Running Game Is LESS Work For Most Men

 

A comment was left after this post on how to present yourself when running game:

 

I don't know man. MGTOW seems less work. As they say, the juice is not worth the squeeze. After dating and having a few gals in bed, I just found out that Adult Movies were more easy and clean and less headache. At times I would just pay if I'm in a tough spot. Professionals don't talk about "feelings", they just do their job. So do I.

I understand.

Paying a pro, masturbation (especially with technology), sublimating sexual urges are all ways to deal.

MGTOW and Running Game aren't always mutually exclusive. Some MGTOW date. Others go into "monk mode" or whatever the individual calls it, giving up dating entirely.

Running Game is for men who want "amateur" female company, but do not want to spend a lot of money, effort, time, emotion, or give up their freedom or be mistreated by a woman.

It does take a little effort to set up your presentation, but many aspects of that - like having a Google Voice number or something similar - are probably good things to be doing anyway in order to protect your identity, even if not seeing amateurs. And once your presentation is set up, maintaining it isn't much effort.

One of the primary reasons to run game is to reduce effort and hassles, and once you get past the initial startup, it makes life so much easier. It's definitely easier than marriage or dating with marriage as a goal, or dating in the ways that are promoted by marriage sellers or most mainstream media. It's also not criminalized. It's not for everyone, but it does work for some.

Save the World, Ladies!

 

There are people who appear to be very, very worried about adult media or erotic media or p-rn.

They say it’s ruining men, exploiting women to the point of trafficking, and even destroying society.

Wow! That sounds dire.

Something has to be done about such a serious threat.

Fortunately, men who are regularly, perhaps daily, with attractive, naked women and climaxing, especially through methods like enthusiastic fellatio, tend to watch much less p-rn, especially if they are getting those experiences for little or no expense.

So, ladies, the solution is at hand (so to speak).

Women can greatly reduce men’s viewing of erotic media by giving men lots of great, enthusiastic sex for little cost. Surely it’s worth it to do this, if erotic media is so destructive.

Get to it ladies! Approach a man today, tomorrow, and every day and save the world!

Running Game - What To Do On Dates

When a man is running game, here's how the ideal date goes:

It's dark out. You haven't seen her in a week or more.

You get a text from her that invites you over.

You go to her place.

Within five minutes of arriving, you're doing what you want to do.

After you're done doing what you want to do, you leave. You're not there to stick around to cuddle, snuggle, spoon, move furniture, fix the garbage disposal, or any of that.

To get to that point, though, you'll probably have to have other dates, first.

"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.

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!

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.

More Fun With Statistics - Body Count and Marriage

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

Have you heard that or some variation of that?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Now let's look at the second graph.

This graph uses months.

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

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

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

What is really going on here?

Running Game - When She Starts Getting Lazy

When you're running game at expert level, and you have a full roster with extra players waiting in the bullpen, one reason to drop a member of your roster is if she drops any one thing you like off the sexual menu or her sexual repertoire. You should have made it clear you like it, and since you did when she did it, and she's done it for you before, she shouldn't have dropped it.

Dropping it means she's either getting comfortable and thinks she has you locked in - meaning she was doing it to reel you in with no intention of continuing to do it, or she's on her way out/favors another guy to the point she doesn't care about doing what you want anymore.

Either way, don't talk with her about it. Don't complain, don't whine, don't demand, don't argue, don't pressure. Don't "negotiate." What's the point? If she wanted to do it, she would have. Desire can't be negotiated.

Don't say anything at all to her. Simply ghost her. If she tries to talk with you after you ghost her, it's because she thought she had you locked in, or the other guy didn't work out. (You should always assume they are seeing other guys; don't indicate you want to be exclusive.)

"Dropping it" would be on a three strikes or less basis. For example, let's say it's fellatio. There can be legitimate reasons she won't want to do it once or twice, like dental work, cold sores, etc. But when it is three times in a row (meaning, over three or more weeks), it means she's dropped it off the menu.

Guys who fall into the trap of thinking they want an "exclusive" relationship tend to end up simply accepting this stuff, because they aren't seeing anyone else and don't want to "start over" with someone else. That is a very common way men end up having a terrible sex life. Early on, she's trying to hook you in. She's auditioning. Don't stick around for it when she stops doing what you like.

One Sign It is Time to Move On

Answering Marriage Seller Assertions, Talking Points, and Questions - Part 11

 

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.

Marriage channels male sexuality.

This is an unproven assertion. It depends entirely on the opinions of the person asserting it and how they are defining terms. The words used can mean different things. But there is no definitive, clear way to prove that John Doe is better behaved because he married, or his dis-likeable behavior is because he's unmarried. It's one of those statements that sounds good, and marriage sellers simply rely on people nodding their head in agreement rather than questioning what it even means.

Most marriages in the USA (and maybe another country you're in) involve the expectation of monogamy, or at least the wife's veto over the husband's sexual desires. This is usually what the marriage seller means: beating a man down. Putting him on a leash (and not in the kinky way). Putting aside swinging, threesomes, hotwifing (ask Jerry Falwell Jr. to explain that one to you), polyamory, "plural marriage," and other forms of having the wife officially on board with her husband having other partners, many married men still have mistresses and affair partners, flings/one night stands, or go to prostitutes.

It might help to ask the marriage seller who uses this argument "What do you mean by that?" Maybe they will hallucinate about an imaginary person, or they will tell on themselves.

What exactly are they afraid would happen if even fewer men married? Men who want to have sex with women can't have sex with women unless those women agree or unless it is rape. So are they worried that a man who decides not to marry is going to rape? Or that he's going to get consent from many different women? Or... what exactly? If they're worried about rape, what they're telling you is that a woman should marry a rapist because they think it's more likely he'll only rape her. If they are worried the man is going to conceive children he won't take care of, well, plenty of married men do that. But how about encouraging vasectomies? If they claim "children without fathers" is their concern, ask them if it would be OK if he had a vasectomy, or was only with women incapable of conceiving or they always avoided intercourse.

It's funny that some of the same marriage sellers who make this assertion also say that married men get more sex. So... unmarried men have "unchanneled" sexuality, but aren't having much sex? That would be their claim, anyway.

This assertion might boil down to "I don't like the way you/other unmarried men are carrying on." So what? So what if this other person doesn't like it? I see husbands and wives do a lot of things I don't like.

Again, varying replies might work, depending.

A) Running game also channels male sexuality.

B) Male sexuality can be channeled without a terrible state contract.

C) I channel my sexuality very well without a terrible state contract.

D) Men can be monogamous or otherwise restrained or responsible in their sexuality without a terrible state contract.

E) Marriage starves male sexuality.

As with many other things in life, do not simply accept assertions and claims as true without questioning them. So many of the arguments marriage sellers use are flimsy and depend on you simply accepting a platitude.

Running Game Helps Pick the Women Who Want Some

Contrary to what some people say and what they might actually think, some women want sex.

Some want a lot of it.

Running game helps you to avoid the women who don’t want you, or would be too much work, and instead helps you to find and connect with the women who are down to get with you.

Yes, some women don’t have much interest in sex, or have lost it. Dead bedrooms exist, and most are primarily the result of women. Many wives, longtime girlfriends, and baby mammas grow cold. The history of prostitution alone is proof men, on average, want it more. Some women use sex as a loss leader or a bargaining chip. 

All of that is true.

But it’s also true that there are women, including attractive women, who are out there looking for it, at least for now, and you can be the one to supply it - if you don’t turn her off.

If you’re there, if you seem to be in-charge and confident, in-demand, a bit mysterious and untamed, and she’s feeling good about or connected to you, you can be who scratches her itch.

She wants plausible deniability. That’s where booze and being at her place or hotel room (often under some pretense), and you taking charge factors in. It’s how “one thing leads to another.”

If you’re not astoundingly attractive (as in, attractive enough to be a model), then she either has to have good reason to think you’re a great or “good enough” lover - or that you have money, power, and/or fame, and being with you will give her a rub, get her along for the ride, or at least some bragging rights. With significantly older women, sometimes it’s enough that you’re younger, eager, and energetic.

What she says will usually clue you in on who you should seem to be to her, whether a fling or someone she might want to latch on to.

If the latter, you want her to think you’re going somewhere, and that she has competition because other women want you, and if she impresses you, she can be along for the ride.

Especially for the former, she might be on the prowl because she’s simply looking for a good time, or attention, or maybe she’s ovulating, or maybe she got dumped, or her younger sister or frenemy just got engaged; whatever is going on, it doesn’t matter other than if you can play into it.

Some women want it.

And many enjoy it, if you know what you’re doing. That will help keep things going with her, if you want.

Two Calls in the Same Hour of Dr. Laura

I found the proximity of these two calls especially interesting. To be clear, they might not have actually been handled mere minutes apart, as the presentation of the program would imply, because 1) Dr. Laura does take some calls off-air, to be recorded for use in the program, and 2) previously aired calls are rerun. And both of these things happen unannounced, letting listeners believe this is all happening live.

May 13, 2025, Hour 2.

“Diane” called, age 70, married 37 years. We’re never told how old her husband is; we’re left to assume he’s about the same age.

In the last year, her husband has said he “doesn’t like” their sex life, it’s “too traditional”, and he’s “much more kinky”, wants “more exciting sex” and wants a girlfriend on the outside of their marriage.

Diane suggested she could do “some of” the things he wants to do, but since he knows she isn’t into it, he doesn’t want it with her. He doesn’t think it’s natural for her.

“He wants acknowledgment from another woman.”

Dr. Laura asked Diane if she’s willing to stay married to someone who’ll have sex outside of the marriage.

Diane was unsure, but of course Dr. Laura pushed for a decision. She does this even though it would be easy to give Diane both advice for staying as well as advice for if she is going to leave.

Dr Laura said that, if all this time of being married, they hadn’t done anything kinky, then it would be out of his nature, too.

Huh??? That’s dung. He could have very well struggled to contain his desires and feelings for 37-plus years. Dr. Laura knows that! But she just wants to beat up on the guy.

Dr. Laura goes on to say he’s at a point in his life he just wants to go out to play, and this is why men go to a prostitute or watch porn; so they don’t have to satisfy a woman.

Where did she get that? There was no indication from the call the caller isn’t satisfied, that her husband doesn’t want to satisfy her, and that he won’t want to satisfy any other woman he’s with. But Dr. Laura repeated it. She hasn’t talked with the husband at all and yet she made this assertion. The husband even said he wanted someone who was into it, so at least his claim is that he cares about the woman’s enjoyment.

Diane said her husband wants S & M.

She also said he’s been a good husband.

Dr. Laura, who has deemed many men who’ve done all sorts of things “good husbands” overall, said “Good husbands are not defined by the behaviors you just described to me.” First, no, Diane was referring to other behaviors. If she had tried describing all of those good husband behaviors at the start of the call or at any other time, Dr. Laura would have stopped her, perhaps with the uberannoying “WOO HOO!!! WOO HOO!! Diane’s husband has treated her well for decades, apparently. Two, talking about his desires isn’t being a good husband? No, if you maintain he’s just supposed to never talk with his wife about his desires. But isn’t it better he talked about his true feelings with his wife instead of simply sneaking out to cheat, hiding it from her?

Diane said she is “torn” because otherwise she loves the marriage. Kudos for Dr. Laura for not going on a long side rant about the word “torn.” I guess she was too focused on badmouthing Diane’s husband.

“Why do you want to stay with a guy who doesn’t want to sexually fulfill you and make love, he wants sicko sex?” Who said he doesn’t want to fulfill her? This is a contrarian assertion by Dr. Laura.

Diane said he says he wants to make love with her and have crazy sex otherwise.

In an attempt to distract the listeners from the fact she’d been messing up, Dr . Laura pivoted to saying she feels sorry for the caller for even debating it. That’s something Dr. Laura does when she’s losing - pivots to disapproval and shaming. She’s the great Dr. Laura, so her feeling differently from the caller is supposed to either change the caller’s position or make the caller feel lowly.

Dr. Laura called it a fact that Diane’s husband going to bring home STDs. See, since it’s “not a religious show,” it’s hard for Dr. Laura to say what exactly would be wrong with this arrangement if Diane was OK with it. Her husband could have had a vasectomy and “I’m Dr. Laura, and I don’t like it” doesn’t seem to be working, so the STD card gets played.

The problem with that is: This isn’t secret. He’s talking with his wife about it. There have been studies showing that people who are upfront about these things are LESS likely to spread STDs, because they get tested regularly and take precautions.

Then Dr. Laura mocked the idea that Diane’s husband would be able to separate out making love with her and getting kinky with someone else. What does that even mean? That he’d still try to get his wife to do S & M? I highly doubt that. Most men are very good at compartmentalization. Dr. Laura knows this! But she ditched that in an attempt to convince Diane and listeners that, somehow, it would be a problem. Maybe it would, maybe it wouldn’t. The alternative is guaranteed to be a problem: he’s either going to leave or be resentful.

Dr. Laura continued by asserting the caller won’t be horny for her husband. How does Dr. Laura know? On the contrary, maybe the caller would get off on it?

When Dr. Laura said women Diane’s age want to maintain the nest, the caller elaborated on that and mentioned being alone. Dr. Laura said “you’re never alone” because of friends, family, activities, etc. Um, what does she tell people who don’t want to marry? “You’ll be alone.” 

Case in point, she went on to say that the husband’s other lovers won’t care to be there when he’s dying (right after calling him a “sh!t” and “creepy.”) Yet again, Dr. Laura doesn’t know that. It happens more often than she’d ever want to admit: a lover who isn’t their spouse and never was a spouse being there as a husband is dying. I can think of someone I knew in such a situation, off the top of my head. I know Dr. Laura, instead of admitting she is asserting something that might not be true, would pivot to calling that strange or disrespectful. And who’s to say his wife will be there when he’s dying? She might die before or she might have divorced him for reasons unrelated to his desires.

Dr. Laura asks if she knew he was into S & M while dating. Diane said she knew he was into “kinky stuff like threesomes.”

Dr. Laura likened it to knowingly marrying a serial killer. I mean really. A guy wanting some sexual adventure has her thinking about murder. Oooookaaay.

Dr. Laura went on with her often-repeated “this is why I do this on radio, so that other women will be warned.” Right, that’s it. Not at all that it pays much more and if she’s in a room with a client/patient she can’t mute them, put them on hold, or hang up on them.

For sure, ladies, don’t marry a man who’d ever want a threesome, or sex with another woman, or an open marriage, or swinging, or BDSM, or whatever. (Spoiler: Almost all men who don’t have a low libido want at least one thing you’d find a turnoff or unacceptable, and even if he genuinely doesn’t at age 28, he might at age 48 or 68. So be sure to avoid this by never marrying.)

Society doesn’t say Diane’s husband’s desires are wrong. Some religions say they’re wrong. But again, the program “isn’t a religious program.” Most of society would say it’d be wrong for him to pursue his desires without his wife’s permission or at least making sure she is informed. Most of society would support him divorcing her to pursue his desires, or never having married.

Do with that reality what you will.

Dr. Laura has made it clear over the decades she is completely opposed to anything but monogamy in marriage. I can’t ever recall her articulating why, though, other than “you took vows to forsake all others,” which isn’t always true. However, I’m certain she has praised callers, letter writers, and others who’ve have been polyamorous, or swingers, or in an open marriage, or have done threesomes, or some other similar things: she just didn’t know the person she was praising had experience with those things, because it wasn’t the topic at hand.

*****

The other call during the same hour was from “Benjamin.”

Benjamin was married for 25 years and he and his wife were both virgins when they married.

He said their sexual relationship had been “tenuous” throughout their marriage because his libido is much more active than hers.

Dr. Laura didn’t jump in and point out that it’s normal for husbands to want sex more often than their wife, so he continued, saying three or four years ago, he said to his wife that had he known they’d be fighting back and forth about this he doesn’t know he would have entered into the relationship.

Notice that this is another example of how men are NOT supposed to be honest or share their feelings. They’re supposed to just shut up and keep being a butler and bank account.

Dr. Laura asked him about watching sex scenes in movies and whether he was doing all of the really exciting things the male characters were doing. Huh??? What does she think the characters are doing in these movies? And she knows they’re fiction, right?

Ben didn’t really say. He probably had no clue what she was talking about: romantic dinner? Passionate kisses? Sneaking out in the morning?

He said for him it was a matter of frequency and satisfaction.

Apparently based just on that, Dr. Laura said “Well that made you a crappy lover.” A good lover is primarily concerned with her satisfaction, not yours.

Uh, he didn’t say only his satisfaction. Also, what if Ben’s wife is a lesbian, or into a kink? Dr. Laura didn’t know anything relevant, unless Ben wrote a letter, in which case that should have been mentioned. Notice she didn’t tell the other caller, Diane, to be focused on her husband’s satisfaction.

Dr. Laura then went on to say the wife likely didn’t know much about her own body, even though the opposite could be true: she might have masturbated a lot before marriage to avoid having sex; she might be masturbating a lot now.

Dr. Laura went on to tell Ben that “probably you’re terrible at it and she has never gained an appreciation for it.”

Poor Ben. He has no way of knowing if he’s bad at it. For Dr. Laura to quickly assert that based on next to nothing is not OK. It’s a common tactic women use against men who say their marital sex life isn’t good. It’s been used against me. Except I know from experience that isn’t the problem. Dr. Laura KNOWS there are many wives who don’t have the same libido she apparently had (which had her doing things she now pretends never happened); many wives aren’t sexually attracted to their husbands. She wrote an entire book that’s mostly about that!!!

Anyway, she went on to tell Ben he and his wife should go to a sex therapist together.

Hmm. I’m guessing Ben and his wife were VERY religious and might still be. What are the odds they’re going to go to a sex therapist?

Dr. Laura continued, saying “Or you’re going to be divorced.”

What is she basing that on? It’s been 25 years. They made it this far. She then asserted again that Ben is a bad lover and turned his wife off. She wants to send him a “tape” of the conversation to play for his wife. Oh, no. No no no.

Now, it’s possible Ben is a bad lover. Sex is a learned skill, and he hasn’t had much opportunity to learn. But it’s also possible his wife simply has little interest in having sex with him or anyone else at all, and it has nothing to do with anything he did or didn’t do. She might have what Dr. Laura would call “trowma” or maybe she has hangups.

Poor Ben. He’s likely never going to experience a good sex life.

Well, there you have it. Two more examples among countless examples of why it’s better to avoid marriage in the first place.

. 

Is That Really in the Good Book?

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

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

Continue to read this entry if you have any interest.

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.

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.

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.

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.