Keeping Boundaries As a Free Man

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

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

Sure, but it gets more complicated than that.

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

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

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


Monk or Ghost

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


Stay Present But Independent

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

Answering Marriage Seller Assertions, Talking Points, and Questions - Part 5

Read Part 1 here and Part 2 here and Part 3 here and Part 4 here.

 

 

Doesn't the woman you're with want to marry?

There is more than one way to answer this depending on your situation, but this question is based on you having at least one woman you are seeing, which may not be the case. In some cases, more than one of these answers will be useful for you.

A) No.

B) She says she wants to marry, but I know she isn't prepared to be a wife.

C) More than one woman I'm with wants to marry. I treat them equally by not marrying either/any.

D) There are things I want. That doesn't make it her/any woman's obligation to do them.

 

E) So what?

F) I take marriage very seriously and I don't want to enter into it lightly [...or at all].

G) We haven't been seeing each other long enough. [60 years might be enough.]

It is important to remember that you're not holding any woman hostage. Ideally, you haven't made any promises about actually proposing or getting married to any specific woman, nor are you living with any woman. She is continuing to see you AS-IS.

If you have told a woman you will propose to her or you will marry her, you need to invoke your prerogative to change your mind, and the sooner you make that clear, the better. She might leave/stop seeing you, she might not. Even if she does, it is far better than marrying. Living together is usually a very bad idea, but don't make it worse by signing a terrible state contract.

This sort of question by marriage sellers is often followed up with "So you're just using her?" or "You're wasting her time!" You are no more using her than she is using you. Since you're not married, your interactions are entirely voluntary, whereas marrying (even if subsequently divorcing) forces some interactions even if one of you no longer wants to interact in that way. If she doesn't enjoy the time she's spending with you or doesn't otherwise get anything out of it, she is free to NOT see you.

Part 6

Dr. Laura Asked If Men Are Idiots for Marrying

On her Tuesday, March 22, 2022 program, Dr. Laura read part of something from Jordan Gray found at Good Men Project. It was titled "I Used To Think That Men Who Got Married Were Idiots."

I used to think that men who got married were idiots.

Or, if they weren’t idiots, they were at least undesirable enough that they just had to settle for whoever chose them… because why else would you tie yourself to someone for life if the reason weren’t that you didn’t have any other romantic options?

I mean, seriously… getting married??

Okay so… you get a couple of months of hot sex, in exchange for a lifetime of indentured servitude to someone who eventually takes you for granted and sees you as a walking wallet and then stops having sex with you and makes jokes with her friends about what a dumbass you are? And that’s if you even manage to stay together… because what’s even more likely is that she eventually leaves you, takes the kids, and steals half of your life savings in the process.

Who in their right mind would sign up for such a thing?

Didn’t these guys realize that, if you really break down the benefits of marriage into their fundamental components, you could hire out all of these needs for way less money than what your lifestyle of snotty nosed kids and inevitable divorce would cost you?

And I’m not speaking hyperbolically here!

Here, I’ll prove it to you…

You could hire someone to come to your house to do a deep clean every other week for, depending on the size of your house, let’s say $200/month.

You don’t want to cook for yourself? Okay, you could hire a meal prepping service who could make your lunches and dinners (you can fend for yourself with a super simple breakfast) for $2,000/month.

Okay, cooking and cleaning are taken care of for less than the cost of your mortgage payment… what’s left? Oh right, the big one. Sex!

Depending on how fancy you are and the legality of sex work in your local area, you could see a sex worker every week for the rest of your life and spend no more than $1-2,000 per month on that expense.

So if you tally up the monthly costs of outsourcing predictable, guaranteed, high-quality cooking, cleaning, and sex… you’re looking at no more than $50,000 per year in total expenses. Now, that might sound like a lot to some in the short-term… but if you compare that to the average cost of raising children, and the amount of money you’ll inevitably have to shell out in your divorce, this is an absolute bargain.

That's where she stopped reading. She took calls from men after that, asking them "Are men idiots for getting married?" At first, she wanted calls from married men, but she had trouble getting enough calls, so she took them from any men (who passed the screeners). The thing is, Dr. Laura promotes marriage. When she deviates from her program's usual format for things like this, she wants a specific answer. It isn't really her trying to give people time to say whatever they want. She will deny anything that goes against her point.

Gray's essay was pretty good up until that point. I waited for her to go back to finish reading the piece, but she never did. Let's see why.

One Reason You're Not Husband Material

Guys, I often write about how there isn't suitable, compatible wife material for you to marry. But another reason you should avoid marriage (or at least, a reason you can tell others when they ask you why you're not married) is that you aren't husband material. This isn't an insult, mind you.

Below is a list put together through listening to Dr. Laura for many years. She is very pro-marriage and used to do marriage and family therapy.

If a woman is looking for a man to be a husband and father to her children, this is the kind of employment he must have. This is just about his job. This doesn't even cover all of the other qualities he must have. If you don't have a job like this, you're not (first) husband material, and so you shouldn't marry. (And, if you don't marry during the child-raising years, then you're not going to be marriage material later on, because you didn't marry earlier, which means you're not the type to commit to marriage.)

A (first) husband has to have a job that, in no particular order...

Thinking Critically About Cohabitation

Introduction: Is Unmarried Cohabitation Bad?

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

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

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

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

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

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


How Do We Know If It is Good or Bad?

The Marriage Seller Pivot

 

 

 

 

 

 

People who try to convince men to marry (marriage sellers) quite often do a pivot.

They usually start their sales pitch appealing to your own self-interest. They say things like:

Married men earn more money

Married men are healthier

Married men live longer

Married men are happier

Married men have more and better sex

But when those of us who know better point out:

• Married men are also taller, meaning that marriage didn't cause men to be richer, healthier, live longer, be happier, have more and better sex, and get taller. Rather, women are far more likely to marry and stay married to men who earn more, are healthier, are happier, more sexually compatible, and taller.
  
• "Married" men are being compared as a group to all "unmarred" men, which consists of diverse groups, including divorced men and men who can't attract a wife (because they are sick, poor, unhappy, etc.) The stats marriage sellers are trying to use to show marrying benefits men never separate out intentionally unmarried men for comparison, many of whom are wealthier, healthier, happier, and having more, better, and more diverse sex than most husbands.
• Over half of everything a married man earns/owns legally belongs to his wife, who can take it away at any time for any reason, and 80 percent of spending decisions in a marriage are made by a wife, often to buy things a man doesn't want and won't use, so my unmarried counterpart only has to earn 51 percent of what I do to be better off than me.
  
• Men have often been conditioned to think they are losers, failures, or sinners if not married, or that complaining about their marriage is a sin or negative confession, and thus might say they are happy (if husbands) and unhappy (if still looking for a wife) as a result.

...marriage sellers will often pivot. They might try an ad hominem attack, call you bitter, ungrateful (if you're married), selfish, loser, immature, incel, misogynist, or even say marriage isn't a bed of roses for women either (which is an odd way to try to sell it).

The more careful ones, though, will pivot from "You'll be so much better off!" to "You have an obligation to get married." They don't lead with the obligation/duty approach because they know it isn't nearly as appealing as the first approach. With the "obligation" approach, they say things like:

Marriage is good for society
Marriage matures men
The Lord wants you to get married

Those are largely circular arguments or, like the first set, involve supposed correlation rather than demonstrable causation in the direction from marriage to positive outcome. If someone asserts something like "marriage is good for society," ask them to explain how. They'll probably say something about fatherless kids being a problem on society. But if you will not create children and then abandon them, where is the issue? They might say that it's better for a woman to have a husband than depend on government. But those aren't the only options. How about teaching and encouraging women to be truly independent?

There simply is no general Biblical command to marry that applies to every man today, especially not to get a bad contract from a secular state or engage in the common behaviors of today's social concept of marriage. Yes, the Lord, according to the Bible, doesn't want you trying to steal away another man's wife from him, so don't do that. Getting married certainly doesn't stop that! Notice the Bible doesn't tell you what steps to take to be married, as in "Do X, Y, and Z, and then you'll be married." That seems kind of like an important thing to be left out if everyone is supposed to marry.

Prager University even tried to teach viewers that married men are sexier.

Pay attention if you hear someone who effectively dismantles the claims of a marriage seller that married men are better off, and you might notice the marriage seller try a pivot.

Stay free, men.

The Modern Workplace and How It Relates to Marriage

Men are expected to "provide". It isn't just traditionalists like Dr. Laura who say this. Most women seek out and marry men they think do, or will, earn more than they do, even if they claim to be liberated, feminist, independent. Notice Oprah's lack of legal marriage. It would be difficult for her to attract a man who earns more than her.

In order to pay for a family, men generally need stable, well-paying jobs that provide a reasonable level of security. However, our economy has changed.

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

"What's next? Polygamy?"

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

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

But it doesn't.

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

I have a prediction.

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

Just wait.

Answering Marriage Seller Assertions, Talking Points, and Questions - Part 7

 


Read Part 1 here and Part 2 here and Part 3 here and Part 4 here and Part 5 here and Part 6 here.


Why aren't you married/Why don't you want to be married?

One problem with these questions is that they are asked as though marriage is the default. It isn't. One must do a series of voluntary things in order to be married. If someone doesn't do those things, they won't be married. Once you realize that the default is being unmarried, deflecting these questions becomes easier.

Yet again, there are several ways of answering this, depending on your situation and your interactions with the person who is asking.

A) I was born without a wife.

B) Marriage is voluntary. I am naturally free. The real question is "Why should I get married?"

C) I don't have compelling reasons to marry.

D) I don't voluntarily sign terrible state contracts.

E) I haven't found a compatible woman.

F) I don't want to inflict myself on someone.

G) I have too much respect for the independence of women than to do that.

H) I refuse to perpetuate such misogynistic patriarchy.

I) Just lucky, I guess.

J) (Turn it around.) Why did you marry?/Why are you marrying? (They will usually cite something they could have had without a terrible state contract. It's up to you if you want to point that out or not.)

Most men don't have a good reason to marry. When men stop accepting without question that marriage is a must and a if not married, a man must seek to get married, and flip things around to place the burden where it belongs, which is on the marriage seller, most of the marriage marketing campaign crumbles.

Part 8

Explain What You Mean in Telling a Husband to Man Up

I've posed this question before, directed at Dr. Laura, but a lot of people tell a husband to "man up" or "grow a pair" or "use your balls" or something similar in dealing with his wife, usually when there is a disagreement or the wife is behaving in some way that is immoral, irrational, unfair, or destructive. I'd very much like to know what someone who says such a thing means by it. What do you they expect the husband to actually do?

He can assert his opinion or demand. His wife can easily ignore or dismiss it.

Then what?

He can't force her to comply, and even if he can physically take unilateral action, she can use the force of law to stop him. He can't withhold his earnings from her (at least in Dr. Laura's scenario, a first marriage wouldn't have a prenup keeping finances separate). Anything he refuses to do for her, she can pay someone else to do using his earnings.

Answering Marriage Seller Assertions, Talking Points, and Questions - Part 14

 

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 and Part 13 here.


Married people have more children, and we need more people. They are a resource.

The main reason married people have more children is the same reason they are married:

Either they believe they are supposed to be married and having children or they believe they have stability in their relationship.

In the Western world, there is very little, if any, stigma left in unmarried parenting.

Again, depending on your situation, there are different way to answer.

A) I don't want any/more children.

B) I can't have any/more children.

C) Water wells are a resource. How many have you personally dug? Food is a resource. Are you producing on a farm more than you're consuming? Food and water are resources yet you don't tell me I should be providing them. Other people will continue to provide children. I will continue to contribute in ways I prefer.

D) People can have as many children as they want without a terrible state contract.

E) I am not obligated to keep supplying to your government ponzi schemes.

F) Be honest and direct and try to encourage people to have more children, rather than telling them they should marry. You can appeal to the people who are already married to have (more) children, if you have a qualm with unmarried parenting.


Don't you want what is good for society?

This makes the assumption that marrying is good for society. You can try asking them to explain how exactly marrying is good for society. They will probably cite things we've already covered in this series: having (more) children, having cooperative parental involvement in raising the children, unmarried men being violent, and unmarried women being dependent on government. As we've shown, all of those things can be addressed without a terrible state contract.

A) The claims that getting a terrible state contract is good for society is based on perceived correlations or things that can be done without a terrible state contract. Signing a terrible state contract isn't good for society. What's good for society is in how people behave. It won't benefit society if I get a terrible state contract, other than to remove a woman from the teat of government. But I wouldn't take on a woman like that anyway. How about encouraging women to be independent?

B) Explain exactly how me entering into a terrible state contract would benefit society?

There is no evidence whatsoever that signing a terrible state contract is beneficial to society.

Answering Marriage Seller Assertions, Talking Points, and Questions - Part 10

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.

Single men waste a lot of time and money running around chasing women.

So do a lot of married men!

But seriously, when a man signs a terrible state contract, his money and time are no longer his own. They are controlled by his wife. Marriage sellers think that is a good thing, and not wasteful.

The men who try this argument reveal that they considered what they did/do when unmarried to be a waste. And maybe it was. Whether the time and money he spends is a waste is up to him to decide.

But many unmarried men, especially free men who know what they're doing, which might include running game, don't waste much time or money and are very much happy with being unmarried.

If a man runs game, he won't be spending a lot of time and money. He's definitely spending less than a husband, though a common complaint of wives is that their husband isn't spending a lot of time and money "chasing" her. How is buying overpriced flowers that will be withered and discarded soon, or chocolates for an obese wife NOT wasting money? You know what a waste of money is? Paying for two sets of divorce lawyers because you entered into a terrible state contract even though you didn't need to.

If you're really so worried that "single" men are wasting time and money how about showing them how to live the life they want for less time and money spent, instead of urging them to sign a terrible state contract?

Part 11

Being Free Isn’t Being Deficient

 

You are a complete person.

You’re sufficient.

You don’t need a spouse, a partner, or whatever anyone wants to call another person to be a complete person and to live a great, productive, honorable, worthwhile life.

Yes, we’re all flawed. Yes, we all have our limitations. Yes, we all need other people to do things or we won’t have food, shelter, etc. (And yes, I believe we all need Jesus.)

But you are a complete person. Having Jesus + a wife won’t save you. The wife doesn’t factor in to your salvation.

You can have a residence, contribute to society, have a great career, be a good friend, and all of that without a wife, a partner, or a girlfriend.

You don’t need someone living with you, having any control over how you live, what you do, how you decorate, what you eat, what you watch, when you go to bed, when you wake up. You don’t need someone there costing you money, taking up your time, nagging you, criticizing you, arguing with you, interfering with your life.

You’re sufficient.

One Way to Warn More Men

If you identify at all with MGTOW or agree with me that most men should stay Free Men (avoiding legal/financial entanglements with women) or at least avoid marriage, one way to get our messages out to more men is to use established platforms, such as online discussions, comments sections, and call-in shows (like talk radio).

Getting a single sentence broadcast can help change lives for the better. If you can red-pill just one man or boy listening, it makes a positive difference. Any show doing an hour or whatever of "open lines" or allowing “talk back” of messages recorded using their app (no set topic) is an opportunity, but especially shows or spaces talking about relationships, dating, family, or marriage.

I wrote an extensive open letter to Dennis Prager, but I'd never call in to his show, for reasons, but you might be able to [at this time, he’s not doing live shows other than tsking some questions from paid subscribers on occasion]. Although I'll be using Dennis Prager and Dr. Laura as examples, you can adapt these tactics to any call-in show, preferably one that puts "live" calls on the air. Note that Dennis Prager does live question and answer chats on Facebook [he did.. he might resume as he recovers from his spinal injury] and Dr. Laura's show has a Facebook page where she allows comments and discussions on things she posts, which are often about relationships and marriage. You can adapt these messages for any forum, social media, or comments area. 

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!

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.

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):

Answering Marriage Seller Assertions, Talking Points, and Questions - Part 12

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.


Single men commit more violent crime.

This can be true without the implication being "More men should sign a terrible state contract."

A) Do you mean to imply that if a violent criminal signs a terrible state contract, he'll become a good citizen? Are you telling women to marry violent criminals?

B) Maybe, just maybe, women are less likely to marry and stay married to violent men?

C) Younger men tend to commit more violent crime AND younger men are less likely to be married.

D) There is no proof that getting a terrible state contract will make a violent person less violent.

E) Do you think I'm going to go around committing violent crimes if I don't sign a terrible state contract?


Unmarried women do damage to society including by dependence on government.

This is one I've heard from Dennis Prager. Most people probably dismiss it immediately. But I'll address it just in case someone tries it with you.

A) I'm not obligated to sign a terrible state contract to modify the behavior of a woman.

B) Maybe that's why they are unmarried; because they are destructive?

C) We can encourage women to be better and independent without sacrificing men to do it.


Even if marrying could be conclusively shown to make men and women better, that wouldn't mean it is an obligation or the only or best way to do it, especially with current state contracts.