Contrary to its intent, the United States is methodically recasting itself as a singles-oriented nation. Notwithstanding the impassioned soapbox orations from politicians about marriage as the bedrock of society, their anti-male policies and laws are, in fact, killing the family and marriage.

In my article “Will Women Halt the Death of Marriage?” I wrote that, for men, marriage is a sucker’s deal. Before you fume at me, ladies, count the number of times you’ve seen a divorced mother writing child-support and alimony checks to her mansion-dwelling ex-husband from the card-table desk of her one-bedroom apartment. Enough said.

The American Community Survey, released in October 2006 by the US Census Bureau, found that, for the first time in US history, only 49.7 percent, or 55.2 million, of the nation’s 111.1 million households in 2005 were made up of married couples — with and without children — just shy of a majority and down from more than 52 percent in 2000.

Yes, folks, instead of solidifying marriage and simplifying our lives, the vote whores on Capitol Hill and in state assemblies across our great country have been catalyzing a pandemic of out-of-wedlock births and spawning costly, socialistic infrastructures to deal with them. As usual, they’ve created another fine mess where one didn’t exist. In this case, the root cause is fear of women (translation: fear of not getting the female vote).

When installing new software, the subscriber must click “I agree” on the 10-page, eye-glazing user agreement, if he expects it to function. How many times does one actually read these documents? I almost never do, because, if so, I’d still be installing Windows 95. Interestingly, when installing new women into their lives, men have a history of exhibiting similar, reflexive behavior — blindly, deferentially, and sycophantically agreeing to known and unknown caveats, provisos, clauses, and conditions. Why? Habit, conditioning, resignation, socialization, and belief that no other options exist.

The typical man, traditionally, has been so deferential to — and fearful of — women that he automatically will allow one to commandeer the dating, engagement, wedding, marriage, and divorce phases of his life. Then, he will kick himself afterwards and cry into the beer of anyone sympathetic enough to listen. Surrendering these phases to her is akin to riding a runaway train — The Estrogen Express — to Disasterville. The only question is, Will he disembark in time to avert the inevitable?

When you think about it, the traditional way of dealing with a woman is to permit her to control your life. Men mistakenly believe they will have more peace that way. This moronic behavior, based on the false assumption that men must crawl through broken glass to get laid, leads to devastating consequences. It’s quite scary to realize how much control over their lives men have conceded to women, with lots of help from misandrist feminists and politicians.

But, it seems that the tide is now turning. Men are increasingly saying no to marriage and relationships, and the Census Bureau statistics prove it. Alas, the out-of-wedlock birthrate (see my article “Playing Abortion Chess”) also proves it. Men are finally realizing that they don’t have to get married and don’t want to get married. They are tired of playing a losing game against the house. To modern men, matrimony equals alimony — not safety, comfort, and love.

When I see a million women marching on the Mall in Washington, DC, demanding that our elected officials restore dignity to men and fathers and the family unit, I will become convinced that they truly believe in matrimony — not just alimony and child support. Until then, I’m not holding my breath.

About the Author

Marc H. Rudov is an internationally recognized author of 30+ articles and the book, The Man’s No-Nonsense Guide to Women: How to Succeed in Romance on Planet Earth^TM (ISBN 0974501719).

Rudov’s book, articles, blog, and podcasts are available at http://www.TheNoNonsenseMan.com/.

Copyright © 2006 by Marc H. Rudov. All rights reserved.

From Coddling to Raunch

Do you remember when a man unable to envision women in roles other than secretary, nurse, or housewife was routinely called a male chauvinist pig? Now that women possess titles such as CEO, judge, chief of police, general, secretary of state, governor, mayor, university president, prime minister, astronaut, scientist, and senator, and because even joking about women at the water cooler will enmesh a man in an EEOC proceeding and may even land him in jail, I thought that term had become a relic of an extinct era.

Until the past year, that is. Ariel Levy, a columnist with New York magazine, wrote a widely quoted and vaunted book called Female Chauvinist Pigs. Ms. Levy describes a recent social trend of bad, raunchy female behavior that contributes to the coarsening of society. While she makes some on-target observations, Levy inaccurately uses the term “chauvinist” to characterize female pigs. Writes Levy: “If Male Chauvinist Pigs were men who regarded women as pieces of meat, we would outdo them and be Female Chauvinist Pigs: women who make sex objects of other women and of ourselves.”

The word chauvinism is derived from Chauvin, a soldier serving in Napoleon’s French army, who was known for his loud-mouthed patriotism. It has come to mean, in our times, the prejudiced belief in the superiority of one’s own gender, group, or kind. When men believed that women were naturally relegated and limited to menial tasks and giving birth, that was chauvinism. Female pigs, however, aren’t feeling or acting superior, and are not chauvinistic. They are self-loathing and insecure, and now are “out-raunching” men.

Prior to this article, I published eight pieces on MissBehaving women: “Exposing Women,” “If Women Were Happy,” “Miscreant Moms,” “Diana Bianchi Enters Victimhood,” “Schwarzenegger’s Miscreant Moms,” “Legal Prostitutes on Capitol Hill,” “Enabling Unfaithful Wives,” and “Debra LaFave Rewarded for Rape.” For the record, I do not believe women should have a higher standard of behavior than men; I also don’t believe they should have a lower one. That’s where Ms. Levy and I agree.

For example, in “Exposing Women,” I quoted articles from FoxNews.com and the Wall Street Journal about women going wild in their bachelorette parties and in their wedding-album photo shoots, exhibiting behavior that makes fratboys look tame. When the Wall Street Journal covers a story like this, on its front page, it’s already a rampant trend.

Why do I care if girls and women are MissBehaving pigs? Because they become girlfriends, sex partners, and mothers, and, consequently, will have the power to control the lives of men. In family courts and criminal courts, judges — especially male judges — tend to give women passes, presuming them innocent while presuming men guilty: in divorce settlements, custody fights, rape accusations, and domestic-violence incidents. In case after case, a woman falsely accusing a man of rape — even admitting it — thereby committing a felony, is not prosecuted. Her MissBehaving is overlooked or ignored.

So, I ask you, Ms Levy: How is this raunchy female behavior rooted in a feeling of superiority to men? It isn’t. The source of escalating female raunch is the lack of self-respect from growing up coddled, spoiled, and feeling entitled to special privileges and deference. Girls are falsely taught that happiness comes from male attention, money, jewelry, clothes, and plastic surgery — instead of from hard-earned achievement. As adults, then, these females enjoy inequitable benefits from the EEOC, Roe v. Wade, VAWA, policemen, DAs, judges, and the media — even though, as Ms. Levy illustrates, they are living and perpetuating a raunch culture. Why wouldn’t they MissBehave like pigs?

NoNonsense Bottom Line

I blame men for allowing women to take control of the gender agenda in this country. Enough is enough. Deference backfires every time. To use Ms. Levy’s characterization, I would say this: If women portray themselves as pieces of meat, we men are correct to agree with them. But, it doesn’t make us chauvinists, and it sure as hell doesn’t make them chauvinists.

About the Author

Marc H. Rudov is an internationally recognized author of 30+ articles and the book, The Man’s No-Nonsense Guide to Women: How to Succeed in Romance on Planet Earth^TM (ISBN 0974501719).

Rudov’s book, articles, blog, and podcasts are available at http://www.TheNoNonsenseMan.com/.

Copyright © 2006 by Marc H. Rudov. All rights reserved.

Apparently, there is money to be made, lots of money, in portraying fathers as morons in sitcoms. CBS helped network television sink to a new low for fathers on Monday night, October 16, 2006. Its highly rated Two and a Half Men, starring Charlie Sheen and Jon Cryer, redefined male impotence and groveling.

For those of you unfamiliar with the show, Charlie Sheen — now the highest-paid star of comedy TV — plays Charlie Harper, a composer of commercial jingles who lives in a beachfront bachelor pad in Malibu. A boozer, gambler, and endless carouser, Charlie shares his pad full-time with now-twice-divorced brother Alan, an unemployed chiropractor played by Jon Cryer, and part-time with Alan’s son, Jake, played by Angus T. Jones. Hence, the 2.5 men.

Since the show began, Alan, a total wimp, has been a pathetic doormat to women — especially his mother and first wife, Judith, who endlessly browbeats him for child support and other payments he’s not required to make. Notwithstanding that, and, with no way to support himself (which is why he lives with his brother), Alan wisely decided to bed and then marry 22-year-old, unemployable, bubble-brain Kandi, played by April Bowlby. As predictability would have it, Kandi, who hasn’t the brains to change a lightbulb, figured out how to divorce Alan and take him for the $500 grand he had just won at a Vegas slot machine.

I had hoped that, with the 2005 finale of Everybody Loves Raymond, another top CBS show with a moronic father as lead character, might come the end of showing disdain towards men on TV. But, it was not to be. Coincidentally, Ray Romano, star and moronic-father-in-chief of his namesake show, has, until Charlie Sheen’s new contract, held the record for highest-paid sitcom star. There’s gold in them, thar WimpyWood Hills.

So, as I sat down to watch Two and a Half Men this Monday past — as in Raymond, the writing and acting in this sitcom are superb — I was appalled at the plot that would unfold. Alan learned that ex-wife Judith, played by Marin Hinkle, would be remarrying — to Jake’s former pediatrician. Alan was celebrating in advance the end of his alimony payments. One wrinkle: Jake didn’t want his mother to remarry; Alan could not sit idly by.

To iron out this unacceptable wrinkle, Alan sprang into action, as any self-respecting man would: he requested his son, Jake, to henceforth address him as Alan and paid him actual money to hug and express love for his future stepfather — and call him Dad. I almost vomitted with disgust.

What are the CBS execs thinking? Why is the audience laughing? How much misandry exists in this country? Can you imagine the same treatment of moms on TV? When hell freezes over. It will never happen. Is life imitating art, or the other way around? I can’t tell anymore. I just know that America looks at its men as a sea of Rodney Dangerfields.

About the Author

Marc H. Rudov is an investment banker and business consultant residing in Silicon Valley, CA. He is the author of 30 articles and the book, The Man’s No-Nonsense Guide to Women: How to Succeed in Romance on Planet Earth^TM (ISBN 0974501719).

Rudov’s book, articles, blog, and podcasts are available at http://www.TheNoNonsenseMan.com/.

Copyright © 2006 by Marc H. Rudov. All rights reserved.

Dear Jennifer,

As you know, the tabloids are atwitter with rumors about the demise of your romance with Vince Vaughn. Worse, they now claim you’ve gotten yourself a boobjob — with before and after photos as supposed proof! Is this true? Nothing speaks insecurity and low self-esteem like a boobjob.

It’s hard enough to endure a breakup but even harder to do so publicly. Moreover, there are reports that Vince has been seen canoodling with another woman. Oy, more salt on the wound.

The tabloids assert that there are three reasons for your breakup with Vince:

1. Incompatibility: Vince is a beer-guzzling party animal; you are a sophisticate with a healthy lifestyle
2. Clinginess: because of the pain from Angelina Jolie catalyzing the breakup of your marriage to Brad Pitt
3. Commitment-shy: because of the speed with which Brad jumped into Angelina’s arms after departing from you.

You should know that the ‘opposites attract’ principal works for magnets, not for people. Opposites always end up driving each other crazy. You can’t change anyone but yourself. Trying to change others breeds resentment and frustration in both parties and is such a waste of life. If you don’t like the fratboy lifestyle, avoid fratboys. Don’t hook up with a man unlike you and hope or expect he will become like you. Futile! Go for the round peg in the round hole.

Heal before hooking up with someone new. Using a new paramour as a salve to heal your old wounds is bad, bad, bad. He doesn’t want to be your salve; it’s unfair to use him for that.

Would you attempt to join a CPA firm as partner if you’re not partner material? No, you have to be qualified to join. Same is true in a relationship. If you are feeling insecure when you “join” a relationship, you will tend to suck energy out of the other person, even worship him. Such behavior diminishes you and will turn him off.

Enter a new relationship only when you are already emotionally independent — so that you can be a romantically interdependent peer, an equal partner. As you have discovered, emotional dependence and clinginess kill relationships.

I recommend that you avoid relationships until you accept Jennifer Aniston, whom a lot of us like. Then, it will be easy to find like-minded, compatible men. With your looks, intelligence, talent, and sparkling personality, that should be a cinch.

If you need to talk, you know where to find me.

Good luck,
Marc

About the Author

Marc H. Rudov is an investment banker and business consultant residing in Silicon Valley, CA. He is the author of 29 articles and the book, The Man’s No-Nonsense Guide to Women: How to Succeed in Romance on Planet Earth^TM (ISBN 0974501719).

Rudov’s book, articles, blog, and podcasts are available at http://www.TheNoNonsenseMan.com/.

Copyright © 2006 by Marc H. Rudov. All rights reserved.