Dennis Prager Latest Talker to Cut Back

Dennis Prager has become the latest longtime talk radio host to cut back.

Starting next week, his weekday nationally syndicated terrestrial broadcast program, and no doubt the pay podcast version of the same, will drop from three hours to two.

The publicized explanation is that Dennis wants more time to work on multiple books he wants to complete.

It hasn’t been unusual for him to take entire days off to work on a book, or for him to skip the last hour or entire days for travel or other activities, with a “Best of” recording or guest host taking his place. For a while he was also doing his third hour with a cohost.

I have no idea if he’s cutting back on the Dennis and Julie podcast or his fireside chats.

While I’m sure Dennis does want to complete more books, I wouldn’t be surprised if another reason for this change is to allow Salem or anyone else paying him to avoid paying him more with his new contract, or even to lower his pay.

Dennis notes he will be starting both hours at the top of the hour rather than six or seven minutes in, saying this will constitute a full radio hour more of content over the course of the week, meaning his listeners will only be losing four radio hours per week, not five. Shifting to :00 from :07 will mean losing the top of the hour news/traffic/weather many of his stations have. I will be curious to see if the ads are shifted to the other breaks. The length of the podcast hours will reveal this. 

Dennis is also announcing he’ll be doing a monthly chat with subscribers to his higher tier subscription, Pragertopia Plus. 

Dennis has had four dedicated hours each week: Ultimate Issues (Hour 3 Tuesdays), Male-Female (Hour 2 Wednesdays), Happiness (Hour 2 Fridays), and Open Lines (Hour 3 Fridays).

My guess is he’ll keep all four. Ultimate Issues will move to Hour 2 and his Friday program will start with the Happiness Hour.

It has never appeared to me that Dennis has had any trouble filling three hours five days per week. He can monologue, he has no shortage of guests, and I’ve never gotten the impression he’s struggled to get callers.

Though I vehemently disagree with him on his pathological pushing of marriage, I usually find his program a worthwhile listen, so I see losing 4-5 hours of it per week to be a negative. At least he’s still alive and on the air.

Should She Call Him?

 

Dr. Laura Schlessinger wants unmarried women to do less sex. She never talks about what she was doing in the past when she wasn’t married. She insists her show is a secular program; religion doesn’t come into play except for her to use a caller’s religion against them or to help them with something. So she can’t refer to religion as to why unmarried sex is wrong in general. But without that, she appears to be envious, or angry about “unfair competition,” or lowering the price of sex. She tries to avoid that by citing mental and physical health concerns and social stigmas (which she attempts to perpetuate).

Just about every episode of her program has calls from prior episodes dropped in, unannounced, as filler and I don’t know if this call is one of those. But it did appear in Hour 2 of Wednesday, January 24, 2024. “Anna” appears 26 minutes into the podcast hour. 

Anna explained that she’s not sure if she should reach out to someone she was dating for two months. She’s 30, he’s 35.

“Everything was going great” and then he “unexpectedly” said he needed to put them “on pause” because he had some “emotional things he needed to deal with,” that he “adored” her and that he “hoped to call her soon.”

Yes, it’s likely those “emotional things” are women who are hotter and/or f—- better than Anna. But there is a slight chance he really did need to sort through some emotional considerations on his own.

“Should I reach out to check in on him?” asked Anna.

“OF COURSE NOT.” declared Dr. Laura. 

Please note that Dr. Laura is generally going to discourage women from appearing to be the pursuer.

“That was the nicest way to dump you.” Dr Laura said he was classy but she doesn’t like it when “people dangle some hope.” She told Anna, “Get on with your life. Assume it’s over.”

Anna started talking and Dr. Laura loudly interrupted her, which is her habit. 

“A. He’s not that interested.

“B. Maybe he is but he’s screwed up in the head.

“Either one of those is not that good for you.”

That’s where the call should have ended. But Dr. Laura is lonely, horny, frustrated, and not happy that if she wants a man, she has to compete against easier, younger, hotter women. 

So she continued the call.

“Did you have intercourse with him? -Oral sex? -Anything else?” She tells callers not to keep talking after they ask one question but she asked three before the caller could get a word in edgewise. 

Anna: “Yes.”

(The rest of the quotes below are from Dr. Laura, pontificating.)

“How stupid you are, as a woman, to do that?”

Why did she include “as a woman?” Would it be OK if it was two gay men? Perhaps because Dr. Laura talks as though men should pay women for sex, and there’s no way the guy had paid enough yet.

“In two months.”

She never gives an acceptable time frame. If it must be in marriage, that means waiting until your late twenties, spending about two and a half to three years, according to the timeline she pushes, getting legally entangled in a bad state contract, and THEN finding out whether or not you enjoy each other sexually. 

“Not knowing the guy.”

This is correct. You really don’t know someone well that soon. On the other hand, there are situations in which Dr. Laura would decide that’s more than enough time to decide someone should be out of your life entirely. Why isn’t it long enough to decide you want to get sexual?

“The sex is meaningless. Is it the same thing as brushing your teeth? It must be.”

Is enjoyment meaningless? What exactly would make the sex meaningful? Dr. Laura didn’t say.

“How many guys are you going to have sex with because you like him and you’re dating?”

I’d like a woman to respond to this and say “As many as I want to.” But they’re usually so taken aback by the scolding and nervous about being on the air in the first place that they just take the haranguing. Seriously. Without a religious rule prohibiting it, what’s the argument against it? Pregnancy? Diseases? There are precautions they can take.

“How does sex become lovemaking?”

When there’s love.

“In the future, how will sex be meaningful?”

The same way going to dinner will be meaningful. Imagine a guy saying “I’m not taking you out for a nice dinner because I’m saving that for my future wife.” Same with gifts. Or long talks.

“If a future guy says how many men have you had and you have to say 15, is he going to be interested?”

This is funny, because Dr. Laura berates husbands who are upset after they find out their wife has had more lovers than he thought. She condemns husbands for even trying to find out. But if Anna and any future guy do discuss their experience, and he’s not OK with her “body count,” then they’re “not a match” as Dr. Laura is so fond of saying. 

“How do you keep sex important if you just use it as a part of dating because you’re attracted?”

The same way you keep going out to a nice dinner important.

“How do YOU become important if you use sex as part of attraction?”

What does that even mean?

“I think women your age don’t think about any of this. You just operate out of the moment.”

There have always been women like that, some of them Dr. Laura’s age.

“But when you add up all those moments, you’re not going to be proud of yourself, pleased with yourself, or even happy. And you could end up quite depressed. Because how many times are you going to get naked and do it and not end up with anything meaningful? And how do you think you’ll avoid depression at that point?”

This appears to be relying on the kind of stigma Dr. Laura tries perpetuate. “You’re going to feel upset at yourself because women like me are going tell you that you should.”

If Anna regrets having casual sex, then sure, having casual sex is going to bring her negative feelings.

But if she doesn’t regret it, it’s a different matter.

When describing the situation, Anna had said everything was going great. Although Dr. Laura will often deny such a statement as true, it is what Anna perceived. That means she liked the guy. The sex must have been good and she didn’t regret it, which is why she wanted to reach back out to him. If she regretted the sex or there was something about the guy she didn’t like, she wouldn’t have done the call with Dr. Laura. 

Most likely, the guy found Anna to be too clingy, demanding, somehow flawed, or just not as much fun as his other options. Dr Laura was correct in saying Anna should move on with her life. If the guy reaches out, it’ll most likely be because women he prefers more aren’t available that evening or that week.

The Incredibly Shrinking Michael Medved Show

I used to listen to the Michael Medved Show as much as I could on live radio, and then the paid podcast when he was dropped by Salem for Gorka.

I eventually stopped allowing that subscription to renew, and very rarely would catch that show live via the home station’s (AM 770 KTTH Seattle) website. Supposedly it was also syndicated, by another company other than Salem.

Last month, that station announced that as of the turn of the year, it was going to air the national Guy Benson show in the the slot Medved had (Noon-3pm Pacific).

As of this posting, I don’t know if there is any radio station carrying Medved’s show. I can’t find any listed on the show’s website.

It looks to me like the program for now is strictly Internet, and people can listen live (for free, I guess.... I'm not sure) or pay for the podcast, which is simply a recorded version of the live program.

This change didn't cause much buzz. As far as I can tell the same basic article, essentially "copy pasta" from the station's press release, was carried in a few places, with someone erroneously implying Medved had still been syndicated by Salem. Nobody has bothered to update Medved's Wikipedia page since August 2023 (as of this posting).

It's been a few years since Tom Leykis gave up doing this live, call-in Internet program because not enough people were paying to subscribe (Leykis is strictly podcast now, when he feels like recording). I don't know what Medved's situation is as far as the program's finances. More people are used to listening online now, so online programs might have a better go than Leykis did.

There are multiple national shows airing live Noon - 3pm Pacific. Medved's now-former home station apparently has a deal with Fox, which carries the Benson show. Not that a show has to air live, but it's better if it does. A couple of other things were going against Medved: age and his criticisms of Trump and various other Republicans as well as conservatives. His target audience no doubt preferred he spend more time pointing out the flaws of the Democrats and the Left.

I'd be interested in the inside scoop as far as the Medved Show's finances, reach, and if he retained any staff or if that staff stayed with the station or went somewhere else entirely. What are his plans? Will he keep the show going even if it costs him money instead of paying him? Having a website, live stream, phone lines, a screener, a producer, and a podcast archive costs money. Is he the kind of guy who wants to (or feels he needs to) work until the day he dies, or does he plan to retire?

There were many times I enjoyed his analysis and perspective over the years. I found his movie reviews worthwhile, too. His history programs played when he was out were the only long-since-recorded talk radio to which I'd listen. And of course he regularly had "Disagreement Day" and guests with whom he differed. He was a big presence in talk radio for decades. But I hadn't listened to his program much since I dropped that podcast subscription.

Whatever is or is not going on with him, I wish him well.

An Answer to Dennis Prager's Question

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

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

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

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

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

There it is. That's the rational response.

It is rational to refuse to enter a terrible contract.

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

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

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

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

Stay free, men!

Brace Yourself For the Attempt to Fool You

 

Each year, there’s a push during the first half of February to fool men into signing a terrible state contract. This year will be even worse, likely starting now, as a fixated marriage seller (it’s how he makes his living) promotes his book, which will be officially released during this time. The book tries to sell people on marrying.

Don’t fall for the marriage selling propaganda that’s heading your way.

Do check out the “marriage strike” and “Free Men” tags here. 

Life has changed.

There’s no benefit to most men in signing a terrible state contract.

Most marriages fail.

Most men can thrive and have a great life without ever signing a terrible state contract.

Our default status is unmarried. Most men have no compelling reason to change that status.

Don’t be fooled with false claims that you will be better off if you lay down your life to the state. Don’t allow insidious shaming tactics claiming it’s somehow better for society if you sign a terrible state contract. Marriage sellers don’t care about what’s best for you. They think they benefit if you get trapped. Misery loves company.

Stay free!

Life is Generally Better

People who think life is terrible now lack perspective.

Life is terrible now? Compared to what???

This isn't to minimize individual tragedies, pain, loss, trauma, or horrors. I'm talking about the world in general, especially the West. If you read other entries in this blog, you see that I'm definitely not someone who advocates that people have children unless they really, really want them and can provide them a good home. But when I see people say the world is too messed up and that's why they're not having children, it defies understanding of history.

For most of human history, just about everyone worked - hard and usually physical labor with dangers - from about the time they could walk until they died. They worked long hours and six or seven days per week. Vacations? What are those??? Life was hard, it was very limited, and it was short. You lived your entire life in the place you were born, upward mobility wasn't much of a thing, your options for just about everything in life were far more limited than they are now. Rest, relaxation, leisure were in short supply. A disability was much more likely to mean an even more limited and shorter life. Treatment options for injuries, illnesses, and physical problems were very limited compared to now.

Personal net worth and access to goods and services was generally a tiny fraction of what it is now.

War, violence, famine, barbarity, corruption, oppression, injustice, disease, dealing with threats from animals and severe weather are the default state of human life; it is only by hard work at civilization that these things have been limited, when and where they have been. And they have been.

When people think of things they think they like about the past, it is always taken out of the larger context.

Just one of many examples today are Generation X people (and older) who reminisce about the 1980s. Maybe they'll mention the music, the movies, the television shows, video games, restaurant chains, or something along those lines. But that drops the context of the looming threat of nuclear world war, HIV seemingly poised to become a pandemic as a certain death sentence, and, conversely, countless other things we've enjoyed since, and just about all the works of art and entertainment enjoyed then are still available to enjoy now in some form.

There are a couple of major things that especially seem to dampen the outlook of younger adults and adolescents: education costs and housing costs. It's true that those have far outpaced inflation. As far as housing goes, there isn't really much new land being made. But we have plenty of land. It's really regulations that slow or prevent the construction of "enough" new units. This is, indeed, one of many problems with big government. Hopefully, this problem will be reduced somewhat by replacing existing apartment and condo buildings with taller ones, adding housing units to struggling malls, converting some floors of commercial high rises to housing, and with slowing population growth. Education costs are high because of what essentially amounts to cartels and government interference. There's no good reason educational costs shouldn't have decreased in comparison to inflation with the rise of technology.

Many other things darken the assessment of people of various ages, depending on their focus. One of the most oppressive for the Left and those who believe Leftists and their messengers is the dire pronouncements of climate change as an existential threat. A constant assertion that climate change is behind various present ills and is on course to destroy the habitability of Earth in the near future is, by itself, enough to cause someone to decide things are terrible now. The dire predictions are hype, though, intended to get people on board with enlarging government, higher taxes (including hidden ones), printing and borrowing more money, and losses in liberty. Innovation, if allowed, will continue to address real environmental concerns.

And that takes me to other people who think things are terrible now: those who value limited government. Many of them see the government is getting ever larger and more intrusive.

Some religious moralists see the de-stigmatization of casual sex and cohabitation, LGBTQ+ political and cultural activism advancements, plummeting marriage rates, the ubiquity of porn, the increased legalization of recreational drugs and gambling as signs everything is falling part, while on the flip side others fret about "Christian nationalism" and the fact that someone might have to travel to another state to legally obtain an elective abortion or get their child a castration.

Some people worry endlessly about who is President or could possibly become President enough that they waste their life doing it.

And there are the people who, looking at the things above and other examples, fear that society has fractured into conflicting extremes, none of which are an appealing association.

Identity politics teaches people to think of themselves or their neighbors as perpetual victims of oppressive systems and that they are surrounded by people who actively hate them and want them dead. That can be very discouraging.

But "everything is terrible now" requires a lack of perspective.

Yes, there are real problems. Yes, there are setbacks sometimes. But overall, life is much better than it was 80, 100, 200, 500 or more years ago. People, whether male or female (or even if they think they're something else), whatever their skin color and whichever adult to whom they're attracted, have far more opportunities and a far higher standard of living than their ancestors did.

Your news source and your activist organizations thrive on bad news, alarmism, and scare tactics. Big business, which advertises, wants you to think your life is terrible but will get better if only you buy enough of their goods and services, and how much is enough is always "just a little more."

You're better off keeping some perspective. This is just one site that might help you with that.

Documenting Prager's Lack of Panic About Adult Media

Dennis Prager has correctly noted many panics that are pushed by the Left. I haven't heard him note that "porn panic" is primarily driven from the Right (with some piling on by misandrists on the Left). I listen to his radio show via podcast, but don't have time to watch hardly any of his Fireside Chats or the podcast he does with a very young woman. So, it is entirely possible I've missed him mention porn panic and it's push from the Right.

His Prager University has made a deal with The Daily Wire. The Daily Wire has show hosts/columnists who buy into, and perpetuate, porn panic. Indeed, Candace Owens is or has been a Prager University personality, but she buys into porn panic. For that reason, I'm documenting here some of what Dennis Prager has publicly proclaimed as far as male sexual nature and erotica, in case anything starts disappearing. To Dennis Prager's credit, as of this posting, he hasn't backed down despite negative reactions over the years from a core audience of his: conservative churchgoing women and the men who are trying so score points with them.

On March 2, 2015, Prager University posted a video hosted by Dennis Prager with the title "He Wants You." Here's the transcript they provided:

Should You Legally Remarry Your Ex?

Men should almost certainly NOT remarry their ex if they have no minor children together. If you never had children with her or they are grown, there is likely no benefit whatsoever to remarrying her.

Yes, if you're paying her alimony, it can stop that, but marrying her legally signs over your earnings to her, anyway!

If she's the one pushing to get back together, you should tell her you'll only consider it after she pays you back for attorney fees, and after she does that, tell her you won't remarry unless she signs a customized prenup.

If you're the one who filed for divorce, why would you want to go back to her? There are two basic possibilities, other than to stop alimony:

1) You've changed. If you've changed for the better, good for you. But legally marrying, and that includes remarrying, is a terrible deal for most men.

2) She's changed. She might have appeared to change. So what? Even if she has changed, you don't need to be married to her. Marriage is about transferring your power and wealth to her.

If she was the one who filed for divorce (and odds are, she was), why would you want to surrender your freedom to go back for more abuse? If she was the one who filed for divorce, and is the one asking to remarry, what that means is that she realized she can't attract a man richer or better than you. That's her problem, not yours. You can get women hotter than her.

She cost your a lot of money, time, pain, and aggravation. Will ending the alimony payments be enough repayment for the troubles and legal bills you had to pay? There's a saying: "Divorce costs men a lot of money, because it is worth it." And if you're not paying alimony, there is likely NO reason to legally remarry.

I know a guy who did this. His wife literally tricked him into signing divorce papers. She ran off with a guy in a band. That lasted about five minutes. She came back to this guy. And he took her back!!!

IF YOU HAVE MINOR CHILDREN TOGETHER, there is some benefit for the children to being cooperative and in the same residence, or at least in that residence when the children are home and awake (assuming she's not abusive to them and this would be putting the children back with her when they otherwise wouldn't be).

Have her pay any legal feels needed to stop child support collection. Still avoid legally remarrying, if you can. A legal cohabitation agreement is a must if you're going to share a residence, but if you're going to legally marry, get a prenup.

Holidays Reminder: Men, Stay Free!

Christmas and New Year's Eve/Day are almost here.

Men, don't do foolish things.

Don't marry.

Don't get engaged.

Don't buy expensive gifts for a woman you consider a date, romantic, or sexual interest.

Don't pay for her to travel, or go to events/parties, or for an expensive hotel room for her.

Don't spend time with a date's friends or family or have her spend time around yours.

Stay free. Enjoy your freedom.

What Happened Next Door

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

I would have known that at twelve.

My siblings would have known.

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

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

Nope. Not buying it.

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

Does This Deter Teen Girls From Fornicating?

Dr. Laura, who has an awesome program and does a lot of good, has been consistent in recent decades about what she tells teen girls and what she tells their parents to tell them about sex.

I think it was the second hour of the program from Monday, September 9, 2019 that she got a call from a mother who'd heard from her sister that her (the caller's) daughter had sex with her boyfriend of about six months and that the daughter was planning to tell her. [This entry has been bumped up.]

Dr. Laura told the caller/mother to tell her daughter:

1) He's told all his buddies
2) Other boys are going to want to get into her also
3) There's nothing special, sublime, or sacred about what they did
4) Animals do the same thing
5) There's no love or commitment attached to it
6) Now you have a reputation
7) Boys talk about it
8) The next time you date you're going to want to do it again because the bar is down and it's less meaningful
9) By the time you marry you'll probably have a pregnancy or STD.

Do these messages deter teen girls today from having sex? I have my doubts.

Be Thankful For Being Free

If' you're a Free Man, count that as one of the thing for which to be thankful as we Americans celebrate Thanksgiving Day.

All over the country, men, many of whom are beaten dogs, are spending a day or multiple days with people they can't stand because they were foolish enough to marry, propose marriage, live with a woman, or be "in a relationship" with a woman. In addition, many of these men have even paid for flights, hotel rooms, and other expenses to facilitate this.

Don't let that happen to you!

If you're in the USA, you should have already taken evasive action. If you're not in the USA, take evasive action before the next holiday!

Be thankful for being a Free Man, and stay a Free Man, and help other men stay free.

Are you free? Are you a beaten dog? Or, are you still blissfully delusional in your marriage, relationship, or desire to be in one? Whichever is the case, feel free to comment below to tell us about it.

Will Dennis Prager Ever Do Something Constructive About Marriage Rates?

 

I don’t know of a more obsessed marriage seller who doesn’t directly make money off of weddings (as far as I know) than radio talk show host, author, and columnist Dennis Prager. 

When he’s hosting his radio show, it seems like more often than not, he’ll throw in at least a comment, if not a whole hour, trying to convince people to marry. A brief comment might be asserting men exist to be a walking ATM and butler for a woman (not the way he words it, but what he’s saying) or lamenting that younger generations don’t share his affection for marriage.

He’ll state the fact that more Americans under the age of 40 have never been married than ever before, in a way that makes it clear he expects his audience to take such news as shocking and tragic.

He has repeatedly said it’s better for a person to have married and divorced than have never married.

This obsession of his appears, based on his own words, to have its origin in him noticing as early as he could remember how husbands in his religious congregation got to wear a shawl. He cites that a common Jewish prayer for a newborn/infant is for them to someday marry. (When that prayer originated, marriage was almost a completely different thing than it is today.)

It’s to the point I suspect his support for religion is based on its encouragement of marriage, rather than his support for marriage emanating from his religious faith. He probably asks in his head in reaction to any bit of news, “Will this encourage or discourage marriage?”

He’s very proud that there are people who tell him they married because of his selling of marriage. Maybe they did? Or maybe they would have married otherwise. But he’ll never tell you if someone who said they married because of him later says it was the biggest mistake they ever made, if they’d even tell him. Statistically it’s almost a certainty that listeners who’ve bought into his marriage sales pitches have subsequently divorced.

But again, he doesn’t see divorcing as a problem. He sees marriage like a job. People are obligated to get a job, but they can leave a job or fire an employee who isn’t fulfilling their roles.

Other things people should keep in mind as he does his sales pitch:

• He’s been divorced twice. He doesn’t see the divorce the same way many of his devoutly religious listeners do.
• He doesn’t think people should avoid marrying someone with prior children (Dr. Laura constantly preaches against bringing your new lover around your minor children, and I agree with her)
• He thinks wives shouldn’t let mood be the sole factor in determining when they have sex with their husband; many people consider that advocating marital rape.
• He’s wealthy. He lives in one of the most expensive cities in the Los Angeles area. He has a national radio show. He’s a paid speaker and pitchman.
• He doesn’t eat home cooked (at his home) meals. Everything he eats wasn’t prepared by his current wife or a cook they hired; rather, it’s almost always from a restaurant. Very few of his listeners can live like that.
• He travels a lot, so it isn’t like he’s having to go home and deal with a spouse at home day in and day out.
• When he was growing up, his married father had a subscription to Playboy. This wasn’t a hidden thing. Dennis resolved not to marry a woman who couldn’t accept male sexual nature, which Dennis has made clear includes accepting that husbands enjoy looking at other women, whereas many of his listeners think that’s akin to adultery.
• Speaking of adultery, he doesn’t think cheating should automatically end the marriage (I agree, but many of his listeners don’t).

As with anyone else, Dennis telling people they should marry isn’t going to reverse the trend of a decrease in marriages. Dennis needs to have an eloquent marriage strike proponent on his program to address what’s really going on and why. Things have to change before the marriage rate will increase consistently again. Prager U doesn’t have a single video advocating for changes to family law; it has multiple videos trying to fool men into signing a terrible state contract.

Click the tags below for more context.  

Why Do Women Have Sex?

Despite what certain activists and college professors say, men and women are different, and some of the significant differences are inborn. So the answer to "Why do women have sex?" isn't the same as the answer to "Why do men have sex?" We have different reasons, and even the reasons that sound the same can be different when prioritization or emphasis is considered.

Each reason only applies to some women. Some women who have sex have many reasons to have sex, some only a few or one.

I'm not a woman. This list is based on what women have said and done, and what I know about biology and sociology. If you know additional reasons, especially if you're a woman, tell me in the comments and maybe they will be added (you can also mention in the comment whether or not you want the comment published). This list is in no particular order.

Dear Dennis Prager: Get Clarity on the Marrage Strike

Dear Dennis Prager,

I listen to every minute of your radio program, I own and have read some of your books, I read some of your columns, I follow Prager U on social media, and I think you do a lot of good. I'm a married father.

With that out of the way, I'm going to again make this appeal:

You need to have an articulate, informed marriage striker on your radio program.

It might be good to have, not necessarily at the same time, both someone who articulates why men are avoiding marriage, and someone who articulates why women are avoiding marriage. But they must not be people who bemoan this. They must be supporters of, or at least sympathetic to, the "marriage strike".

This would benefit your program and it would benefit you, as it would give you more clarity and it might help you make your arguments and appeals even more effective. It would thereby also help your listeners.

The marriage strike isn't just a matter of women who want to depend on government and men who don't want to grow up. There are independent, mature, principled, responsible, productive, decent, values-driven people who have avoided marriage for reasonable, logical, fact-based reasons.

Your producer/staff should be able to find individuals who'll appear on your program. Here's a suggestion. That's someone who has experience being on talk radio. You can also try contacting the person at morgue33[ at] gmail.com.

Here Come the Holidays

Halloween is almost here. And in the USA, Thanksgiving will be here before you know it.

Guys, this is a reminder that you need to be executing your holiday game plan.

Go To The Doctor

People trying to sell you on marriage, at a loss to point to a good reason for a man to marry, say that husbands benefit from having a wife nag them to go to the doctor.*

Think about that.

You're paying over half of your salary and giving up your time and freedom and control over your life to ...have someone nag you to go to the doctor.

But here I am, telling you to do it, and I'm doing it for free. That's what other people should do. They should cut out the "middlewoman" and tell you to go to the doctor, not to get married.

Go to the doctor. Now you don't need to get married or even shack up with a woman or even be in a relationship.

Seriously. Find doctors you like.  Make appointments. Set reminders. Go. Be honest with them. Ask questions. Take ownership of your health. Do these things, and you'll be better off than the average married man.

Find doctors you like. You should have an Internist or Primary Care Physician, a Dentist, an Ophthalmologist, and, if you have specific problems, a Psychiatrist, Cardiologist, Urologist (get a vasectomy!), Dermatologist, etc. If you don't have one, try looking around your area for someone who takes your insurance. You need good doctors you can trust. (If you don't have insurance for some reason, see if you can be practice for medical students.)

Make appointments. Just do it. You can always move them if you need to. Ask your doctors' offices how often you should have appointments.

Set reminders. A good doctor's office will send you reminders, but put your appointment in a calendar you actually use, such as in your smart phone, and set reminders.

Go. Keep your appointments.

Be Honest With Your Doctors. There's no point in lying to them. Be completely, thoroughly, brutally honest with them, even if you feel embarrassed or like a failure. They're there to help you. Tell them what you're feeling and experiencing. Tell them what you do. If you're eating a lot of junk, fornicating with skanky women, and abusing substances, having problems with memory, seeing, hearing, erections, urinating or bowel movements, tell them! If there's something that seems off with the twig and berries, say so!

Ask Questions. Ask your doctor questions. Ask about your symptoms. Ask about their recommendations. If you don't understand something, ASK... no matter how stupid you might feel.  If you come up with questions between visits, record them however is best for you so that you'll actually have them handy to ask. Many doctors allow questions through a website, app, or email.

Take Ownership of Your Health. We're all getting older. We can't act like we're not. We can't eat like we used to. We need to be responsible. You already know overeating and substance abuse and sitting around all day every day are bad things. You know sex with someone who hasn't been recently tested and cleared, especially without condoms, is risky. Your doctors might order certain tests for you, like blood tests, urine tests, fecal tests, and stress tests. Don't avoid those! And if you're sexually active, you can easily get tested for diseases and infections that can be sexually transmitted.

If you're prescribed medications, research them to see what they might have as side effects and what the possible alternatives are. Pay attention to how you react to a medication.

Pay attention to what you're eating. The American diet is full of junk. Artificial sweeteners and fat substitutes, a ton of sugar everywhere, loads of sodium, and processed fat. By all means, if there is something you really like, a few bites of it is fine. Don't feel like you need to clean off your plate, though. It's fine to save something for later or even let it go to waste. We all need some fat, sodium, and even sugar in our diet, but most of us can cut way back. If you prepare your own meals at home, it is so much easier to eat right. You can use spices, especially cinnamon, and agave to make things tasty. I like soda ("pop" to some of you). I like the tastes, I like the carbonation, and I like the caffeine. But most of the stuff out there, even diet, is awful for us. But there are lines of carbonated "flavored waters" and there are concentrated "caffeine squirters" as well. Right now I get Kirkland canned carbonated flavored water. I forget what it's actually called, but they have grapefruit, lime, and lemon juice ones. There's very little juice in them. But I can add my own flavoring and caffeine. For most people, natural fats, including on meats, isn't bad. It's not what makes you fat. What makes you fat is eating too much while moving too little, including all the sugars.

Learn to cook. Take classes if you need to. It's never been easier. There's a ton of recipes and other information you can find online for free. You don't need to Food Channel stuff. With a blender, a crock pot, and a skillet, you can have enough variety to never be bored. There are meal kit services, and you can have groceries, even just fruits and vegetables, delivered.

Move more. Whether it's exercising at home or a gym or getting a personal trainer, or going for walks, or going for swims, or bicycling, moving more and keeping active is important. If you're a man, and one who looks like he can handle himself, it's very easy to get more exercise in by doing things like NOT looking for a closest parking spot. Go park in the far corner. You don't really need expensive gym memberships or personal trainers. You can find ways to move more. Even if it's just using a treadmill or stationary bike as you watch your movies or shows, you can move more.

You don't need a woman around to nag you about these things. You can take care of yourself.


*While some of the reason married men AS A GROUP are healthier than "unmarried" men is nagging, some of it is also selection, meaning women are more likely to marry healthy men than sickly men. And they're more likely to marry wealthy men than poor men, and of course wealthy men can get better health care and personal trainers and the like. Also, men who died too young to marry skew statistics. Personally, I was healthier unmarried and I'm confident I'd be healthier than I am now had I never married.

Daily Wire and Dennis Prager Panic Over Marriage Strike

 

The Daily Wire folks like Ben Shapiro, Matt Walsh, and Dennis Prager have been freaking out, the last day or so even more, because more and more men have realized that signing a terrible state contract and being reduced to nothing more than an ATM and lackey is not for them.

It’s a little late, fellas.

Dennis continues to be pathological on the subject. It’s truly stunning.

The state contract is atrocious.

Most marriages fail.

Most men can have a great life staying free.

There’s no benefit in marrying a man can’t get for less cost and risk other ways.

And more and more men are figuring this out.

Don’t like it? Change the family laws and courts, for starters. There’s a lot more too it, though. 

Life has changed. We are adapting.

Guys, do check out the “Free Men” and “Marriage Strike” tags attached to this post.

Dennis Prager: "You Owe Me" & Circular Reasoning

Dennis Prager has repeated many times on his radio show, Prager U videos, and elsewhere I'm sure, that his teachings on male sexual nature (the core of which includes that most men want to bang most women and if a husband stays faithful, it means he has worked at doing so) have prompted married couples to approach him, such as at his speaking events, and express that those teachings have helped their marriage.

Dennis Prager says he tells the husbands "You owe me."

Really?

What if that man married in the first place because of Dennis Prager's constant urging of men to do so?

If that is the case, it's like Dennis Prager encouraging a man to step in front of a moving bus, then telling someone on the bus to give the man an ibuprofen pill after the bus runs him over, then Dennis Prager tells the guy as he's being loaded into an ambulance, "You owe me."

Dennis is largely correct about male sexual nature, but his inevitable conclusion of selling marriage isn't the only option. To Dennis it is, because he has an obsession with urging men to sign that terrible state contract. He might say this is prompted by his faith in the Torah, specifically the early chapters of Genesis, yet other things he's said seem to imply or outright indicate one of the reasons he has faith in the Torah is that he says it promotes marrying and having children. It seems circular.

Recently he did an hour on his show saying people should "act religious" and "lead a religious life" even if they don't actually believe in the religion, because it means "living a good life." From what he's said other times, that "good life" likely is primarily, or significantly, about marrying and having children.

Regardless, who determines what a "good life" is?

To some people, a good life is earning more than enough to meet all of their needs as well as finance many of their desires, being able to move for promotions and new opportunities, driving stylish sports cars, eating at high end restaurants, taking expensive vacations any time of the year, going to concerts and theaters, having a clean and orderly home so they can have company over frequently and host parties and gatherings, being able to get a good night's sleep, having sex anytime and anywhere in their home, keeping a punctual and reliable schedule, and many, many other things that aren't possible or are far more difficult if they're raising children. What makes Dennis Prager's model of a good life (which he didn't explain thoroughly this time) the correct one?

My understanding of a good life is ultimately determined through my faith. If someone doesn't have that same faith, why would their definition of a good life necessarily match with mine? The churches I have attended have said they meet because of Jesus. If someone doesn't believe Jesus is an authority, why would they get up on a Sunday morning (or Saturday, for some), go sing and listen to a lecture, and fork over money? People can join far more convenient social clubs or charities.

It seems that sometimes Dennis Prager forgets that not everyone (or, not everyone who isn't a Leftist) wants the same things he does. I'm reminded of my open letter to Dennis Prager.

The State of This Blog

Being married and raising kids (and, of course, working full time) means I don't have a lot of free time. (Not because I'm having fun with my wife, but because when I'm not working I'm usually running errands or doing chores.)

I have so many draft posts I'd like to complete and post, including continuations of various series I have started.

I try to get at least a couple of new posts up here each week, and I rotate still-relevant past posts up on other days, so that six days per week someone coming here might see something they haven't before.

I'm active daily on Twitter, or X, or whatever it's being called today.

Send me a DM on Twitter if you want to reach me privately. You can also comment on any post here and ask me NOT to post the comment. That's another way to send me a message privately.

Of course you can also comment on posts if you DO want your comment to be posted.

Also, I always like to hear from you as to why you read this blog, or how you found it. Or, just tell me how your life is going or anything else you want to say.

I plan to keep updating here and keep analyzing the things I see, hear, and read, and keep encouraging men to thrive as Free Men, other men to make the best of their situations, and giving women insight into how men really think.