Running Game - Your Presentation

Many young, hot women quickly have sex with "jerks," especially jerks they think have money, power, or fame. The guys who appear to be dependable, stable, reliable, and nice - the guys who will be their puppy dog - these women hold those guys off until the women have "had their fun," and have a lot of baggage and fading looks, and need a man to play Captain Saveahoe.

If you think you need to be an "upstanding", successful man with a great job, honest and upfront, and romance a woman and pay her way in order to get sex, well, you've been lied to.

Even if you're not looking for sex, your presentation, like most of running game, can still protect you.

You can get sex in three inexpensive dates or less with one woman. Running game helps you find and enjoy the women who are either 1) sexually attracted to you based on your appearance or 2) will consent to have sex with you because they think you have, or are about to have, a lot of money, power, or fame. Of course there will be women who won't play, but running game smokes them out before you spend much time, money, or energy on them. It protects you from being a doormat, beaten dog, errand boy, or walking wallet.

You want the appearance of David, not Rick.

Most Marriages Fail

Here are some facts about marriage:

• A smaller percentage of the population in the USA is married than at any time in the country's history
• Absent an extensive and upheld prenuptial agreement specifying otherwise, legal marriage is a wealth transfer mechanism through which the wealthier/higher-earning spouse will be forced to pay the other
• Most women who marry will marry men who do, or will, earn more income than they will
• Legal marriage usually assigns paternity (which means two decades or more of financial obligation) to the husband, regardless of how the wife conceived the child, thereby using the force of law to perpetuate paternity fraud in the case of adultery
• Wives are far more likely to file for divorce than husbands
• Most marriages fail. 

That's right. MOST MARRIAGES FAIL.

If by success we mean "lasting and generally happy", which most people do, most marriages fail.

1) 33-40% of first marriages end in divorce. Subsequent marriages have a much higher divorce rate.

2) Of the marriages that don't legally divorce, easily at least 20% (and probably much higher) fall under one or more of the following categories:
  a) legal separation
  b) physical separation (some people stay legally married for decades after they've split, even if they haven't seen each other in years)
  c) sexual separation (ongoing infidelity, whether or not the spouses are still having sex with each other)
  d) emotionally dead (they are roommates, perhaps with shared financial accounts, largely indifferent to each other)
  e) hostile/abusive
  f) quiet desperation on the part of one or both spouses
  g) miserable (whether or not a-f is involved)

The reason the marriages in category 2 don't end in divorce are a varied: 1. One spouse murders the other, whether or not they then kill themselves (other than the person who claims to have found the body, the default suspect in the murder of a married person is their spouse... what does that tell you???) 2. Before divorce can take place, one or both spouses die (whether suicide, overdose, illness, accident, disaster, violent crime, etc.) 3. They were too chicken, masochistic or otherwise mentally ill, or too much creatures of habit to bother divorcing.

So, 33 (which is a lowball) and 20 (which is also lowball) add up to 53% of marriages being "failed" marriages. 

A failed marriage isn't just a problem emotionally/psychologically/socially/spiritually, for a breadwinnining man it can be financially devastating:

• Wives make 80% of the purchasing decisions in a marriage, meaning the earnings of a breadwinning man usually go to buying goods and services he'll never use and maybe never wanted. If she incurs debts, those debts are also his.
• In a divorce, he can be compelled to pay for her legal team as well as his own.
• She can get 50% or more of the marital assets, meaning anything he earned during the marriage, no matter how bad of a spouse she was.
• In some places, like where I live, ten years means she gets lifetime alimony. In the UK, a husband divorced for many years started earning much more income, only to have the courts compel him to pay even more alimony!
• She is more likely to get (more) custody of children, thus getting child support through college.
• Even if the husband didn't want another child and his wife conceived one with the neighbor, the husband can be compelled to pay child support for that child through college.

Since most marriages fail, and the state marriage contract punishes breadwinning men, what is wrong with warning men that most of them should avoid getting legally married? Shouldn't they be warned before they spend large sums of money, time, and emotional labor and capital on an engagement and wedding, and subsequent anniversary gifts, and arguing and counseling/therapy/retreats and all of the other things they don't want to do, and divorce lawyers? Given the statistics, isn't it a responsible thing to strongly caution men?

Some marriage sellers, even if they sometimes claim marriage will make men happier, dismiss happiness as a measurement of success. Catch them while they're in the right mood, and you'll find them saying that marriage is a duty or obligation and your happiness doesn't matter a hill of beans. They want people to marry because:

• They think it will mean more children, and more children raised in good conditions, because studies have shown that children raised in legally intact marriages have done/behaved better than children raised in other conditions.
• They don't want people fornicating.
• They don't want men doing other things they like to do, like play video games or hang out in bars, so it is better to have them running errands at the behest of a woman.
• Women and children are less likely to be on the dole if there is a father/husband in the home.

That's right, men. You are supposed to stop doing what you want to do, and pay for other people and do what they want you to do. "But women don't want to do family-generated chores and errands either!" All the more reason not to marry!!!

Marriage is extremely expensive for a breadwinning man, and most marriages fail. Bemoan these facts if you want, but they are facts, and we have to deal with reality.

Having a Family Doesn't Guarantee Happiness

Men Going Their Own Way

You Don't Need a Wife

To What Should Males Aspire?

Why You Don't Want to Get Married

Should You Have a Woman as a Friend?

Inspired by a comment, I want to explore the concept of you, a heterosexual man, having a female friend or multiple female friends.

I'm talking about actual friends, not mere acquaintances.

If you're married, shacking up, or in an exclusive relationship, and hopefully you're not - but if you are, you really "shouldn't" have female friends with whom your girlfriend/wife isn't friends, and certainly not ones your girlfriend/wife doesn't know about. 

"But Ken! I was friends with her before I started this relationship!" Yeah, well, this one of those countless reasons not to get into exclusive relationships in the first place. If your girlfriend/wife isn't friends with her, and you're not hiding her, she's almost certainly been the subject of arguments between you and "your" woman. Right? OK, for some of you unmarried guys, your girlfriend is waiting until you sign on the dotted line (which you shouldn't do!) before she starts trying to end your friendship.

But what about you free men? Is it OK, is it smart, to have female friends? And if you have such friends, should you become scarce around the holidays?

Having a Family Doesn't Guarantee Happiness

Matt Walsh, who I agree with some on some really big things, is back [this entry is being bumped up] to beating the drum to marry and pop out kids. He starts off his column at The Daily Wire citing comments by former First Lady Michelle Obama. [This entry bumped up from January 2021.]

The former First Lady was interviewed by "Blackish" star Tracee Ellis Ross and the women together lamented the fact that girls "still dream of weddings" and "Prince Charming." The two agreed that some women (Tracee Ellis Ross included) can sacrifice family for the sake of a career and be "happy as a clam." In fact, it would seem that Mrs. Obama — who is married with two kids — thinks this path is preferable, given that she considers it a problem when girls aspire to marriage. Ross provided compelling evidence to prove that her decision to forgo family life was the right call: "Look where I'm sitting," she declared. Yes, the summit of all happiness is to sit on a stage with a former First Lady. Truly, this is the eternal bliss for which we were designed.

Maybe Ross is happy? I'm not aware of Walsh having psychic abilities.

"Why Can't Men Be Upfront and Honest?" - Part 2

Part 1 of This Series

Short answer: Because that doesn't get them what they want. 

Longer answer:

Letting things go unspoken, letting women continue with their self-created delusions and misperceptions, engaging women by running game gets men what they want.

Let's consider a very familiar scenario.

Get a Vasectomy

Hey, you... sir... yes, you.

Chances are, whatever your situation, getting a vasectomy will be one of the best things you can do for yourself (if you're not already shooting blanks.)

Why? Because children take a lot of time, money, and energy, and complicate your life. They also tie you to a woman for the rest of life (with the possible exception of using a donated egg and rented womb). And, chances are, you can't provide a new child with a stable, lasting, loving, healthy marital home in which that child will be raised.

Whether you have children or not, you should probably get a vasectomy.

If you are 50 or older, you're too old to raise kids from birth, regardless of your wife's age, and you should definitely get a vasectomy.

But you should probably get one if you're younger, too.

If you aren't eager to have a(nother) child, you should probably get a vasectomy.

If you can't come up with a logical, coherent, rational, unselfish reason why you should have a(nother) kid, don't make a new child. This would be another human being we're talking about. Doing it because she wants it isn't a good reason. And you definitely shouldn't have a child if you already have a child (who wasn't adopted away) with a different woman, or if you aren't sure 1) you're with a woman who is good mother material, 2) you want to be with her for the long haul, 3) you're compatible, and 4) there are no red flags. (That pretty much means you shouldn't have a kid.)

I can give you reasons NOT to have a(nother) kid.

As I always say, I can't address every religion. I know there are religions out there that tell men not to get vasectomies. What I can tell you is that there is no Biblical command to avoid getting a vasectomy.

Condoms and other methods of contraception aren't 100-percent effective. Pulling out is not effective. Condoms are not always effective, women have been known to poke holes in them or retrieve the contents, women have tried to get themselves pregnant via “outercourse”.

The surgery itself is easy to go through. Mine was virtually painless. After having it lab tested a couple of times, it removes so much worry and uncertainty and risk. It reduces the amount of power any woman will have over you. Remember that each sperm cell a woman gets from you is like you handing her a blank check.

Even if you think you'll never have intercourse or any other kind of sex again, at least not with a fertile woman, get a vasectomy. Things change. And as strange as it sounds, a woman can still get your sperm even if you don't choose to have sex with her, such as by retrieving some after you masturbate or have a nocturnal emission or by assaulting you while you sleep. So, get a vasectomy to ensure that can't happen.

If you're worried that you might change your mind, freeze some sperm. But NEVER allow that frozen sperm to be donated.

So, ask your general doctor for a referral to get a vasectomy. Do not let anyone talk you out of it. This should be YOUR decision, not anyone else's.

One of the most basic things a man can do to protect himself, protect his life, protect his finances, and prevent himself from having to deal with a bitter, irrational creature who hates his guts is to get a vasectomy.


Motivations for Going Child Free

What A Woman Can Do With Your DNA

You Can Persuade Rather Than Parent

To What Should Males Aspire?

Running Game - Why Not Be a Romantic Gentleman?

Most of running game involves going AGAINST what you might think, what you've been told, works.

Don't go on dates arranged by coworkers or family members.
Don't buy her gifts.
Don't bring her flowers.
Don't meet her for lunch or coffee.
Don't take her out to a nice dinner.
Don't call her the next day.
Don't shower her with compliments.
Don't make holidays, her birthday, and anniversaries special for her.
Don't seek to make a good impression on her family and friends.
Don't be yourself or be your best self.

It works better for you if you don't show that you care, if you don't tell her everything about you, if you're not agreeable to everything she wants, if you don't show much effort, if you're not available most of the time, if you don't agree to see only her. Refusing to help her with her problems, compromise, or jump through hoops to impress her; acting like you have better things to do; and going after what you really want works.

Why would media lie to you? Because most media tries to appeal to what women want to see.

Why would your mother, grandmother, stepmother, aunt, sister, female coworkers, female neighbors, female friends lie to you?

Few, if any, of them are intentionally lying to you. They will say what they think sounds nice, or think they're supposed to say. But their goal isn't to get you laid, unless you have a very unusual relationship with them. Their goal is to get you paired up with a "nice", agreeable (to them) woman who will be their ally, their friend. The women in your life will tell you what they want men to do when they use those men for finance, labor, status, access, attention. Of course they want to be put on a pedestal and treated well. Oh, sure, they like it a lot when a man takes them out to a nice, expensive restaurant. Wouldn't you like it if someone paid for your nice dinner? Wouldn't you like someone to signal they will make your life financially easier? But that doesn't mean they'll be a great lover to the guy who does those things; usually quite the opposite. Even most articles, books, videos, or forum threads with women giving men advice on how to get laid will tell you what they WISH worked. But what actually works to get you what you want with as little trouble as possible is running game.

Romantic Gentlemen spend a lot of time, money, and effort, and what they get - if anything - is waiting for one woman until she's done "having her fun," is jaded and saddled, often, with debt, diseases, and kids. This woman might be available to him sometimes when it comes to what he wants. She'll always be available to let him pay for things and do chores for her, though.

Meanwhile, the guys running game enjoy the company of many different women without doing or dealing with much they don't want to. They don't spend much time, money, or effort to get what they want, and they do get what they want. Ask me how I know.

Running game works. Being the Romantic Gentlemen might work, if you want to be a doormat, a butler, and walking wallet.

Men and Women Do NOT Need Each Other

No, Dennis Prager, men and women do NOT need each other.

Pathological as he is, Dennis Prager raised the issue again during the weekly "Male/Female Hour" on his program, on December 6, 2023.

He said he doesn't know (heterosexual) men who say men don't need women. He must be ignoring or selectively forgetting some of his mail.

A man can live his entire life and thrive without a woman. A woman can live her entire life and thrive without a man. There are people who are doing this right now. There are people who've done it.

No individual person needs to reproduce. But yes, both a man and a woman are needed for reproduction ...for now. Science is rapidly ending that.

Sex? Clearly sex isn't a NEED, because many husbands are living without it. And many people say people should wait until they marry to have sex, and some of those people also say people shouldn't marry before they are 28. So sex may be a very strong WANT, but it isn't a need. And again, science/technology and art are making better and better masturbation aids, to the point in which it may become difficult to distinguish it from sex. Also, people can and do have sex without living together or being in an ongoing relationship that involves anything other than sex. I'm sure that's not what Dennis is talking about.

The government needs people to pay taxes, especially for their ponzi schemes. But male taxpayers don't need any of the taxpayers to be women, and vice-versa.

There are still some jobs for which it is very hard to find women to do them. But again, technology is making that less and less the case, and for now it means that women need men, not "a" man to herself. For this, men don't need women.

Dennis can’t even say men, or, more precisely, boys, need women for breastfeeding, as he has been a staunch denier of the need for breastfeeding.

People CAN live happy fulfilled, productive, honorable, worthwhile lives without ever living with the opposite sex, without working with them, and without having any as friends.

Men and women don't need each other.

Correlation Isn't Causation: Lower Risk of Divorce in Religious Young Marrieds

"A study shows that religious people who marry young and didn't shack up are less likely to divorce!"

The people who tout this want you to believe that if you're religious and marry young, without shacking up, you'll have a lasting, happy marriage.

Well, it might last legally.

There are other studies, though, that show that among all people who marry, people who marry in their late twenties are less likely to divorce than people who marry before then.

What gives?

There's a hint in the fact that people who marry really young don't have the time to cohabitate before they marry. It's a bit like saying that there's a low cancer rate among people killed in school shootings.

Here's what's going on.

People who are so religious that they get married young (this avoids unmarried sex) without having shacked up are also going to be so religious as to think that divorce is a terrible sin (also, they are probably living where - geographically and subculturally - there aren't a lot of options for other partners/spouses should they divorce). So they stay married.

Now, you might ask if these really are happy marriages.

The same people who want you to believe it's a good idea to marry young without shacking up also will tell you these people who've done that report that they are happy (with their marriage).

Of course they do! Because:

1. They see the alternative as being a terrible sinner, a pariah if they were divorced, looked upon with disapproval by the people who have been most important in their life. They aren't comparing their marriage to true freedom or another marriage. They are comparing it to having lawyers and courts and shaming and gossip and no sex or affection or company at all.

2. Admitting to researchers that they are miserable, or even just less than very happy, with their marriage is considered sin (such as ingratitude).

3. If they have picked up any of the "Word of Faith" type thinking, they would think it is a "negative confession" to say their marriage isn't great; they think it would make their marriage worse to admit it.

So, what happens? They stay together, miserable, and deal with it by eating, drinking, antidepressants, golfing, watching football all weekend, maybe beating each other up, having affairs, suicide, etc.

I know these people. I've been around a lot of them. A lot of them will claim to be ever so happy in their marriage right up until the moment they file for divorce, or kill themselves, or admit to an affair, or worse. Yes, some of them will divorce, just later.

I discourage most men from legally marrying or from shacking up, but if you're going to marry, DO NOT DO IT until you've achieved your dream. Don't believe these misleading reports. Yes, it would be nice to have a wife who "doesn't believe in divorce" but not if it means misery.

Running Game - Young Men Have Time On Their Side

If you're a young man or boy who is frustrated, anxious, or down about your experiences (or lack of them) with women, I want you to know that if you play your cards right, time is on your side.

Media and the rumor mill make it look like "every" guy except you (and a few "incels") are scoring with the ladies. But that's not true. There are many, many men in your situation.

You don't have to be handsome, tall, strong, rich, accomplished, powerful, or famous, or romance them like some guy in a romantic comedy or princess fantasy, to have fun with the ladies.

Time is on your side.

 

Why is that? Because as men get older, they tend to have more of what hot women want, and as women get older, they tend to have less of what most men want. That's true, even if it sounds unfair, sexist, misogynistic, or whatever anyone wants to say about it. Like it or not. It's a demonstrable fact. Look around. Older men, including those who are plain looking or downright ugly, can get young, hot, attractive women. In fact, part of your current struggle might be the result of the attractive women your age being busy with older men. In most relationships and marriages in which there is an age gap of more than few years, it's almost always that the guy is older and the woman younger. To some extent, this can even be seen in high school. There are attractive girls who go to at least one prom for every year of high school, because 11th and 12th grade guys want them. How many 9th or 10th grade guys are going to prom? Not many.

You don't see supermodels dating guys working in a fast food joint. Meanwhile, the sexiest men in the world usually don't care what the women they date do as jobs.

Women seek the man with the most wealth/power/fame their looks can attract, and men get the youngest and hottest women their wealth/power/fame can attract. The bigger the diamond on a woman's finger, the thinner the finger, unless she's a very rare case who was able to buy it herself or inherited it.

There are hot women you want right now, who think they'd never ever go out with you. But as time ticks by, as they age, as their youth slips away, as they gain baggage and lose fertility, the pool of guys they can date gets smaller and smaller. Almost all women, even the most beautiful, "hit the wall." Meanwhile, if you do things right, the pool of women you can date will get larger and larger (the pool will... the women won't.... I mean, the larger ones will wish they could date you, but you'll have your pick).

None of this is to say that poor men or fat or unattractive women can't be great people. Many of them are! This is strictly about the realities of dating.

And you don't actually have to be rich, powerful, or famous. But if you stay free and manage your wealth well, you will have plenty of "disposable" income as you get older.

Guys in their late 30s, their 40s, their 50s who don't have kids, don't have alimony payments, haven't lost their wealth in a divorce, have their act together, and don't have a wife or "exclusive" girlfriend are in high demand.

Time is on your side, young men.

"But what about right now?" Get your presentation together and working for you. And if that doesn't do it, well, more on that another time.

Keeping Boundaries As a Free Man

If you are a Free Man, meaning you don't have a wife and don't live with a woman, I implore you to enjoy your freedom. I also urge you to keep your freedom. 

That might sound easy. I mean, don't you have to decide to move in together and don't you have to ask a woman to marry you?

Sure, but it gets more complicated than that.

Some women literally scheme to get pregnant even though you've made it clear you don't want to have children. Some women incrementally move-in-by-stealth. Some women nag and nag and nag (and even get your family to join in) to get you to "propose".

You need to keep boundaries in order to stay a Free Man.

AVOID POP DNA TESTS. Don't buy them for your family, either. You can't stop them being foolish and taking them, but avoid taking one yourself. No good will come from one of those. The only time you should take a DNA test is through the advice and arrangement of your lawyer.


Monk or Ghost

This is the the most extreme way of staying a Free Man without literally going off to be an isolated hermit. Some men decide to avoid women as much as possible. They don't date, they don't have female friends, they don't work for or with women, and they don't have any professional or financial connections to women (for example, they refuse to have a woman as an accountant or doctor). That is extreme, but for some it works.


Stay Present But Independent

This is the less extreme way. You can still participate in society and interact with women. You just need to be persistent and firm in keeping yourself independent. Let's consider how to do this.

Entitlement

 
We have been told many times things like:

A man who has paid for a series of expensive, romantic dates isn't entitled to sex.

Husbands aren't entitled to sex.

Awesome, faithful husbands who are romantic and make their wife's life wonderful and much less stressful aren't entitled to sex.

Can't we all see that? Nobody is entitled to sex.

And, in the very same way...

Nobody is entitled to be heard.

Nobody is entitled to attention.

Nobody is entitled to romance.

Nobody is entitled to being treated to dinner.

Nobody is entitled to someone else's earnings.

Nobody is entitled to someone's else's residence.

Nobody is entitled to someone making sure they are safe.

Nobody is entitled to a ring.

Nobody is entitled to a wedding.

Right?

"You'd better listen if you want sex."

Not if he runs game!

If You Marry, You WILL Have a Prenuptial Agreement

The question is, will it be the default agreement put together by strangers (state law, left up to interpretation and application by a judge), or will it be customized to the two of you?

The state prenuptial agreement is TERRIBLE for breadwinning men.

You might think "I don't really have much." Maybe not. But with hard work and smart moves, that'll change. Don't cheap out! If you "cant' afford a prenup," you can't afford a wife.

Guys, you should NOT be marrying at all, but if you are going to legally marry or even just cohabitate, you need a customized prenup, and you need to do it right. Judges have thrown out prenups. Here's how to minimize the risk of that happening.*

1. The agreement has to be signed and notarized/filed/whatever BEFORE a wedding date is set, before there's a pregnancy, and before you live together. You do not want her to later claim she was in any way pressured or coerced or signed under duress.

2. She will need her own attorney and so will you. The attorneys will go over the agreement before it is finalized.

3. Along with your attorney, line up a professional videographer and a (retired?) judge to go over the finalized agreement with both of you and your attorneys, signing and dating it on-camera. The judge should confirm your date, time, location, identities, that you are of sound mind, that you're entering into this agreement willingly (no wedding date has been set yet, etc.), that you have your attorneys present and that you are satisfied with them, that you understand English, and go over each clause of the agreement to explain what it means and whether or not you consent to it. The idea is to make it virtually impossible for the agreement to be challenged later by claiming there was pressure or that something was unfair or not understood.

4. Make sure you have discussed with your attorney how to keep the agreement in effect. Certain things you might otherwise say or do could end the effectiveness of the agreement, and you want to be sure to avoid that. Don't let her pressure you into doing those things!


The specifics of the agreement will be up to the law and what you two and your attorneys work out. She might ask for a sunset so that if she stays with you a certain number of years, the state's agreement comes into effect. Avoid that! All that does is give her a countdown. Things that might be in the agreement might include, but certainly not be limited to, access to financial accounts, the conditions of any joint accounts, provisions for insurance, what each of you owned and owed at the time you entered into the agreement, the process for amending or changing the agreement, who will pay for what, what happens if there is a separation/divorce/incapacitation/death, what will happen with property purchases and sales, etc.

You want to protect any property or assets you would be bringing into the marriage. Have your own business? Plan to start one? What if you create something like a work of art or a game? These are things that need to be considered.

If you own a home, you'll probably need her to sign a quitclaim deed and you'll probably have to refuse to allow her to "help" with paying for or maintaining it.

In most places, inheritance is NOT community property. If anyone is leaving anything to you, they should leave it only to you, NOT including her, and you should keep whatever you get separate. For example, if it's cash, it would go into an account she has nothing to do with.

If there is a divorce, you're not going to be able to get away with paying her nothing. You're going to have to pay her something, but if you spell out what in the agreement, it can be far less than what you'd have to if you went with the state default.

Again, you most likely shouldn't be marrying (or living together) in the first place. But if you're going to take that risk, mitigate it somewhat with a customized prenup. If she won't agree, DO NOT MARRY HER.

Keep in mind, having children provides an end-run around a prenup. She can get a court to order you to pay "child support" well above what it takes to raise the children. No man should be conceiving children unless he sincerely wants to be a father.

*I'm not an attorney. Do not so much as share a residence, let alone marry a woman, without consulting a family law attorney.

Is College Part of a Racket?

Yes, college is part of a racket, in most cases.

But sometimes, people have to go along with a racket.

I have a Bachelors degree.

Charlie Kirk didn’t, and he was way more successful in his short life than I have been in my longer life.

But… Charlie Kirk was a rare man. Very few people are going to be able to make a living speaking and debating at colleges, doing a podcast/national radio show, leading organizations like Turning Point USA, and whatever else Kirk did. Few people have what it takes, and there’s only a few spots that exist for someone like that.

Employers demand degrees for many of their higher paying positions. For some, it’s legitimate. For others, it’s a lazy screening technique. But it’s a fact of life.

If you have a way you can make a legit, good living without getting a college degree, especially if you’ve already made a good living and didn’t get a degree (comment to tell us about it), good for you. That’s great.

But we shouldn’t pretend most people, especially most men, will thrive without a degree.

Yes, colleges are often Leftist, especially misandrist, indoctrination centers. Yes there’s a lot of waste and inflated costs. But as long as employers have degrees as a requirement for being hired or promoted, it’s a racket that must be endured.

I highly recommend anyone going to college but without a scholarship that covers all or most of it spend as little as they can by using their community college and state college systems. Yes, the “elite” schools enable lucrative networking. There are other ways of networking, though.

If you’re no longer in your late teens or early 20s, don’t let that discourage you from going “back to school.” If your goal requires a degree, go for it.

On the other hand, if you can thrive without college, and if you’re good at learning things other ways, don’t think you must go to college because you were “supposed to” or your parents always wanted you to.

It’s your life.

"Why Can't Men Be Upfront and Honest?" - Part 3

Part 1 of This Series

Part 2 of This Series

Women usually know within the first five minutes of meeting a guy whether or not they'd ever have sex with him. But it isn't like they'll tell the man. That would be upfront and honest.

Unless they are asexual or something is wrong with them, men want sex. Depending on their morals, religion, strategy, etc., they might be willing to wait for sex. They might want sex AND [fill in the blank... marriage, family, etc.]. But we all want sex. If we didn't, we likely wouldn't have asked the woman to date, meet us, or let us come over.

"But women want sex, too" you might object.

Yes, most women do want sex, at least for part of their life. But the average woman doesn't want sex as much as the average man. The average man also wants sex with a wider variety of women than the variety of men women want to have sex with. The worldwide history of humanity demonstrates this. It is beyond the scope of this posting as to why that is. But it IS the case. A man would have sex with just about every woman he sees who isn't absolutely hideous.

So... in general, it is the man's role to pursue the sex, as he is more likely to want it, and intercourse doesn't happen if he isn't turned on. (Please note, I'm referring to the initiation of the relationship. Once a sexual relationship is established, of course it's great with most men if the woman takes the initiative sometimes.)

The man wants sex. Otherwise there wouldn't be a date. The woman may or may not want sex. She might be going on the date for freebies, attention, to affirm to herself or signal to others that she's desirable, leverage, or many other reasons instead of wanting sex with the guy. If he runs game, he will either smoke her out as not wanting sex with him, or he'll get to the sex with less effort/time/money/emotion than the man who doesn't run game.

She might want sex upon meeting him, but if she finds out something about him - and it depends on the woman what those things might be - she might not agree to sex. So, for the man who is primarily looking for sex, the less he reveals about his true self, the better. That's the case for most men. There are exceptions (very wealthy men, for example). She doesn't need to know any more more about him because he's not there to live together, get married, and have children. He's there for sex. If she finds him attractive enough to have sex with him, between his physical appearance, his behavior with her, and what she thinks she knows about him, he doesn't want to say or do anything to change that.

But if she doesn't want to have sex with him, he wants to find that out as soon as he can so he can stop wasting time, money, and energy. She can be upfront and honest and tell him that right away.

Why would a man have an obligation to spend more effort/time/money/emotion than it takes for him to get what he wants? In these sorts of relationships, it is up to the individuals to seek out what they want, to initiate what they want, and to either agree to, or decline, what the other person initiates. These are not marriages. They are dating relationships, hookups, booty calls.

If the woman doesn't like what he's doing, she is entirely free to stop seeing him. She can be upfront and honest and tell him that it is her intention that she's not going to have sex with him (or have sex with him anymore) unless he spends more time and money on her, agrees to an exclusive girlfriend-boyfriend relationship, or whatever. Maybe he'll agree to wait or change the relationship. Or maybe he'll carry on as he has, and she will still allow him to show up for a booty call, despite what she's said. If she stays true to her word, he can either agree to the terms or move on.

This is a dance. Men will dance in a way that gets them what they want. It's generally women who either reward the dancer or not.


Part 1 of This Series

Part 2 of This Series

Part 4 in This Series

Dialoguing With Marriage Sellers

This happens a lot.

Marriage Pusher: Guys, marriage is great! I'm so happy!!! Married people are happier than singles!!!

Me: Most marriages aren't both lasting and happy.

Marriage Pusher: Marriage isn't supposed to be about your happiness.

Sometimes it's great to have it in writing.

Thinking Critically About Cohabitation

Introduction: Is Unmarried Cohabitation Bad?

I've been carefully mulling over just about everything I've accepted about sociology.

Let's look at shacking up (unmarried cohabitation).

Don't misunderstand. I'm against shacking up. But I'm also against misleading people.

Dr. Laura (and many socially conservative commentators) will tell callers that shacking up is linked to negative indicators, such as:

• It makes it less likely you will get married
• It makes is less likely you will stay married
• Increased infidelity
• More abuse
  

When Dr. Laura (or any other commentator) barrages someone with all of this, most recipients aren't prepared for it and don't have the wherewithal or the time to counter the claims. Indeed, as Dr. Laura says, she refuses to argue or debate, which seems strange if she's confident that she's right. She hits her callers with this and that's that.


How Do We Know If It is Good or Bad?

Entering A Bad State Contract Won’t Save the World

Attention Men!

You don’t have to enter into a terrible state contract to:

-Share life with a woman

-Take care of, provide for, and protect a woman

-Raise children

You don’t have to enter into a terrible state contract, share life with a woman, or have children to:

-Make America strong

-Be a good citizen

-Be a good Christian

-Be a good conservative

-Be a good Republican

-Be a good man

-Fight Leftism

-Live a good life

-Leave a legacy

-Change the world for the better

You can do those things as a Free Man.

Entering a terrible state contract that does little other than shifting your earnings and power away from you doesn’t do any of those things.

To What Should Males Aspire

Running Game - Should You Reveal Your Vasectomy?

In general, the less truth about yourself you reveal to the women you see/date, the better, because anything you say can and will be used against you, meaning it could turn her off or be used to track you down when you're done dealing with her.

If she wants children (no matter how far into the future), and especially if she's looking to get pregnant soon and/or by you (which she might not reveal), you being snipped is NOT something you want her to know, at least not at first.

On the other hand, if you have good reason to be certain she really, truly, sincerely doesn't want to get pregnant now or at any time in the future (and remember, women change their minds on this sort of thing, especially if they don't have any children), you might want to let her know.

If you don't tell the women you've had a vasectomy, and you know for sure you're shooting blanks, there may come a time when one of them tells you "we're pregnant." If that happens, you might want to get tested again if it has been a while. Once confirmed that the vasectomy is still effective, it is up to you how long you wait to tell her, but DO NOT pay for anything or sign anything that would imply you are the father. Do not buy any baby items. Do not pay for prenatal care. This will likely force the issue, but either way, when the time is right, produce a printout of your lab results and something indicating when you had your vasectomy. You should probably ghost her after that, and you may even need a letter from a lawyer or a restraining order against her.

Keep in mind, if she's trying to get you to think you're the father, it is because whomever really knocked her up isn't as successful as you (or, as she thinks you are), or she doesn't have any way to track him down. She's trying to get you to put your time, money, and sweat into raising someone else's kid for twenty years. So don't feel bad about shattering that game plan by confronting her with the facts, and then having nothing more to do with her.

Vasectomies are highly recommended for any man who wants to run game.

If you know anyone who has been subjected to paternity fraud, or attempted paternity fraud, or bogus pregnancy tests, comment below. Or comment if you have anything else relevant to say about this entry.

Good Luck With That

The Institute For Family Studies needs to promote marriage. So Alysse ElHage has this blog entry touting a new book that attempts to address marriage problems through churches. [This entry was bumped up.]

A few years ago, I was scrolling through Facebook to catch up with friends and family when I stumbled upon some news that made my heart sink.

As I've said, Facebook is a front row seat to a train wreck.

A married couple from the church my husband and I had attended for about 10 years had apparently split up since we moved away. Both the husband and the wife were popular leaders in our church and seemed to have a vibrant marriage that everyone admired. But now she was building a life with a new man in another state, while he raised their two children alone. As I was trying to digest this news, I discovered that at least five other married couples with kids from the same church had split up over the past few years. Two of the couples had been married for several decades; one couple less than five years. When I asked our pastor what happened, he was as brokenhearted as I was over the news, but he had no answers. He’d tried to counsel with some of the couples, but the spouse who wanted out (most often, the wife) was dead set on divorce.

Pay attention, men.

1. These were supposedly dedicated, churchgoing wives.
2. They seemed to have a vibrant marriage. You have no idea what's going on behind closed doors.
3. Decades of marriage can mean the wife gets set with alimony for life. In California (I don't know how many other states are the same), ten years of marriage sets her up for life.
4. The women are the ones leaving. YOU CAN'T STOP THEM. And, quite often, the more you try to treat them well, the more likely it is they'll walk all over you and leave.
5. The pastor claimed to have no answers. Most likely, he had answers, but doesn't want to say them.

You Can't Tell She'd Make a Good Mother

If you're looking for "the one," and you shouldn't be, you might ask "Will she make a good mother?"

Now, there are some red flags that indicate she definitely wouldn't be a good mother. But just because you don't see certain red flags (yet) and think she's compatible with you and on the same page when it comes to parenting does NOT mean she will actually be a good mother.

There really isn't any way to know for sure.

In the good ol' days, she didn't have much choice. She'd better do things your way. Things are very different now, with a culture that undermines parenting.

She might SAY she wants to raise children, but just like you, she really has no clue. Being an older sibling, or babysitting someone else's kids can cause someone to legitimately realize they don't want children, but they're not a good way to decide that one DOES want to parent. How can things work that way? Because if children irritate, annoy, exasperate, or otherwise bring you down, that's enough to know you shouldn't raise any, but even if you enjoy being around them, that's far different from being their parent, who is financially, socially, morally, and legally responsible for them 24/7/365 for 18 or more years.

Having a dog isn't being mom to a human child.

There are some definite signs, other than not liking kids in general, she's not mother material. She wouldn't make a good wife. Her career comes first or she has a highly demanding career (long/odd/extra days, frequent travel, instability/having to hop from company to company, emotionally draining/stressful, leaves her exhausted); she's misandrist; she's impatient or easily angered; she needs everything neat and orderly; she's unhealthy; she's mentally ill; she's a substance abuser; she's irresponsible; she's abusive; she isn't nurturing or affectionate.

Other things are harder to discern.

If she already has children, you shouldn't be with her, let alone making more with her or bringing your kids around her and her kids.

You can't tell with reasonable certainty a woman will make a good mother, and frankly, you probably shouldn't marry.

So you probably shouldn't have kids, or if you are going to have kids, you might want to consider not having a wife and keeping control by using a donated egg and a surrogate for gestation.

It’s Not Too Early to Form Your Holiday Game Plan

Free Men, and men who want to be, it's NOT to early to think about the holidays, and by that, I mean Halloween, Thanksgiving, Hanukah, Christmas, New Years, and Valentine's Day. 

There are two main considerations for you:

1) Dealing with family and "friends" who will be asking you (or pestering you) about your status as a free man. You know how it goes. "When are you going to get married?" Questions like that.

2) Avoiding spending those special days with a woman who wants to take away your status as Free Man, or will be expecting you to spend a lot of time, money, and effort on her.

Don't do something something foolish and start thinking there is "the one" to whom you should hand over your freedom. Don't be so ignorant, delusional, or masochistic that you're thinking you want to be exclusive with a woman.

It Is NOT a Public Health Crisis

The latest tactic (or, at least, the latest that I've noticed [this entry was bumped up and was published a couple of years ago]) of "anti-porn" activists is claiming it is a "public health crisis" and seeking to have it declared as such by governments. Doing things like this might rile up the people who already agree with them, but it makes them look extremely foolish and lessens their credibility. It's also feeds a problematic trend, as David Boaz of the Cato Institute points out so well here.

Tactics matter. The tactics used  to get what you want can also be used by others to get what they want. Live by the sword, die by the sword. Hmm, here have I heard that expression before?

Boaz leads off with what prompted him to write:

A Republican National Convention platform committee has declared pornography “a public health crisis.” Committee members don’t seem to know what “public health” means.

Lately it’s been liberal Democrats who have applied the “public health” label to everything they don’t like — smoking, obesity, venereal disease, motorcycle accidents, and more. They see “public health” as a blank check for government action.

Exactly. By claiming it is a "public health crisis" the people who pushed for this to be in the party platform are hoping they can make this an exception to the desire for smaller government. Here's the danger to the party: Millions of people view porn and then don't perceive there to be any problem as a result, so when a party platform calls it a public health crisis, they think the party leaders are being stupid.

More Fun With Statistics - Body Count and Marriage

"People who have no or fewer sex partners before marriage are more likely to be satisfied with their marriage and less likely to divorce."

Have you heard that or some variation of that?

Even if true, it would be completely useless to you if you've already married. If you've had "more" sex partners, then it would be all the more reason to avoid that terrible state contract! Or if she has. If you both have, that's EVEN MORE reason not to marry.

But some will find that statement useful in telling younger people to or anyone who has has "fewer" sex partners why they shouldn't have (more) sex outside of marriage.

It won't deter anyone who doesn't want to get married.

And it might not deter people who are good at analyzing data and statistics.

Let's look at a couple of graphs that are being used to push this message.

As Panscan points out, we're not seeing the entire graph. There's a 5 percent difference between people who have had 2 partners and people who've had eleven, twelve, or scores of partners. But it looks more dramatic when you remove all of the graph under 50 percent.

Also, if we're going to take the graph seriously, men who've had 6-10 partners are better off than men who've had four or five partners, and women who've had 11 or more partners are better off than women who've had 4 partners.

Even if a man "waited" for sex, there's still a 27 percent chance - more than 1 in 4, he will admit to not being very happy in his marriage. And for women, that's 35 percent - more than one in three!

Finally, notice that the husbands are happier than wives. Guys, don't be selfish by asking a woman to marry you!

Now let's look at the second graph.

This graph uses months.

Notice that people are divorcing a couple of years in. Guys, if you're foolish enough to marry, refuse to spend much on the wedding and related events.

80 months in (so a little over 6 and a half years in), the lowest rate of divorce is still 10 percent, meaning 1 in 10 couples. Most people will have had a 25 percent divorce rate! 1 in 4 couples!

Also, if we take this graph seriously, if you've had one premarital partner, you might as well have had countless, at lease as far as six years or so down the line.

What is really going on here?

Is It Really Sacred?

Since I listen to every (new) minute of the Dr. Laura Program, I heard her give this monologue recently. It has been posted on her website as a blog post. I still don't see an ongoing blog tab anywhere on the site, but this was tweeted out (by her staff, since she doesn't touch Twitter). It is titled "Respect Your Marriage Vows by Not Shacking Up First".

As regular readers of this blog know, I think shacking up is a generally bad idea; it's almost as bad as legally marrying.

But Dr. Laura promotes marriage and is against shacking up. Dr. Laura maintains that her program is a secular, non-religious program. But if you pay attention, she invokes religious concepts sometimes.

If someone isn't planning to marry, shacking up can't possibly disrespect their marriage vows. And now, many, perhaps most people, who do want to marry will refuse to do so without first living with the person they are considering as a possible spouse. The secular world has made it clear that they see shacking up as a normal part of relationship cycles. Without invoking religion, it is extremely difficult to explain how this would disrespect their future marriage vows. Dr. Laura has tried to teach that it is objectively detrimental to shack up, which I address here. In this blog posting of hers, she tries to explain why shacking up is bad a different way.

If you call anything a ‘piece of artwork’ or if you call something sacred, don't you immediately look at it differently from everyday objects or experiences? It doesn't matter if you're religious or not, I think when we say something is sacred, everybody lowers their voice and shows more respect. It's not accidental.

So, playing a mind game with oneself? Then someone could call shacking up "sacred" and this is all over.

Use This Neat Trick to Have More Free Time, Money, and Happiness

DO NOT MARRY! Don't live with a woman. Do not promise exclusivity to a woman. Do not spend money on women (at least not more than $60 per date.)

That will leave you with more free time, more money, and happiness as you'll have a peaceful home and get to do what you want, when you want, how you want.

Stay free. Stay a Free Man.

You can have a full, happy, productive life without ever marrying.

Most men shouldn't marry.

You weren't born with a wife.

You don't need a wife.

There's a lack of marriageable women. Red flags abound.

Marriage is a bad deal for most men.

Most marriages fail.

Here's my open letter to Dennis Prager countering his encouragement of men to marry.

Dennis Prager’s Status

Dennis Prager suffered a spinal cord injury in an accident in November 2024.

He has now stated he’s paralyzed, which I think was something left unsaid until recently.

I listened to every minute of his radio program via the paid subscription when it was on the air. It has been off the air since his accident (he had guest hosts at first, if I recall correctly, until his company shuffled the lineup).

He was fairly busy in addition to the radio program, with writing books and columns, his PragerU, public speaking and appearances, endorsements, and other video and audio media he’d do (the Dennis and Julie podcast, Fireside Chats, etc.).

I expect he will not be returning to doing a daily radio program. Not because a paralyzed person can’t do radio - they can, although for all I know he has difficulty breathing - but because even before the accident he was feeling the limits of his time. Based on things he’s said over the years, I’d think completing his Rational Bible series and other writings, along with planning the future of PragerU, take priority.

I pray he has many good years still ahead of him.

While I agree with most of his opinions and positions, I contend his highest priority is telling men to marry and have children; I have many posts here arguing against many of his claims in that area and my position is most men shouldn’t legally marry.

I have been reluctant to make new posts along those lines referencing him, and bringing past entries referencing him that are still relevant back to the top of the blog.

I might only focus on what others in the public square are saying, or I might resume referencing Dennis Prager’s fixation. But if I do the latter, I didn’t want to do so without first pausing to offer my prayers for him here and acknowledging that he’s not in the same position he used to be to clarify and defend his positions.

Time

 
Time is limited.

Life goes by fast.

Memento mori.

I knew this from an early age. Unlike many other people my age when I was a kid, I wasn't always looking forward to being older. I knew that I was only going to be 11, 12, 13, etc. once. I knew that time moves in one direction. I suppose part of it is that I had a generally good childhood. My parents, for the most part, were really great parents. It wasn't all a bed or roses. But I look back on it mostly fondly, and I think my parents generally gave me a better childhood than my kids are getting.

Ask any lucid old person who isn't in constant unbearable pain, even someone on their death bed, and they'll tell you that life is short.

I'm at the age where I most likely have fewer years ahead of me than behind me.

I bring this up because it is one reason I encourage men (and women!) to be, stay, and enjoy independence. Enjoy life. Stay free. Don't waste your time.

There are things we must do even if we don't want. Others, not so much. For most men, what we now call marriage isn't what they really want to do, and they shouldn't. But this doesn't have to be about marriage. It can be about staying in a job when you are able to survive without it. Or putting up with a "friend" who brings more bad than good to our life, or trying to keep a relationship with a relative who isn't a good person, or continuing an activity that has lost overall benefit to you.

It's why you shouldn't put give scam calls/texts/emails or door-knocking salespeople or a movie you find lacking in purpose to you a second more time than absolutely necessary.

Time is slipping by. Each of us has less time in this life every second that goes by.

Life is short. Time is precious. Don't waste your time.

Unpaid?

"When someone is selling something, they don't like it when other people sell the same or similar product or service for much less." - Me [This entry has been bumped up.]

On Dr. Laura's Thursday, June 18, 2020 show, she took a call from a woman who has had a boyfriend for three years and she called about the possibility of talking marriage. Dr. Laura asked her if they were having sex. Of course the answer was yes. Dr. Laura called her an unpaid whore, which is a term she tends to apply to shackups, which the caller noted because they weren't living together. Dr. Laura went on to say that women like the caller are "giving men sex for nothing."  (I may be conflating the call with another one from the same episode, during which a man challenged the wisdom of marrying without having lived together.)

Aren't they giving each other company and sex? What exactly is he getting out of the relationship that she is isn't?

Again, we see the principle that men are expected to pay for sex, or that women don't enjoy sex.

And, we have no idea what bills of hers he's paying, or what gifts he's giving her. If he's taking her to nice dinners and paying for her vacations, entertainment, recreation, etc., then she is getting paid.

Dr. Laura brought up the white wedding dress and how it's not fair for women who aren't virgins to wear them. Except the truth about white wedding dresses says otherwise.

Being Older and Childfree

Ever obsessed with getting other people to marry or remarry and have children and completely baffled that there are people who want a different life from his, Dennis Prager asked (rhetorically, not as a call-in topic) during Hour 1 of his Wednesday, May 22, 2024 radio show what childfree people think as they get older.

I’m not childfree. I invite anyone who is “older” and childfree or has heard from someone who is, to leave a comment.

I’ll give a few examples of what I’ve heard:

Wow, I am enjoying retirement so much. Staying childfree allowed me to retire, and do so with enough money and freedom I can do the things I want.

Thank goodness I don’t have to deal with problematic children or grandchildren, like my classmate, who’s always talking about the drama she’s going through.

It’s great having the house I want and having it the way I want. It’s clean, orderly, set up for adults, and not all run down and dirty.

So glad I didn’t have to pay for college and weddings for kids and grandkids like my coworkers did. They’re still working while I’m retired.

Go ahead and add what you’ve thought or heard.

Is That Really in the Good Book?

I added a link in the right column of this blog. It's for a website called Biblical Sex. Maybe you don't consider the Bible an authority on matter of sex, but you probably interact with people who do. Some people try to base laws on it. We often hear people appeal to what they think the Bible says about sex, erotic media, erotic fantasies, and looking at the bodies of other people.

The Biblical Sex website tries to clear up what the Bible actually commands and doesn't command, in doing so, the website often disagrees with that is taught in certain conservative religious organizations and movements. I'm not saying I agree with everything the website says, just that it is worth reading the articles there.

Continue to read this entry if you have any interest.

The Importance of an Emergency Fund

Less politely, they are called "F--- You Funds."

You need a minimum of six months, ideally a year, of liquid funds. This would be enough to cover your hard expenses if all of your income stopped: mortgage/rent, utilities, vehicle/transportation, clothing/laundry, medical/health visits and costs, groceries, necessary memberships and subscriptions, etc. You can get an over-estimate by looking at every outgoing payment out of your bank or credit union account for the past year, and totaling that up.

Why? Because your employment might change. Life changes. Emergencies happen. Disasters happen.

You want to have the fund in place so that if your employer(s) disappear, or become too much trouble, or decide they don't need you anymore, you can walk away and be OK. Do you know what it is like to be at a job mostly for the fun of it, knowing that if things are no longer fun, you can walk away and be OK? I had a time in my life like that. (Unfortunately, I made the mistake of marrying, so that changed.) Having an emergency fund doesn't turn a blah or lousy job into a fun one, but it does give you peace of mind and a lot of flexibility.

If you're truly living paycheck to paycheck, without an emergency fund, something is wrong. You need to change that somehow. Cut expenses. Get a raise. Get more work. Change jobs. Sell some of your stuff. If you have debts, pay those off, starting with the debt with the highest interest rate first.

You need to put aside as much money as you can on a regular basis until you have a full fund. Have it automatically move from your checking account to your savings account, if you can. Or into some relatively safe, liquid account like brokerage account. Once you do have that fund in place, consider continuing the diversions, to an investment account. Unless you're elderly or terminal, you should be investing and saving up. Think of it this way: plan, budget, save, invest, and insure.

Guys, this is much easier to do if you don't have a wife and kids for which to pay. If you have an emergency fund and you make the mistake of marrying, at least ensure, with a lawyer, that your emergency fund stays separate. It will help you if there is a divorce. Do what your lawyer says: Do not co-mingle that fund, do not spend it on stuff for your marriage, or for your wife. ALSO, if you get an inheritance, work with a lawyer to keep that separate as well. THAT can be your fund if you don't have one already.

You Don't Need a Girlfriend

Boys and men need to know that they don't need a wife and don't even need an exclusive girlfriend.

When I was growing up, what I learned from media - everything from advertisements to movies to television shows to books and especially music - was that "everyone" had a girlfriend and then a wife. If there was a breakup with the girlfriend, you had to find another girlfriend. This was how to be happy. Guys who didn't have a girlfriend or a wife, if they weren't gay or Catholic priests, were losers. My parents didn't tell me that, but they had each other. I didn't have an older brother to show me any differently.

It wasn't until I was heading into my mid-twenties that I finally realized what a load of crap that message was.

A really awful engagement was ending and I realized I'd rather be alone the rest of my life than endure any more of that.

I could have saved myself all sorts of trouble, all sorts of negative thinking going all the way back to sixth grade, if I had learned that it is OKAY, even preferable, to NOT have an exclusive girlfriend. Ever!

If Enough Churchgoing Men Refuse to Marry, Polygyny Will Be Encouraged

"What's next? Polygamy?"

That was often heard, especially from Religious Right people, during the successful battle to extend, nationally, state marriage licenses to same-sex couples. For a long time, religious conservatives (Evangelical Christians especially) have insisted heterosexual, married monogamy is the ideal and the only acceptable sexual relationship.

The way the marriage-and-family ministries have talked about polygamy, or anything that isn't monogamy, you'd think the Bible emphatically condemns anything that isn't monogamy. 

But it doesn't.

The Biblical case that "monogamy is the only way" is a very weak one. It is based on trying to say that polygamy (polygyny, really) in the Bible led to problems. You won't find any passage in the Bible that actually says monogamy is the only acceptable relationship. On the contrary, many heroes of the Bible had multiple wives (and more). 

I have a prediction.

If more and more men, including churchgoing men, go on a marriage strike, some of these religious organizations that have warned against polygamy will switch to encouraging it. For the LDS church, that would be familiar territory. These organizations will encourage it because they want women to marry and have babies, and lots of babies, and if there aren't enough men, they will break down and encourage women to share husbands. 

Just wait.