Men Are Not In The Mood

 

Whether from simps, or from family ministries, sociologists, and other marriage sellers, or from feminists, we often see assertions that men need to do this or that.

Sometimes it’s husbands specifically, or men in relationships, or men in general.

And to that I say, “Men aren’t in the mood.”

Haven’t we been told that if someone isn’t in the mood to do something, it’s a severe transgression to demand they do it anyway, or to even accept them “voluntarily” doing it?

Oh, sure, someone might say “That’s specifically for women and/or about having sex.”

But we’ve also been told that men and women are equal and interchangeable and that sex is just another activity like so many others.

So… “I’m not in the mood” is an entirely valid way to decline an assignment or demand.

Try it. Especially in social media. I do this. When you see someone saying what men should do or must do, respond with “We’re not in the mood.” For individuals, it’s “He’s not in the mood.” For you, it’s “I’m not in the mood.”

Men are not in the mood.

Deal with it.

Another Reason to Remain Unmarried and Free

There are many reasons to stay unmarried, and I've listed some of them before here.

I've also discussed how Free Men can be morally superior to married men.

I recently realized another very important reason for men to remain unmarried and free.

I've seen repeated claims that we can't be sure a woman who is performing on a webcam isn't being trafficked. By the very same thinking, we can't be sure any woman who we'd marry isn't being trafficked into the marriage. She might say she's not, but maybe that's because she's being threatened to say she isn't.

There is a long history of trafficking fueling marriage and marriage fueling trafficking. Marriage wouldn't be where it is today without trafficking, and trafficking wouldn't be where it is today without marriage.

So, men, the only way to be sure you're not perpetuating trafficking of brides is to avoid marriage.

Stay free, men!

"Is It OK For Spouse to Withhold Sex?"

Someone came here by that search. [This entry is bumped up because it is still relevant.]

It used to be cultural and legally understood in this country that sex and marriage went hand-in-hand, so to speak. We can go all the way back to the Puritans, and if a wife told her friends her husband wasn't giving it to her as often as he should, word would inevitably get to other men in the community and that guy would be confronted. Withholding can be seen as a form of cheating. You're cheating your spouse out of something they should have.

Up until recent times, this concept of sex and marriage being necessarily intertwined continued. Unrelated men and women had no right to live together or even share a hotel room together, and in some places could be prosecuted for doing so. Marriages could be considered null if they were never "consummated" with intercourse. Husbands could rape their wives without violating a law, because her body, or at least her sexuality, belonged to him (and his to her... people forget that part). Adultery was grounds for divorce and could impact the outcome of the divorce. Affair partners can still, in a few places, be successfully sued by the scorned spouse for "alienation of affection". To this day, when a married person is a plaintiff in a lawsuit, their spouse can join in, depending, claiming a loss of consortium (less or no sex because of wrongs done to the spouse by the entity being sued).

The question about whether it is OK for a spouse to withhold sex has to be addressed to someone, though.

How to Break Up

So you're a guy dating a woman and you want out of the relationship.

This is about a situation in which you don't have any serious entanglements other than social: you're not married or engaged, not living together, you have no kids together, she doesn't have minor children who have bonded with you, you don't own anything major together. You're boyfriend-girlfriend or some equivalent. When Running Game, you don't need to break up - you simply stop seeing her. Breaking up is for when you haven't been running game, at least when it comes to this woman, so you've allowed the situation to get to the point you're a couple. That's the situation you're in now.

The point of breaking up is for freedom and personal protection. Maybe you want to reclaim your freedom. Maybe you're being proactive in protecting yourself. Maybe she's trying to move the relationship towards financial transfers or entanglements, living together, marrying, or having children. Maybe you want to be a Free Man. Maybe she's done something for which you have zero tolerance, or she's reached strike three. Maybe she's withdrawn or denied affection.

PLEASE NOTE: If you haven't had a vasectomy, you might want to wait for her period to make sure she's not pregnant, then never give her access to your sperm again as you commence the breakup plan. "Oopsie" pregnancies seem to happen a lot when a relationship is on its way to ending, and some women use fake pregnancy tests or tests shared or sold by pregnant women to mess with a man. ALSO, you might want to safely retain any media or communications with and from her that would disprove any false allegations against you of assault/rape, harassment, or any other forms of abuse.

Which way or doing a break up is best?

A) Dump her cold turkey with either 1) an announcement or 2) going ghost?

B) Get her to dump you?

C) Break routines and get more distant?

How To Avoid Single Women With Kids

Someone came here by searching "how to avoid single women with kids."

The most popular entry here is a warning not to date single mothers. You can see for yourself there are hundreds of comments on it.

Of course, you can avoid single women with kids by avoiding women entirely. That fail-safe solution isn't for everyone, though, especially if your a self-destructive masochist who actually wants to get married.

So how does a guy avoid single women with kids (single mothers), especially since more and more women are mothers the older they get?

Hang out in the pet store by the cat supplies.

But seriously, simply pay attention. Most single mothers won't stop talking about their kids, or will badmouth "the father of my kid(s)". In online dating profiles, their kids will often be in their pictures, even though there really isn't a good reason to show complete strangers pictures of their kids unless they're trying to attract pedophiles.

Any woman who hides the fact she has kids is definitely bad news. If you're just looking for sex, there's a chance a woman who hides or omits that she has children is also just looking for sex, and so you might think that's a good thing. But ask yourself... how did she become a single mother in the first place? By other men who were just getting together with her for sex? Stay away, unless you have had a vasectomy, and even then, you should probably heed the warning against dating single mothers.

How do you smoke out a single mother who is hiding the fact that she's a mother?

Perhaps by moving things to her place as soon as you can. You don't want her coming back to your place, anyway. If she's reluctant to let you see her place, she might also be thinking about her safety and convenience, or it might be a mess, or she might live with her husband(!), or she might have kids.

It would take a lot of work for her to remove signs of being a mother from around her place. She could try to pass off the other bedrooms as roommates' rooms.

It doesn't matter how things are going, or how attractive you find her. Once you realize she has kids, especially if she hid it, and especially if you haven't had a vasectomy, you need to drop her immediately. Leave. Ghost her.

If you have any tactics that work for you, please do share them in the comments.

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?

Who Leads the Home?

Most men have a strong drive to have sex with women, especially the woman he's serving in marriage.

Most men don't want to argue or disagree with their wife, or have her nagging or whining or complaining to him.

Most women marry men who do, or will, earn more income than them.

These realities, along with family law and courts, and domestic violence laws and policies, mean that men lose their power when they marry. Husbands have power at the delegation of their wife. She can rescind that power at any time.

These things mean that if the wife doesn't let her husband be the leader, she will be the leader.

"Oh, we decide together."

It might look that way, especially when what he wants/chooses is something she would choose if it was entirely up to her. But husbands will often try to avoid conflict with their wife, so unless she truly defers to him, he's going to defer to her when there is disagreement. He may be so good at that she might not even realize it is what he is doing, or she might think he doesn't really care either way (even though he might care very much).

There are only two people. If each gets one vote, and they don't agree, what's the solution? When a husband takes the lead, and the wife doesn't accept his decisions, she's likely to call him inconsiderate, immature, controlling, or some other negative descriptor.

In my home, my wife has said in the past that she wants me to make more of the decisions. However, when I decide differently than she would, she says I didn't listen to her. I did listen to her! I listened and still decided the way I wanted was the better choice. She's not happy with that. So, it's better to talk with her, figure out what she wants, and unless it's sure to be significantly destructive, "agree" with her or "decide" the way she wants.

This is one more reason not to marry, as free men don't have to deal with this. Live alone, and you always get to decide. But if you're going to be foolish enough to marry, try to have this worked out ahead of time: How are decisions made? How are disputes settled? She might not stick with whatever she says before you marry her, but you can at least try. If you really want to subject yourself to marriage.

Vows Vary

Dr. Laura read a letter at the end of the Wednesday, May 13, 2020 show from the wife of a caller. The wife explained that her husband had called claiming that there were sexual problems in the relationship. The letter writer explained, because he never said so during the call, that her husband had been trying to get her to have sex with other men. (There is a whole fetish or two about that.) [This entry has been bumped up.]

Dr. Laura again talked about "breaking vows".

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.

Answering Marriage Seller Assertions, Talking Points, and Questions - Part 13

Read Part 1 here and Part 2 here and Part 3 here and Part 4 here and Part 5 here and Part 6 here and Part 7 here and Part 8 here and Part 9 here and Part 10 here. and Part 11 here and Part 12 here.


Don't you want to raise children in the best environment?

There is more than one way to answer this depending on your situation.

A) I don't want children.

B) I am willing to sacrifice my desire to have children to avoid burdening a woman.

C) I haven't found a compatible woman who is suitable to be a good mother.

D) The terrible state marriage contract does nothing to help my children other than making it less likely I will leave. Since I will not leave my children, the terrible state contract does nothing positive. This is one of those apparent correlations; people who get along well and live healthy lives are likely to be good co-parents AND get/stay married. However, we can be good co-parents without the terrible state contract. Behavior is what matters. She's either going to cooperate and be a good mother or she won't. A state contract that rewards her for divorcing and further encourages her to divorce by emasculating me certainly won't help.

Mind you, anyone who argued during the push to have two dudes be able to legally marry that "marriage isn't about children" shouldn't be attempting to use this argument. Plenty of other people will try to use it, because when all unmarried child raising is compared to all married child raising, children appear to be better off being raised within marriage. But of course that data never separates out parenting by people who intentionally avoided marriage even though they got along well and shared goals, including the goal of raising children together.

You do not need a terrible state contract to raise children well.

Grandpa Lived in a Different Era

I’m so tired of people asking why husbands and fathers today aren't like their grandfathers or great-grandfathers in terms of leading their homes, tempering their wife when she's way out of line, and keeping their kids in line, etc. The embellished memories of how those men of yore kept everything hunky dory without losing their cool can be entertaining and even amusing to hear once or twice, but the constant extolling of this imagined past familial utopia is irritating.

There are very important things that aren't included in this praise of these "real" men.

Those men could literally beat their wives and children, rape their wives, and kick any of them out of the home without giving them a dime in walking money. If some punk was horning in on one of the girls in the family, the dad could run him off the property with a gun. And none of it was against the law or, even if it was technically against the law, nobody would arrest these men, let alone prosecute them or convict them. Now, not all men actually ran their homes like that, but the general cultural understanding that they could was enough to keep their families in line. Wives and children did run away, facing destitution in doing so, especially when relatives were unwilling to take them in. Many of their relatives would side with the husband/father. Yes, a woman might find that her own father would side with his son-in-law. Just about everyone else did, too... employers/customers, clergy and congregations, mental health providers, doctors, banks, newspaper editors... just about anyone. Wives were told to go back and obey and please their husbands, with maybe doing something on the sly behind his back (like squirreling away some savings if the husband would spend too much or wouldn't let his wife have enough money).

A married woman couldn’t get a credit card or engage in many other financial actions without her husband’s agreement. This is the real reason some women had secret stashes of cash the home. They couldn’t put it in a bank without their husband knowing.

Unlike now, a marriage license was an actual license to live together, have sex, and have children. There could be serious legal consequences if you did any of those things without a marriage license. That license gave a man access to his wife’s body, whether she felt like it at the moment or not. If she cheated on him, not only could be beat her, kick her out, and divorce her, but she could be criminally charged and she certainly wouldn’t get half of everything plus lifetime alimony.

Is that how things should be run? I'm not saying these were good things. But they "worked" in that they 1) kept children from being a disobedient presence in the family home, and 2) kept wives from emasculating their husbands or acting significantly in contradiction to what he wanted. If you can find an acceptable way to achieve those goals now, please share it with us. We’d love to know the secret. And sorry, telling men to “be like your grandfather” ain’t going to do it. You might as well tell someone to fly on a magic unicorn. Grandpa lived in a different era.

The men of today have different dynamics to deal with in the home. They also have different dynamics to deal with outside the home. Every workplace, every institution has been feminized, and most of them have been integrated with women. Most media and most businesses and other organizations seek to cater to feminine sensitivities and priorities when there is a conflict with masculine. Grampa didn’t have to compete with both other men and women in selling his labor. He didn’t have to worry that having a normal conversation with another guy at work could get him fired for “harassment” because someone overhead something they didn’t like.

Sorry, everything else has been changed. You can't expect men to behave as though nothing has changed.

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!

Why Aren't You Married?

[I'm bumping up this entry because it is as relevant as ever. I noticed that I indicated that things go well in my marriage some of the time. "Well" is a relative term. If you would have described to me the "good" time in my marriage now before I married, I wouldn't have married.]

Even when things are going well in my marriage, I’m not one of those married guys who thinks everyone should be married. Unless someone has a baby on the way, it irritates me when I see someone pressuring someone else to get married. [My thinking on this has changed.]

Whether you are officially on a marriage strike or you have decided marriage is not for you, the fact remains that most people will get married at some time in their life, and so many people assume everyone wants to get married. Whether from relatives or coworkers or women who want you to buy them drinks, or fellow religious congregants, guys get to hear it over and over again: "Why aren't you married?"

If you are a Free Man or part of Men Going Their Own Way, or you are a marriage striker, or have simply decided marriage is not for you, what works as a good reply to this annoying question? Being married, I don’t use these, of course, but let's look at a few possible replies. Please comment with any good ones you have, too.

Here are six responses, getting progressively more provocative (I keep in mind that casual sex is no loner discouraged in our culture):

What I Mean When I Say That Word

Generally, when I use the word “sex” on this blog, like when I’m talking about running game, I’m talking about erotic activity between two or more people that involves the genitals  or behind of at least one, with the intention of giving pleasure and ideally a climax to at least one person. It doesn’t have to mean “PIV” intercourse, but it can.

If you’re running game, the highest goal is to avoid spending any more money, time, or energy on women than absolutely necessary to get you what you want, and to keep your freedom intact. Most men who run game also want some form of sex, to climax, and to see a beautiful woman naked in-person, but it’s possible there are a few who just want some temporary company. Whatever satisfies that man is up to him. If I was a free man running game, I could go without PIV as long as there was fellatio, cunnilingus, and getting to see/explore the women.

The point is, the word “sex” on this blog and in my posts on X, unless I say otherwise, can mean intercourse, but it can also mean fellatio, or cunnilingus, or certain use of hands, or… you get the idea.

By the way, when I say my wife and I have sex about once every 3-6 weeks, I’m using that definition. We might go months without intercourse. That’s all her choice.