The Shock Collar Marriage

“Reading your blog is like reading the musings of a dog with an electric fence shock collar around his neck. He has to go into tremendous detail and project the outcomes of actions in his surroundings because, ultimately, he realizes he is a captive slave and has no other choice. If he approached life any differently, he would perish from the sheer despair of realizing the limits of his circumstances. Good advice, but remind your readers every once in a while of those areas where your perspective is limited.”
Firstly I don’t think I’ve ever misled readers into thinking I’m something I’m not. I’m on my real name and pretty much laying it all out in the open with my relationship and sexual history. Furthermore I’ve many times framed monogamy and marriage simply as a sexual/life strategy, which also implies that there are other strategies out there to pursue. In a general sense though I am advocating monogamy.
We are all captives to our choices. What we have done in the past affects our ability to make choices now. The choices we are making today affect our outcomes in the future. Marriage as I have made clear is a significant choice that carries with it enormous risks and benefits, if it all works it’s wonderful, if it all goes to hell it’s definitely not. However that doesn’t mean being single is without a similar risk/benefit outcome either.
The freedoms of being single are more easily understood than the risks. Having worked long term care I can assure you that those patients without children have a much worse endgame than those that have family. Both in terms of having regular visitors advocating for better care, and just the desire to perish from the sheer despair of realizing the limits of your circumstances. I found just working in long term care gruesomely awful, I cannot imagine having to live in it.
Likewise the longer you stay single the less your options to ever decide to change tracks and get married are. The game community hammers this point home on women who realize with horror at age 35 or so that with fading beauty and rancid eggs she has awful marriage value. The moment of horror comes later for men, but it does eventually come. Unless you’ve got assloads of cash a 40 year old man that’s never married and never fathered a child probably is getting close to being written off by women as just unable to form a serious partnership even if they wanted to. Definitely by 45.
If you’re single you are the only real safety net for you. Life is going to throw a curve ball or two at you and what can more easily be absorbed and deflected by a couple, may break a single. A job loss and a medical event can utterly destroy a single, as opposed to damaging a couple. This is part of the reason why gay people are fighting so hard to have gay marriage accepted and allowed. Marriage can be a mutual insurance plan. Sometime I help Jennifer, sometimes she helps me. Sometimes we win, sometimes we lose, but we win and lose as a team.
And yes I’m upbeat about things. I’m not going to go all Law of Attraction silly about things and Positive Thinking isn’t a magical spell that banishes everything hard from life, I just see no point in whimpering through life like prey. You shouldn’t step up to anything with the mindset that you’re going to have your ass handed to you.
If you want true despair…I suggest you go read the game blogs written by single men. The prevailing view is that Western Civilization is in it’s last days and that we are all slaves to the system and powerless to avert its destruction. Obviously for those men that cannot convince a woman to bear them children, whether we all die in the fires of collapsed society or peace and prosperity reigns doesn’t really matter all that much.  Personally I don’t see the hard wired biological pair bonding effects between men and women vanishing any time soon. Life, civilization and definitely some form of marriage will continue on and as arrogant as it may seem, I’d like to think I’m doing my part to promote that.
Besides, my marriage is more like this anyway…..}}}
Sometimes I get tired from all the…. doggy style…

Comments

  1. Deansdale says:

    It's like these people don't know the difference between good and bad LTRs. A dog with a collar? Is this guy an idiot?! He completely misses the whole point of LTRs and LTR game, that's for sure. I'm in my thirties and I had my share of the fun but I was never as happy as I'm now in an LTR. I'm not saying this LTR will last forever but I'd certainly say that a good LTR beats being a single "gamer" hands down.

  2. Athol Kay says:

    Basically they want to selectively trump biology and perceive anyone that can't as a loser.

    The game is much much longer than they care to understand.

  3. Well put AK. Yes after being married for many yrs. one daydreams of the single life from time to time. But I know a few single midlife people they live life the same way whe do, get up go to work, come home with a few hours to themselves, go to sleep, repeat… 2yrs. ago I had an aortic dysection which I somehow survived, everyday my wife and kids were at my side. What that meant to me I can't even put into words. Marriage might have it's ups and down but it it comes with bonuses that you don't even expect. Plus I really love that I can have sex anytime I want!

  4. Anonymous says:

    Having lived with someone and on my own, the benefits of being a couple really are exponential…Stephen is right, there are just so many things that are bonuses that people don't even realize until they actually happen.

    A close friend is currently going through a divorce, and its going to be a long road for her ~ and I know at the end of it all, she is going to be wanting to get into a LTR with some one else. Hopefully with more luck this time.

    N

  5. Confidunce says:

    Those are the guys most in need of PUA for LTR. Althoug they've learned to act alpha just long enough to get laid a few times, they can't comprehend a long-term relationship that lacks the prisoner mentality. This means they don't realize that (a) frequent sex is better as you have it more and more with the same person, (b) lots of men don't feel "[en]slave[d]" or "collar[ed]" in their LTRs, and (c) girls below the age of 25 are a pain in the ass to deal with for the rest of your life.

    Which leads me to another point: learning PUA without also learning PUA for LTR is really just *pretending* to be alpha. Style even wrote about it in The Game, where many of his friends reported being miserable in their relationships because they couldn't keep the woman entertained/gamed.

  6. Athol Kay says:

    That's because in a LTR Alpha and Beta cannot be faked. Style is fun, but it's useless without Substance in the LTR.

  7. Anonymous says:

    I have a quick question. Do you and your wife use birth control? Because although I love sex with my husband I have anxiety about having more children. Not that I don't want more at some point but I do find this to be a "reason" I don't want sex more.

  8. Athol Kay says:

    The moment we stop birth control Jennifer gets pregnant. We use birth control pills.

    If you are stressed about more children then yes that will be a damper on things sexually for you.

  9. Anonymous says:

    As us. We are just very fertile people apparently. Unfortunately, I find that I have a hard time morally justifying taking BC. I wasn't always this way but it has come to me since early on in our marriage.

  10. The thing is, what the point of being an so called pua alpha if you dont wnat to pass on your genes. Most of these guys not only do not want LTR's they dont want children, so what the point of all of this game in it doesnt lead to the eventual outcome of passing your genes onto the next generation and also doing as much is possible to make that next generation pass on their genes ie grandchildren.

  11. Athol Kay says:

    Anon – email me the whole story if you like athol.kay@gmail.com

    Pops3284 – yup agree. There's no point beyond their cock feeling good for a few minutes.

  12. The PUAs like to paint all women like the ones in DC or any big city. I get the point: we cannot be naive, but there really are good girls and boys out there (really).
    For marriage game it's more about discovering what your grandparents knew instinctively. This is what has been lost. We men need to find it. It's not a women issue.

  13. Anonymous says:

    I am the guy who made the post quoted above.

    I think you completely misrepresent the intent of my post and the realities of marriage today.

    You and some of your readers clearly confuse good marriage, or good LTR with any marriage or LTR. That is misleading and inaccurate.

    The reality is that good marriages are few and far between, and are high risk for any man, given the legal and societal biases men face today in the US.

    I know far more men who are in their 40s-60s who are struggling financially because of a messy divorce after many years of marriage. Their wives all filed for divorce here in CA or in NY (where I moved from), where, after 10 years of marriage, you stand a good chance of getting lifetime alimony on top of all the other perks.

    Their lives are ruined in an economy where the older worker has a hard time finding a job, but child support is effectively nonmodifiable in states like NY.

    Some are liquidating retirement accounts to pay their ex-wives, many of whom are well-educated, but refuse to work full time. Hopefully some of that money will go towards the children they rarely see.

    I am not a PUA, not single for most of my life. I was in a 9 year marriage that uniformly sucked. I knew that I stood a good chance that if I left I would never see my kids.

    Instead, I spent well over $150K over several years to parent my children half time. I'm still being hauled back to court after being divorced for 9 years. I'm far from alone, in this regard. Many men have similar (or more horrific) stories.

    The last thing I want to do is potentially deprive my kids of any legacy just because a legally entitled woman decides she's bored and needs someone to subsidize her journey of self discovery, along the lines of Eat, Pray, Love.

    By only telling half a story, you are seriously misleading your readers by omission.

    Lay it all out there, Athol. You are not the person with any leverage in your relationship.

    At the end of the day, if your wife gets bored and decides to dump you, your assets will be divided by incompetents who will bill you at $300/hour and will report in to a court with no due process (Google Elkins California Family Court).

    I'm not trying to be negative – I'm just trying to persuade you to be realistic about the legal and financial risks your readers face as men who may be contemplating marriage.

  14. Athol Kay says:

    You call me a dog with a shock collar and you expect me not to take offense?

    Want the other side of the marriage coin? Read every other blog in the manosphere. Most of whom seem to actively want your marriage to fail to be one more foot solider in the Men's Rights War. I'm sure you aren't asking them to tell the other side of the story where marriage can be happy and functional.

    I'm a rare male voice within the manosphere willing to be remotely positive about marriage. That's what I do.

  15. Anonymous says:

    I certainly got our attention with my previous post – I did not intend to offend.

    The marriage negative posts are just as lopsided as yours, but in the opposite direction.

    In that respect, you're all pretty much the same.

    A more balanced perspective all around would be welcome.

    I stand by every (factually correct point in my previous post, and I noticed you did not address any of those points specifically in your reply.

    Looking for Balance,

    Anonymous

  16. Demonspawn says:

    A more balanced perspective all around would be welcome.

    It's as simple a question as this:

    What does a man gain from marriage?
    vs.
    What does a man risk by getting married?

    Now, I'm sure Athol will list a number of things under that first category. The problem is that he'll honestly shock me if he list anything which actually applies. Instead, he's going to list a number of things which he gains from his relationship with the woman who is his wife. Those things come from the relationship, not from marriage itself.

    On the other side of the equation, getting married does open a man up to a great deal of risk. The evidence is in Antonymous's comment above.

    So we have a lot of risk for little reward. Ok, perhaps she'll leave you if you don't get married to her, but what kind of person wants you to do something which isn't in your own best interests just to benefit them? Is that the type of person you want as a partner?

    Now, allow me to do a 180 and admit the obvious truth: Marriage is the fundamental bedrock of civilization itself. The problem, however, is that men actively avoid marriage because it is such a high-risk/low-reward endeavor for men. The solution isn't to force men into marriage or blind them from the truth of it, it is to return to a sane society where marriage is actually beneficial to men and get laws passed/repealed such that the risk/reward ratio isn't so lopsided against the man.

  17. Athol Kay says:

    http://www.marriedmansexlife.com/p/marriage.html

    http://www.marriedmansexlife.com/2010/02/dershowitz-and-feinstein-and-legally.html

    http://www.marriedmansexlife.com/p/risks.html

    http://www.marriedmansexlife.com/2010/03/10-critical-things-in-how-to-choose.html

    I hope that suffices for now. If you've been following along recent posts you'll understand that this is a very stressful week in the Kay family.

    As an aside though…

    I keep getting asked to write posts for "women wanting to game their husbands", "about single men finding a wife", "Men's Rights", "raising children", "sexless marriages", "biblical relationships" and so on and so on.

    After a certain point what I have to offer would just become too vague to be useful, or even interesting to anyone.

  18. Athol Kay says:

    The risk isn't marriage nearly as much as having children is.

  19. Anonymous says:

    "The risk isn't marriage nearly as much as having children is. "

    Agreed, unless you live in a state like MA:

    http://tinyurl.com/lifetimealimony

  20. Athol Kay says:

    You're linking to a story in the Boston Globe. You think my blog has more pull in MA than the Boston Globe?

    I can't solve every problem related to marriage.

    If it's that important to you then start your own blog. They are free.

  21. Anonymous says:

    "What does a man gain from marriage?
    vs.
    What does a man risk by getting married?"

    No risk, no reward. They key is managing the risk, and Married Game is a fantastic tool for managing the risk of getting divorced. Honestly, once I understood hypergamy, I suddenly felt much more in control of my marriage. I know what I need to do to maintain my Sex Rank, and if I do that, there's an excellent chance I'll never have marital problems.

    Besides, I married smart. My wife was properly civilized and has the necessary software installed in her brain to understand how the world works.

    Oh, and shock collars can be a lot of fun…

    Athol, good luck on your trip. My heart goes out to you – my own dad passed away recently. I'm glad I spent time with him before the end.

  22. Deansdale says:

    This blog is all about reducing the risks of your marriage. I think this is the BEST advice anyone can give to those guys who want to raise their own kids in the best possible way, ie. in a traditional marriage.
    "Don't marry" is good advice for those who are old enough to not care about women at all and for those who don't want kids or have kids already. But it's useless for wannabe fathers.

  23. Anonymous says:

    Athol,

    where did you get this idiotic, paranoid and mean-spirited idea that MRAs want all marriages to fail?

    Höllenhund

  24. Athol Kay says:

    Hollenhund – all the shaming language I get for suggesting marriage can be happy.

  25. Anonymous says:

    ""Don't marry" is good advice for those who are old enough to not care about women at all and for those who don't want kids or have kids already. But it's useless for wannabe fathers. "

    Or those who do care about women, but have too much at stake if their marriage goes south.

    If you are divorced with kids, why put their legacy/future support at risk?

  26. Demonspawn says:

    Hollenhund – all the shaming language I get for suggesting marriage can be happy.

    Because a marriage can't be happy.

    Your relationship with the woman who is your wife can be happy, obviously. But a marriage is nothing more than a business contract. A contract is emotionless. We as a society need to stop juxtaposing the two. (Btw, this is a bit of what your blog is about: fixing the relationship with your wife. But that's what it is, fixing the relationship, not fixing the marriage.)

    No risk, no reward. They key is managing the risk

    ?????
    There's no risk, but the key is managing the risk? That just doesn't make sense.

    You can have a relationship with a woman without being married to her. You can even have a long term relationship with a woman without being married to her. The question is: what do you gain by entering your relationship under the jurisdiction of a marriage contract? What do you risk by doing the same? Is that risk/reward ratio in your favor?

    give to those guys who want to raise their own kids in the best possible way, ie. in a traditional marriage.

    Traditional marriage no longer exists. Our laws have destroyed traditional marriage and replaced it with an absolute anti-male monster.

    But it's useless for wannabe fathers.
    Here's your advice: Don't do it here. Find a country where traditional marriage still exists and start a family there. Parts of South America, Parts of East Europe, and China are good places to start looking.

    Besides, you don't want to have kids here. Our society is headed south precisely because we have destroyed traditional marriage and made entering the marriage contract a net loss for 99% of men. Your future kids' best chance of success is "not in these feminized countries"

  27. Anonymous says:

    Uh-oh, here it comes!!!

  28. Sorry about commenting so late, but I wanted to be in the right state of mind to both read and respond.

    Excellent call. As a single man in my 40's (45, and thanks alot for that comment! heh *no worries, just chuckling, and a bit worried*), I have finally come to the conclusion you have already reached. And, to the fact that finding a wife who can and will bear young ones is now tight. My difficulty has been health related, so it has not been purely being too picky or such. And I have had long term relationships.

    What amazes me, is as with atheism (no push on you here, the shoe doesn't fit with you), liberalism (in general), and many other things, those who are supposedly open minded and do what they like can't see the other side. They want everyone to be like them. Though I will admit, in spite of my being Catholic (now) and wanting a wife and children, for friends who are not Christian I recommend not marrying. It may sound like a double standard, but my recommendations are based on the realities of the legal system and the value of marriage for it's own sake. You seem to be an outlier?

    You certainly have a great way to put things and I hope your marriage remains a thing of beauty.

  29. Athol Kay says:

    Demonspawn I think you're playing with words a little but I agree with relationship vs the marriage agreement. I've covered that before saying that your vows are essentially a verbal agreement and not the actual agreement you are making. You can really mention the vows as part of your divorce hearing for example.

    I very much think the idea of foreign bride shopping is fraught with pitfalls that make marrying American women look golden. Nothing like becoming a commodity to an entire extended family instead of just a wife. Nothing like becoming the Greencard bridge, plus if you ever bring her back she can just file here anyway. I've read some utter horror stories in my time of that.

    Jennifer and I are from similar cultures but separate countries and that is a stress on us at times enough as it is.

  30. Athol Kay says:

    Doom – I am somewhat unique in my combination of "post-Christian" viewpoint. I've benefited from some of the traditional morals and viewpoint, but moved into not needing to see God as a factor that is needed to legitmate it all.

    I just see that traditional marriage has been a very effective strategy for me to follow. So in that sense I've not thrown the baby out with the bath water when I became atheist.

    Though that process was about a decade long event to work through. In part it was simply through respect and love for Jennifer that I didn't cheat on her while I was working through it. She's an exceptional woman who has always done right by me, so fucking her over would have been quite a low move. Eventually I came to realize that my marriage was one of the defining things of my life and a source of much of my happiness.

  31. Demonspawn says:

    I very much think the idea of foreign bride shopping is fraught with pitfalls that make marrying American women look golden

    Actually….
    Divorce rate within the US with native brides: 50%
    Divorce rate within the US with foreign brides: 20%

    Both of which wasn't what I was talking about. I do not suggest seeking a foreign bride to bring back to the US, I'm suggesting leaving the US for a country where traditional marriage still exists and relocating there, marrying there, and raising a family there.

  32. Athol Kay says:

    Where are those stats from?

    I'll tell you all about my marriage proposals in Fiji sometime…. walking into a store for a soda and getting the daughter offered…

  33. Demonspawn says:

    Stats: http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/MobRept_AppendixA.pdf

    Excerpt:

    Impact on U.S. Marriages
    According to data supplied by the U.S. Census Bureau, there were 2,395,000 marriages in the U.S. in the 12 months ending June, 1997 (and 1,154,000 divorces in the same period). The 4,000 to 6,000 marriages involving international services represent, then, a tiny portion (.021 percent) of the women who marry U.S. men.
    It is interesting to note that, based largely on data provided by the agencies themselves (along with the Commission on Filipinos Overseas report cited above), marriages arranged through these services would appear to have a lower divorce rate than the nation as a whole, fully 80 percent of these marriages having lasted over the years for which reports are available.

  34. Athol Kay says:

    I don't really think we can trust the stats from the service agencies helping arrange (i.e. "selling") international marriages.

    There is a repuation for fraud with these groups. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_marriage_agency

  35. Anonymous says:

    "There's no risk, but the key is managing the risk? That just doesn't make sense"

    Have you really never heard the saying "No risk, no reward?" In long-hand it means "in general there can be no reward without taking a risk commensurate in size with the desired reward."

    It makes perfect sense. Ask your friendly, local bookie if you need a longer explanation.

  36. Deansdale says:

    Demonspawn, there are men who are already married, and there will be guys who'll be "forced" into marriages by social pressure or even just by their own fear of being alone. There is no real advice for them in the MRM or MGTOW movement.
    Athol helps these guys improving/saving their marriages and he deserves a lot of respect for this.

    And let me tell you this… I live in East Europe and I see divorced couples everywhere. There's no misandry in the air (yet) and the laws are waaaay better then yours (alimony is practically unheard of and child support is a lot more reasonable) but we have no-fault divorce and it shows. And we also have mangina and female judges. The woman I live with had a divorce just a few years ago and she told me they went to the court with his husband with things settled between them but the judge (a wymyn) insisted she should push for more.
    (They have a verbal agreement the guy pays a child support of about 10% of his monthly wage per kid per month (2 kids) which he actually spends on the kids himself by going shopping with them. This CS is not enforced by the court or any agency or whatever. I think lots and lots of men in the anglosphere would give an arm or a leg for a settlement like this :) But they ARE DIVORCED nonetheless so the poor guy can't raise his own kids and this is the most important point.)
    Also, we're in the EU and if the Lisbon Treaty gets signed we're probably f*cked because that will mean the "progressive" laws from the UK and the like will be enforced here too.
    I reckon expatting from the US is getting harder by the day because the social norms and the laws get gradually "westernized" everywhere.
    So I'd say if you want to marry don't leave your country for a culture you know nothing about. Search for a US state where the courts take prenups seriously and then marry with a good prenup. Also, don't have joint accounts with your wife, etc. etc. You can do many things to protect yourself from a disastrous divorce – but expatting can prove to be a disaster in and of itself.

  37. Athol Kay says:

    "Athol helps these guys improving/saving their marriages and he deserves a lot of respect for this."

    Many thanks Deansdale.

  38. Demonspawn says:

    Have you really never heard the saying "No risk, no reward?" In long-hand it means "in general there can be no reward without taking a risk commensurate in size with the desired reward."

    Ok, now your reply makes more sense. I thought you were applying "no risk" and "no reward" to the questions I asked.

    But, that means that you ignored the questions. You are just making an assumption that the risk and the reward in entering a marriage contract are roughly equal. You couldn't be further from the truth.

    I mean, what bookie wouldn't want a $100 dollar bet that only pays out $10 when you win on a coinflip? No risk, no reward, right?

    Demonspawn, there are men who are already married, and there will be guys who'll be "forced" into marriages by social pressure or even just by their own fear of being alone. There is no real advice for them in the MRM or MGTOW movement.

    Deansdale, there are lemmings who are already off the cliff, and there are lemmings who'll be "forced" into jumping off the cliff by social pressure or even just their own fear of being alone. There is no real advice for them in the the LGTOW movement because that movement focuses opening your eyes to what jumping off the cliff means and why you shouldn't do it! The LRM movement is attempting to change the physics of jumping off the cliff to make it better for lemmings, but is not getting much success.

    And, again, to play to my pendantic side, Athol is helping guys improve their relationships with their wives (and, yes, he does deserve credit for it). The MRM is actually attempting to save marriage (by getting the laws changed), but they are not making much headway.

    So I'd say if you want to marry don't leave your country for a culture you know nothing about.

    Neither would I. I suggested places to start doing your own research.

    Search for a US state where the courts take prenups seriously and then marry with a good prenup.

    Meaningless. If such mythical state existed, all your future-ex-wife would have to do is relocate out of state and then file for divorce in that new state where prenups are treated like toilet-paper.

  39. Anonymous says:

    "But, that means that you ignored the questions. You are just making an assumption that the risk and the reward in entering a marriage contract are roughly equal. You couldn't be further from the truth"

    On the contrary, I did not ignore the question, I just got a different answer than you did. You think your answer is right? That's okay – I think marriage laws need a serious revamp myself, so we're not on completely different planets. I am certainly not arguing for the status quo.

    But you're attempting to split "marriage – two people building a life together" from "marriage – the legally binding obligations" and saying that the legal stuff is unnecessary. Just move in together, take whatever vows the two of you think approrpirate, and get on with life. That's your point, right?

    Well, one of the classic mistakes in risk analysis is assuming the most visible risks are the only ones you need to worry about. When you do that, you skew your analysis and under-weight the less visible risks. The disaster of divorce court is a very visible risk, and you're plan attempts to avoid it, giving up the (to you) negligible rewards associated with the legal designation of marriage.

    But in doing that, you're taking on a whole other set of risks that, while less visible, may be more likely or even more severe. Perhaps both.

    If you think retaining custody of your kids is hard after a diviorce, what do you think it would be like if the kids' mother decides to leave you and the two of you were never married in the first place? BTW, you'll still be on the hook for child support, marriage or not.

    There are other risks to a "marriageless marriage." For example, I think the biggest cause of divorce today is unconstrained female hypergamy. An "unfullfilled" pseudo-housefrau goes looking for an upgrade. Civilized women constrain their hypergamous impulses, marrying the best they can and then doing their best to stay married because they realize just how bad the prospects for a 40 year old woman are. Uncivilized women play hook-up games until cougarhood, then get desperate, never really understanding what the hell is happening.

    So, which type of woman is least likely to dissolve your partnership after 10 years and three kids? The civilized one. Which woman is most likely to demand a traditional marriage in order to form that partnership in the first place? Again, the civilized one. So by entering into a traditional marriage – with the right partner! – you've accepted one risk (formal divorce) but mitigated another (informal divorce). In fact, formal marriage is a practical necessity to have much chance at being a father living in the same house with his teenage kids (when they need a father the most). Avoiding marriage almost guarantees you will partner with a woman who will leave you down the road, because 99% of the woman who have some chance of remaining loyal to you won't want anything to do with shacking up.

    Where you get screwed is if you marry an uncivilized woman. Then you get both sets of risks for no real reward.

  40. Demonspawn says:

    But you're attempting to split "marriage – two people building a life together" from "marriage – the legally binding obligations" and saying that the legal stuff is unnecessary. Just move in together, take whatever vows the two of you think approrpirate, and get on with life. That's your point, right?

    Not exactly.

    Traditional marriage is very important. The problem is that it no longer exists in much of the western world.

    There are other risks to a "marriageless marriage." For example, I think the biggest cause of divorce today is unconstrained female hypergamy.

    The biggest cause of divorce is unconstrained female hypergamy… because the constraints of marriage in western cultures have been changed to longer penalize a woman who breaks her marriage vows. So there is little difference between the "civilized" and "uncivilized" woman in this portion of your reply. Even a "civilized" woman in the US knows, when entering a marriage, that she can break it at any time with virtually zero consequences.

    Our laws and culture are influencing the vast majority of our women to be uncivilized.

  41. Deansdale says:

    "there are lemmings who are already off the cliff"
    Your opinion on married men is very low, I get that, but they are still men and I think they deserve help if they want it or need it. Many of them will be important allies (in the MRA sense) sooner or later :P

    Don't relocate with your wife. If she goes anyways (which evidently means she doesn't give a f*ck about you), file for a divorce immediately in the state you live in.

  42. Demonspawn says:

    Your opinion on married men is very low

    The majority of them, yes. It comes down to a simple question: What did you gain by getting married?

    Most men can't answer that question. That means they do things without considering the consequences. You should, rightfully, have a low opinion of such people.

    Don't relocate with your wife.
    You don't have to. She could "be visiting her family" or "on a trip for work" or any other excuse. Unless you are going to rule that your wife can never leave the state (you can't) or divorce her any time she does leave the state, you're exposed to this possibility.

    But you still haven't answered: what state even has that respect for soon-to-be-divorced men in the first place?

  43. States require a certain time of residence before allowing a divorce to happen in their jurisdiction, just for that purpose. Even Nevada, for crying out loud. The laws may be bad, but they are not purposefully evil; they were well-intentioned when they were written.

    Anyway, Texas has pretty good divorce laws. By default, you essentially have a prenup for stuff you owned before marriage, anything you are gifted during marriage, and anything you inherit during marriage. Only your joint earnings are community property. You might call that unfair, but there it is; it's meant to actually support marriage. Child support is limited to a certain salary cap no matter how much you make.

    Finally, to answer your question about what rewards are there for legal marriage per se, apart from the advantages when it falls apart mentioned above (men are protected by the same laws regarding custody, etc., if they are married), if it's a good marriage you have someone you trust to manage your affairs in case of incapacitation, you have access to hospitals and such, power of attorney, and other direct legal advantages you wouldn't in a cohabiting situation.

    Emotionally, what does it say to your new cohabitant that you married that bitch but won't marry her (many mras are divorced). Also, you guys are all about the science so here it is:
    http://www.troubledwith.com/LoveandSex/A000001077.cfm?topic=love%20and%20sex:%20living%20together

    Living together is not as beneficial as being married for longevity, happiness, healthiness, etc.

  44. p.s., guess who's getting married in November?

  45. Demonspawn says:

    Emotionally, what does it say to your new cohabitant that you married that bitch but won't marry her (many mras are divorced).

    That the problem is the institution of marriage. That you learn from your mistakes. If she won't recognize that and insists that you marry her because you married someone else, then she's a self-interested harpy that you would be foolish to consider marriage with anyways.

    Also, you guys are all about the science so here it is:

    Without being insulting, let me just say that these studies suffer from a lot of selection bias and demonstrate how much you're willing to think about what you read.

    Alcoholism:
    70% separated/divorced
    15% married
    That means 15% is never married.

    And since I played with numbers below:
    (70 * .5) + (15 + .5) = 42.5%
    Getting married almost triples your chance of becoming a chronic problem drinker.

    Suicide:
    They give no numbers, but thought would lead to the idea that dead people don't get married. On top of that, the greatest rate is among divorced men. I don't have the numbers handy now, but I did once calculate that the increased suicide rate for divorce averaged with the reduced suicide rate for marriage weighted with the divorce rate actually increased the chances of suicide vs staying single.

    Morbidity: These numbers are always fun. First, men who die young almost never get married ;) However, if you've done the number crunching you'll find some interesting things. If you take the data from the selected age forward (ignoring all deaths before that age) and then calculate life expectancy based on factors you'll find that around age 35 or so your life expectancy becomes greater if you never marry (men only, btw. I didn't do the crunching for women).

    Psychiatric: Again, crazy people are less likely to get married.

    You get the idea, but just for kicks I'm going to show you the numbers on Loneliness since they supplied them.

    Never married: 14.5% loneliness.
    Married: 4.6% loneliness.
    Divorced 20.4% loneliness.
    Chance of divorce: 50%
    (20.4 * .5) + (4.6 * .5) = 12.5% loneliness… not that much different from the 14.5% loneliness of never getting married.

    p.s., guess who's getting married in November?

    What are you gaining from getting married?

  46. Your "chance of divorce" statistic (50%) is vs. "chance of dying/being widowed" (50%). In any given year, there is a 4/1000 chance of getting divorced. It's just that when you add that up vs. the 50-70 years it takes to die instead, you see what happens. Further, divorce rates decline sharply after age 25. I'm nearly 50, so my chances of getting divorced before dying are very slim, maybe 1-2%, especially with game. So that's the risk.
    See: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/mvsr/supp/mv43_09s.pdf

    I told you the rewards already, but specifically, we are buying a house together, and I want the laws to protect each of us financially in the event it doesn't work out. If I cohabited with her, there's no way she would put the money from her house sale into our house. So in that case I wouldn't put her name on the house title, but my payments would be higher. Given that we wouldn't be married, she wouldn't put money directly into the house; I'd have to charge her rent or something, which would have to be declared as income on taxes. The legal complications would be immense in case of breakup, and tax figuring would require an accountant.

    Would anyone who's not stupid sign up for cohabitation to put money into a house and then walk away with nothing? Not likely. Would anyone not stupid invest as heavily in a non-committed relationship? Not likely. A smart woman would not agree to enter a long-term relationship with someone who refuses to marry. So that leaves me with stupid cohabitors as a choice. Those stupid people are also less likely to be moral and more likely to cheat and/or be violent, and not be nearly as interesting to converse with.

    Health decisions would become equally complex and be undermined by the inherent casualness and lack of unity and trust implied by a cohabitation. In cohabitation, either of us could walk at any moment; among normal people, which none of you MRA's seem to have ever met, the commitment of marriage means something beyond just living together.

    Would I trust a roommate with my financial information? No. However, divorce laws protect me from my wife. The courts will automatically put injunctions and restraining orders on a spouse once divorce papers are filed; not so cohabitation. Burden of proof is on you to prove what's yours in cohabitation.

    Financially, it is much more efficient to cohabit than not. Just for instance, insurance is $300 a month for her; it will become $0 incrementally to add her to mine, so there is a direct benefit of nearly 200k over 20 years time. My car insurance will go down, etc., etc.
    See also:
    http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/article-30190.html

    Also, due to my income, I am very limited as to what I can contribute for retirement. However, since she runs a business, she can contribute 12k a year into a SIMPLE IRA. This makes for a nice, protected nestegg for retirement, IF WE'RE MARRIED. Otherwise, there's no way in hell I'm contributing to her SIMPLE unprotected, and she can't afford to contribute to it on her own. In any case I'd be at her mercy in retirement. With marriage, my money is protected by divorce laws that you hate so much.

    So given those rewards vs. the minor risks, I choose to marry, from a strictly rational point of view. There are other reasons obviously.

    I think you mean that I should avoid marrying stupid, bitchy cows, and you're right, I should have. My fiancee, on the other hand, had a very equitable divorce from her spouse long ago, and is a quality woman. You talk as if all other things are equal if I choose to marry or not. They are not equal. The commitment of marriage means something to both partners, like it or not, and a sort of uncertainly principle applies.

  47. Demonspawn says:

    Would anyone who's not stupid sign up for cohabitation to put money into a house and then walk away with nothing? Not likely.

    You've apparently never heard of renters.

    A smart woman would not agree to enter a long-term relationship with someone who refuses to marry.

    Of course, because marriage is so far in her favor. But I'm not looking for a smart woman, I'm looking for a fair and equitable one.

    In cohabitation, either of us could walk at any moment; among normal people, which none of you MRA's seem to have ever met, the commitment of marriage means something beyond just living together.

    And what keeps her from walking at any moment? What would she lose in a divorce?

    The commitment of marriage means something to both partners, like it or not, and a sort of uncertainly principle applies.

    No. The commitment of marriage means something to men, but very little to absolutely nothing for the majority of women. Thanks to the new laws of marriage including no-fault divorce, alimony, the tender-years doctrine, and other laws which have destroyed traditional marriage; she knows she can walk at any time, for any real or imagined reason, with almost certainly with a financial advantage to her, and with the kids.

    Now, in closing, I'd like to congratulate you by the fact that you can answer the question of "what's in marriage for me?" However, I don't want other to think that those reasons automatically apply to them. You're marrying a woman who works and has a career and who won't be mommy-tracking out.

  48. Firstly, I want to say I appreciate your heartfelt closing; it's so easy in these things to go all black-and-white and not acknowledge the others' points especially on the internet.

    You are right that she CAN technically walk at any moment and lose little to nothing in the process. What I was getting at is that I have reason to believe her when she says it means a lifetime commitment to her.

    I see it as my role to keep up the attraction and comfort in the right mix to keep everything interesting enough that she doesn't want to leave. One can't succeed 100% of the time; so my hope is that the fact that she keeps her promises will mean something in those times. At least now I know how to do what is necessary; in the past I only ever attracted women accidentally, generally when I had given up on them.

  49. Athol Kay says:

    Good luck with your marriage Elhaf.

  50. Meaningless. If such mythical state existed, all your future-ex-wife would have to do is relocate out of state and then file for divorce in that new state where prenups are treated like toilet-paper.

    Crap. I'm an attorney though not practicing as such that many years out of law school who went to Stanford and a top 5 law school. I've also looked into divorce law over the last several years in a good number of states as a matter of personal interest.

    Prenups if done up right are mostly honored in most states. They are in NY and Florida and California not to mention Texas for example. Prenups aren't allowed anywhere in America to dictate child custody or child support=also and mostly stealth alimony. There's a noxious 1988 federal law about that. Whether they can totally cut off alimony for aged wives in very long marriages does vary by states. They're generally very effective in not dividing assets 50/50, or maritally earned or increased assets 50/50 however. Courts will tend to not let a woman married to an affluent man be destitute however, regardless of how lazy she was or how flagrant her cheating behavior. Unfortunately.

  51. Anonymous says:

    "If you want true despair…I suggest you go read the game blogs written by single men. The prevailing view is that Western Civilization is in it's last days and that we are all slaves to the system and powerless to avert its destruction"

    One of the best and truest things you've ever said.

    Jennifer 6

Speak Your Mind

*