The Age of 2017 is Over - The Age of 2018 is Here

Another calendar year is winding down to a close. Have you made resolutions for 2018? Resolutions can be made at any time. You don't need to wait for an arbitrary calendar date. I read somewhere that if you can keep  a new habit for 21 days, you're likely to keep it going. It can also be helpful to make incremental changes. For example, if you want to walk more, don't think you need to start walking a certain long distance every day. Start with something and then add to it a little at a time.

But this entry is not about resolutions.

It is simply taking a moment to think about the year ending and think about the year ahead.

New Years Eve and New Years Day have become popular proposal days, and there are people who  pick December 31 as their day to get married. Guys, DO NOT fall into that trap!

As for me, I have kept active on Twitter and I plan to keep active on this blog, because I find it therapeutic and if I can help just one man have a better life, and to be better, than it will be worth it (in addition to how it helps me).

There were some big things that happened this year. My wife's sibling and in-law, who'd been living with us rent-free for almost two years, were kicked out by my wife because my wife didn't think they were helping out enough and didn't like their attitudes. We had to hospitalize one of our kids in a psych ward (they were only there temporarily, but long enough) and we're still dealing with finding the best therapy. There was at least one other big change on which I might elaborate later.

I'm not planning big changes for 2018. I plan to keep working and I plan to keep trying to keep my wife from going off the rails again and keep tending to my kids. Save for a concert I have tickets to already, I have nothing planned for me that will be fun. I'll be happy if life doesn't get much worse.

A few notes about media from this past year. Hugh Hefner died, as I predicted he would (two other people I predicted would die in 2017 haven't - yet). Some people tried to tie Hefner in to all of the men doing everything from sending unsolicited crotch shots to sexual harassment to rape in the entertainment industry. At the other end of the spectrum, the head of a Protestant ministry, the Christian Research Institute, left Protestantism for Eastern Orthodoxy while staying put at the ministry, which I consider to be a bad move on his part (not necessarily joining the EOC, but keeping his position in a Protestant ministry). Then there was Tom Leykis continuing to pass along his astute observations on the unfolding demise of the corporate terrestrial radio industry while threatening to end his own Internet-based show unless he got enough subscribers by the end of the year.

Do you have observations for 2017? Plans or predictions for 2018? I always welcome comments. I hope you have a great 2018.

How Things Go in Marriage

At least mine, anyway, and probably a lot of other husbands.


Scenario 1:

Wife: I'd like you to make more of the decisions.

Me: [consults with my wife, makes a decision]

Wife: You don't listen to me!

Me: I did listen to you. We didn't agree. I made the decision.



Scenario 2:

Wife: I want to do X, Y, and Z.

Me: Let's think about this for a bit.

Wife: I REALLY WANT TO DO X, Y, and Z NOW!

Me: What if M, N, and O happen as a result? I don't want to deal with that. That wouldn't be good.

Wife: You're so negative! Why do you have to crap on everything I want to do?!? This is the best thing to do!

Wife: [Does X, Y, and Z.]

M,N, and O are the result.

Wife: I didn't know it was going to be like this! This bums me out so much. I wish we'd never done X, Y, and Z. HELP ME!!!

REPEAT with different things in the X, Y, and Z spots.


If you want to share scenarios, please comment with yours.

What Women Like

Today's example of what women like - like so much they will have intercourse with such men, apparently without effective contraception - comes from a recent Dear Abby column:

I have a 14-year-old daughter I have raised alone. Her father has never been in her life, nor has he been in the lives of his other children with other women. He has a long history of criminal behavior and mental illness.

Note that the guy being described has obviously had sex with many women, women who don't use contraception effectively.

Will There Be a Tom Leykis Cliffhanger? - UPDATED

As has happened in some years past, at least as recently as 2014, Tom Leykis, who evaluates his business goals on a calendar year basis, is warning his listeners that his live audio call-in show will end at the turn of the year unless the finances are favorable. Extremely transparent in comparison to so many other entertainers, he's insisting that unless he has 1,900 subscribers by the end of the year (and it is important to note the shows at the end of the year will be repeats due to the holidays), this version of his show, which started in early 2012, will end, with a final live show in early January to say goodbye. And as Leykis says, his word is his bond. As of this writing, he has nearly 1,800 subscribers. Unless the pace of subscriptions and renewals picks up, his live shows this year will end without it being clear if the goal will be met.

If you're not familiar with Leykis' business, you should be. And you should care what happens with it.

Go Watch Your Musicals, Ladies

UPDATE: I'm bumping this up on June 15, 2012 because today Dr. Laura covered this topic again and asked for comments on Facebook (even though grown men are not supposed to use Facebook, right?) about how playing video games is turning men into pathetic worms. Or something like that. I haven't listened to her commentary on today's show yet. I'll likely have more to say about this soon, based on the comments left on Facebook. -K

UPDATE AGAIN 12/14/2017: Bumping this up again because she again told a caller to toss out her 16 year-old son's video game system (and remove the network entirely from his life). You know what guys that age are likely to do if you do that, given their newfound free time? Knock up girlfriends.



Dr. Laura is back from vacation and the first segment of today's show already got me going. If you click on my Dr. Laura tag you'll see that there's a lot I like about her and her show and I think she does a lot of good. But one of the areas in which I think she's off the mark is "video games". I've written about this before.

I think it was her second call of the day... a wife had called, dragging her husband along, telling Dr. Laura that they have disagreed since they got married (about a year and half ago, if I recall correctly) about the husband playing video games. Dr. Laura did NOT ask the wife if she knew about the guy's game playing when she married him.

Instead, she insisted that the guy needed to choose between the video games and his wife. She repeatedly said that he looks like a "boy", and "adolescent". She would not listen to anything he had to say, nor when his wife tried to interject something. She called it "childish", a "turn-off" and said it didn’t matter what his accomplishments were, that he needed to give up the games.

From there, she went to break and when she came back, she emphasized her point again. Finally, just before she took another call, she threw in a mention that women should not overlook it before marriage and then turn around and make an issue of it once married. (My guess is that she'd advise women not to marry these guys.) I wish she would have drilled the wife on that one. I think it is a rotten thing to do to marry someone and then make an issue out of your spouse's recreational activity.

As I wrote before, I don't play video games. I don't even play those games on social networking sites, or solitaire, or any of the other games found in desktop and handheld computers. But I still fail to see what the big deal is about this. Some people like watching movies. Some people like watching TV shows, including sports. Some people like playing video games. I fail to see why one is worse than the others. I get that Dr. Laura is not into them, but she's wrong on this one.

There are a lot of things, I’m sure, that the husband could cite about his wife's behavior that guys would find a turn-off, even though he married her knowing about them. Dr. Laura had kicked off the show talking about how she had taken time off to go sailing and how much fun it was. There are people who would find that to be silly or childish. But so what? They don't have to go sailing. And Dr. Laura doesn't need to play games, and neither does this guy's wife.

At least people are able to play video games together, and he's right there in the home so that his wife can approach him if she wants to. I hope that guy rewards his wife for dragging him into that trap by picking up a solitary hobby that takes him out of the house or into the garage and away from his wife… so that she begs him to go back to playing video games.

I personally know two grown men who are game designers, and they are mature and make a good living. It's honest work. And they target their games to adults - not with "adult" content, mind you, but they do not talk down to children. I hadn't even thought about them, though, when I started writing this. I was simply thinking about players.

Don't like your husband playing games? Go watch a musical, or scrapbook, or whatever.

Do You Have a Commitment?

Ladies, after listening closely to Dr. Laura for many, many years, I know how to tell if you have are in a committed relationship. Some of you think you're in a committed relationship, but you're really not. I've tried to keep this as simple as possible.


Do You Have a Commitment?

On Spreadsheets and Owing Sex

[Bumping this up.]

Much attention was recently paid to a posting by a frigid wife of a spreadsheet her husband made detailing their lack of a sex life and the lame excuses she provided in rejecting him.

In response, many people have circulated this flowchart:

Of course this is not something presented from a Biblical perspective. In the Biblical worldview, married people (uh, that's a man and a woman, for you youngsters who have been robbed of a good understanding of marriage) belong to each other. Sexually rejecting your spouse is denying something they are owed, and is religious grounds for divorce, and used to be legal grounds for divorce, back when you actually needed a reason. Marriages weren't considered valid unless they has been consummated with intercourse.

We can agree that a wife (or woman, since we as a society now want to shame slut-shamers) does not owe anyone sex. However, we should also agree that in the very same sense, no man owes a woman...

love

respect

his seat

his coat

his arm

a dance

a prom

a phone call

protection

help with heavy objects

automotive maintenance and repair

romance

dinner

a movie

a ride

the storefront side of the sidewalk

conversation

attention

flowers

jewelry

sweets

a wedding

a baby

birthday cards

birthday presents

anniversary cards

anniversary presents

Valentine's Day cards

Valentine's Day presents

tax money

Let's make sure we establish that and it will be a wonderful world of men and women not being pleasant towards each other.

Most likely, the woman who posted that spreadsheet her husband had made rarely, if ever, rejected a nice session of fornication with him. Before they married, she represented herself as enjoying sex and wanting to have regular/frequent sex with him. If he was a bad lover or somehow deficient in their relationship in a way that turned her off, why wasn't he alerted? She was able to function just fine then. Now that he has signed a legal contract giving him certain financial obligations to her, she rejects him. Is this just a coincidence?

Many unmarried men, especially ones who are divorced, find that many women seem to be willing and eager to have sex - lots of it - with them, even if they don't spend much (if any) time, money, or effort into romancing them or "setting the mood" or jumping through hoops. This is true even if those women have children, jobs, and maintain their own homes. These women really seem to enjoy the sex, too. Why do so many wives, meaning women who are legally entitled to one man's earnings, have so much less interest in sex? Is this just a coincidence?

Even stupid men eventually follow the rewards.

A strong inculcating of conservative religious notions about sexuality will tell a man that fornication is wrong. However, at some point, more and more men will be willing to be celibate or an occasional fornicator than a rejected husband, because becoming a husband means taking on very serious risks and obligations and if the rewards aren't there, fewer men are going to do it, no matter how much their churches tell them women deserve husbands.

On the personal front, it has been a while since I wrote this series. Things have gotten worse. Mercy sex is now once per week if I am lucky. Two week+ intervals are being imposed more, and that's just part of the problem. Recently we spent a little time with a married couple I admire that we do not get to see that often. I have been friends with them for a long time now, long before I met my wife. The husband was one of my groomsmen. After the visit, they wrote to me with their concerns. Their concerns matched those of my father (who has been telling me to consider divorce) and line up with what our therapist has said to me. All of them urge me to find relaxing, fun time for myself, but I just don't see how I can without further shortchanging my children, who have already been screwed by having the parents they do.

I hope somebody out there is learning important lessons from all of this.

Your Child, Your Choice, Your Responsibility

The mommy wars never end. Michael Medved, as I type, has Erica Komisar on his show, who has a book out about the importance of mothers being with their children from birth to age three. Of course there are women calling up complaining about the fact that children benefit from actually being with their mother. They'd rather not hear the truth, apparently. And others are complaining that their employer doesn't facilitate this.

There are thee issues here.

1) It is YOUR responsibility to plan things so that if you have children, they will have their mother* with them. Your choice, remember? With choice comes responsibility. Daycare is almost always voluntary and a bad choice. If you're not cut out to be a mother, don't become one. If you don't have a marriage that allows for you to mother your own children, don't have them.

2) It is not a legitimate role of government to compel employers to provide daycare or maternity leave or any other of these accommodations parents want.

3) Employers should be free to run their businesses as they want. If they want to give mothers paid time off to raise their children, fine, but expecting all employers to offer it is an attitude of entitlement.

A Free Man Calls Dr. Laura

As you know if you read this blog, I'm married, and I'm a father, having had children with my wife. I got married because I wanted to, and I have children because I wanted to.*

On yesterday's (Wednesday, November 1, 2017) Dr. Laura Program, which I love, I think it was the first call that she took that had me wanting to scream.

The caller was a man of about 30 years of age, who has a girlfriend who is 29. He's never wanted children. The girlfriend indicated she has wanted children, but was willing to not have children for the right relationship.

Hugh Hefner and Hysteria

After a long and storied life, Hugh Hefner passed, and everyone seemed to have something to say about him. Those who had mostly negative things to say about him fell into two basic categories: self-proclaimed feminists who are misandrists, and people with a religious conviction that sex and nudity are for monogamous heterosexual marriage and anything that goes against that is some of the worst stuff ever.

While some critics puffed up their essays with big words, if you watched closely and read between the lines, what really upset people about Hefner more than anything else was that he and/or his media exposed or glaringly reinforced some truths people didn’t want to admit:

1)  Men can get sexually aroused strictly from the visual, and static, two-dimensional visuals at that.

2) Men want to see women naked more more than woman want to see men naked.

3) Men are willing to pay to see women naked.

4) Women, even the girl next door, are willing to sell their sexuality for money.

5) Men want sex more than women.

6) Women are their most visually attractive in their late teens/early 20s.

Hugh Hefner's biggest "crime" was making glamour nudes of the world's most beautiful women accessible to the masses, especially men, even if they were poor, whereas in the past, only the rich could see such women. He catered to the tastes of grown men, without trying to accommodate women and children or let women dictate what men should enjoy. Playboy allowed men to see nude women (albeit only pictorial representations) without having to sign a state marriage contract. These are his real sins in the minds of so many, whether they want to admit it or not. Some of the men speaking out are trying to appease their wives or pastors.

Regarding truth number 2, notice that while Playgirl and similar offerings became a thing, their popularity was only a tiny fraction of that of Playboy, and much of that interest came from homosexual men.

The critics, especially the religion-based ones, make it sound like Hefner was one of the worst things that ever happened to the world, because his magazine and associated media had young, beautiful, nude women and because he surrounded himself with young, beautiful women. He did far more damage with some of his political involvements and some of the messages conveyed in text, but people want to focus on the fact that his magazine featured women in their birthday suits.

Do the critics really think that if Hugh Hefner never existed, media, and society in general, wouldn’t be like it is today? While critics and fans alike try to paint Hefner as a pioneering pornographer, if he hadn’t done it, someone else would have. He saw a demand and cultural trends, and he capitalized on them.

Below are some of the reactions published online in response to Hefner’s death.

Video Games, Employment, and Marriage

Matt Walsh posted this Daily Wire story by Paul Bois to knock men for supposedly "playing video games instead of finding jobs"/

A new study shows that young males would rather sit on their rears while playing "Grand Theft Auto" than look for long, steady work.

Oh really now?

According to research from economists from Princeton, the University of Rochester and the University of Chicago, non-college educated men are rejecting full-time employment and spending as much as 40 hours a week playing video games.

I'm sure there are some who did this. But how many have been looking hard for work, aren't finding it, and are enjoying a little entertainment with their free time? What are those guys supposed to do? Oh, I know... they're supposed to be lackeys to women.

​The University of Chicago's Erik Hurst, an economist at the Booth School of Business, confirms that happiness, at least for now, has gone up among this group of people.

This is when the misandrists say that happiness shouldn't be a goal.

Why Health Matters in Relationships - Part 2

In the first installment from a couple of years ago, I wrote about why health matters in relationships, and a small part of what I wrote was this:

The kids. What genetic problems have our kids inherited, including mental illness? What did her conditions and the medications do during her pregnancies? Our kids are not lacking in their appearances and they are highly intelligent, but I'm bracing for mental illness to be diagnosed and when their behavior is problematic I wonder if they've been impacted by medication. My wife could no longer physically control the kids from an early age so discipline became a problem. Also, the kids literally watched their mother lose touch with reality and behave in ways that they'll probably be talking about in therapy for the rest of their lives.

Since then, the fit has really hit the shan, bigly.

Someone Please Call and Ask This

I want to hear a call like this to Dave Ramsey or any conservative and/or business/financial commentator who will answer questions/give advice through call-in show. Dave Ramsey is ideal because he gives financial advice and is popular in conservative religious circles:

I want to know your thoughts about this pending deal because I’m getting cold feet.

I have a friend with whom I’ve had what amounts to a weekend hobby for a few years. We often get together a couple of nights in a week, too. My buddy wants to take it to the next level, though, with papers and everything. He wants to form a partnership and register it with the state.

Although there’s nothing in the written contract that penalizes either of us for working with others, my potential partner expects I will put all of time and resources into the partnership, and said there'd be Hell to pay if I even thought of doing a side project with someone else and the partnership would be over.

With the people who've prepared like we have, who hire a consultant like we have, there's about a 40% failure rate of these ventures. Failure would mean not only would half of the assets go to my partner, but I would have to pay my partner’s attorney fees, and I would be obligated to pay money to my partner based on the length of the partnership; if the partnership had lasted ten years or more, I’d be making payments in perpetuity.

There is the possibility that products would be created within the partnership that could be liabilities and financial drains for 18-25 years; I would be expected to cover those costs, including more than necessary if manage to earn a high income. There is a possibility, but by no means a certainty, that the products will provide me with some nominal income late in my life.

Even though there is an expectation that we would not work outside of the partnership, many people who’ve entered into these agreements have done that anyway, and like I said, there is no penalty for doing so. If my partner incurs a liability with someone else, I would be obligated to pay for it for 18-25 years.

Finally, my partner has indicated that soon into the partnership, I will be the person solely responsible for bringing in revenue; my partner plans to provide intangible contributions, such as encouragement, but would not be penalized at all for not doing so. Even without bringing in any revenue, my partner would still get at least half of the assets in the event the partnership ended.

Do you think this is a good deal for me?

Of course those of you who read this blog know exactly what I'm talking about. From a purely financial perspective, it would be insane to tell someone this is a good partnership to enter.

Revisiting My Series on the Claim Married Men Get More Sex

[Bumped up from December 2016] I wrote a seven-part series for this blog that ran in February and March of 2010. A lot has happened since then. I have done more reflection, I've had significant life experiences since then, I have learned much more about my wife, and so I thought it would be a good time to revisit what I wrote back then.

From Part One:

We've been having quick, rather vanilla/repetitive/almost clinical, once-a-week, mostly one-sided sessions for quite a while now, usually involving her waking me up from a dead sleep (I don't get enough sleep as it is), though not as creatively as she could. That means we've been doing it 4-5 times a month (and usually not taking her to climax, which I really, really like doing). There's no way we've averaged 9.94 times a month when considering the whole marriage.
Verdict: I am currently one of the people who can say I got more sex while unmarried than married.

Geez, I thought I had it bad then. It's been more like once every three weeks now, although my wife has just agreed to try to get it up to three times per week. The problem is, after everything that's happened and the things she's said repeatedly, including recently, and done, it is difficult for me to be turned on to her. Sex is a burden and chore for her and she deliberately avoids orgasms except for rare times. Yes, I'm still physically attracted to her and want to enjoy her body and treat her well, but treating her well seems to be leaving her alone, and emotionally it's a mess. Like just about every other plan to which she agrees, the plan to at least make out more often will probably be dropped quickly.

Why the Meaning Behind Words Matters

As I’ve written many times before, I’m a big fan of Dr. Laura and agree with most of what she says.

One thing I appreciate is that she tends not to buy into the hysteria regarding “adult media” that so many other conservative, “marriage-and-family” advocates have. Primarily, that means when a wife calls, upset that her husband likes looking at pixels depicting nude women or even women in sexual situations, Dr. Laura usually tells the caller to get over it as long as it is depicting human adults, isn’t gay male material, isn’t something like BDSM or some other fetish, and the husband isn’t neglecting his obligations (such as rejecting his wife to go and masturbate to porn).

On yesterday’s (September 11, 2017) show, the first or one of the first calls was from a woman who found out that her husband was looking at “teen porn”. Unfortunately, despite the fact that 18 and 19-year-olds are teens, and many people older than that pretend to be teens in mainstream media as well as adult, Dr. Laura immediately condemned the husband, raised the subject of “kiddie” stuff and told the woman to leave her husband and take the husband’s computer to have it checked by police. When the caller pointed out that 18 and 19-year-olds are teens, Dr. Laura said that a year or two doesn’t make a difference.

When Dr. Laura tells wives to get over the fact that their husband views adult media, what exactly does she think most of that media depicting “women, women with men” features? In most cases, it isn’t women the same age as the husband or the wife. Most of those women in general adult media (as opposed to “granny” or “MILF” stuff) are under 30 years of age, many of them 18-25. Playboy has always featured women who were as young as 18 and 19 (and, the fact is, at least once they had a female under the age of 18).

Your average regulation heterosexual man is going to find women under the age of 25 to be most attractive. I’m talking about from a purely visual, casual perspective. Of course he’s going to find the woman he loves and who loves him to be highly attractive. And truth be told, if most women had to rate men solely on the performance of their penises, most would prefer guys under the age of 25. It’s simple biology.

In other words, Dr. Laura might have told a woman to leave her husband, the father of her child, and invite police to search his computer over the kind of stuff that can be found in Playboy.

Could There Have Been Another?

Recently, I heard that in marrying the wrong person, there was someone you probably passed  over who was the right person.

So I'm going to put that to the test that by looking at my own life.

A Flaw in Tom Leykis’ Logic

It's been almost ten years since I published what is below the fold. It still stands up.

You're not going to find a better talk show host than Tom Leykis when the topics are the radio and television industries. He's also brilliant when it comes to personal finance and money management, entrepreneurship, motivation, and how to avoid marriage, avoid relationships, and how a man can "get more tail for less money".

One of the areas he falls short in, however, is when he blasts Christianity or a general belief in God. He's a lifelong atheist. But there are atheists out there far more knowledgeable and willing to debate much more seriously than Leykis. So when he tries to goad people to call up and argue with him about God, it isn't surprising that it doesn't "work". He tried having a semi-regular segment to his show called Ask the Atheist, but he dropped it for lack of calls (his audience is different now that his show is streamed online rather than on terrestrial broadcast radio), and today he tried (and failed) to do an unofficial Ask the Atheist hour by saying Hurricane Harvey is proof there is no God. There are many, many, many, many, many serious essays on natural disasters/suffering and the existence of God that Leykis could critique during his show, or he could have a Christian apologist on his show if he was really interested in a serious discussion. Instead, he's inviting his listeners to call in, most whom are primarily interested in how to fornicate with as little trouble as possible. If anyone does try to take the position of Theism or even Deism, Leykis resorts to the tactic of essentially repeating "Sez who?!? and "Not so!!!" and all sorts of sleight of word, redirection, etc. Most of what he does is to provide an entertaining show, but this appears to be an attempt at an ego boost or confirmation bias. Whatever the case, he isn't open to serious discussion on the topic. If he was, it might actually be a more successful segment to the show.

But let's get to what I wrote ten years ago.

Life Has Changed - Get Over It

About a year and half ago, someone named Ankush Bahuguna had something published at a site I wasn't familiar with, mensxp.com under the title of  "Why Modern Relationships Are Falling Apart So Easily Today".

We're not prepared. We're not prepared for the sacrifices, for the compromises, for the unconditional love.

A lot of people aren't prepared. But some people are unwilling to make the sacrifices, the compromises, and to put in all of the effort, because they do not see the potential benefits to be worth it. In many cases, they are right.

Unconditional love is an interesting term. Most people don't really mean it when they use it, and some people who do are being foolish. For example, a woman who "loves" her husband after her rapes her child and remains unrepentant is sick.

We're not ready to invest all that it takes to make a relationship work.

Right, a lot of people aren't, and one reason is that there is no assurance it will actually work. Someone can choose wisely, treat kindly, and still get screwed over because the other person can suffer, for example, a brain trauma that changes their attitude and moods.

We want everything easy.

A lot of people do. Other people are willing to work hard, but for many men, there is no benefit to work hard for a relationship with a woman, especially not a marriage. For these men, it isn't that they want things easy; they don't want them unnecessarily and unreasonably difficult or disadvantageous.

We're quitters.

If someone is hitting their head against a wall, they should quit.

Bad Boys Are So Much Fun - Until They Murder Your Kid

It's a good thing "safe and legal" abortion prevents this stuff from happening, as promised. Oops. It didn't. Alene Tchekmedyian had the unenviable task of reporting at the Los Angeles Times on a couple of baby murderers.

Brandon Jerel Williams, 27, was sentenced to 25 years to life in state prison after he was found guilty of first-degree murder, torture and assault on a child causing death, according to the Los Angeles County district attorney’s office.

His 23-year-old girlfriend, Rosie Lee Wilson, was convicted of second-degree murder and child abuse and sentenced to 15 years to life in prison.

Prosecutors said the fatal beating occurred Aug. 21, 2014, when Wilson left her son with Williams, her live-in boyfriend.

Some guy thought it was a good idea to stick it in Wilson and impregnate her. Good job there, buddy. Now, the question is, does he even know he got her pregnant? Did he care? Did he fight for custody? Since he's not even mentioned in the article, my guess is that he's completely out of the picture. But, it is the Los Angeles Times so that might not be so.

One of the "crazy" things Dr. Laura tells people on her show as often as she can is that they should not bring their new lovers around their minor kids. People think that's ridiculous advice, but stories like this are Exhibit A as to why I agree with her. Children are far more likely to be abused by their parent's new lover.

When you read on, it becomes clear this "mother" was choosing her new gina tingles by a bad boy over her own child.

You Can't Argue With Crazy

I previously wrote this about why health matters in relationships.

Among the various  health issues my wife deals with is mental illness. I'm aware that mental illness can range from controlled and relatively mild to completely debilitating. It can also range from "everything is fine right now" to "I'm going to try to kill myself". One of the problems is, there isn't always a way to know when things have shifted until the person is dead or you have to act to prevent them from killing themselves.

Recently my wife and I had a disagreement, and in my frustration, when the children weren't there to hear, I yelled about how I think one of the kids is getting unfairly neglected.

Whenever I yell, everything is diverted. We're no longer going to address what the disagreement is, it is going to be about how terrible I am for yelling. My wife and one of our kids are both extremely good at diverting, although they usually use different tactics. My wife's blanket defense is usually invisible health problems. Yes, she has real health problems. That I can't see how they are limiting her at the moment makes it harder for me to best handle situations. She can cite these problems whether or not they are actually interfering at the moment.

Between her health problems and focusing on my tone or volume of voice, she's always able to avoid changing her behavior. It is always about how I need to change my behavior. So, I end up being worse off having communicated my disagreement or desire, and it is better for me not to have said anything at all. I've been a slow learner when it comes to this.

Yet Another Lament That Men Don't Want to Marry

Quite often, Townhall.com has some great content spanning "conservative" viewpoints from center-right to libertarian to whatever. Recently, they ran another column lamenting that men don't want to emasculate themselves by marrying. That's not how they put it, but that's basically what it amounts to. This time Jerry Newcombe wrote the piece:

I attended an unusual wedding this past weekend.

You attended a party. What you usually don't see are the pointless and not-so-pointless arguments and all of the bad things that result from a man and woman living together in a Mexican standoff with the state.

Ben Steverman notes in the Drudge-linked article: “The U.S. marriage rate—the number of new marriages per 1,000 people—has been falling for decades….And research firm IbisWorld predicts the marriage rate will keep falling over the next five years.”

Although I wish this was mostly from men refusing to sacrifice themselves on the altar of ungrateful narcissistic gynocentrism, most of it is likely a mere delay. People are getting married later because... they can and they should (if they're going to marry at all). People who are busy trying to get a college degree and/or trying to establish themselves in a career aren't in a good place to be a good spouse.

He adds, “It’s unclear whether the decline of the American wedding is a permanent trend. American millennials lag previous generations on many metrics of adulthood…Maybe most of them will eventually get around to weddings of their own—but then, it’s possible that many never will, and that they’ll bring the U.S. marriage rate closer to Europe’s.”

Metrics of adulthood... so the Pope isn't an adult? People should establish themselves as independent adults. They don't have to marry to do that.

It would be disastrous for this country if we went the route of Europe in being a post-marriage society. The old cliché is still true: As the family goes, so goes society.

Even if I agree, I can't encourage men to enter into such a raw deal. Want more men to marry? Work to stop punishing husbands in law, courts, and culture. Raise women who will be the kind of women who will attract and keep a husband.

What’s happened to marriage in America?

We took away incentives for men to marry, and added risks and obligations to husbands. Men have been slow to catch on, but more and more are.

Hollywood has turned monogamy into monotony.

It wasn't Hollywood that did that. Women who are trying to get a man to sign on the dotted line are often quite different sexually than a woman who has a man trapped.

The irony is that surveys show that those who are married tend to enjoy everything on a much more fulfilling basis. And that includes intimacy.

The surveys are flawed. If a survey doesn't distinguish intentionally unmarried men from the rest of unmarried people, and compare them against married men, it is worthless survey. It's also worthless if there wasn't at least some confidence in being anonymous.

Let's deal with a couple of facts. When you combine:
...marriages that divorce
...marriages that don't legally divorce but more or less end before death with emotional, physical and/or legal separation
...marriages that end with suicide or murder-suicide
...marriages that have significant periods of misery related to or based on these two people being legally/socially tied together and/or living together

Then MOST marriages are not happy, lasting marriages. MOST. Does it make sense to you rearrange your entire life and to wager half of your wealth on something that is more likely to fail than succeed?

“Living in sin” (as cohabiting used to be called) has lost its stigma—but most such couples don’t seem to realize that, statistically, living in sin prepares you for divorce more than it does for a happy marriage.

Yes, but why is that? I used to blindly buy into the idea that they had doomed their marriage by shacking up, and I maintain that shacking up is a a terrible idea (almost as bad as legally marrying). But the reality of the situation isn't so simple. Among the reasons is that some people who shack up should never have married in the first place, but they do because they're already living together. They marry because they think it will fix things, because we keep saying that marriage is some sort of magic tonic, or the woman is told that if the relationship doesn't end in marriage, she's been "used" or "wasted her time" even though she was getting something out of the relationship the entire time. It is also likely that the kind of people who shack up are more willing to leave a bad marriage than spend the rest of their lives being miserable in it. There are other reasons, but the one that fits with what this guy and others like him are saying is that, in some cases, people establish patterns in shacking up as unmarried individuals that carry over into the marriage, where they are supposed to be united, to the detriment of the marriage.

Although millions profess Christian belief, too many compartmentalize their lives and fail to live by Christian standards, i.e., no sex outside of traditional marriage.

I really have to wonder where exactly this comes from. What, precisely, does he mean by sex? Words or phrases translated "sexual immorality" in our English Bibles are not clear enough, obviously, because some people say it includes making kissing off-limits. Intercourse was more of a problem before there was contraception and before there were DNA tests. The Old Testament seems to be focused on intercourse. I know what churches have taught, but how much of it is explicitly taught in the Bible? I'm not arguing that PIV is the only thing the Bible teaches against or that everything else is OK. Clearly, giving each other orgasms causes people (especially women) to bond, and that is problematic if you shouldn't be with the person to whom you're bonding. But I really don't think the Bible is as clear as so many of my fellow religious conservatives would think.

Government tax policies, especially in the example of welfare, have subsidized single parenthood, thus, breaking the back of the urban family.

Yeah, that should be stopped.

Instead of actually helping the poor, welfare has ensured their long-lasting misery—because the family is the key to upward mobility.

Not for men. Really. In today's employment market, men need to be able to work long and odd hours, extra days, move, jump from one employer to the next, go on business trips, and network in mixed company unencumbered by a wife and kids who require stability and limiting interaction with women who are now ubiquitous in every strata of the workplace. A man who doesn't have a wife and kids to support can save, insure, and invest in a way that will increase his wealth far more than his married-with-kids counterpart.

Traditional marriage is good for individuals all the way around. Numerous studies show it’s good for your spiritual health, your mental health, your physical health, and your fiscal health.

Again, those studies are flawed. Personally, I attended and focused effectively in church services and Bible studies far more often as an unmarried, child-free man. I did personal Bible study far more, too. Now, I'm busy being a butler, medical advocate, and prison warden.

Many today think marriage is unnecessary.

It is. Someone can have a fulfilling and full life a productive, independent adult. Most of us aren't living on isolated farms anymore.

They think marriage is misery, and singleness is bliss.

It certainly can be. In singleness, someone has far more control over their life.

Perhaps one of the biggest myths of all about marriage is that feelings are all that matter.

Of course feelings aren't all that matter. Freedom matters. Finances matter. Peace of mind matters. Self-determination matters.  And that's why most men shouldn't marry.

He then retreads the flawed correlations between marriage and positive indicators, implying that it is the duty of individuals to sacrifice themselves so society will be better off. Sorry, but the social climate has changed. Men do not have the same power and influence as husbands and fathers as they used to.

The couple wed in the cow patch said a mixture of traditional vows along with some interesting twists...

And how many of the people attending had always made vows to love, honor, and cherish until death, but haven't???

Let women and bicycle-less fish enjoy themselves. Don't marry them, guys. Take care of yourself, become independent and secure, and find worthy causes for your time and money. Don't tie yourself to an irrational creature with the imposition of the state into your relationship.

Priceless Comment Left on This Blog's Most Popular Entry

Here's a comment from a divorced mother upset that I warn men away from woman with children. Note my response.

Many People Do Both

There are many lame arguments out there, especially when expressed in tweets, against "porn". That's in quotes because some of these scold accounts say anything that arouses someone other than their live, in-the-flesh spouse, is porn. Meanwhile most people would think of porn as videos and pictures explicitly depicting people having sex, and that's about it (other than, maybe, delivering a pizza).

Before I go further, exposing bad arguments does NOT mean I think any given media content, or the production or "use" thereof, is a good thing. It means I find bad arguments to be annoying.

Time for Father’s Day Again

[Bumped up from 2010] I have a better relationship with my father than my three siblings. Part of the reason is that unlike them, I wasn't around when the worst of the divorce and related drama was taking place. I was at college. Speaking of college, I'm the only one that got a college degree. One of my siblings is likely get one eventually – in mid life. I don't expect the other two to even go back to college at all. My father and I have done work for the same organization in the past, and I know I remind him somewhat of himself. But three important reasons why my relationship is better with my father is that I take some initiative, I don't treat him like an ATM, and I don’t badmouth his wife.

There will probably be a dinner – homemade or otherwise – in honor of my father-in-law, even if it doesn’t happen on Father's Day.

I'm a father myself now, as you know if you've read other entries in this blog. I’m also the sole income earner in our home. As such, I’d rather not get purchased gifts for Father's Day. I mean, it was my money to begin with after all, and if I need it, I'll buy it. No, homemade gifts are good, and so are services.

Truly, I can't think of getting anything better for Father's Day than a hug from my kids.

Technology is a Tool, Not An Evil

There are people who are in enduring, happy marriages who "met online". Granted, there aren't a lot, but that's because most people in general aren't in enduring, happy marriages. Yet the moment a female caller to the Dr. Laura Show says they met a guy online, the rest of the call is determined. That's because the hostess' bias against all things online kicks in (she has her reasons). She says she obtained bias confirmation (she doesn't put it in those words, but that's what it is) when she says "guys and articles" tell her guys go online for an easy lay.

Yes, many men do. But not all.


And men also go to bars and clubs and street festivals and a bunch of other places for easy lays.

But yes, some guys use dating and hookup services to, surprise, hookup. Some of the most effective tactics include going after all women whose pics attracted them and are in the area, regardless of whatever else her profile says. These guys aren't looking for general compatibility, just easy, no-strings-attached sex. This is one reason why women can be inundated with contacts from men. It's a numbers game. Guys throw as much against the wall as they can to get a little to stick.

But not all of the men online are looking for hookups. Especially with the more exclusive matchmaking services, the ones that take more time and money, there are men looking for a wife (because they think they can beat the odds or they are unaware of the odds or are masochists or losers who are desperate for a woman to take over for mommy).

My advice to women is that if they're really looking for a husband, they stick to the serious, more exclusive services (in addition to the old-fashioned ways of looking) and never assume that what the guy says about himself is actually true. This is just a way to establish contact. Like a guy you meet on the street, everything he says about himself could be a lie. Meet in a neutral, public place, and don't get sexual right away.

Just remember, though, ladies, if you do find a man who wants to get married: You will be sharing your life, home, and finances with a guy who is foolish enough to enter into contracts that have no guaranteed upside to him and horrendous risks and limitations.

I'm sure Dr. Laura gets calls from women in good marriages who met online, but that never comes up in the conversation because the calls are usually about things that are troubling them.



Dr. Laura has mentioned more than once that she'd been in talks to endorse and/or help facilitate an online matchmaking service, but she had so many requirements and restrictions that it would limit profitability so it wasn't a go.

The caller on yesterday's show did admit she got sexual right away with the guy she met online, so Dr. Laura again said "men used to have to pay" for that. Sigh.

Was Sacks Sacked?

As I previously blogged, attorney Adam Michael Sacks would do the Tuesday "bonus" hour of the Tom Leykis Show, and for me, it was must-listen. Recently, that arrangement ended, and as far as I know, all Leykis has publicly said about it is a terse written statement indicating the involvement had ended. No reason was given.

Since Leykis' Internet-based audio talk show began (after the terrestrial broadcast corporate radio version had been off of the air for a few years and Leykis rode out the rest of his contract), Sacks would not only do that hour on Tuesdays, alternating between  "criminal law" (mainly DUI and marijuana violations) and "family law" (mainly divorce, alimony, child support, and child custody), but he would be at listener parties  and events and his ads would run throughout the show. And by his ads, I mean ads for his law practice that featured copy read by Leykis, and ads for becoming an advertiser with The New Normal (Leykis' businesses) as spoken by Sacks. Sacks and Leykis even talked on the show about work Sacks had done for Leykis, such as with traffic tickets and with getting a restraining order against a radio show host Leykis and/or Sacks have described as an obsessed fan. Finally, Sacks would often appear during other times on the show by calling in to answer questions and give advice to another caller.

Of course, listeners have speculated as to why Sacks and Leykis have parted ways. Leykis has had his staff go back and eliminate the Sacks bonus hours from the archive files available as podcasts to paid subscribers. To paraphrase Leykis, he did that because those hours were essentially infomercials. However, there was some entertaining and informative content to many of those hours.


What could the reason be for ending the professional relationship? I have no more insight than any other frequent listener who occasionally visits the show's Facebook page. I figure there are several basic plausible reasons, and it may be a combination of two or more of them. So in no particular order, let's consider them. Again, these are POSSIBLE reasons, I'm not stating that they ARE the reason(s).

Emptying the Nest

Many commentators I admire are aghast that so many parents allow their adult children to continue to live with them or allow them to move back in with them (such as after college). This is seen as part of what is making them "snowflakes".

The idea is that since children become legal adults at age 18, they should be out on their own at that age (and if they are done with high school or should be), and it is only allowable for them to continue to live at home, if it is at all, if they are going to college full time and, perhaps, also working part time. Dr. Laura also makes it clear they have to be following house rules, especially when it comes to not fornicating or allowing a boyfriend or girlfriend to stay over. The adult children are to be kicked out and all material/financial support ceased if it is known that such a rule has been violated. (If the parents do have such a rule Dr. Laura will tell them they should.)

Some parents hear this and are surprised, because they think it would be good for their adult children to live at home to build up financial stability rather than having to share a dump with roommates and struggle.

Dr. Laura sees virtue in that struggle, and she cites her own experiences at that age.

There's a potential problem citing the past, however.

Why I Listen To and Retweet Tom Leykis

Tom Leykis ridicules my faith and any faith that includes theism or anything supernatural. He thinks people like me are not smart. He dismisses many of the moral convictions I hold. He promotes abortion (and has paid for multiple elective abortions himself), even telling guys how to effectively prompt a woman to have an elective abortion if she's knocked up and he was at least one of the guys having intercourse with her. (To be fair, he encourages guys to avoid conceiving in the first place through vasectomies and condom use, although not abstinence). He sometimes bashes political figures and media personalities I respect and admire. Some of his political soapboxing frustrates me. I'm aging out of his target demographic.

And yet, I'm a regular listener.

Why? Many reasons. Here they are, in no particular order:

Matt Walsh on Falling In Love

Matt Walsh gets a lot right a lot of the time. Overall, he makes a good point about romantic love in this column provocatively titled "I Didn't Fall In Love With My Wife". He says:

We’re bad at it because we don’t understand it, and we don’t understand it because we don’t understand love. You can’t forge a lasting marriage if all you know about love is what you learned from an Ed Sheeran song.

OK.

But here’s the reality: these were our choices, every step of the way, and that state which we’ve found ourselves falling in and out of is not real love. Real love is an act of will. A decision. A conscious activity. It is something you do and live. Love is chosen, and if it is protected and nurtured, it grows. Love is sacrifice. Love is effort.

Emphasis mine, to point out that marriage sellers themselves say these things over and over again.

He says it again:

Love is dying to the self.

If you don't want to die to yourself, don't marry! I know he says "love" but you can bet your donkey that Walsh would say that requires you marry your romantic interest.

Christian Research Institute President Hank Hanegraaff Goes Eastern Orthodox

It's time to revisit a topic I only write about once every few years. So if unless you're interested in the inside politics of Christian ministries, this entry probably won't interest you. However, I'm getting hits for some of the old entries dealing with the Christian Research Institute (CRI) and the President thereof, Hank Hanegraaff, because of some recent events.

Prom Season

Every year now, I note this ritual, which has become another day, along with "Sweet Sixteen" (or other birthdays for certain cultures, at 13, 15, etc.) and wedding days (the the related events) that are all about feeding the narcissism and sense of entitlement of attention-whores and attention-whores-in-training.

Refer back to my "Beware the Prom", and this look at a Dear Abby column, and this look at a different Dear Abby column and now this more recent entry on increasingly showy proposals for dates.

It a nutshell, here are my problems with the prom as it is these days:

1) Boys wasting money.

2) Another event where females are princess-ized, which is a problem as long as males are prevented, culturally/socially and often legally, from events that cater to them and are focused on them in a similar way. Go ahead and tell me... what event gives boys the equivalent of the prom, where the activities are all about things he wants to do, with the boys dressing the way they want to dress, the girls dressing the way the boys want them to dress, the girls paying for it and escorting the boys, and where the boys will go hang out with their friends during the event?

I Can't Even Get Enough Sleep

As I pried myself out of bed after yet another too-short sleep, with no end in sight, something I already knew really sank in.

If I was an unmarried, child-free guy, I could actually get enough sleep.

Instead of getting up when I do when I prepare for work, I could sleep in at least another two hours, because I would be living closer to where I work and I would have less to do for other people before I leave the house.

I wouldn't have this dog that does various things that delay my sleep, wake me up, and diminish the quality of my sleep.

After work, I'd have a shorter commute home, fewer chores and errands to do, and wouldn't have to tend to the kids.

I could do things without being interrupted by what my wife and kids want.

Right now, on days I work, I'm getting about five hours of sleep, on average. On the other days, I'm lucky if I get eight. "How about naps?" you ask? Dog won't have it. She'll start barking. Constantly. At nothing.

A Shifting Position?

As I frequently say, I'm a huge fan of Dr. Laura. I agree with her almost all of the time and I think she does a lot of good. She had to deal with cancer not that long ago and I hope/pray (despite what she might say about hoping and praying) she never has to deal with cancer again.

It is nearly impossible for cancer not to change someone, and I think breast cancer changed her. As she said on the air, she had breast cancer and had a single mastectomy and, thus far, opted not to have reconstructive surgery.

In the past, when women called to get her advice on plastic surgery, including breast surgery, she used to be very supportive of "restorative" surgery, to counter what disease, surgery, aging, or breastfeeding had done. We're talking women trying to get back to the way they used to be, not women who used to be B-cups going for DDs.

Lately, though, she has discouraged women from even trying to get back to the way they used to look through surgery.

Torturous Tweeting

One of our favorite anitporn (and, apparently, antimasturbation) Twitter accounts, NoFap, tweeted out this profundity:

If you use enough porn and get addicted, you'll never need to date, have relationships, or romantically connect with humans.

First of all, "porn addiction" either doesn't exist or is exceeding rare. That phrase is usually used to describe a guy enjoying porn who has a wife who disapproves. It is probably why "addiction" seems to be a huge problem in subcultures in which porn viewing is considered very sinful, but not so much in subcultures where porn viewing is seen as frivolity at worst.

Secondly, there are a lot of guys who love to avoid dating, relationships, or "romantic connections", probably so much so that even some who think porn is lame will claim to enjoy viewing it just to make it easy to get rid of women.

Finally, either NoFap believes women have nothing to offer men other than auditory and visual sexual stimulation, or they think a lot of men think that way. Either way, isn't it better that someone who thinks of women that way not date them, or at least not try to get into relationships with them?

Here's my page discussing these topics.

It's National Masochistic Self-Destructive Male Week!

Well, that's not what they're calling it. Leading up to one of the worst days of the year, marriage pushers have decided this (February 7 - 14) should be "National Marriage Week USA".

Ugh...

So of course, they're marriage marketers are trotting out the same misleading statistics and fairy tales.

A good example is Sheila Weber's piece I found at Fox News.

The misleading headline is "Better Sex, Better Health, More Money: What Men Really Get Out of Marriage".

More than ever, today’s young men question the value of marriage to increase their happiness and well-being.

Of course they do. Men eventually catch on. We see what is going on around us. We see what has happened to our fathers, our uncles, our brothers, our friends. We see what happens to them when they marry. We see what happens to them when they get divorced. We see when something is a bad deal. We see the brides, who literally the day after the wedding, chop off their hair and start gaining weight. More men are opting to live a better life than that.

The U.S. marriage rate has dropped dramatically (from 70 percent in to 50 percent in four decades) and marriage is getting replaced with new habits of long-term dating, late marriage and long-term cohabitation.

Better get used to it.

When My Sentence Ends

I've never been arrested, but sometimes I liken my marriage to serving a sentence due to my wife's mental illnesses, which she hid from me until after we had kids, and her deteriorating physical health/abilities (which were also hidden from me).

It's still many years until our youngest child is grown, and thus by Dr. Laura's rules I'd be free to leave the marriage, but lately a thought crossed my mind:

Do I have a moral obligation to tell my wife if I plan to leave, and if so, how far in advance?

Obviously, she'd be informed at the time if I physically moved out of the house and/or had her served with divorce papers. But I'm wondering if I'd have a moral obligation to tell her in advance of that.

I referred to staying married until the kids are 18/out of high school as Dr. Laura's rule, but I have adopted it as well because I agree. To be sure, Dr. Laura does advise people to remove themselves and their children from an abusive situation (either leaving or kicking out the abuser), but absent actual abuse, the best thing is to stay and raise the kids and be polite and civil (and if at all possible, affectionate) to the other spouse.


The way I see it these are the basic possibilities for the future, in no particular order:

Does He Really Care?

I believe it was Dr. Laura's opening comments on her Monday, January 23 2017 show in which she listed and described ways to know a man loves you. If you listen to her or read her stuff, or follow this blog, you know that for her, dating is for discerning if you're a match for marriage. If you're in your late twenties or older, you're finding your spouse and you marry about two years after you start dating. (But keep in mind, if a guy is in his 40s and has never been married, he's probably not going to marry or probably not marriage material, and nobody with minor children should be dating seriously enough that the minor children meet their parent's new lover.)

So with that in mind, here's  Dr. Laura's list of signs he loves you, even if he hasn't SAID the words. Some of it might be slightly paraphrased from what she said:

You're having a bad day and he tries to turn it around, bringing sweetness into your life.
He remembers the little things you say and do.
What you say makes a difference to him.
He wants to know about your day.
He talks about his day.
He says and does cute little "nothings" (which Dr. Laura says are somethings).
He puts you first in front of his friends.
He wants to know more about you.
He loves to hold your hand.
He enjoys taking care of you  and wants to know you're OK.
He offers you a helping hand when you need one.
He remembers the special occasions.
He likes to be close, such as watching a movie and cuddling.
He wants to meet and know your family and to like them.

He talks about his dreams for the future, hints or talks about "our" future
He makes time for you.
Your opinion matters.
He can't stay mad at you for long.
He tells you what he likes about you.
He apologizes when appropriate.
He's very protective of you.
He touches you in subtle and loving ways.
He gets giddy.
He says nice things about you to others.

March Madness

People have the right to protest, not riot, and not litter. And we all have a right to analyze their protests to see if what they're saying is true and what they want is a good thing. A lot of people have spread this essay by Dina Leygerman. Let's take a look at it. After that, I'll link to some coherent and reality-based stuff.

It has the headline, "You Are Not Equal. I’m Sorry."

A post is making rounds on social media, in response to the Women’s March on Saturday, January 21, 2017. It starts with “I am not a “disgrace to women” because I don’t support the women’s march. I do not feel I am a “second class citizen” because I am a woman….”

This is my response to that post.

Because, if you don't think you're a victim, by golly you're wrong!

It's Not Too Early To Think About Valentine's Day

Ladies, you can scroll down to where I address you. The first part of this entry is for men.

Guys, I'm not talking about planning an overpriced romantic production.

I'm talking about GETTING OUT.

Get out of that engagement or relationship before wasting time, money, and effort on Valentine's Day.

If you're married and happy, fine... go ahead and plan something. But if you're married and unhappy (and have no minor children!) and are thinking about getting out, now is the time to make your move (if your lawyer agrees). If you're shacking up, now is the time time to make your move. If you've got a girlfriend, now is the time to make your move. If you're seeing someone but she's not your girlfriend, become very scarce until February 15. You don't want to continue things or make them worse.

If you're not absolutely sure you want to be with this woman for the long term, don't waste your time, money, and energy, and don't waste her time. Get out before Valentine's Day.


You don't need a wife, but most of you will get married anyway, even though you can't explain why, in part because some married guys aren't being honest with you. If you're going to be proposing (see this before you do), do NOT propose on Valentine's Day, her birthday, or any other gift-giving occasion, or it makes it more likely she can keep the ring if things don't work out. You want that ring to be considered conditional. You should NOT be marrying if you have minor children (unless she's the mother of your children); your kids shouldn't even know you are seeing anyone.



*****

Hey ladies... do you have a man in your life? A husband, a steady, a romantic partner?

Does he care about the Super Bowl? If so, will/did you help make it a great day for him? If he doesn't care about the Super Bowl, is there some other annual day other than his birthday that you give him an especially good time?

If not, why do you expect him to make a big deal about Valentine's Day?

Valentine's Day is NOT for men. It just isn't. It is a day when men are expected to make a huge fuss about romancing a woman. There are the dinner reservations, entertainment, gifts, chocolates and candies, flowers, cards, etc. Now, sure, a man who is genuinely happy in his relationship wants to give the woman what she wants. However, a scheduled and expected (demanded) communal thing means more hassle, more expense, etc. Who needs that? If it is truly about celebrating your love, it can be done any day of the week, when there won't be crowds and jacked up costs.

If you have a man who makes a big deal about Valentine's Day, I hope you reciprocate on another day or you at least make it worth his effort.