A Detrimental Partnership

Some things in your life, you do well. You know a lot about those things, maybe from experience, maybe from formal education and training, maybe from educating yourself. You do those things well and will likely be able to do those things well until you die or unless you get serious dementia.

Imagine if someone came into your life who clearly, objectively, provably, wasn't very good at doing one of those things, or at least nowhere near as good as you, yet you now were compelled to partner with them in the matter, meaning they would get to make a lot of the decisions, or you were expected to clear every significant decision with them.

This is what can happen when a man who has his financial act together marries.

A Change in Perspective

At the opening of her Wednesday, January 18. 2023 program, Dr. Laura read something written by a man with the title of  "All The Wrong Reasons I Pursued Love with Women Why I'm Changing Now".

Here's what it said:

*****
I was taking women out because I lacked the confidence to say no.

I had a fear that if I didn't spend a lot of money or time on them they wouldn't want me or see me.

I was using dating to get my needs met. Sometimes I was just horny and needed some fun or relief, but I wouldn't communicate that.

I felt that nobody would give me that, so ultimately I would end up paying for an expensive date out and about, listening to her babble on and on, and buying her gifts.

I also had a belief that my value was tied to my wealth.

I also learned that when I was horny and not having sex, I wasn't able to think clearly anymore.

It no longer became about enjoying life, but about ego. Will she stay with me? Am I good enough for her?

I never asked myself if I was enjoying these relationships.

I also learned that I could do and have what I wanted without giving up so much of my time, money, and freedom.

We have a tendency to spend and do tasks to keep a woman because of fear, and this is something I wanted to challenge.

I want to see what it is like to stop paying costs I didn't have to, and trust I will have a better life if I learn to limit my dates and learn to enjoy my own company.

And I have a feeling that will be much more rewarding than I can imagine.

I've also learned that my hard work and resulting earnings are sacred. I want to keep control over my wealth.

I will no longer take women on lavish dates who don't want to have the kind of fun with me that I like.

Staying free has helped me develop my own set of beliefs and flourishing into someone I can respect.
*****

Just kidding. That's not what it said. Everything above does have an analogy to the sentences Dr. Laura read. But what she read was from something written by a woman and the title was "All the Wrong Reasons I Slept with Men Before and Why I’m Changing Now." Dr. Laura DID NOT cite on the air where the essay was posted and who wrote it. Instead, she was very limited in what she actually read from the essay, even removing important phrases from some sentences.

Dr. Laura left out the parts about how this involved supposedly Buddhist meditation, from someone raised as a Southern Baptist, and how this person doesn't believe in a need for get a state license for marriage, nor for marriage to be permanent; check in frequently to see if the relationship should continue. What we have here is a woman who rode the carousel. And now that she's older, her hormones are changing, and the men she can attract aren't as high in their social status, she's basically saying she's only going to have sex if she feels an emotional connection, rather than just for recreation. She can still go through many men per year, but she's going to pretend it's much more profound than what she was doing before.

I'm not faulting a single woman for thinking she's going to put more meaning behind when she has sex. But let's be clear about what's going on here, and what Dr. Laura did with the text.

And what we have another example showing that men can get young women with no strings attached and little time, money, and effort spent by running game.

The Men Who Are Beaten Dogs

The best humor contains a lot of truth. Check out the late great Sam Kinison's first appearance on national broadcast television, on Late Night with David Letterman:


That was in the 1980s. Things have gotten worse since.

Beaten Dogs are the opposite of Free Men.

They are emasculated. Their dreams have been killed.

We all know beaten dogs. Some of us are beaten dogs.

Beaten dogs deny themselves, or are denied, not only their dreams, but peace, quiet, autonomy, freedom, and many joys. They are often denied the ability to enjoy the fruits of their own labors. Their current lot in life is quiet (at least usually) desperation, servitude to an irrational and often abusive creature in the form of a wife, girlfriend, or babymamma.

Quite often, what accompanies this, if not retired or on disability, is employment in bleak conditions, often until they die. They are lucky if they have one space at home that is truly their own, and any time with the guys, apart from the clucking hens, shrill shrieking shrews, and ungrateful brats.

If a Beaten Dog has a job they enjoy, they will try to spend as much time on that to avoid being home. Otherwise, they might take up golf or bowling or try to find some other way to hang out with guys.

Make no mistake. Beaten dogs put themselves into this situation. They believed what was sold to them about relationships, marriage and/or parenting. "They didn't choose the right woman," say many observers. For most of these men, there was no such thing. The problem is that they didn't take the necessary steps to be and stay Free Men.

Can a Beaten Dog become free? Yes. But it takes changing just about everything, takes a lot of time and energy, and a whole lot of money. It almost always means needing to move and get a divorce. It means the loss of a lot of supposed friends, and possibly losing relationships with their sons and daughters, and maybe their parents and siblings as well.

Prevention is best. Stay free!

Running Game as a Father

If you have children, you need to make them your priority. If you're no longer with their mother and reconciling isn't possible, don't bring more chaos to their lives via new women and the children of those women.

Running game can help with that, because it minimizes the amount of time, money, and energy you spend on women and keeps those women separate from the rest of your life.

Get a vasectomy if you haven't already. Your kids don't need you making half-siblings for them to deal with.

Date when your kids are not with you. If you have full custody, see if your siblings or parents can babysit, but accept that you're not going to have as much free time or freedom as if you were a completely free man. Do not date when your minor children are with you, even if they are teens who can stay home without you. They need your attention.

Never bring any of your lovers around your minor children. Don't make the mistake of thinking you need a girlfriend or wife to be a mother figure for your children. If their mother isn't in their life, and you think they need a mother figure, move next to your sister or mother. Even if you'd foolishly want to marry (again or for the first time), marriages in which there are stepchildren have a very high failure rate.

If their mother is bringing her new lovers around them, if she even makes more babies, you can't control that, and it is all the more reason for YOU not to add chaos to the lives of your children. Make sure your children are aware and will report if any of their mother's lovers or the lover's children abuse or attempt to abuse them, because according to reported statistics, abuse is more likely in such situations.

If you didn't avoid creating a broken home for children, consider running game as how you handle dating.

Who Is Right About Staying Together For the Kids - Dr. Laura or Dennis Prager?

Dr. Laura's priority is the well-being of minor children. She has experience as a marriage and family therapist, although she's far more experienced as a radio talk show host and author dealing with family problems, moral dilemmas, values, ethics, and more.

Absent actual abuse, she tells married parents who want to divorce to wait until the youngest child is 18 years old, up and out of the home. Her reasoning is that this avoids breaking up the child's home and bringing chaos into their lives while they are minors.

Dennis Prager, who says people should divorce instead of living in misery, says that it can be worse for the children to be in their (adult) late teens or early twenties and then have their parents split, because then the now-grown children think of their family life as fake or a lie, and they can still get extremely upset about the divorce.

It should be noted that Dennis Prager, who has no formal experience as a marriage and family therapist and has written much less on parenting/family and spends fewer talk show hours discussing those issues, has had more children than Dr. Laura and one more divorce than her (Dr. Laura was not a mother when her first marriage ended).

It's one of the things I would very much like to hear these two radio talk show host veterans discuss directly. I doubt that will ever happen since their shows aren't part of the same company. Also, because Dr. Laura refuses to argue/debate on her show, and my guess is that would also include any other show as well (this is probably one big reason she didn’t appear anyone else's show for many years, except for one on the same channel as hers - on which she doesn't argue.)

Unlike either of them, I would advocate most people avoid this question entirely by not marrying.

We Are Not a Project

I found a column by Suzanne Fields at conservative site Townhall. With a headline of "A Good Man Is Still Hard to Find" I took notice. [This entry has been bumped up.]

Women have been complaining since the original Adams family was evicted from the Garden of Eden that "A good man is hard to find."

Whining, complaining, nagging... yep.

Despite radical feminist mockery of the very idea of manliness, that men are natural sexual predators, most women -- with very few exceptions -- still want one.

Of course they do! It's nice to have the cash flow, the bodyguard, an errand boy, and a receptacle for your whines and gripes and thoughts.

The #MeToo movement has nevertheless changed a lot of things in the wake of the sexual harassment-scandal season. One of them is the regard in which men are universally held by women. It often seems we're back to the '80s, when there was a similar assault on the idea of manhood and some women decried all sex as rape.

Radical feminist activists Catherine MacKinnon and Andrea Dworkin were widely credited with saying that "all sex is rape" and "all men are rapists." They both deny the statements, but Dworkin conceded that she did say, "Penetrative intercourse is, by its nature, violent."

No wonder men are choosing to To Their Own Way (see MGTOW).

An Answer to Dennis Prager's Question

Dennis Prager, who, perhaps, prioritizes promoting marriage over everything else, used his Wednesday, June 29, 2022 "Male/Female Hour" to talk about ultimatums to marry.

Men, if she gives you such an ultimatum, do NOT give in.

Dennis Prager asked "What's the rational response to 'If you love me, you'd marry me.'?"

Here it is. Put on your glasses, Dennis. Look closely.

"If you love me, you won't encourage me to enter into a terrible state contract that is detrimental to me."

There it is. That's the rational response.

It is rational to refuse to enter a terrible contract.

A man and woman can love each other, still commit to each other, still share their lives, still take care of each other and do everything good any other couple does, without that terrible state contract.

They can even draw up legal contracts, if they'd like, including cohabitation agreements (never do it without a lawyer, guys).

Dennis Prager also said he can't think of any reason to not marry someone you've been with for years. I know Dennis Prager is a better thinker than that. Here you go.

An open letter still awaits. I've been listening to Dennis Prager and reading his writings for years. I have yet to hear or see him fully address why the benefits unique to marriage outweigh the unwanted obligations and disliked limitations of that bad state contract.

Stay free, men!

A False Dichotomy

Dr. Laura asserts the following dichotomy to her callers and her audience:

• Marriage means, among other things, having a state contract, making vows, living together, sharing finances, sexual exclusivity in complete privacy. Otherwise, it isn't marriage.
  
  
• Those things aren't part of dating, especially long-term dating, or living together without a state license (shacking up). There are no obligations and there are no agreements, such as an agreement to sexual exclusivity.

According to her, romantic relationships are either marriage as she defines it, or, if two years or fewer old, are mutually agreed to be on the way to marriage, or they are aren't worthwhile and there are no rules.

She's allowed to say what she wants on her program. But she can't dictate this for anyone else. The dichotomy she presents does not describe reality.

There are married people who don't have a state license, never had a ceremony, keep separate finances, spend substantial periods of time apart, and/or aren't sexually exclusive. They use the terms "husband" and "wife," treat each other as spouses as far as doing things together and generally putting each other first and caring for each other, are recognized as spouses by the people around them, and might even be recognized as married by the state.

There are unmarried people who have been together for years, live together, share finances, and/or have agreed to sexual exclusivity. The people around them recognize that they are a couple and respect their agreements.

These things are happening every day. Millions of people do these things. This is going on, whether I like it or not and whether anyone else likes it or not. And for the record, I'm generally against, in most cases, agreeing to an ongoing exclusive relationship, living together, or marrying.

A state-licensed marriage isn't the only personal relationship with rules. Friendships usually have rules. So do most unmarried romances. Commitment is in behavior. The state license isn't a commitment to do anything other than have the spouse who earns more pay the other.

If she's going to deny a caller's reality, the reality they've been living, the caller should probably consider getting advice from another source.

Running Game - The Hot Sauce Trick

If you're running game, ideally you've had a vasectomy and it tests as still being effective. If that's not the case, you shouldn't be having intercourse without a condom, one that has only been in your possession, not hers. You might want to use a condom even if you have had a vasectomy, for STD prevention. NEVER rely on a woman saying she can't get pregnant or is using some form of contraception. Countless men who have relied on that are stuck with children they didn't want or child support payments, dealing with women who are nightmares.

Either way, used condoms go in the trash, not down the toilet, because that can cause plumbing problems. You need to carry a small bottle of Tabasco or habanero sauce with you when you do this.

Why?

Because adding a few drops of such sauce to a used condom you then place in the trash will let you know if she tries to retrieve the condom to use your sperm against your will. Yes, women have tried this, and yes, the hot sauce trick has worked.

It's Not Healthy to Sign Terrible Contracts

Delano Squires had a blog entry over at one of my "favorite" blogs. With a title like "Making Boys Into Men" you just know it's going to be ripe.

Editor’s Note: This week, the Family Studies blog is publishing a series of short essays addressing the meaning and purpose of healthy masculinity in today’s world.

By "healthy masculinity" they mean "Men doing what we like." In their case, that's marrying, having children, and being compliant followers to their leadership. Let's get to Squire's contribution.

American boys and men are in a state of crisis. The notion that masculinity and traditional gender roles are “toxic” forces of oppression is a common refrain in our cultural commentary and political discourse.

Yup.

The first lesson is that no man should feel ashamed of being male, because God created him that way.

Good.

I also believe that men function best in environments marked by order, so I will teach my sons that men who want to lead families need to be led by God’s word.

Married men don't lead families. They might be allowed to appear to lead.

A Common Red Flag When Considering Marriage

A tweet by Brad Wilcox:

New "research by Stanley & Rhoades [indicates...] men & women who cohabited w 2+ partners prior to marriage were 60% more likely to end up seeing their marriage end in divorce or separation"

Well, there you have it guys. Have you shacked up with at least two women, including your current girlfriend/fiancee? Has she? If either of you have, you have another reason to avoid marrying. Your marriage would be doomed!

Sure, the tweet and the report behind it are intended to try to get people who haven't shacked up yet not to do so. But we can still apply it to people who have, who should use the information to avert disaster. DO NOT MARRY!

Wilcox had a whole article about this.

Where Can You Find a Friend?

 
Where can you find a new friend, if you want and need one?

You want quality friends.

Family. I’m not talking about your parents, or, if you have them, your children. It’s great if they’re not terrible people and you’re friendly with them and can do things with them in addition to the requisite family obligations. But most true friends in your family will be more of a horizontal connection, like siblings and cousins. Maybe uncles or nephews. Some people will not find friends in family, and that’s OK. You being born into a situation doesn’t mean you’ll find friends there.

Acquaintances. These are not the same thing as friends, but they can become friends. You know each other on some level because someone or something introduced you to each other. Who are your good quality acquaintances?

Neighbors. Making neighbors your friends is great and practical. If you’re living in a rental or they're renting, you or your neighbors might not be there long. But if you both own, there’s probably more stability. It's better to have neighbors as friends than as enemies. Maybe you'll just be friendly. But if you find a friend or two in the neighborhood, that's great.

Classmates. Like family, classmates aren’t friends by default. If you can’t see being friends with them when you’re not required to sit in the same room or won’t be studying together, then it’s not going to work. But if you have things in common beyond your academic connection, a classmate can make a good friend.

Co-workers. This is risky. I generally advise keeping your employment life and your personal life as separated as possible, despite it being historically common to make friends at work. You don't want friendship interfering with business or your career advancement. If you’re leaving your employer and likely won’t be back, that might be the time to go ahead and make someone a friend. If you work for yourself, it’s a different matter. But don’t let “friends” take advantage of you for free work. If you trade work with each other, fine. But if it is one-sided on an ongoing basis, that’s not friendship. 

Church. Ideally, church (or your equivalent) will be a great place to make friends. Free men need to be careful, though. If you end up shifting so that most of your friends are from your specific church, that might be a sign you're in a cult. Be careful.

Hobbies, clubs, charities, activities, etc. Obviously, you’ll have a shared interest with the people you meet these ways. Just don’t expect that your interest and involvement will always align with theirs. Sometimes, people move on from these things, and that’s OK. Also, beware of the self-proclaimed enthusiast who seems to gripe more about your shared interest than enjoy it. Sometimes people should move on from something, but haven’t, and they’ll suck all of the enjoyment out of it.

Again, you might not need more friends. But if you do, some places to look for them are better than others.

Did I miss something? Left me know in the comments.

June is Coming

Wedding season, gentlemen. Maybe you’re scheduled to be the groom.

Maybe a man you care about is scheduled to be a groom.

Maybe a woman you’re "seeing" or "with" is expecting you to be her date for a wedding or weddings.

Obviously, the first situation is the most dire.

Running Game - Do Not Care

Running game isn't just about saving money, time, and effort. It is also about reducing "emotional labor," as the younger generations like to say.

Recently, a young man went to the front door of the house where his ex-girlfriend was. He ended up literally breaking in, and was immediately and fatally shot by the father of his ex. This was recorded on video.

Why was he so determined to gain access?

I don't know any the history of that relationship, nor do I know what personality or mental disorders he might have had, or his history of violence.

What I do know is that some people who have otherwise had stellar behavior have lost control of themselves when it comes to relationships, especially when there are arguments, disagreements, or breakups.

Why Romance Doesn’t Cure Dead Bedrooms

 

When a husband complains about a dead bedroom, chances are he will get advice telling him to be more romantic. Usually, he’s already doing that, or doing it in so far as his wife allows.

Sadly, it usually won’t cure a dead bedroom.

That’s because the reason she is rejecting or sexually starving him isn’t because of a lack of romance.

What does romancing a woman do?

• It signals his interest.
• It signals his willingness to back up his interest with effort and investment.
• It’s one of many ways to create a bond.

A husband has already done those things on an ongoing basis in extremely significant ways.

This isn’t to say a husband shouldn’t romance his wife. If she wants romance, he should romance her. Because spouses should do certain things for and with each other because the other spouse enjoys that.

A wife isn’t rejecting her husband because of his lack of interest, effort/investment, or bonding. If he didn’t have interest, she wouldn’t have the opportunity to reject him!

She’s rejecting him either because she already has a bond with him and figures she doesn’t need to please him anymore or she is trying to severe their bond. She is sabotaging their relationship. What she wants matters, what he wants doesn’t. She’s exerting control. Her motivations to have sex with him are outweighed, in her mind, by reasons to avoid sex with him, no matter how irrational her thinking. 

Some women deny this because they have a high drive. They insist the husband must be a terrible lover. But many women don’t have a high drive, at least not most of the time. There are husbands who are very romantic and great lovers and are still rejected so that they are having sex infrequently if at all. The average husband is more than willing to do what a wife tells or shows him she needs sexually. But she does have to tell him (sweetly/kindly) or show him.

This is not about women who have some condition or injury that has them in a lot of pain. Of course there are certain things they won’t be doing or won’t be doing often. This is referring to women who, for example, collect and store resentments and decide to punish their husband even if he’s a good man. Nobody’s perfect, and as that record of mistakes or wrongs gets longer and longer, his sex life suffers.

Sometimes, a husband and wife in a dead bedroom might have sex after romance. But generally, romancing a rejecting wife will not cure a dead bedroom. Nor will it that the husband takes on more of the chores.

It’s just one of many reasons more men are joining the marriage strike.

Is This How You Want to Live?

From a recent Dear Abby column, COVERING MY EYES IN TENNESSEE wrote:

I'm so disgusted. My wife has started walking around the house with no panties or bra, letting it all hang out, so to speak. Then she makes comments like, "Doesn't this look good?" I'm sickened by her behavior. I feel violated. How do I tell her to stop without hurting her sensitive feelings?

What a strange thing for a man married to a woman to write.

Why is he reacting this way?

Most men would LOVE this!

Is he gay???

Very, very strange.

Hmm.

What's going on here?

There Are Rare Circumstances in Which Using Daycare Is The Best Choice

People shouldn't have children unless they are prepared to raise them. Raising them means having them with a parent until they go to Kindergarten at age five or six, then having with a parent before and after school. School doesn't end at 6pm. Dumping a kid in daycare is almost always a result of choices.

A good daycare is, of course, better than being with an abusive parent, but even then, it would be better for the kid to be with grandparents or aunts and uncles.

Let's consider the other rare circumstances in which daycare is the best choice.

 

A) The other parent killed themselves, or abandoned the family (and there were no signs either of those was a likely possibility before making the children) and they're not paying enough support to allow the other parent to be with the kids; B) and there wasn't enough in funds or other assets and no way/time to work to avoid having to leave the children for work; C) and there's nobody else, like good, reliable grandparents, aunts, uncles, etc., to care for the child while the remaining parent is at work.

For 99 percent of the kids dumped in daycare, the circumstances weren't anything like that.

Unfortunately, there's no way to be certain the other parent is going to be around, present, and either able to care for the children well or provide enough income, for the duration of raising the children. People can try to set things up that way. They can try to choose wisely, treat kindly, and all of that, and have things like life insurance. They can try to only make children with someone who is already wealthy and set things up so the children will always be taken care of regardless of whether there is a death or the relationship ends. But most people aren't that wealthy, certainly not when they are 40 or younger, and there's no fail-safe way of ensuring things will work out. It's always somewhat of a gamble to have children, even for someone who tries to make the odds be in their favor as much as possible.

You can have a great life insurance policy on your income-earning spouse, and if they commit suicide you're SOL. Maybe there was no sign they'd do that when you had kids with them, but they suffered a trauma after you had the kids and eventually they did themselves in. Or maybe the trauma leads to them abandoning the family to live on the streets, jobless.

So, there can be circumstances in which daycare is unavoidable.

But "We want to live here, in this house, with these investments" or "I deserve my career" aren't those circumstances.

If you don't have children yet, think about these things very carefully.

Cause and Effect - Rejecting Your Man

Ladies, if you're married or in a relationship with a man in which you are expecting sexual exclusivity, it is important for you to know something in case you haven't picked up on it before or nobody else has told you yet.

If your man has a libido, and you sexually reject him, that rejection will usually have unpleasant consequences unless the rejection is very rare. What counts as "rejection?" It can range from repeatedly delaying or declining some form or all forms of sex to refusing to try things in which he's expressed interest. Rejection includes him not even bothering to ask/try because he has good reason to believe he'll be shot down. It also includes letting yourself go to the point he loses attraction, or picking fights or nagging to the point he wants nothing to do with you.

The consequences are likely to be one or more of the following, in no particular order:

1. He will be less motivated to do things for you. This ranges from chores you want done that he doesn't care much about to anniversary celebrations, vacations, and expensive gifts.
   
   
2. He will be less open with you about his feelings, desires, fantasies, and thoughts.
   
   
3. He will cut back on other forms of affection and intimacy. This might mean spending less time with you, less touch, fewer compliments, etc.
   
   
4. He will be irritable, grumpy, or snarky.
   
   
5. He will occupy himself or numb the pain with substances (food, alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, etc.) or more hobbies/more time on hobbies that don't involve you.
   
   
6. He will masturbate (more), and that masturbation will be likely to involve porn (visual and written), videos and images of exes or other people he knows, memories and fantasies of exes, fantasies of other people, etc.
   
   
7. He will get it elsewhere.
   
1. Ongoing affairs
2. Flings
3. Hookups/One night stands/Booty calls
4. Sex worker
5. Sexting/Video chat/chats/online forums/apps
    
8. He will leave.
   

He might not think "Because she won't do this, I'm going to do that." Maybe he will, maybe it will just be what happens without him actually thinking it through. I'm not saying these things are all right or justified. Nor am I saying you should do things you don't want to do. I'm not denying some men behave this way even if you're a great lover. I'm simply informing you of reality: men react in these ways to sexual rejection by a woman they expect to be their lover. Don't expect he'll warn you about these things ahead of time or tell you after the fact, even if you ask him directly. What's his incentive to tell you?

You might not care. You might have things the way you want them. But you're most likely delusional if you think there is no consequence you don't like when you reject him.
 
If you can't handle this, it might be a good idea not to ask for, or agree to, a supposedly exclusive relationship. Or, resolve to be a good, enthusiastic, available lover to him, because if you've picked a good man and you treat him right, he's not going to leave or go elsewhere, and he will do what he can to meet your needs and desires.

Fun With Statistics - Cohabitation

Cohabitation, or "shacking up," as Dr. Laura (and I) still call it, leads to marriage.

That goes against what Dr. Laura says. Shacking up is one of her main no-nos, in her countercultural preaching. She often rattles off a few statistics (which may or may not be current) to try to bolster her point.

And yet, if someone is a marriage seller, as she is, I can use statistics to point out that cohabitation leads to marriage:

1) Most people in our culture who marry lived together before they married.

2) Couples who don't live together are far less likely to marry each other.

There it is! CONCLUSIVE PROOF that living together leads to marriage!

Right?

Well, in fairness:

1) Many people live together but never marry each other.

2) "Couples who don't live together" includes all those people who are only couples for a few months and then break up; of course they didn't marry.

My overall point is that using statistics can be misleading, as I already pointed out in this post, "Thinking Critically About Cohabitation."

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I'm not advocating living together unmarried with a romantic or sexual partner. I generally think it is a terrible idea. But more and more people will not marry someone unless they live with them first. To me, that's all the more reason to avoid shacking up, as I discourage most men from marrying and encourage them to stay free. Despite what Dr. Laura says, when a guy has his girlfriend living with him, it reduces his freedom.

Too Few Friends?

 

Supposedly, people today have fewer actual friends; too few.

Friends can be good for many reasons. They can keep you in check, give you feedback, back you up, keep tabs on you, give you perspective, open your mind, enable experiences, connect you to job opportunities, and so much more. Some people will say a spouse can do those things, too. I switch that around. A friend can do many things a spouse might do, so you don’t need a spouse, and unlike a legal spouse, you can get rid them without paying if they become harmful.

If you need (more) friends, there are many ways to find some. But first, who is friend material to you?

A friend should be someone you’re not ashamed or embarrassed to be associated with or seen with. They mean well for you and you for them. Your relationship isn’t based on one of you trying to get something from the other, other than companionship, emotional support, and good times. They are someone you can trust to a reasonable extent. They aren’t a bad person as people go. They are someone you might want to share a meal with, exchange gifts with, share experiences with, confide in, do favors for. While charity can be something one provides for a friend, a chronic charity case is just that, not a friend. Friends aren’t projects.

If they’re someone who aggressively assaults or abuses, steals, causes trouble for less than noble reasons, is a drain on your energy or finances, is a junkie or drunk, or is friendly with you because they’re trying to convert you to their cult or MLM scheme, that’s not friend material.

They don’t need to be the same race, ethnicity, religion, or political affiliation as you.

Think about what you’re hoping to find in a friend. Is it someone you can play games with? Watch sports with? Hunt with? Listen to music with? Try new restaurants with? Look for women with? Ride motorcycles with? Restore classic cars with?

This is assuming you truly want new friends. Maybe you’re already happy with how things are and you don’t have time for new friends. But if you do have time or can make it, and you think it would be good, then you can make it happen.

Think about that, and in another post I’ll write about where to find friends.

Is Fake Bad?

"Marriage is real. Porn is fake."

That was tweeted out by a Twitter account that is constantly warning people about porn.

The way this is worded implies a person's choice is to either be married or watch porn. Or, if we're being really generous, that their can put their energy into their marriage or they can put it into porn. The most plain reading is that marriage is good because it is real, porn is bad because it is fake. It's a contrast between the two.

We could just as well say:

"Work is real. Action movies are fake."

Media is fake. Even much of "reality" television, even documentary movies, are "fake" in the sense that they can't give a full view of reality.

Here are some other things that are "fake":

Why Your Husband Isn't Pursuing You

...Or is outright rejecting you.

Dr. Laura recently [this entry has been bumped up from August 2017] had a call of the day that was about a married couple not having sex. The caller was the wife and she wanted to know what to do. Her show's Facebook page linked to it, and many very revealing comments were left there.

Jamie's husband works all day and when he comes home, he is too tired for sex. What can Jamie do to bring the spark back?

Let's look at some of the comments:

How to Prevent Domestic Violence, Cheating, and Divorce

This is how you can prevent domestic violence, cheating, and divorce:

Do not marry.

Do not live together.

Do not promise nor expect exclusivity.

Free Men who want to remain free men in good standing do not engage in rape, sexual harassment, domestic violence, stealthing, stalking, or revenge porn.

Free men, if they want sex, run game, which ensures that they don't waste time with women who do not want sex. Free men do not marry nor live with women. Free men do not agree to exclusivity. This prevents domestic violence, cheating, and divorce. It also prevents rape.

More men should be Free Men.

Yet Another Example of Why Men Avoid Marriage

AT A CROSSROADS is a beaten dog who wrote  into Dear Abby:

I met my wife in college.

Bad move, unless he didn't get serious with her until later. College is great for playing the field.

We have been married for 40 years and have two adult sons.

Forty years of marriage is important to the rest of the letter.

My wife had a brief affair early in our marriage, but we have long since moved on from that.

Then there was no reason to mention it, right? Oh, but there is. If they didn't have kids at the time, he should have hit the eject button.

However, increasingly over the last 15 years, my wife (career homemaker, her choice)

Of course it was! If he left her, he'd have to pay!

has been aggressively making demands in exchange for anything she does for me -- i.e., if I don't buy her something, she won't cook dinner, do laundry or have sex.

Please send this to any guy you know who might get married.

I buy her things all the time, and I give her an allowance, roughly 70% of my take-home pay. Some of her demands I simply cannot afford, so I often cook, clean, etc., myself. As a result, we haven't had sex in more than 10 years.

This is marriage, guys. Most marriages are like this or are closer to this than being good marriages.

OK, before we get into the next part of the letter, it has already been established that he doesn't have a marriage. What he has is state-enforced slavery, with the option of physically leaving but still being financially enslaved.

Two years ago, I met a younger woman. She is also married, although separated.

How does he know that?

She still shares a home with her husband and their two children.

While it might be legally possible in some places, that sure doesn't sound like separation.

We meet as often as we can and I find her delightful and easy to get along with.

For now. She's auditioning.

Lately, she has been saying she wants us to leave our situations and get married.

Why would you ever want to remarry?!? You like things with her now. That's not marriage. Even so, wait for her leave her husband and prove it. Don't make any changes that take her into account until she has at least done that.

My concern is twofold. First, when my wife gets angry, she threatens to divorce me and take everything I've got, even if it costs her everything as well. She does not bluff.

She could and would do that even if she never said that to you. That's what happens if a wife doesn't earn income and the marriage goes on for decades.

Second, my girlfriend is so much younger than I am that I'm concerned that while things are great now, I'll be an elderly man in the not too distant future and could be a burden to her. What are your thoughts?

I have to wonder: What have you been spending on this girlfriend? How much more money do you have than her?

Never operate under the assumption that any woman will continue to be a positive presence in your life. Even if you both divorced and married each others, the odds are slim that marriage would work out well. Do not promise this woman anything, and don't limit yourself.

Your marriage is over. It has been over for a long time. But if you can keep out of the family courts for the rest of your life, and avoid paying for two legal teams, that would be great. So, if you want female companionship, run game as discretely as you can. Don't worry about pleasing your wife, but it's best she never have definitive proof you're with other women. Although statistically unlikely, the best thing for you would be for her to drop dead soon, with you outliving her many years so you can have some peace.

Unmarried guys, I hope you're seeing that that the best way to "win" at marriage is to NOT PLAY.

Dear Abby responded:

If the only thing keeping you in this unhappy marriage is fear, contact an attorney to discuss what a divorce would cost you financially.

As she has done with other situations, Dear Abby could have asked an attorney. Maybe she did, but doesn't want to print the results.

This guy is SCREWED. If he were to divorce, he'd lose at least half of everything, and on top of that, he'd have to pay for both legal teams AND likely pay significant ongoing alimony for the rest of his life. His wife and the attorneys would stretching things out as long as they could, milking his paycheck. HE... IS... SCREWED. THAT is the crappy family law we have.

Stay free, men.

Dennis Prager Again Tries to Get Shackups to Marry

Dennis Prager decided to revisit last week's Male/Female Hour with a continuation of the topic for that hour yesterday, Wednesday February 1, 2023, which was about living together vs. being married. [This entry has been bumped up.]

He said he is puzzled by women who want to live together but not get married.

A caller had her screening statement read by Dennis on the air, even though he didn't take her call. She said her married friends have said that "marriage is the death of romance." While people will think that means the man stops pursuing the woman, I think the truth of it is more that most women think they are settling; most women want the same small group of men, and most can't have one them. Marrying kills their "romantic" fantasy that they'll end up with someone "better" than the guy they're with.

In addition to that, any woman who earns more or thinks she will earn more has reason to avoid legally marrying. There are also women who don't want the state further involved in their lives, and women who do not want what they see as a religious ceremony.

But back to "marriage is the death of romance." Dennis said no, having children is the death of romance. He's expressed that multiple times before, and he is someone who urges people to raise children. Take note, guys! Don't ignore the truth, even when said "in jest."

The first caller who got on the air said it was the women he's with who had been reluctant to get married. He mentioned she had been married before to a wealthy executive. Dennis was either too fixated or didn't want to ask, but to me, that sounds like she was getting a lot in alimony, which would end if she married. What Dennis did say was "Ask her, if not for the financials, would you marry?" HUH?!? That's like asking, "If there was no soccer ball involved, would you want to play soccer?" Marriage is primarily financial. It's a wealth transfer mechanism.

As he often does during the last segment of an hour, Dennis read the screening info of the callers rather than actually taking the calls. The last one said "The marriage contract is stacked against men." Too bad that caller didn't get on the air, but kudos to them!

During the hour, Dennis did bring up a question he plans to use as a future topic:

"Why do men fear marriage?"

As I've said before, fearing rattlesnakes is good sense. It is logical. But "fear" might not be the right word for this. Men have evaluated the situation and are increasingly choosing wisely.

• The state marriage contract is bad.
• Today's social marriage contract is bad.
• Most marriages fail, and divorce often screws men over.
• Wives are burdened by and resentful of their husbands.
• More women don't truly want to be wives.
• Fewer women are prepared and willing to be wives.
  
• Men can have everything in life they want to without marrying.
• Being free is the default. Men lack compelling reasons to give up their freedom and power.
  

It's not "Why do men fear marriage?" The question should be "What compelling reason do men have to marry?" Dennis cites "reasons" he finds compelling, but he mostly finds them compelling because he developed, at a very early age, an emotional fixation on being a husband. Most men aren't going to find his reasons compelling.

Again, Dennis, you need a marriage striker on your show. It would be clarifying,

When Someone Regrets Being a Parent

Duncan Jones recently issued a couple of controversial tweets: [This entry is bumped up from January 2019.]

I have 2 kids. 2 1/2 years and 9 months old respectively. I’ll tell you something I never see anyone admit... they are exhausting, frustrating and life-destabilizing. They are rarely fun. Sure, smiles are great, hugs are lovely, but it’s HARD and not obviously a good choice in life.

This is where people feel compelled to say “i wouldn’t change it for the world!” But you know... Of course I’d reconsider! It’s exhausting! Its banal! It’s like looking after a dog you can’t housetrain. What it is, is that it is. and they are mine. Hopefully they turn out ok.

Columnist Matt Walsh, conservative Catholic hubby and dad that he is, lit into Jones and those who responded in solidarity.

What's most concerning is the reaction these tweets provoked. In the 24 hours or so immediately after they were published, a sizable portion of the responses were entirely supportive and sympathetic. A bunch of parents decided to join the fray and register public complaints about their own children. Until saner voices joined the discussion, the thread was a long litany of unseemly parental bellyaching. And not just vague "parenting can be tough" type complaints, but much more specific and personal "my life is miserable and my kids are awful" type complaints.

Those are their experiences. Yes, they shouldn't say these things if they are using their true identity and thus their kids can find out about it. In some cases, it won't matter because the kids are already too far gone, but in most cases, sure. But let's be honest. Walsh isn't just upset that their kids might see this. People like Walsh don't want people speaking the truth about parenthood: that for some people, it brings misery. Some people aren't suited to it.

Let's not deflect from the fact that many people regret having children. Many of them aren't being great parents as a result. Let's encourage people to think very carefully about becoming parents, instead  of saying "Oh, it will all work out! You'll love it! Don't worry, just do it!"

Women who do this are told they're ignoring their motherly instincts. Men are told they're just immature.

A Running List of Reasons Given By My Wife

This will be a running list, in no particular order, of reasons or excuses my wife (and maybe yours!) gives to NOT make love or have sex. As I've written in other entries, we're down to about once every three weeks, and usually it's a mercy session.

Some of these reasons might be legitimate some of the time; I'll grant that. But cumulatively, it is rather sad, given that this is supposed to be a mutually enjoyable "gift from the Lord" that is supposed to be a major benefit to marriage that, in turns, strengthens marriage and is good for our health and all of the other stuff.

Now, I know how the world works. The average man wants sex more than the average woman, and the same holds true for our little microcosm: I want sex more than my wife. Traditionally, on a societal level, this has either been handled through official polygny or through mistresses, concubines, or prostitution. Or, even if monogamous, there has been an agreement, whether tacit or explicit, that marriage is an exchange. The wife has agreed to sex as often as the husband wants it (in addition to cooking and making sure the household chores are done) because he's protecting her, providing for her, and keeping the children in line (even with just the threat of what'll happen when Dad comes home). This agreement seems to have been abandoned for the most part, which is one reason why most men shouldn't bother to marry. I'm fulfilling my end of the bargain, however.

I'm sure there are some snarky types out there who will read these and tell me that if I was a more considerate and all-around better lover, I wouldn't hear these excuses so often. See, that's what I'd believe, too, if I didn't have the experiences of my wayward youth. I know it isn't me. And I have solicited her thoughts and feelings during neutral times (away from lovemaking situations) about what I can do to make things easier and more enjoyable for her. The bottom line is that, whether because of her medications or some other reason, she doesn't like sex much. She pretended to be craving sexual affection before we married, and still somewhat until we had our children, because she wanted the guarantee of my financial support. Once she had it, she no longer had to pretend. She will not say it that way, but that's the harsh truth. (And it is the harsh truth for a lot of men. I suspect the real reason prostitutes are put down is because they deliver when they're paid and paid women who don't deliver hate that.)

Same goes for "You should be romancing her. I bet you're not taking her out on dates like you did before you married!" Hey, I've tried. She shoots down dates, she doesn't want flowers, and she doesn't want me drawing a nice bath for her.

She KNOWS it’s not often enough for me. She has said so. But she doesn’t do anything about it and she sure as hell won’t let me go elsewhere.

Feel free to add your own reasons or excuses in the comments, even if you're a woman whose husband is rejecting her.

Since this is a running list it will be updated and bumped up from time to time, and I'll elaborate on some excuses.

Not Inherently Hateful

If a woman says something like "Marriage as it is now isn't for me. In fact, I'd prefer to live by myself and not have a boyfriend or partner. Maybe I'll date. But I'd prefer to be independent and make my own decisions. I don't like the general culture's approach to romantic relationships. I'll do my own thing."

Would you call that woman a sexist? A hater? A white supremacist? A reactionary? An extremist?

Do those questions confuse you? They should.

One Exception To "You Knew This Before You Married"

When Dr. Laura has a caller complaining about something in their marriage, she will almost always have one of these two statements as part of her response, even if she uses different wording:

1) You knew this about them before you married them.

2) You didn't spend enough time getting to know them before you married them. 

Usually, it is true. I do maintain, though that people: 1) CAN hide who they truly are, and especially a bad habit, for the 24-33 months she recommends before marrying, and 2) people can be changed negatively by illness or trauma.

But what I wanted to talk about was sex. 

High School Reunions and Keeping in Touch With Classmates

Does your high school class have reunions? Does your high school have general reunions or have an alumni association that does? Should you go to them?

With social media, we can keep in touch with any classmates or fellow alumni we want to. Still, there can be a social dynamic that happens with in-person mingling with a wider mix of classmates that can't happen on social media or meeting up with just a few classmates.

Obviously, if high school was hell for you because you had few friends or positive acquaintances, you don't have a good reason to go - other than to show off and rub it into the faces of those who mistreated you or rejected you that you're successful/happy now, if you are.

That brings me to three reasons why you might go, in no particular order.

1) To hook up

2) Business networking

3) To show off

If you'd have to travel, you have to think if it is worth it. Reunions, like Proms, have been given mythical status by Hollywood, but for most people they don't amount to much of anything.

Have a bunch of old friends you want to get together? You can set that up outside of an official reunion.

Whether wanting to hook up, get a job, or sell something, you can have an edge simply because you went to the same high school (which usually means, simply because of where your parents chose to live at that time).

Let's talk about hooking up.

Why People Want You To Marry

Men are told to get married.

If it weren't for the constant drumbeat of marriage sellers, there would be even more men joining the marriage strike than have already.

Boys are sold marriage from the earliest ages. It's in the media we consume from the earliest ages.

Why? Why do people want you to get married?

There are many reasons.

Some might have bought into the flawed claims that men are better off if they marry. That's almost never the real reason someone will urge you marry. Let's consider some of the reasons.

The Reformed Ho

The Rational Male and others have been making much of what appears to be the trend of sex workers or de facto sex workers, and self-identified promiscuous women “finding Jesus” and becoming “born again” church girls.

Let me make something clear right away.

If someone has truly repented and embraced the true Jesus as Lord and Savior, that’s a beautiful thing, whoever they are and whatever they’ve done.

A problem arises in that only the Lord knows for sure what’s going on in someone’s heart. We can only make guesses based on behavior, experience, and time. After all, Judas Iscariot was one of the Twelve Disciples, appearing to be a follower of Jesus.

That a woman has appeared to have repented and is attending church, even been baptized right there in front of everyone, does not obligate any man to wife her up.

By the way, that goes both ways. No man is owed a wife.

I generally discourage men from legally marrying, and almost as strongly discourage men from socially/religiously marrying. But if you’re going to marry, a supposedly reformed “ho” is probably a bad choice, even more so if you’re a virgin or have little experience, or are a lackluster/“vanilla” lover/not well hung.

Consider…

1. Even if she never says it, she’s going to be comparing you to many other men. It is almost certain she has been with many men more skilled, more exciting than you. It’ll be even worse if she ever rubs that in.

2. You’re going to think about that from time to time, and realize she picked you as her retirement plan.

3. You’re going to resent that she had her fun, exciting, passionate, wild, varied experiences and you sacrificed and waited, going without. And you might feel bad for thinking that way.

4. Perhaps frequently, guys will look at her and/or you a certain way, or she will look at them a certain way, or they might look at each other a certain way, and you’ll know that guy has at least seen her naked, maybe he’s been inside her, and he didn’t have to sign away half of his earnings, pledge exclusivity, maybe didn’t even have to romance her or take her on an actual date.

5. If you have kids with her, the kids will likely have to endure taunting from other kids (if she was in erotic media or web camming). I don’t think it’s OK to do that, but it’s likely to happen anyway. Your kids are likely to see some of her old work.

I could go on, but I explained many concerns that apply in general  to “body count” and can apply to the more specific situation of a “reformed ho” here:

Does a Woman’s Body Count Matter?

What the critics and cynics think is that these women have aged out, maybe brushed up against the wall a bit, and are looking for a retirement plan. Women younger and hotter than them have hit the scene, and so it’s harder for these experienced women to get the attention and money they used to.

So the women turn to the reliable, dependable churchgoing guy whose experience with women and their manipulations is scant, who will be happy to be having sex at all no matter how infrequent or restrained, who likely won’t be cheating on her, who will be pressured to accept her as redeemed and forgiven, and who will believe or be told it’s all his fault if anything goes wrong in the marriage because he’s supposed to lead and serve her.

Heck, she never even has to feign a headache. She can brush him off by saying she’s having flashbacks to her past, which, of course involved her being “used and abused” no matter how much it appeared she was enjoying herself and no matter how much she said at the time it was all her choice.

In response to the discussions about these situations, I’ve seen what amounts to “But what about promiscuous men?” Formerly promiscuous men might be better matches for formerly promiscuous women, though such men are more likely to still want a lot of sex. But as far as criticizing such men…  fair or unfair, we can, for the sake of argument agree that men shouldn’t have been promiscuous but also maintain there’s a difference, because of biological and sociological realities. Except in very rare cases, women ingest or absorb more body fluids from men than the other way around. That’s just a part of the biological reality, as is the fact that it’s women who carry pregnancies, not men, making it problematic in the minds of some that she’s had the body parts and fluids of so many men in her.

Just part of the psychological and sociological consideration is her history of being abused, her relationship or lack thereof with her father, and her need for male attention. Those things, if present, can interfere with marital success.

Men who say that her redemption in Christ is what allows him to gladly take her as a bride despite her past likely have limits to that grace, even though Jesus can overcome anything.

“It doesn’t matter if she had hundreds of men.”

OK. But would you still say it doesn’t matter if she…

-had thousands of men

-had many women as lovers

-engaged in group sex

-was with many men married to her friends

-was with otherwise evil men, knowing they were evil

-was with 13 year-old boys

-was with dogs

-was with horses?

And yes, there are many women out there who’ve done one or more of those things.

Likely, there is some point at which the man says “Can’t be with a woman who did that.” Such men shouldn’t wag a finger at men who say they can’t be with a woman who has a three-figure body count, or even “just” a two-figure body count, even more so if those men have a low or zero body count.

Marriage is optional. And there are still men who want to marry (the poor saps!) who don’t want to be married enough to override the turnoff of a woman’s sordid past. That significantly reduces the pool of wife material women.

But if a man is running game instead of looking for a wife, her past is much less significant, other than the requirement she NOT be a virgin and not have children. A promiscuous woman is a good thing to guys running game.

The bottom line here, no pun intended, is that yes, Jesus can bring redemption and healing, but if a man is foolish enough to be looking for a wife, all other things being equal (which rarely happens), he should pick a woman who hasn’t ridden the “carousel” thousands of times; that’s the natural inclination of most men who want a wife.

When The Attention Thirsty Change Tactics

Does a Woman’s Body Count Matter?

Free Men Are Morally Superior

Rape and sexual harassment are immoral.

If you're a good man, you don't want to rape or commit sexual harassment. According to informed, enlightened, educated people, including women (and we are to believe women), rape includes sexual activity between spouses when there wasn't an enthusiastic desire in both of them to immediately have sex with each other when they started to touch each other. We also know that sexual harassment includes asking for sex when the other person doesn't have an enthusiastic desire to have sex with you at that exact moment.

Does A Woman's Body Count Matter?

Does a woman's body count matter?

Matter for what?

It doesn't matter too much for a man who is running game.

It can matter a lot if you're looking for a wife (which most of you shouldn't be) or a mother for your children.

This isn't about what it is fair. This is about reality. This is about the way things are, whether we like them or not. Men and women are different. We have different bodies, different biology, different brains.

When running game, a man avoids virgins (men should avoid virgins in general) and women who aren't virgins but are now "saving it" or "waiting" for marriage, engagement, exclusivity, or several months into the relationship. As long as she doesn't have a serious STD, doesn't have children, and does what he likes, it doesn't matter how many guys she's been with (as long as she isn't a virgin). (There are other limitations on who to date, though.)

If a man is foolish enough to agree to be exclusive, shack up, marry, or have children with a woman, body count is going to matter to many men. There are many reasons why, in no particular order:

The Horse is Out of the Barn and the Robot is Out of the Box

Grab some popcorn and some tea and peruse the panicked, hysterical shrieking of the controlling women and their enablers who can't stand the idea that more and more men will be enjoying robots that essentially amount to advanced dolls and sex toys. [This entry is bumped up because it is as relevant as ever.]

Technology is always going to be applied to sex, if there is any way it can be. This is human nature.

Sex dolls and sex robots or whatever you want to call them will never be effectively banned. Aside from the fact that prohibiting the private ownership and use of personal objects isn't practical, how exactly do you ban these things without banning a bunch of other things? How do you define a sex robot or a sex doll? Some men will stick their penises in knotholes in a plank of wood. Are you going to ban planks of wood? No. So, are you going to ban all robots? All dolls? All sex toys or masturbation aids? Any three-dimensional representation of a person?

Despite the futility, some women (and the men who enable them) are trying to ban these elaborate masturbatory aids.

Learn to Say No

Something any adult needs to thrive and to protect themselves is to learn to be comfortable saying "No."

You do not need to, nor is it healthy, to try to satisfy every request that anyone brings to you. Some religious people mistakenly think that if someone comes to them with a request, they are supposed to say yes, or at least find a solution for them. But that's not what the Lord does. The Lord often tells people "No." If you're ever going to parent, and most of you shouldn't, you'll have to say "NO!" quite a bit.

Do you ever find yourself agreeing to someone else's request or demand, only to regret it later or even immediately, or looking for ways to back out, or simply not showing up?

There are two relationships a man can have that make saying "No" extremely difficult:

1. His relationship with his wife

2. His relationship with his boss

Both have to do with his financial well-being. His wife can take away over half of everything he's earned (and his children!). His boss can fire him.

Men can avoid or mitigate this problem by saying no to marriage in the first place, and by being self-employed or at least having an Emergency Fund.

It should be easier to say "No" to anyone else, whether the person at your door, on your phone, or in your inbox claiming to be a salesperson, the panhandler on the street, the traffic cop who asks to check inside your vehicle with no probable cause or warrant, relatives, neighbors, someone you're dating, and just about everyone else.

People do need cooperation, so of course there are times you should say "Yes" even if it wasn't your idea, or isn't exactly what you want to do right now, because it is the right thing to do or because it will help you reach your other goals. But there we be times when you'll need to say "No" to avoid people walking all over you, or overextending yourself, or moving further away from your goals, or giving up your dreams, or any number of other reasons.

The more self-sufficient and independent you are, the easier it will be for you to say no. If you can walk away from something and be happy or at least content or satisfied, or more than you'd be if you'd said yes, that's a great place to be.

Two Types of No: No as in "absolutely not," and no as in "sweeten this deal and maybe I'll say yes." Let's look at both of those.

Some People Don't Want Men Reading the Truth

Some of the comments left here and, more often, some of the tweets sent my way on Twitter say things like "I feel sorry for your wife" and "Does your wife know what you're saying?"

There are people who have a vested interest in attempting to shut down people who do what I do: warn men about what they're really dealing with and giving men possible techniques to avoid being abused or disadvantaged.

They don't want men knowing these things. They don't want men to read the truth. They want men mindlessly continuing the cycle.

There are few places where men can get the truth when it comes to these topics. Many husbands don't feel at liberty to tell unmarried men the truth about marriage. Sometimes you can read between the lines. But blunt truth? That's rare.

As for my wife, she has a husband who pays all of her bills and handles all of the paperwork, has given her the life she always wanted, does almost all of the household chores including the cooking, runs almost all the errands, listens to her whenever she wants to talk, has almost never said "no" to her, is eager to enthusiastically do anything she wants when it comes to romance and sex, never asks that we watch anything different from her choice on the shared televisions in the home, and has ensured she will be financially taken care of whether she stays or go, whether I live or die. I have literally saved her life and have never touched her in anger. I don't splurge on myself, I don't do drugs or smoke, I don't get drunk. I give her words of affection and affirmation every day. I get her the gifts she wants. I probably get along better with her parents/siblings than she does. She has candidly told others she has a great marriage. Her life is probably better than the lives of the women who criticize me.

But yes, I come here and tell the truth: Most men shouldn't marry. Most men don't even need an exclusive girlfriend. Marriage is a bad deal for most men. Most men can get everything they truly want out of life without ever marrying. Marrying is the biggest mistake I've made.

Stay Free, Men!

What Happened Next Door

If you'd told me when I was twelve years old that multiple women who'd appeared in Playboy magazine were going to live in the Playboy mansion, appear in the magazine multiple more times, and be in a "reality" cable television show with Hugh Hefner, I would have known that those women, who were several decades younger than him, were going to expected to be his girlfriends and have sex with him even though he was old and not in the best shape and not committing to any of them, and they would be expected to participate in parties whether that seemed like fun or more work, and that what they were going to get out of this deal was fame, money, access, networking, and visits to Disneyland and wherever else. He's an older man, not in the best shape, and yet these women were going to have to show him a good time.

I would have known that at twelve.

My siblings would have known.

What thinking person over the age of sixteen wouldn't have known this?

But once Hefner was dead, and thus no longer useful, he was cast as a villain by some of the people who used to praise him and cling to him.

Nope. Not buying it.

If you weren't saying this was bad behavior at the time, but rather were profiting off of it, you don't get to bash him now and get any sympathy or points from me at all. Those women knew exactly what they were signing up for. The same goes for anyone going to an adult party at the mansion. Of course staff, such as cooks, cleaners, etc. shouldn't be targeted for harassment, but it was the Playboy mansion; home to a man who built the magazine and brand from the ground up. Nudity and shenanigans should have been expected.

Does Marriage Require A Bride, A Groom, and Jesus?

In discussions about marriage, divorce, and how to keep marriages together, there will often be comments from people who insist that for a marriage to work, it has to have three people: a bride, a groom, and Jesus. Sometimes they will be less specific and say "God" instead of "Jesus" (orthodox Christianity teaches that Jesus is God, as is the Father and the Holy Spirit).

Now, I'm a Christian. I wish it was true that being Christian would make marriages successful. And yet the divorce rate, including in "Evangelical" churches, indicates that isn't the case.

A good reply to that is "Well, not everyone who attends church is truly a Christian, and if people consistently applied Christian principles in their marriage, their marriage would last."

I can grant that.

There's still a problem though.

Don't we all know people who have been married for decades, some until one or both die, who aren't Christian? Even some who haven't placed God at the center of the marriage; indeed, neither may have any faith in God? And yet they've lasted.

The only possible answer to that I can think of is that the person who makes the original assertion would say that the marriage isn't real or isn't successful, no matter how cute or adorable the couple seems to be, how they treat each other in front of others, and how the children they raised together have turned out.

Things like that immediately diminish the credibility of such believers in the understanding of certain unbelievers.

Today's legal and social marriage have very little resemblance to the marriages in the Bible. But let's say applying Christian principles to marriage is one way that will make a marriage successful. The problem with this is that the only perfect practitioner of Christian principles is Jesus. No matter how devout, there will be times one or both spouses will screw things up. Then all it takes is for one of them to go to a divorce lawyer during a time of temporarily screwing things up, and the ball gets rolling downhill.

Also, we don't truly know someone else's heart and future, even a woman we date for years.

Men can have Jesus at the center of their life without signing a terrible state contract. Men can have Jesus at the center of their life without ever having a wedding ceremony, or living with a woman, or raising children with a woman.

Guys, being a Christian, no matter how faithfully, will not guarantee you a successful marriage. Sometimes, the only way to win is to not play.

And for anyone who says Christians are called to sacrifice - Yes we are, but not foolish sacrifice. Men can apply one of the ultimate Christian principles and stay unmarried, like Jesus.