Today should be a day of celebration for anti-father feminists and policymakers. The New York Times published an article, “Middle School Girls Gone Wild” (reprinted below), proving once again that girls and women in this country are out of control. This trend of MissBehaving is occurring at younger and younger ages, and, in my opinion, the lack of paternal influence — either from absence or spineless silence — is the main culprit.

In this NYT article, we learn about girls in sixth, seventh, and eighth grades dancing like sluts — in tiny skirts or tight shorts, with bare bellies, rouged cheeks, and glittery eyes. They writhe and strut, shake their bottoms, splay their legs, thrust their chests out and in and out again. Some straddle empty chairs, like lap dancers without laps — while their parents watch and cheer. Unbelievable!

Rosanna Hertz, women’s studies professor at Wellesley College (alma mater of Hillary Clinton), wrote Single by Chance, Mothers by Choice: How Women Are Choosing Parenthood Without Marriage and Creating the New American Family. Welcome, Professor Hertz, to the “new American family.” Ain’t it great?

Your world stinks, Dr. Hertz. You are espousing garbage that helps destroy my society. Alas, too many men — fathers, TV producers, lawmakers, mayors, governors, judges, district attorneys, chiefs of police, and presidents — remain silent while you and your misguided colleagues, under the guise of “progressive” academia, dismiss and undermine men.

When the New York Times, ordinarily pro-female, calls attention to MissBehaving, the problem is huge. To any father who is both actively present in his daughter’s life and cheering while she denigrates herself, I say, Hang your head in shame, for you have allowed women to dominate your thoughts and your life. You, sir, are part of the problem. You, sir, need a new pair of balls.

Let’s make 2007 the “Year of the Father.” I am calling on all men in all Western cultures to stand up, to become men once again, to reclaim your role in society. By this proclamation, I am not promoting the male domination of women; I am exhorting you to fight against the oppressive tide of misandry.

A society should measure itself by the way its children behave. Our society’s females, from Britney Spears to the 12-year-old girls imitating Britney Spears, are MissBehaving. Why? They never hear the word “no” — not from their fathers, not from their boyfriends, not from their husbands, and not from their district attorneys. In the immortal words of Pogo, “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”

NoNonsense Bottom Line

If you believe that our overwhelmingly unbalanced, man-is-irrelevant society is either unfixable or fixable only by women, you are wrong. That attitude got us to where we are now, a bad place. It’s time for a change. A big change. And, 2007 is the year to make that change. It may be our last chance. So, what can you do?

Every time you see men treated badly on a TV sitcom, complain to the show’s producers with calls and e-mails. Every time you see a brewery negatively portray men in its TV commercials, call and write to the brewery in protest. Every time you see a newspaper or magazine article define domestic violence as men mistreating women, write to the editor to protest. Every time your state legislature proposes another bill to limit men’s and fathers’ rights, bombard the bill’s author(s) with calls, faxes, and e-mails. Every time a woman insists that you pay for her meals and vacations, refuse to do it.

Whatever you do, do NOT sit there doing nothing except complaining to yourselves and your friends. Inaction always leads to total defeat, an emasculating and expensive end. What will you do?

About the Author

Marc H. Rudov is an internationally recognized author of 30+ articles and the books Under the Clitoral Hood: How to Crank Her Engine Without Cash, Booze, or Jumper Cables^TM (ISBN 9780974501727), and The Man,s No-Nonsense Guide to Women: How to Succeed in Romance on Planet Earth^TM (ISBN 0974501719).

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

December 29, 2006

Editorial Observer

Middle School Girls Gone Wild

By LAWRENCE DOWNES

It’s hard to write this without sounding like a prig. But it’s just as hard to erase the images that planted the idea for this essay, so here goes. The scene is a middle school auditorium, where girls in teams of three or four are bopping to pop songs at a student talent show. Not bopping, actually, but doing elaborately choreographed re-creations of music videos, in tiny skirts or tight shorts, with bare bellies, rouged cheeks and glittery eyes.

They writhe and strut, shake their bottoms, splay their legs, thrust their chests out and in and out again. Some straddle empty chairs, like lap dancers without laps. They don’t smile much. Their faces are locked from grim exertion, from all that leaping up and lying down without poles to hold onto. “Don’t stop don’t stop,” sings Janet Jackson, all whispery. “Jerk it like you’re making it choke. …Ohh. I’m so stimulated. Feel so X-rated.” The girls spend a lot of time lying on the floor. They are in the sixth, seventh and eighth grades.

As each routine ends, parents and siblings cheer, whistle and applaud. I just sit there, not fully comprehending. It’s my first suburban Long Island middle school talent show. I’m with my daughter, who is 10 and hadn’t warned me. I’m not sure what I had expected, but it wasn’t this. It was something different. Something younger. Something that didn’t make the girls look so … one-dimensional.

It would be easy to chalk it up to adolescent rebellion, an ancient and necessary phenomenon, except these girls were barely adolescents and they had nothing to rebel against. This was an official function at a public school, a milieu that in another time or universe might have seen children singing folk ballads, say, or reciting the Gettysburg Address.

It is news to no one, not even me, that eroticism in popular culture is a 24-hour, all-you-can-eat buffet, and that many children in their early teens are filling up. The latest debate centers on whether simulated intercourse is an appropriate dance style for the high school gym.

What surprised me, though, was how completely parents of even younger girls seem to have gotten in step with society’s march toward eroticized adolescence — either willingly or through abject surrender. And if parents give up, what can a school do? A teacher at the middle school later told me she had stopped chaperoning dances because she was put off by the boy-girl pelvic thrusting and had no way to stop it — the children wouldn’t listen to her and she had no authority to send anyone home. She guessed that if the school had tried to ban the sexy talent-show routines, parents would have been the first to complain, having shelled out for costumes and private dance lessons for their Little Miss Sunshines.

I’m sure that many parents see these routines as healthy fun, an exercise in self-esteem harmlessly heightened by glitter makeup and teeny skirts. Our girls are bratz, not slutz, they would argue, comfortable in the existence of a distinction.

But my parental brain rebels. Suburban parents dote on and hover over their children, micromanaging their appointments and shielding them in helmets, kneepads and thick layers of S.U.V. steel. But they allow the culture of boy-toy sexuality to bore unchecked into their little ones’ ears and eyeballs, displacing their nimble and growing brains and impoverishing the sense of wider possibilities in life.

There is no reason adulthood should be a low plateau we all clamber onto around age 10. And it’s a cramped vision of girlhood that enshrines sexual allure as the best or only form of power and esteem. It’s as if there were now Three Ages of Woman: first Mary-Kate, then Britney, then Courtney. Boys don’t seem to have such constricted horizons. They wouldn’t stand for it — much less waggle their butts and roll around for applause on the floor of a school auditorium.

Well, the news is in: the man-hating district attorney from Durham, NC — Mike Nifong — has, at last, thrown in the towel on his wrongly pursued rape case against three lacrosse players from Duke University.

Nifong today dropped the rape charges against the three lacrosse players because his star witness, Crystal Gail Mangum — the stripper who goes unnamed in almost all news accounts, even though the names of the accused are constantly displayed — suddenly cannot remember if the alleged perpetrators raped her. Suddenly can’t remember? Are you serious?

Perhaps Mangum’s foggy memory haunts her because, prior to arriving at her Duke stripping gig, Mangum had sex with at least three different men — according to a DNA test, which surfaced last week and which Nifong illegally suppressed. This DNA test exonorates the three wrongly accused Duke students. Worse, Nifong never even interviewed Mangum until a few days ago. Imagine such legal imprudence from a district attorney, especially one prosecuting a world-famous case in which three men could be imprisoned.

In “Juris Contemptus: The Un-American Scourge,” I wrote about DA Nifong’s unethical behavior, in prosecuting his case before TV cameras, thereby violating the American Bar Association’s Rules of Conduct. He did this to win reelection, and he was successful.

I am not, in this piece, going to rehash or expand upon Nifong’s legal transgressions — I’ll leave that to the legal talking heads on cable news programs. Instead, I want to address something deeper and more pernicious: male misandry.

Mike Nifong is an example of a dangerous force in Western cultures: a man in a position of power who hates men, a male man-hater, a man who presumes all men guilty in entanglements with women, a man willing to sacrifice other men — because it is politically acceptable — to further his agenda. This is a serious, anti-family problem in our society. It’s one thing to see man-bashing from angry feminists; it’s quite another to experience it from men.

Let’s face it, the reason men have fewer reproductive (Roe v. Wade) and civil (VAWA) rights than women is that men — who comprise the majority of lawmakers, judges, governors, and presidents — write, interpret, and execute our laws. Why do men hate men so much?

In most homes, children are taught to worship mothers and take fathers for granted. This was true when fathers actually lived with their children. It’s now worse because, in at least 50% of homes, fathers don’t live with their children. What better illustrates the treatment of mothers vs. fathers than telephone calls? In any calendar year, the volume of paid long-distance calls is highest on Mothers’ Day. On the other hand, the volume of collect long-distance calls is highest on Fathers’ Day. What does that tell you?

Men are constantly vilified and portrayed as incompetent losers in TV commercials — especially during the Super Bowl, a man’s venue — and TV sitcoms. My Australian colleague, James Macnamara, based his PhD thesis and subsequent book on this destructive, misandric trend, showing that it exists in his native country as well as in the UK and the USA. Moreover, standup comedians, most of whom are men, routinely refer to men as unfaithful dogs, even though women equally cheat on their boyfriends and husbands.

During this month of Christmas shopping, I’ve seen TV commercial after TV commercial admonishing men to buy jewelry, clothing, and teddy bears for women. Yet, I have not seen ONE appeal to women to purchase anything for men. It’s as if men have but one purpose in life: supporting women.

When a female teacher rapes a male student, many men — including Geraldo Rivera — dismiss such an event as a right of passage. Through a sexual encounter with a female teacher, a young boy — who is a child — could contract an STD, become a father, or be falsely accused of rape. This would permanently destroy the boy’s life.

No matter. In Western cultures, males — whether boys, single men, or fathers — have no value. Men are largely to blame for this because they tolerate it. These eunuchs hail from man-hating homes and enter the world as man-hating, self-loathing adults, dedicated to worshipping and deferring to women. We see it in dating, in marriages, in the workplace, in movies, on TV, in elections, in print media, in family courts, and in criminal courts like DA Nifong’s.

Until men start challenging and overturning this widespread, inhumane misandry, they will be permanently relegated to the emasculating role of sperm donor/ATM — and they will deserve it.

About the Author

Marc H. Rudov is an internationally recognized author of 30+ articles and the books Under the Clitoral Hood: How to Crank Her Engine Without Cash, Booze, or Jumper Cables™ (ISBN 9780974501727), and The Man’s No-Nonsense Guide to Women: How to Succeed in Romance on Planet Earth™ (ISBN 0974501719).

Rudov’s books, articles, blog, and podcasts are available at TheNoNonsenseMan.com.

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

We are 10 days from the end of 2006. Perhaps you are contemplating your resolutions for the new year, 2007. Don’t waste your time.

On January 1, 2005, I was at the gym. I had noticed the ‘resolution crowd’ that always shows up in January and is nowhere to be found 30 days afterwards. So, I became inspired to write “Did You Make Your New Year’s Revolution?”

Here’s an excerpt from my article:

A resolution is an intention or a determination — a force existing only in one’s mind. Revolution, on the other hand, means complete and forcible overthrow, radical and pervasive change — in other words, taking massive action to reverse a current situation. A revolution, by definition, occurs outside the mind, on the ground, requiring physical action, dogged perseverance, and sacrifice.

I get lots of e-mails from readers, and, as a frequent talkshow guest, I hear from men and women all over the country. It astounds me how much they hate relationships and still don’t want to change.

Some men hate to wine & dine women for sex, but they are too chicken to change. Other men view women as little girls and love to provide for them. Then, in divorce court, when helpless girls suddenly become vicious attack dogs, these foolish men are shocked.

Women complain that men treat them like property, like whores, but don’t want to drop their attitudes of entitlement.

NoNonsense Bottom line:

People like to whine and complain; they even know, in advance, that their dysfunctional behaviors will lead to ruin. But, they don’t have the balls to make radical changes in their lives.

My books tell people they must change to get new results. Change can be painful, but great results justify the pain. You know how much you really want something by the personal price you’re willing to pay for that result.

If you want a better body but get liposuction instead of changing your diet and busting your ass in the gym,
you don’t really understand the concept of change … or revolution.

If you want your life with women to be the same in 2007 that it is now, don’t read my books. If, however, you are sick of the same nonsense, day in and day out, I urge you to read BOTH of my books. If you’ve already read them, reread them.

If you love your friends, you’ll turn them onto The Man’s No-Nonsense Guide to Women and Under the Clitoral Hood.

The next year will be what you make it. Revolution leads to change. Resolution is nothing but mental masturbation.

Read “Did You Make Your New Year’s Revolution?”
http://themansnononsenseguidetowomen.com/Media/NewYearzRevolution.pdf

My books are available via www.TheNoNonsenseMan.com

Happy (Drastically Changed) New Year

About the Author

Marc H. Rudov is an internationally recognized author of 30+ articles and the books Under the Clitoral Hood: How to Crank Her Engine Without Cash, Booze, or Jumper Cables™ (ISBN 9780974501727), and The Man’s No-Nonsense Guide to Women: How to Succeed in Romance on Planet Earth™ (ISBN 0974501719).

Rudov’s books, articles, blog, and podcasts are available at TheNoNonsenseMan.com.

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

In mid-October, I wrote “CBS Profits from Dumb Dads,” in reaction to yet another pathetic display of paternal impotence on a network-television sitcom. A week later, I was a guest on a San Antonio radio station, debating a misguided female psychologist in denial about the negative portrayal of men in the American media.

It turns out that institutionalized misandry is not unique to the United States; it is as bad or worse in Australia. In fact, we see a growing trend, in Western-oriented democracies, of the media, and consequently family courts, kicking men “down under” — literally, figuratively, and geographically.

An eye-popping article appeared today in The Sydney Morning Herald, based on the doctoral thesis of James R. Macnamara, about the vilification of men in Australian media. In writing his treatise, “Representations of Men and Male Identities in Australian Mass Media,” Dr. Macnamara, affiliated with the University of Western Sydney, studied more than 2000 articles and TV stories about men, over the span of a year. His research demonstrates, starkly, that men are commonly represented as insensitive, stupid, or incompetent.

According to Macnamara: “Out of 100 stories about fatherhood in the nation’s six most-popular newspapers and magazines, only one was written by a man. Many did not even quote a man. When men were portrayed positively — in shows such as Queer Eye For a Straight Guy — it was often because they had “embraced their feminine side.” MacNamara said this anti-male bias further demonized men by reinforcing feminine traits as positive and masculine ones as negative.

There’s nothing new here, except that James Macnamara did a brilliant job of quantifying the problem in Oz. The question remains, therefore, Why and how is misandry growing?

It is happening because men are allowing it to happen. Why don’t men fight back? Why? This is the fundamental question! I believe that so many males are raised in homes that diminish fathers (e.g., the number-one day for collect calls is Fathers’ Day) and worship mothers, that boys grow up feeling insecure and self-loathing. This was bad enough in times when there were fathers in the homes. Nowadays, a father in the home is a rarity — providing more opportunity for mom, consciously or unconsciously, to feminize the mind and attitudes of her son, who craves and requires a strong male identity for normal development.

So, when this vaginized boy progresses to the highschool and university environments, he faces a deluge of the left-wing, politically correct, feminist agenda. Eventually, this boy becomes a “man,” who goes to work at a politically correct newspaper, magazine, or TV network — or gets himself elected to a state assembly, the US Congress, or a state or federal judgeship. Feeling inadequate from a lifetime of propaganda, and finding it professionally expedient to be sensitive to doing the “right” thing, he then perpetuates feminist, anti-male policies, perspectives, advertisements, and TV shows.

A frightening example of how out-of-control American misandry has become is Michigan’s new Coercive Abortion Prevention Act. Essentially, this law prohibits a man from leaving a pregnant woman with whom he currently resides. That’s right: If a Michigan man’s wife or girlfriend is pregnant, regardless of whether that fetus is actually his, he now is her slave — another swift kick in the balls of all men, delivered largely by men. Just how much hatred do men — who comprise the majority of all lawmakers — have for other men?

Yesterday, President George W. Bush held a joint news conference with British Prime Minister Tony Blair. The topic was the report of the Iraq Study Group, the bulk of which Bush, thankfully, dismissed. Negotiate with Iran? Is James Baker nuts? Bush said that he has no choice but to take seriously the threats from our enemies and not allow them to prevail. Said Bush: “Historians, years from now, cannot ask why ‘Bush and Blair ignored these threats.’ I am not going to ignore these threats!”

Likewise, we men must stop ignoring the threats of total adumbration of manhood. We have the opportunity, now, to stop misandry in its tracks. We permitted it to grow; we can kill it. Otherwise, years from now, when our society is a pure gynocracy, we will be scratching our heads (our balls will long have atrophied), wondering how we lost all of our rights. Do you want to see your grandson, 20 years hence, doing his doctoral thesis on the gerontological struggles of eunuchs?

About the Author

Marc H. Rudov is an internationally recognized author of 30+ articles and the books Under the Clitoral Hood: How to Crank Her Engine Without Cash, Booze, or Jumper Cables™ (ISBN 9780974501727), and The Man’s No-Nonsense Guide to Women: How to Succeed in Romance on Planet Earth™ (ISBN 0974501719).

Rudov’s books, articles, blog, and podcasts are available at TheNoNonsenseMan.com.

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

My recent radio gigs:
=================================================

================================================================

Monday (12.18.06) in NYC

Show: Covino & Rich
What: Under the Clitoral Hood
Date: Monday, December 18, 2006
Time: 4:00PM EST/1:00PM PST
Where: Maxim Channel, Sirius Satellite Channel 108

To listen to the archived show:

Windows Media Player
http://wms2.streamhoster.com/mhrudov/CovinoRichMaxim_121806.mp3

Everything Else
http://web2.streamhoster.com/mhrudov/CovinoRichMaxim_121806.mp3
Covino & Rich’s page:
http://www.covinoandrich.com/theshow.html
=================================================
Wednesday (12.13.06) in Atlanta

Show: Steve & Vikki in the Morning — ‘The Ladies’ Room’ segment
What: Under the Clitoral Hood
Date: Wednesday, December 13, 2006
Time: 8:00AM EST/5:00AM PST
Where: WSTR (Star94) 94.1FM, Atlanta

“Marc — you rock! Loved the conversation.
Your book should be must-read material in all
high schools. Hope to see you on Oprah, soon!
Can’t wait to have you back on the show.”

Vikki Locke
Cohost, Steve & Vikki in the Morning
WSTR 94.1FM (Star94), Atlanta

Listen to the archived interview:

Windows Media Player
http://wms2.streamhoster.com/mhrudov/SteveVikkiStar94_121306.mp3

Everything Else
http://web2.streamhoster.com/mhrudov/SteveVikkiStar94_121306.mp3
==================================================

Saturday night (12.09.06) in San Francisco

Show: Sex With Emily
What: Under the Clitoral Hood
Date: Saturday, December 9, 2006
Time: 2:00AM EST/11:00PM PST
Where: KIFR 106.9FM, San Francisco

Emily’s page: www.SexWithEmily.com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Marc Rudov Doing Sex With Emily

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Listen to the archived interview:

Windows Media Player
http://wms2.streamhoster.com/mhrudov/SexWithEmily&MHR_120906.mp3

Everything Else
http://web2.streamhoster.com/mhrudov/SexWithEmily&MHR_120906.mp3
===============================================

December 7, 2006 in Cincinnati

Show: The Scott Sloan Show
What: Under the Clitoral Hood
Date: Thursday, December 7, 2006
Time: 9:00PM EST/6:00PM PST
Where: WLW 700AM, Cincinnati | XM Satellite: Channel 173

Listen to the archived interview:

Windows Media Player
http://wms2.streamhoster.com/mhrudov/ScottSloan_120706.mp3

Everything Else
http://web2.streamhoster.com/mhrudov/ScottSloan_120706.mp3

‘Marc Rudov is informative, passionate, and, most of all …
PROVOCATIVE! He’s like a red-hot poker in the side of
dating etiquette. One of those rare guests you’ll be looking
for a reason to rebook.’ — Scott Sloan

This morning, I appeared as a guest on KBKS (KISS) 106.1FM in Seattle, on Jackie & Bender Mornings. Seattle, if you don’t know, is the left-wing capital of Misandria, the land of man-hating women and vaginized men.

Let me give you a little background about this show. There are four hosts of this program — Jackie, Bender, Sammi, and Jubal — two males and two females. Before I got on the air, Jubal, one of the guys, shaved off some of his pubic hair and placed it on a pizza. Then, one of the females, I don’t know which one (I was too shocked to remember), vomited. OK, now you understand the “class” of these people. By the way, Seattle Magazine apparently voted Jackie & Bender Mornings the best AM radio show of Seattle. Go figure.

This interview, which was prerecorded an hour before it aired, was chopped up, edited, and slanted to make me appear misogynistic, which is untrue and why I generally don’t agree to doing prerecorded interviews. Because of this disingenuous, unprofessional ambush, I have done my last prerecorded interview.

Inherent in KBKS’s ambush was Sammi’s accusation of me lumping all women together as golddiggers. I never said this, do not feel this way, and never felt this way. Truth be told, I believe that most women feel entitled, and I stand by that. Most does not equal all. This is exactly what I told the fab four, but that’s not what they wanted you to hear.

After KBKS played my adulterated interview, when I could not respond, Sammi accused me of being ugly — her alleged reason for my attitudes. In her reprinted screed below, she invited Seattle women to Google me for proof of my ugliness. This fomented her man-haters in the listening audience to insult me. One even sent me hate-mail (also reprinted below).

People who hurl personal, ad-hominem insults during a debate are small. A radio host who purports to know my book without ever reading it is even smaller. You read that correctly: Sammi & Company never read my book. That’s OK — the pusillanimous hosts and callers solidified my case (notice that there were zero male callers — they’re too scared in Seattle to challenge the women), which delights me to no end.

The hot babes I’ve been involved with would argue with Sammi’s defamatory comments about my looks, but they have too much class to lower themselves to contact Sammi. Now, I don’t want to get down to Sammi’s pathetic level, but I have a suggestion for her: lose the donuts and buy a gym membership.

As you know, women generally tend to attack personally when they don’t like the subject matter. This is one of the main reasons men generally don’t respect women. Instead of arguing with logic and reason, why not throw rocks? It’s easier and feels better, right? If more fathers would be tougher parents to their daughters, this wouldn’t be the case.

NoNonsense Bottom Line:

These KISS attackers had their fun, got their ratings, bashed men, bashed me, and ironically validated everything I’ve ever written about entitled women. They unintentionally enhanced the value of www.UnderTheClitoralHood.com, beyond what I could have wanted or expected. I thank them for that.

After you listen to the interview (links immediately following) and read the lovely literary works below, by Sammi and her angry listener, please feel free to contact Sammi to convey your feelings — and please offer your comments below.

================================================

Please listen to the interview and then provide your feedback:

Windows Media Player

Everything Else
================================================

Here’s What Sammi Wrote on Her Blog After the Show

Marc H. Rudov was on with us today talking about his book. We went into this interview really wanting to talk to him and thinking he’d be fun to talk to and would have some great points. Wrong. Marc has a book out that teaches men to avoid gold diggers. That’s his opinion. I’m all for someone writing a because I know there are some gold digging women out there who do nothing but hook up with rich guys. Marc says it’s all women and will not budge. He’s not willing to listen and consider that not all women are like that.

He’s judging and it’s not a “teaching men” type of book. He says, in the most simple of terms, that men shouldn’t pamper women at all! If you agree, you’d love his book. We didn’t agree with his views (including Bender), so we ripped on him. We talked about everything from him being nuts to the fact that he’s not attractive to our thoughts on why he was divorced (which he wouldn’t talk about). We got an e-mail later thanking for the opportunity to be on but not appreciating how we talked about him. He claims he gets PLENTY of women and that he’s working on a TV deal so he must not be that ugly. You decide.

Google Marc H. Rudov. That’s two guys in two days I’ve had you look up. I promise that yesterday’s man was more of a treat BY FAR!

Enjoy the weekend you are about to have. Can you believe Thanksgiving was only last week? Time is flying by although it seems like the holiday was a month away. Also, Jingle Bell Bash is one week from Sunday. Where did the time go?

Sammi

P.S. Jubal thinks that his head injury is causing him not to be funny. He thinks he’s lost it.

===================================================

Hate-Mail From An Entitled, Angry Seattle Princess

I heard you on the radio today. You know something, I’m always glad when a guy like you asks me to pay for a date. Because that keeps me from wasting any more time on him! THAT’S why you’re divorced–You’re a skinflint jerk!! AND you are WRONG! Let me explain something to you: Women measure a man by whether or not he is willing to be generous, and not just with money. However, how willing a man is to spend his money on a woman is a very telling indicator of how willing he is to open his heart.

I know men (married to very lucky women) who wouldn’t hesitate to do whatever was necessary to demonstrate their feelings for their mate. That’s the kind of man I want. Sometimes that has to do with money, other times it has to do with whether he will cook me a meal once in a while, be willing to listen to my point of view on issues, my worries and concerns, etc., or take me to an event that is more interesting to me than to him, just for companionship and supportiveness. Would you be willing to do those things? I doubt it.

You wealthy men always act like you’re being asked to donate a kidney when you have to spend money on a date. Let me ask you something: What is your purpose in asking a woman out? A woman doesn’t need a man! So what incentive do you offer for her to spend time with YOU? If all you want is sex, why don’t you just grow some balls and represent that up front? Maybe that’s all the woman wants, too. But the truth is, you’re afraid the woman might not feel the same way and burn you at go. But a date implies you’re interested in something more. DATING is a process by which two individuals get to know one another in order to find out whether they are compatible, interested in one another, share values, etc. I have dated guys with money, and they are usually the biggest jerks and tightwads (like you!) that there are. Look, asshole, even today most women don’t make as much money as their male counterparts in equivalent positions. So if a woman is at an economic disadvantage, why would you expect her to pay for a date she could not afford? Does that make her less appealing as a mate? Does it make her less able to be a loving, devoted, loyal partner in the marriage, a good mother to your children, a staunch supporter in sickness or health, wealth or poverty? You know–the things marriage are supposed to be about. I’m sorry you ended up with a “gold-digger,” but let’s be honest–you get what you give. If you bring low expectations and high demands to the table, what else do you expect?
=====================================================

In closing, I’d like to reinforce my main theme, repeated in everything I write and say: unless men and women treat each other like peers, they never will get along. Women do not deserve any rights or privileges that men cannot have, so men must stop deferring to them. This means that men must cease wining & dining women for sex. They must learn how to attract women without using cash. It’s that simple and the theme of Under the Clitoral Hood. Finally, if radio hosts in the future ever claim that I believe or said anything other than what I just wrote, they are lying.

About the Author

Marc H. Rudov is an internationally recognized author of 30+ articles and the books Under the Clitoral Hood: How to Crank Her Engine Without Cash, Booze, or Jumper Cables^TM (ISBN 9780974501727), and 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.