily Mail. They acknowledged that, yes, a woman might have a fancy title at work “like senior VP of corporate marketing and investor relations and run a staff of fifty people,” but she should “switch from masculine to feminine mode. Set the table and cook dinner, and ask him nicely to help clean up!”

Crikey, did women man the barricades for nothing? Is feminism to be ditched for acquiescent wifehood?

Yes, it seems the authors peddling their unoriginal but damaging prescription for happy marriages are stuck in some time warp or desperate to make a splash. At what cost?

Consider this: “Just like dating isn’t 100% equal (the guy has to pursue you and propose), marriage isn’t always either. (You must) both agree your husband/partner is the decision-maker and you are his key supportive team member... even if you make more money.”

(It’s a wonder these two dames allow for the fact that women can have more high-powered careers than their husbands or partners.)

But allowing the man to be the decision-maker is based on the authors’ perception that romantic relationships “are based on biology, not finance. There’s a hierarchy that goes back to caveman days. If you act too bossy or overbearing, you will emasculate your husband and your marriage will suffer, so let him take the lead role.”

God help us.

The rule-makers add that, in general, men are born leaders. 

“This is biological. It’s based on our experience and that of our clients, and biology states that men are born to lead and women are more the nurturers, even though they’re in powerful positions in their work life... You have to be feminine even if you’re a CEO because no man wants to be with a woman who behaves like a man.”

So, careers are allowed but women must still behave like doormats in the home, keeping the peace, ironing the shirts, cooking up a storm and being available for intimacy.

Should a wife say ‘yes’ to sex even if she’s not up for it?

“You should try to,” says Ellen, “but you don’t have to say ‘yes’ if you’re not in the mood.” That’s about as progressive as The Rules Handbook gets.

Women do not need rules that are basically deeply misogynistic. Today’s women are too copped on to buy into such moronic bull****.