Welcome back!

If you can read this WE MADE IT!

This website had serious problems for a few months. It didn’t work.

But now things are on the way back. By some time early in February 2022 all the content will be back. You’ll see the latest version of the book How to stop beating your wife. The book is about 75% finished as of the end of January 2022. It is projected to be completed by about April 2022. This website will have instructions on how to purchase the book as a pdf and hard copy.

Come back again soon and watch the gradual chapter additions. At all times you’ll be able to subscribe to us on Patreon. Thanks for your support.

Preliminary Expectoration

When did you stop beating your wife? is the classic – and supremely nasty – loaded question.

Back in the day the accused target – the brute – had a tiny chance to recover his soiled reputation by claiming Who, me? She’s not my wife. But in our post-rationalist, post-existentialist, post-binary, post-modernist, post-truth era, facts don’t matter anymore. Fewer men have wives nowadays. More than a few women have wives. Yet the fix between wives and their beaters endures. Almost all wives insist they are beaten regardless.

As a humanitarian gesture a book of instructions on how to stop beating your wife is overdue. Fine. But that’s not what we have here.

Consider the book How To Stop Beating Your Wife a prequel. Powerful societal forces are already in place to end the shameful scourge of wife beating. The book will wake people up to what is already happening: the evolving right side of history. And why it is already too late for any opposing movements, laws or forces to change this progressive trajectory.

She felt the whip, Emile Bayard, 19th century

In a mere two hundred years from the book’s publishing date society will routinely acknowledge that Ecclesiastes is dead. The joys of rationalism, existentialism, binary sexuality, post-modernism, and the obsession with truth will be buried like an archeological fossil. As the philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831) could have predicted, the thesis of beating one’s wife will clash with the antithesis of marriage-and-breeding to produce the longed-for synthesis: a new, equalitarian family. Set your clock by this prediction. Ready or not, within the next two centuries everyone will be swept into better lives.

Continue reading “Preliminary Expectoration”

Chapter 1: Putting my self aside

It wasn’t until my thirties before I decided to put my self aside to become a father. I was married. After my first love insisted we wouldn’t have children, we went our separate ways. I could have remained single for a few years longer as I was making strides learning how to enjoy life with the ladies. But I wanted a family.

When another woman who seemed right enough came around, I married again.

The two of us grew up in similar, gritty East Coast big city neighborhoods. Our families consisted of mother, father and kids sticking together under one roof through thick and thin. Our parents – her father, actually, and both my parents – fled from the other side. We already had our degrees and professional credentials. We were some flavor or other of Jewish. She rose from her family’s limited resources, eventually mingling with people of great wealth. She was a master of New York pluck. We fancied ourselves as originals in our own ways, though not on parallel tracks.

Despite our stylistic differences, we swore we were ready to give all that up to settle down for the big task in life: raising a family.

It was no secret that marriage and family were institutions under assault on the day we caught each other’s eyes. In the world out there, the signs that the ground was shifting were everywhere. Divorce lawyers were feasting. People were fleeing their marriages instead of trying to fix them. In my days on the outer fringes I was on the same party invitation list as the authors of the book Open Marriage. Some of my friends tried “group marriage” (she and he married another she and he). Nor were the two of us innocent babes in the woods. We had each already been divorced. During my previous marriage I was among the first of my generation who didn’t insist that his wife bear his family name as her last name.

Continue reading “Chapter 1: Putting my self aside”

Chapter 2: What could society do?

At this moment in the early 1980s public debate about the family was dominated by the confluence of several unhappy realities: Families were breaking up. Divorce for those who bothered to get married was becoming the new normal. More and more children were born out of wedlock, and most of these kids grew up with no adult males in their homes. Single mother heads of households were said to be drifting into lives of poverty. And the cost to taxpayers of family support systems was rocketing out of control.

What could society do?

Some people claimed to have found the answer to the financial and social costs of family breakdown. Their answer picked up on trends in social thought which were well on their way to acceptance for their own reasons. The proposed answer then topped off these trends with a new twist.

All over the contemporary landscape, the role of morality in public life was under growing suspicion. In the past a result of the influence of religion on American thought was a decidedly moralistic view of certain family-related practices. Some activities were thought of as good, so were deemed worthy of encouragement. Other activities were bad and brought down chastisement on those who practiced them. Having children out of wedlock was definitely bad. The English language has an ancient and pejorative b-word name for the children of the unmarried. Traditional society had a very narrow view of the women who engaged in the ‘sin’ of bringing these so-called b–tard children into the world.

But by the 1980s these ancient attitudes were past their sell-by dates.

Continue reading “Chapter 2: What could society do?”

Chapter 3: You can never again be sure

Divorce is humbling. It wrecks one’s sense of entitlement.

Before divorce it’s possible to believe that life will be fine if you just keep your nose clean. That the fulfillment of dreams is simply a matter of effort. And that mistakes can be remedied.

After divorce life is full of velvet traps. Even your spouse – the person closest to your heart – can’t be trusted. And your instincts are not always your best guide.

The iron lesson divorce teaches is that you can never again be sure. About anything.

The documents delivered to me – the pleadings my wife submitted to court to begin running the divorce clock – were ferocious. She asked the court to give her custody of our son, to have me removed from our apartment, to make me pay alimony and child support in amounts greater than my income, and to have me pay for her lawyer.

To justify this heart-stopping list of demands my wife used perhaps the most common excuse for divorce of the day. She accused me of domestic violence. On three occasions, no less.

Right from the start of the game I was deep in the hole.

Continue reading “Chapter 3: You can never again be sure”

Chapter 4: No exit

My wife’s first attempt at forcing me out of our home was a dud. In September 1981 – a year and a half after she fired her opening shot across my bow – the court notified us it wasn’t impressed with any of her claims. None of our living arrangements needed to be disturbed. The best the court could do for her was mark us down for a divorce trial at some time in the indefinite future. 

Score some very big points for my lawyer! He knew his stuff. 

Just as my lawyer had lectured me, because my wife continued to live under the same roof with me and do the ordinary things most married people do together the court couldn’t swallow her story of violence. Several years later courts began to take seriously the argument that women victims of violence sometimes continue to live with violent husbands despite the violence. I can’t know for certain but I suspect it would be incredibly difficult for any court to read the particular claims she wrote and come to any conclusion other than the one our court came to. Chances I would harm her in our home were far less than the chances she would turn into a Jael of the Book of Judges.

Continue reading “Chapter 4: No exit”

Chapter 5: My drummer was too fast

When I finally fell back down to earth off my lofty perch, I discovered I had grown much, much smaller.

In my rebellious years around college I had pushed the envelope of social values. My hell-raising – such as it was – was part of my generation’s struggles in the name of civil rights, anti-Vietnam war, feminism and gay rights. I also directed energy to organizing migrant grape pickers in New York State – nothing to do with the more famous California grape workers group; college professors at CUNY as a member of the negotiating committee of the first union-CUNY contract; and hospital social workers at NYU on behalf of my then-wife’s employer Local Union 1199. Eventually all of the causes got melded into routine American values. I had solid proof my vision wasn’t completely out of whack.

For four plus years – from the moment the guy in the elevator served me with divorce papers to the one note funeral oratorio of our son’s apartment door slamming behind me – my life was brimming with optimism. Futurist talking heads convinced the world that women and men of tomorrow will not be like women and men of the past. Women in droves were already abandoning their aprons and vacuum cleaners to venture into the world of jobs and careers. It struck me as more than plausible to expect men to stake out new territory too. It seemed inevitable that the world would be making room for a brave new kind of Father. I invested all my chips on that bet.

Continue reading “Chapter 5: My drummer was too fast”

Chapter 6: Who is in contempt?

The previous chapter ended around the time our son was three years of age.

The grand purpose of this book is to get from Point A to Point B. Point A is the “normal” of family and law as described in Chapter 1: Putting my self aside. Anyone who lived in the Western world in the eighteenth to twentieth centuries will recognize Point A. Its limits are by now tediously obvious. Many of the upcoming class of twenty-first century marriage candidates have developed mega-phobic reactions to Point A’s suggested order of things. Egged on by lecture halls full of tenured warning bell tollers – the curriculum is preached that the only cure is to gyrate into any configuration not endorsed by this once-venerable institution.

This chapter chronicles the painful series of big and small lived experiences this author was thrust through after he was flagged off the road to his personal Point A. His world changed. His mental furniture was reupholstered – replaced with the latest man-made fibers – er, human-made stuffing.

Continue reading “Chapter 6: Who is in contempt?”

Chapter 8: Ecclesiastes redeemed

https://www.aeragon.com/itz/06-solomon.html

 

We know for certain that Solomon was both the richest and wisest man that ever lived. Since he had a harem of 1000 women, it is safe to purport that he would at least be a contender for the title of all-time-greatest hedonist. Perhaps the main thesis of Ecclesiastes is that Solomon concluded that without God, everything is futile and meaningless in the end. So many times, Solomon mentions that everything was simply striving after the wind and he was undoubtedly the most successful man by the world’s standards that has lived or ever will live. In retrospect, after completion of the book at hand, the reader may conclude that Ecclesiastes records, reflects and laments upon the greatest tragedy of all of history.

 

Ecclesiastes 12:9 And besides that Koheleth was wise, he also taught the people knowledge; yea, he pondered, and sought out, and set in order many proverbs. 10 Koheleth sought to find out words of delight, and that which was written uprightly, even words of truth. 11 The words of the wise are as goads, and as nails well fastened are those that are composed in collections; they are given from one shepherd. 12 And furthermore, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh. 13 The end of the matter, all having been heard: fear God, and keep His commandments; for this is the whole man. 14 For God shall bring every work into the judgment concerning every hidden thing, whether it be good or whether it be evil. (JPS) (Emphasis added)

 

 

Digging deeper: The JBFCS – and its secular and religious-group affiliated equivalents – claim to do psychotherapy on children – including young children. I wonder. During my therapy training internship I saw a few children. I taught briefly at Pratt Institute’s graduate art therapy program. Art therapy seems a painless way to glide children into deeper therapy. Despite these experiences I am very dubious of the effectiveness of therapy before children are well in their teens.

My reading of Freud and Piaget question its effectiveness. It’s common knowledge that children can be bluntly honest – sometimes embarrassingly so. Freudian literature suggests that children usually don’t learn to lie until somewhere around nine years of age. Psychologically it is not until around this age that they learn the thought they hear in their heads can’t be heard by other people – unless you babble them out loud. And vice versa. Maybe a young child thinks they know what other people think. It takes about nine years of experience before they recognize that sometimes their assumptions about what’s going on in other people’s heads are mistaken.

Lying doesn’t happen until a child is convinced that other people can hear their spoken words – but can’t hear the voices in their head. And the child can purposely mismatch the two. A lie is saying one thing while believing / hearing in one’s head / being told by one’s conscience or superego – another thing.

From a Piagetian perspective all of a child’s mental processes start with her- / himself. What the child sees / experiences is funneled through the one and only central processor that is known – their own brain. Piaget uses the term ‘egocentrism’ to signify that the child starts out and continues life for a long time thinking what they see and experience is all there is. The child’s ego is the center of all experience. It takes quite a while before the child discovers that the other people in their life actually have minds and thoughts and feelings that are not the same as the equivalent in the child’s head.

The relevance of this idea to therapy is that

 

Title 18 in Federal Law has a provision for prosecuting folk for depriving a citizen of their civil rights under the ‘color’ of office. Sadly, no one seems to ever get prosecuted under the law.

 

Vanity of vanities, all is vanity

My psychotherapy practice filled my four day a week appointment book only during a few of its middle years.

I might flatter myself into believing my legal issues didn’t spill over into my therapists’ demeanor. Possibly. But not certainly. No patient ever said the words, but it’s conceivable my mind was not always tuned to the right channel. Which makes for unsatisfied customers. Who hesitate before making referrals.

In the latter twentieth century the most popular college major in the US was Psychology. Undergrads who wanted to enroll in grad psych programs took the Graduate Record Exam as a rite of passage. The most popular cram book for the psych GREs was published by Arco a division of publisher Simon and Schuster. During lulls in my legal jousts I became primary author of three editions of the Arco GRE practice book. I once googled that my book was the best seller in Arco’s GRE catalog. But it never earned more than about two thousand dollars a year. A tablespoon of prestige. But hardly a gusher of big bucks.

I tried my hand at business to business and insurance projects to enhance my opportunities. Printers and the post office were the only beneficiaries.

My national professional association embarked on a scheme called “peer review.” It stunk to high heaven. People like me – and the six single-spaced pages of names of psychologists in the printed Manhattan telephone yellow pages directory – go into private practice to be our own bosses. The “peer review” plan wanted to corral us ornery stray cats to make us the national association’s employees . A bunch of us ingrates formed a dissident faction. I wrote a pamphlet titled “The Other Side Of Peer Review” – which danced all over the scheme’s fallacies. My side pretty quickly slayed those mice and gang their worst laid plans a-gley.

I rabble roused for a few months. But didn’t get a single referral for my therapy practice.

Professional organizations dripped into my blood stream. I was elected President of the New York Society of Clinical Psychologists. Decades later this title still induces an Erasmus-ian  chuckle. Alas the organization’s best days had passed. My impatient love interest didn’t have enough fight in her to keep this sick puppy alive. She succeeded me in office, then folded the organization into the larger state psychological association. Again, not one client referral.

 

 

George Orwell. In his brief allegorical novella, “Animal Farm,” an array of animal characters — lead by the thinking pigs of the farm — staged a revolution, driving out their human overseers.

The anti-human animal comrades started out sounding like zealous Russian Bolsheviks (“four legs good, two legs bad”). But soon they ended up conned by a murderous cult of pigs under a Joseph Stalin-like leader. And so, the revolution became what it once had opposed (“four legs good, two legs better”).

 

Kafka

 

In the postmodern era it’s a clever DIY – Do It Yourself – project to call yourself married or divorced without purchasing licenses or getting papers stamped by government factotums. Some intrepid taste-makers go this route to express their creativity and individuality. All bets are off once children are in the house. Mom and Dad may have crafted their own off the grid DIY contracts. The State considers those things Amateur Hour. Enforcers of the Law say children are entitled to certain material things most DIY contracts ignore. Whatever naive parents may have agreed to will become irrelevant litter once the courts bag their prey.

 

 

Digging deeper: The JBFCS – and its secular and religious-group affiliated equivalents – claim to do psychotherapy on children – including young children. I wonder. During my therapy training internship I saw a few children. I taught briefly at Pratt Institute’s graduate art therapy program. Art therapy seems a painless way to glide children into deeper therapy. Despite these experiences I am very dubious of the effectiveness of therapy before children are well in their teens.

My reading of Freud and Piaget question its effectiveness. It’s common knowledge that children can be bluntly honest – sometimes embarrassingly so. Freudian literature suggests that children usually don’t learn to lie until somewhere around nine years of age. Psychologically it is not until around this age that they learn the thought they hear in their heads can’t be heard by other people – unless you babble them out loud. And vice versa. Maybe a young child thinks they know what other people think. It takes about nine years of experience before they recognize that sometimes their assumptions about what’s going on in other people’s heads are mistaken.

Lying doesn’t happen until a child is convinced that other people can hear their spoken words – but can’t hear the voices in their head. And the child can purposely mismatch the two. A lie is saying one thing while believing / hearing in one’s head / being told by one’s conscience or superego – another thing.

From a Piagetian perspective all of a child’s mental processes start with her- / himself. What the child sees / experiences is funneled through the one and only central processor that is known – their own brain. Piaget uses the term ‘egocentrism’ to signify that the child starts out and continues life for a long time thinking what they see and experience is all there is. The child’s ego is the center of all experience. It takes quite a while before the child discovers that the other people in their life actually have minds and thoughts and feelings that are not the same as the equivalent in the child’s head.

The relevance of this idea to therapy is that

 

I employed a law firm for a few months. It burned through my deposit at record speed.

I congratulate myself unabashedly because in the bigger picture any father employing a lawyer in Family Court steals money from the child(ren). Fathers usually want to use their money for things for the kids – like college education. Not for things for their lawyers’ kids..

 

This is in recognition of the principle that visitation is a joint right of both the noncustodial parent and the child and that the best interests of the child would be furthered by being nurtured and guided by both of the natural parents (seeBostinto v Bostinto, 207 AD2d 471, supra). Moreover, “[o]ne of the primary responsibilities of a custodial parent is to assure meaningful contact between the children and the other parent” (Matter of Raybin v Raybin, 205 AD2d 918, 921), and the willingness of a parent to assure such meaningful contact between the children and the other parent is a factor to be considered in making a custody determination (seeO’Connor v O’Connor, 146 AD2d 909, 910; 123*123 Lohmiller v Lohmiller, 140 AD2d 497, 498).

 

 

“A good man leaveth an inheritance to his children’s children”
Proverbs 13:22

 

 

There is,” wrote the literary critic Leon Edel, “no hurt among all the human hurts deeper and less understandable than the loss of a parent when one is not yet an adolescent,”

http://time.com/4856225/law-school-free-speech/

 

  • Time warps being the unpredictable things they are,

 

When she said “I am exercising my discretion, based on what I read in the Report ….” a naive listener might assume some rough diamonds would be dug out of the Jewish Board’s report. No shovels were dirtied in any report excavation. Every reason for ostracizing father cited in the “Decision” made its first appearance late in the “hearing” well after the Jewish Board’s report was logged in – and most of these gems were birthed only in mother’s direct testimony – about which father had no advanced notice, so his interrogation was handicapped.

 

 

 

My psychotherapy practice filled my four day a week appointment book only during a few of its middle years.

I might flatter myself into believing my legal issues didn’t spill over into my therapists’ demeanor. Possibly. But not certainly. No patient ever said the words, but it’s conceivable my mind was not always tuned to the right channel. Which makes for unsatisfied customers. Who hesitate before making referrals.

In the latter twentieth century the most popular college major in the US was Psychology. Undergrads who wanted to enroll in grad psych programs took the Graduate Record Exam as a rite of passage. The most popular cram book for the psych GREs was published by Arco a division of publisher Simon and Schuster. During lulls in my legal jousts I became primary author of three editions of the Arco GRE practice book. I once googled that my book was the best seller in Arco’s GRE catalog. But it never earned more than about two thousand dollars a year. A tablespoon of prestige. But hardly a gusher of big bucks.

I tried my hand at business to business and insurance projects to enhance my opportunities. Printers and the post office were the only beneficiaries.

My national professional association embarked on a scheme called “peer review.” It stunk to high heaven. People like me – and the six single-spaced pages of names of psychologists in the printed Manhattan telephone yellow pages directory – go into private practice to be our own bosses. The “peer review” plan wanted to corral us ornery stray cats to make us the national association’s employees . A bunch of us ingrates formed a dissident faction. I wrote a pamphlet titled “The Other Side Of Peer Review” – which danced all over the scheme’s fallacies. My side pretty quickly slayed those mice and gang their worst laid plans a-gley.

I rabble roused for a few months. But didn’t get a single referral for my therapy practice.

Professional organizations dripped into my blood stream. I was elected President of the New York Society of Clinical Psychologists. Decades later this title still induces an Erasmus-ian  chuckle. Alas the organization’s best days had passed. My impatient love interest didn’t have enough fight in her to keep this sick puppy alive. She succeeded me in office, then folded the organization into the larger state psychological association. Again, not one client referral.

 

 

I remained a socialist for several years, even after my rejection of Marxism; and if there could be such a thing as socialism combined with individual liberty, I would be a socialist still. For nothing could be better than living a modest, simple, and free life in an egalitarian society. It took some time before I recognized this as no more than a beautiful dream; that freedom is more important than equality; that the attempt to realize equality endangers freedom; and that, if freedom is lost, there will not even be equality among the unfree.”

Karl R. Popper, Unended Quest: An Intellectual Autobiography

 

 

most ‘experts’ are feminists = believe fathers have had their way for millenia

i don’t believe ‘science’ = academic suicide to disagree = which are the schools that disagree with feminism = where one can research and publish and earn a salary

self report science weak

strange. as an expert i could talk about child therapy. my phd piaget nyscp gre books my course at columbia grad – 3 papers on reading list

no independent child therapists. they lasts less than 10 sessions. break up the family balance. parents yank child out. same with marital counseling. very poor results.

 

An interesting tale of gender equity awareness was told by the nineteenth century British Queen Victoria, an obsessive diary writer.

Victoria knew from the cradle she would eventually be queen of the wealthiest empire in history. As most women of her time in the Western world did, she felt the need to marry. On her second meeting with Albert – a minor nobleman from an obscure German principality – she was ecstatically smitten. By all accounts their marriage was passionate and fulfilling. Except for the wifey part. Albert had a very clever plan to meld English nobility with European nobility, thus enhancing English power. Victoria’s part of the plan was to give birth to babies – some accounts say seven, others say nine.

She wrote “I think people really marry far too much; it is such a lottery after all, and for a poor woman a very doubtful happiness.”

Being the loyal wife took a toll on her body. After her husband Prince Albert died it is known she had “intimate” relations with two other men – but whether exchanges of bodily fluids was part of the deal is doubtful. Medicine in those days – even for the mighty British Queen – was shaky. Her expansive diaries illuminated many shocking topics. But not the issue of whether her post-Albert body would allow her to achieve carnal happiness. The safest bet of those who knew the medical confidences: probably not.

Not that Prince Albert in his lifetime escaped consequences. To all the world the British royal family lived lives without scandalous gossip. But one of their sons broke the mold. When it came time to go off to college their son Bertie didn’t model his behavior on his parents’ righteous ways. He definitely liked – and indulged in trysts with – the girls. One time Prince Albert went out of his way to visit his son at his college quarters at Oxford to read the riot act to him. It was a dark and stormy night, as they say. Father Albert caught a cold – his death of a cold. He died just a few days later. Bertie the younger didn’t take his father’s untimely demise as a warning from Heaven. British royal behavior took a distinctive turn from its Victorian to its post-Victorian days.

 

back several centuries fathers retired when sons earned money becoming an apprentice shifted costs of living onto master people didnt live long women were worn out bec they constantly had children

 

At one time in the early n – now – need consciousness raising on how society artificially constrains them into role1970s men were dubious that any part of the women’s movement thing would be good for them. Something excavated that skepticism. Maybe the storm of complaints that men owed it to women to get out of their way – ie induced collective guilt – did the trick. Or maybe men actually cottoned to the idea that women might contribute to making family economic lives easier. Within a few years men became as vocal as women trying to make the lives of women more compatible with the changing times – which is not necessarily a bad thing – at all.

Mes not suited to their talents or their desires. And how they can stop beating their wives.

Appendix 1: Kierkegaard and the Lower East Side

Loz DSC00050gemspa.jpg

By Alex Lozupone - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=50721614

The Lower East Side (LES) is the revered name of an area of Manhattan located on the southeastern corner of the island. Because rents were rock bottom in the late nineteenth century and half of the twentieth century it was home in waves to most of New York City’s incoming ethnic groups, such as Italians, Jews, Puerto Ricans etc.

The author arrived on the LES as an NYU student early in the 1960s. NYU had no student dormitories for its Manhattan campus at the time. It didn’t really need any because almost all its undergrad cohort consisted of New York kids who started college across the Hudson River but couldn’t hack it away from New York subway your-wate-and-fate scales, Chock Full O’ Nuts date nut bread, roast chestnuts, potato knishes with mustard and dirty water hot dogs. So they returned to their accustomed stomping grounds to wrap up their sheepskins at $39 a course credit hour.

Continue reading “Appendix 1: Kierkegaard and the Lower East Side”

Appendix 2: David Hume and chastity

David Hume (1711-1776) is one of the most influential Enlightenment writers in the English language. Although distantly related to minor nobility, Hume started life with no known advantages but a prodigious curiosity. His father’s sojourn among mortals ended soon after the boy’s second birthday. His mother Katherine (nee Falconer) – whom David in his autobiography called “a woman of singular merit, who though young and handsome” – raised David, his older brother and his younger sister in “slender” circumstances. Whatever occupational choices this handsome woman made obviously did not include the one choice women of different times chose to pave their ways to tainted gains.

David’s college admission papers and SAT scores gather dust in an as yet undiscovered storage bin. When unearthed they may settle the dispute whether he entered the University of Edinburgh at age 10 or 12. His classmates didn’t usually enter those hallowed halls until the riper age of 14.

College did not agree with the wee lad. Following his father’s footsteps into business law would have been the logical key to a bespoke life. But that darn restless curiosity steered him in a dodgier direction. He used his college years plus several more to drill himself in classical literature. He essentially home schooled himself, asserting that “there is nothing to be learnt from a Professor, which is not to be met with in Books.”

Another important figure in English letters and arts was William Blake (1757-1827). Hume was comfortable among Enlightenment thinkers, while Blake was not. Yet both agreed on the issue of learning. Blake wrote: Thank God I never was sent to School, To be Flogg’d into following the Stile of a Fool.”

Continue reading “Appendix 2: David Hume and chastity”