It's Not That Every Woman Will; It's That Every Woman Can

 Guys,

This will be a short post; it'll have a video embedded, and not much more. The YouTube channel, Hearit Stories, posted this video this morning. It's about a woman who games the system and almost gets the marital home during the divorce. Will every woman do what Amanda did? No, the problem is that every woman CAN! Every woman can work the system and ruin you in the process. That's why it's imperative to not only stay single; it's imperative that you never live with a woman. Sorry, but that's the way it is.

Burden of Proof

 Guys,

Below is a comment my response to someone else's comment to a video about a false accusation. The YouTube channel, Hearit Stories, ran this video. Hearit Stories is a GREAT channel, BTW! Though its content is AI generated, the stories are compelling. One of the commenters wondered why Robert, the man who was falsely accused, didn't also file criminal charges on top of his successful lawsuit. Below is my response, based on my experience, why Robert may  not have gone ahead with criminal charges.

-----------------

It all depends on how the criminal statutes are worded in his state. I was falsely accused back in the 1990s by a woman I'd dated briefly. In court, she LIED her ass off! She told many flagrant, blatant, and obvious lies, lies that could easily be disproved. Hence, I looked into filing charges against her, particularly false swearing. In NJ, false swearing is like perjury, but one doesn't have to prove corroboration and all that; it doesn't have the same burdensome requirements of a full blown perjury charge. For false swearing, all one has to do is show that the defendant made two conflicting statements, and that both can't be true simultaneously; all you have to show is that one of the statements is false. If you look back at the OJ trial, what Kato Kaelin said and did would be an example of false swearing.

HOWEVER! However, in NJ, where I'm from and where my case happened, there's a critical phrase in both the perjury and false swearing statutes, a phrase that would give my accuser an out. In both statutes, there's a phrase that says, "believed by the defendant to be true." Why was that crucial in my case? Well, she had an eating disorder, so she could argue that her mental perception was clouded sufficiently that she believed what she said to be true. She could easily get any psychologist to testify to this. Because of that and a desire to get on with my life, I didn't follow through with criminal charges.

Secondly, because of the "believe all women" trope, there's a serious reluctance on the part of the criminal justice system to prosecute women for false accusations, lying to the authorities, etc. Back then, it wasn't called "believe all women"; there was no hashtag with that name. Nevertheless, the concept existed, and it was practiced. When researching my case, there was, a case in Oakland, CA where a woman falsely accused a man and committed perjury. IIRC, she even ADMITTED to it! Even so, the prosecutor declined to bring charges, as doing so was politically explosive. That's what men face in these situations.

Thirdly, for criminal charges, regardless of how the applicable statutes are worded, there's also the matter of a higher burden of proof for a criminal case. In a civil case, all that one needs is a preponderance of the evidence; all one has to do is show that there's at least a 51% chance that X happened. OTOH, with a criminal charge, one has to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, which is much more difficult to do.

In closing, filing criminal charges, particularly against a woman, is difficult. Even casting aside the "believe all women" belief and practice, the applicable criminal statutes' language may leave her a way out; the hole may be big enough for a truck! There's the matter of"believe all women", which makes bringing charges at all problematic; no one wants to be seen as hurting the damsel in distress. Finally, the burden of proof for a criminal charge is far higher than that required for a civil case; the proof that may be sufficient for a civil case may fall short of what's required for a criminal charge.

What BOP Means on TikTok

 Folks,

Thanks to political correctness, I had to spend hours digging around the Internet to find the meaning of a new Internet acronym and slang term: BOP. What does BOP mean? BOP=blown out pussy. No WONDER its meaning has been censored; can't insult the women now! As promiscuous as most modern women are, most of them are BOPs; most of them have blown out pussies. How appropos...

Two Reasons Why More Women Will Be Single by 2030

 Guys,

Red, host of the Chow Time Pod YouTube channel, did a video about how 45% of single women ages of 25-44 will be single by 2030. Below is my comment in response.

-----------------

Red another dimension to this is that, in addition to women delaying marriage for their careers, by the time many of them wake up and decided to settle down in their early-mid 30s, two things have happened. One is that the men that they want who are their age can get younger women, and they do. The second is that men don't have the same  sexual desire when they pass 30.

The first factor is elementary. Think about it. Say a woman becomes a successful lawyer by 30. That means she'll want another successful lawyer in his mid-late 30s; she'll want someone who's at least a senior associate, if not a junior or senior partner in the firm. Guess what? That senior associate or partner can bag hotter, more pleasant women in their early 20s! Why would he want some old, combative prune who's either hit the wall or is about to hit it? Why would he settle with someone less attractive, masculine, and combative if he can get someone who's more appealing, both physically and otherwise?

The second factor is that, as men pass through the ages of 30-35, their sex drive drops; they think with their big head, not the little one. As Terrence Popp, host of the Redonkulas Regiment channel, says, men don't engage in "dick thinking" as they pass through their 30s; as a 63 year old retiree, I can definitely confirm this. Can I still do the deed? Yes, but it takes something extra to get me in the mood these days. It's not like it was in my younger days, when I got hard if the wind blew! Once that happens to a guy, women no longer have the power over him like they did when he was younger. As an older guy, I can take women, or I can leave them. I can look at a beautiful woman and acknowledge that, but it's the same as if I were acknowledging the beauty of a work of art or something; it's not like oh she's hot, I have to have her. When a man reaches that point, it is so LIBERATING! Once the sex drive cools down, it's as if a man has been released from the clutches of a terrible beast. At that point, a man can say, yeah, I'm good.

Those are two reasons why 45% of women aged 25-44 will be single by 2030. By the time career women are ready to settle down, men of their age and level can get someone younger and hotter, and they do. Also, what women forget is that, when men pass the age of 30, their sex drive cools; their desires for women subsides. Once that happens, it's easier for men to walk away from women and be happy alone.

Attitude Towards Death in Racing: Then and Now

 Guys,

Here's another comment I want to preserve for posterity, so I'm copying it and pasting it here. It's about how the attitude towards death and racing have changed over the years. This comment was originally left in response to a video about F1 great Jackie Stewart's push for safety.

----------------------

Prior to Jackie Stewart's push for safety, there was a very blase attitude towards safety. The attitude towards the drivers, was: hey, if you don't like it, there are 100 guys waiting to take your seat; there's the door. I think that the classic movie, "Grand Prix", captured this attitude very well.

Secondly, when Indy Car and F1 resumed after WWII, death had been a commonplace occurrence; after all, tens of thousands had died during the war. This attitude was captured in the 1955 Indy 500. There was a fatal and fiery crash during the race. The race was stopped, cleaned up, and then continued. That would be UNTHINKABLE today! However, the 1955 Indy 500 was just 10 years after WWII, and everyone had either lost someone close to them during the war, or they knew someone who'd been killed. Death had been a common occurrence in the recent past.

Along with that, everyone knew that auto racing was dangerous, and that death came with the territory, as they say. The attitude was, if you climb into a car or onto a motorcycle to race, you know that death is a possibility. It wasn't that people wanted drivers to die; it's that the prevailing attitude was that they knew what they were getting into, and if they die, they die. They knew the risk, and they accepted it. Attitudes were very different post WWII.

Why Men Avoid Marriage in America

 Guys,

Yesterday, Far From Eden put out a video about why men are walking away from women, relationships, and marriage. I've had a spirited back & forth with a guy telling me that, if I don't take the risk, I'll die childless and alone. While I understand and am in basic agreement with him, he's not from the US. He has no understanding about what American men face if their wives divorce them. Below is my response to him.

-------------

​ @anonperson3972  since you're not in the US or even the Western World, you have no idea of what men face here. If you're in a country that has sane divorce laws, promotes family, and so on, GREAT! Then, the risk is worth it. Where I am, the risk is not; I know, because I speak from experience.

Furthermore, I agree with you that marriage and family are the bedrock of a healthy society. God created marriage and family, so there's that too. However, we no longer practice marriage in that way.

Let me tell you a little story. 20-25 years ago, I lived near the Jersey Shore. The Jersey Shore is within an hour or so drive of NYC; where I used to live, one could also take a bus or train to NYC as well. One of the Jersey Shore's best known landmarks is Monmouth Park, a horse racing track.

I used to go to Monmouth Park every weekend, as I enjoyed the horse racing. I used to bet on the horses, and I never lost. I didn't always win; some days, I broke even. However, I never lost. Why? Because, I made it a point to know the odds before placing my bets.

I got a copy of the track's program and a copy of the Daily Racing Form as soon as the track opened, which used to be like two hours before the first race. I then found a table, and I studied them. I looked at which horses were racing; I looked at how they did on dirt vs. grass; I looked at how they did over short vs. long distances; I looked at when they last ran; I looked at whether they'd won before; and so on. Then, for good measure, I made it a point to watch the horses being paraded before they took to the track. What was their body language? What was their attitude? I can remember races where I won the bet because I saw a confident horse being paraded before post time. Only then did I walk over to the betting window and put my money down. Again, I never lost. Why? Because I knew the odds going in, and I placed my wagers accordingly.

The same principle applies to marriage. What kind of women are available? Are they wife material, or are they for fun only? Do they have high body counts? What do they think of men? Do they like men? Here in the US, women don't like men very much. Are the women kind? Do they have good domestic skills? Are they honest? Do they even attempt to do the right thing, regardless of how they feel? Face it, women are all about their emotions and feelings. Furthermore, what are the consequences for a man if his wife divorced him? How likely is that to happen? Will he be treated fairly, or will he be screwed over? Will he be able to rebuild his life and go on, or will he be ruined long term? And so on.

When viewed in that light, there are things that stand out to me as a man in America. One is that the women suck; sorry, but there's no other way to put it. Two, the vast majority of them aren't ready to be wives; they don't have the attitude to be a good wife, nor do they have the skills to be one. Three, divorce rate is 50%; i.e. there's a one in two chance that your marriage won't last. Four, it'll most likely be the woman who files for divorce; here in the US, wives file for divorce 80% of the time. Five, family court, where divorces are adjudicated, are overwhelmingly anti-male, meaning that you WILL be screwed! The only question is how badly will the man be screwed? Finally, even prenuptial agreements won't necessarily help you; judges can and do set them aside. A man has no protection in divorce. Because it's necessary to be married before one can be divorced, men are making the logical decision to avoid marriage.

Let me address this from another angle, an angle every one can relate to: economics. If you see that the economy is slowing down, what is it you do? You cut spending, right? Since you don't know if you'll be working as much as you did before or not at all, it makes sense to cut spending, so as to save some money for the bad times you see coming. On an individual level, cutting spending makes sense.

However, here in the US, at least 2/3 of economic activity is driven by consumer spending; that is economic activity, the macro economy if you please, is driven by the decisions of millions of individuals. When millions of people make the sensible, individual decision to cut spending, what does that do the the overall economy? It slows down more, doesn't it? After all, it doesn't have the same inputs as it did before. In other words, the decision that makes sense on an individual level is bad on a collective, societal, or macro economic level.

The same applies to marriage and divorce here. Given the environment men face here, it makes no sense to marry; after all, the only way to avoid divorce is to avoid marriage. However, on a collective, societal, and cultural level, that's bad; no country can survive long without strong marriages and families. I understand that, and I agree. However, if I'm literally risking homelessness by getting married, sorry, but I'll pass.

In closing, I agree with you. If all I were to suffer is a broken heart in the wake of divorce, I could deal with that; it would suck, but I could deal with it. What I can't deal with, especially as I'm about to turn 63, is homelessness. Since that's a distinct possibility if I am divorced, I'll pass on marriage; marriage simply isn't in my best interest. Again, the odds are bad for me, so I'll pass; that's a bet I won't make under any circumstances. Thank you.

Why Modern Sport Bikes' Sales Are Falling

 Guys,

Here's another comment I want to preserve. Though this blog deals mainly with men's issues, I also reserve the right to write about other topics such as motorcycles and motorcycling. Brit Stuart Fillingham has a good video about why modern sport bikes aren't selling as well these days. Below is his video and my response to it.

--------------

Stu, I never got a sport bike simply because they're TOO MUCH for me! Between their power, acceleration, braking, and quick handling, most sport bikes (600s on up) are beyond the skills and abilities of most riders. In order to get anything close to the max capabilities of modern sport bikes, one has to be a national or world class rider; one has to be racing in BSB, Moto America, or WSB to come close to extracting the full capabilities of these motorcycles. I'm good enough to stay alive and keep out of trouble on two wheels, but I'm not on that level. Sport bikes are overkill for me and most riders.

Then, there's the matter that it's a fool's errand to try going fast on public roads anyway. Even if traffic, speed limits, and sketchy pavement weren't enough to deal with, there's the matter of road debris. There's a tight, 90 degree turn near my house that's often covered with mud, dirt, and stones after a heavy rain. Imagine hitting that turn at full speed; your tires will hit that, break loose, and before you know it, you've had a nasty low side crash. Plus there are animals to deal with; if you're in a more rural area, you could find deer or cows in your way. Public roads aren't conducive to going fast; if you want to really push a sport bike, then you need to do a track day; for me, that would be a PITA, as the nearest race tracks are hours away from me.

Thirdly, sport bikes are simply UNCOMFORTABLE! Their riding position makes sense for what a sport bike is designed to do, but it's not comfortable to ride for more than an hour or so. Plus, after you pass a certain age, you might not be able to contort yourself into a sport bike's riding position. Can you still bend your knees that much? If so, how long can you keep them bent that much? Even for the young guys, sport bikes aren't that comfortable. Outside of a race track, are sport bikes really that suitable for most riding? I would submit that they're not.

Finally, there's the cost of owning and operating a sport bike. Yes, they're highly capable machines, particularly for their intended purpose, but that capability comes at a cost. The young guys who used to comprise most sport bike owners can't afford them anymore; 600s carry low five figure price tags, and bigger sport bikes are more expensive. That doesn't take into account the cost to insure these things. In the event of a crash, all that Tupperware will cost a FORTUNE to replace! That's reflected in the insurance premiums one has to pay for a sport bike. Most young guys who would've owned them in the past can't afford that. Secondly, older guys, who are affluent enough to afford them, no longer want them; they want to slow down and enjoy the ride, and sport bikes aren't conducive for that.

In closing, I'm not against modern sport bikes at all. They're truly awesome and wondrous machines. Today's sport bikes on the showroom floor are BETTER than what the professionals raced just a generation ago! Think about it: when Eddie Lawson was racing, his bike had a 120 rear tire-a 120! Can you imagine that? Modern sport bikes have 180s on the rear. That doesn't take into consideration the inferior tires, lower power engines, inferior brakes on the bikes that the pros raced a generation ago. Modern sport bikes are simply too much for most riders. Between that and their high cost of acquisition and ownership, it's only natural that their sales would fall.

Child Support from Conception

 Guys,

You all MUST WATCH the video below! Dan, host of the Men Need to be Heard YouTube channel, has a barn burner of a video about this. It's almost a half hour long, but it's well worth your time.

Ryan Spencer on Tamron Hall

 Guys,

A good YouTube channel to follow is Manosphere Highlights Daily; he's MUST SEE TV! He did a recent video about Ryan Spencer, the young woman who went viral on TikTok, crying in her car that she can't find love. Miss Spencer was on The Tamron Hall Show recently, so MHD did a video about it. Below is the comment I left in response, as I've been following Miss Spencer on TikTok since May of last year. I'll post MHD's video and my comment below.

-------------

MHD, I found Ryan Spencer's TikTok soon after Better Bachelor featured her last year, and I started following her; I've seen every TikTok of hers since mid May of last year, and many she made before then. That is to say I have a good idea of who she is and what she's about. She's had good opportunities to find someone, yet they don't stick around. I'll give just two examples.

There was one guy, who she calls "Ohio Man", who ended things with her last summer. She was set up with him via mutual friends. She was never exclusive with OH Man, but they were seeing one another regularly and things seemed to be headed that way. Then, she took a 3 week vacation to Europe with her cousin, and this is what cause things to go off the rails with OH Man. I'll explain.

Now, to those who say that OH Man should've said no girls' trips, there were two flies in the ointment there. One was that Ryan and her cousin, Isabella, planned the vacation in March, long before Ryan met Ohio Man. Two, they weren't exclusive yet, which begs the question: how can one set boundaries with someone you're just getting to know? I think that Ohio Man answered that by flying the coop.

Why do I think Ohio Man flew the coop? There are two reasons. One was that, while in Europe, Ryan posted a TikTok about being on the dating apps, and setting them for wherever they were. If I were a guy dating her and I saw that, I wouldn't be amused. BTW, she ended up taking that one down! Two was that, even though Ryan's TikToks portrayed her and her cousin swimming and going sightseeing, Isabella's were a lot more revealing. Bella's TikToks showed them getting drunk, going to clubs, etc. Since Ryan reposted some of Bella's TikToks, it wouldn't have been any problem for Ohio Man to look at her TikToks too; when he saw Bella's TikToks of their European girls' trip, I think he hit the "eject" button. Ryan, of course, took no accountability; she basically blamed Ohio Man for the failure of that nascent relationship.

There was another good, solid opportunity that she didn't follow up on: the guy from Washington, DC. She didn't have a nickname for him, so I'll call him DC Man. DC Man has a job in DC, so he has to stay there. DC Man was in Ryan's hometown for a family reunion. They had a wonderful first date; they shared a nice dinner, then went back to her place to talk and play board games until 2 AM. It sounded like they really connected, and was thus worthy of a second date. DC Man offered her a train ticket to come down to DC to see him; all she had to do was say "Yes, I'll come down." BTW, Ryan is in CT, and CT has two or three Amtrak Acela stops; getting to DC wouldn't have been a problem. Ryan didn't follow up on that one, and I think she made a mistake. Connections like that don't happen every day; when they do, you need to jump all over them.

Ryan has made other TikToks talking about her multiple "situationships". One, with a pilot whom she nicknamed "Pilot Man", she described as "a one week stand"; those are her words, not mine. She had another situationship with a guy she calls "Hallmark Man". She's had other situationships too.IOW, she's used up and ran through. She made a TikTok a few weeks ago where she bristled at the thought of people asking her about her body count, and she said, "That's none of your fucking business!" Again, those are her words, not mine. No serious guy is going to want her.

Anyway, those are my thoughts on Ryan Spencer, the guest on The Tamron Hall Show. I found her TikTok last year, and I've been following her ever since mid May; I've seen every TikTok she's made since then, and I've seen many she made before then. She's had opportunities, but she can't convert them; she can't secure the relationship she says that she wants. Based on my observations, she's her own worst enemy, but she can't take the accountability to realize that. Those are my thoughts...

Proof of My Long Held Reservations about Ashley St. Clair

 Guys,

I'm going to write about "conservative" influencer Ashley St. Clair. Some years ago, I saw her in my Twitter feed before I was banned there for the crime of Wrongthink. It was evident that she leaned conservative; she said many of the right things, which I liked. She's also a nice looking gal, which also scored points with me. However, as much as I wanted to like her, my "little voice" told me to hold on; don't be so quick to cheer for her or sing her praises.

Before I continue, let me say that, politically, I'm an Independent; I'm not affiliated with either major political party here in the US. I had been a Republican; in fact, I was a FOURTH GENERATION Republican! However, after years of disappointment over their lack of courage and willingness to be a real opposition party; after years of disappointment over their lack of will to enact a truly traditional, conservative, and American agenda; I became an Independent a few years ago. Secondly, my political views have also evolved over the years; i've become more libertarian in my leanings, though Libertarians, like putative conservatives, have problems. Hence I consider myself to be conservative-libertarian as depicted on the Nolan Chart. As a Christian, I don't know where else I could be, really.

Yesterday, my instinctive reservations about Ashley St. Clair were borne out; yesterday, there was tangible proof as to why I've had reservations about her all these years. The Gateway Pundit, a conservative website, had this article about Ashley St. Clair's recent antics. It turns out that she went on Twitter, now X, to proclaim that, not only is she a single mama to be; she's proclaiming Elon Musk to be the father! I have at least three problems with this development. One is that she's sexually active, something I suspected from her edgy dress. Two is that she'll be a single mom. Three is that she's pointing the finger at Elon Musk in a public fashion-very trashy.

Why do I have a problem with conservatives being sexually active? Mainly because conservatism, as I understand it, has its roots in Christianity and the Bible; at least true conservatism does, I think. Well, the Bible exhorts and admonishes us to save sex for marriage. Given the fact that modern dating and relationships are such a shitshow (sorry, but there's no other word for it) with situationships being the most one can aspire to, I think that the God's instructions in Holy Bible have more than proven their validity and wisdom.

Secondly, WTF are conservatives engaging in single motherhood? What's up with that? Miss. St. Clair isn't the first high profile, conservative woman to become a single mom, either; that dubious distinction goes to Sarah Palin's daughter, Bristol, who was showing an obvious baby bump at the 2008 Republican National Convention. Since conservatives normally lean towards, if not practice and proclaim, Christianity, shouldn't they refrain from sex outside of marriage and single motherhood? Shouldn't they-gasp-try to PRACTICE living better than the anti-God, antichrist, and anti-American leftists do? If they're going to live like everyone else, what, on Earth does conservatism have to offer anyone? How is it really any better than what it purports to be against?

Let me say this: when I first saw pics of Ashley St. Clair, I had reservations about her. Why? she dresses in a borderline provocative manner. Her tops were cut just a bit too low, and they fit her a bit too snugly; her clothing walks right up to the line between sexy and slutty without going over it. Sorry, but that's not what a traditionally conservative woman should do. A truly traditional and conservative woman will dress modestly. THERE, I SAID IT! As Matthew 7:16 and 7:20 say, by their fruits ye shall know them. In other words, if someone professes to be something, then there will be tangible proof via their actions; i.e. their life conduct will demonstrate that they really are that something.

Finally, a woman who is at all traditional and conservative does NOT go proudly proclaiming that she's about to be a single mom! She does not live a libertine lifestyle, let alone show visible proof of the same. Lastly, she doesn't publicly point the finger at the putative father until she has proof, nor does she do so until after trying to privately work things out with the father. How can she have proof without a DNA test having been done? Was a prenatal DNA test done? Did Miss St. Clair ever talk to Mr. Musk privately about this? Did she try to work things out, secure support, etc. prior to going public? Ashley St. Clair is pointing the finger at Elon Musk, claiming he's the father of her baby, yet she's not providing proof. To top it all off, she made this announcement on Musk's platform, X-talk about chutzpah. What Miss St. Clair did is the epitome and quintessence of chutzpah! All I can do is shake my head here.

In closing, though I wanted to like her, I've had long held, instinctive reservations about conservative influencer, Ashley St. Clair. Yesterday, my instincts were once again proven correct; there is now tangible evidence as to why I had instinctive reservations about Miss St. Clair. The moral of the story is: listen to your gut, Fellas! Listen to your "little voice"; it's speaking to you for a reason. Until next time...

Don't Be Settled For, Fellas!

 Guys,

I follow Strong Successful Male's YouTube channel, and an oft repeated theme is how, when former carousel riders are approaching 30, they make it a point to find and marry their sucker, their nice guy. Here's a good video from Zoe's Stories that's in that vein. Enjoy!

My Thoughts on Prenups

 Guys,

There's a cool, new YouTube channel that I watch every day: Zoe's Stories. Though the content is at least partially AI generated, it's good. The stories are usually about women mistreating their men, and they're from the woman's point of view; that is, they're told through the woman's eyes. We can gain insight into how women think about men, relationships, and why. For Red Pillers needing their daily dose, I consider this channel MUST-SEE TV!

Since their new episode is about prenups, I left a comment explaining my thoughts about them. What do I think about them, and why? Though you can and should watch the video, you don't have to go there to see my thoughts on prenups. Why? Because I saved them for right here! Down below is my comment I left in response to Zoe's Stories' new video about prenups.

--------------------

I have three thoughts WRT prenups. One is that, when you marry, you ALWAYS have a prenup! It may not be one that's formally presented from one person to another, but it's there. Two, considering that women file for divorce at least 80% of the time and they do so for spurious reasons, a prenup is a necessity for any man who's thinking about marriage. Finally, depending on jurisdiction, prenups may or may not help; some jurisdictions are more prenup friendly (i.e. they honor prenups) than others.

So, what sort of prenup exists when you get married? Simple, it's your state's marriage and divorce laws. They decide how the marriage will be dissolved and how assets will be divided. Think of having a will vs. not having one. Just because you don't have a will when you die doesn't mean that your estate can't be liquidated and closed. It will be, but it won't be you who decides these things; it'll be that state's probate laws that decide on the disposition of assets vs. any last will and testament you leave directing the same. Having a prenup vs. not having one is the same thing. If you have a prenup, then you can decide who gets what if the marriage fails. If you don't have a prenup of your own, the state's marriage and divorce laws will decide these things for you. That's number one.

Number two, women file for divorce the vast majority of the time, and they usually do so for spurious reasons. They leave because "they're not happy"; they leave because they're bored; they leave because they want "to find themselves", a euphemism for riding strange, new dick. Here's something to think about: women don't file for divorce due to adultery any more often than men do. That is to say that, if a man marries, the odds are good that the woman won't honor her marriage vows; the odds are that she'll leave at some point. Overall, women file for divorce 80% of the time; if the woman is college educated (read indoctrinated), then she'll file first 90% of the time. Assuming the divorce rate is 50%, here are the odds of the wife leaving; here's the math: 0.50*0.80=0.4, or 40%; 0.50*0.90=0.45, or 45%. That's approaching 1 OUT OF 2; that's a coin flip! Would you jump out of an airplane if there was almost a 1 in 2 chance of the parachute failing? I know, and I REST MY CASE! If a man is contemplating marriage, he must keep these things in mind.

The final consideration is that some states are more prenup friendly than others; i.e. some states honor and uphold prenups more often than others do. If you're a man considering marriage; if you're a man considering using a prenup to offer some protection; then it behooves you to consult a family law attorney in your state. That family law attorney can tell you more about whether or not prenups are upheld in your state, so you can decide whether marrying with a prenup will offer any meaningful protection. If your state isn't prenup friendly, then marriage cannot and must not be considered.

In closing, there are three important considerations about prenups. One is that, if you marry, there's already a prenup in effect: that states' divorce laws. Two is that women most often file for divorce first, and they do so for questionable reasons. Just a quick visit to TikTok (or ChikTok) will confirm this, as there are women all over the place telling other women that they don't need a good, solid reason to leave, even if they're married to a good guy. Finally, some states honor prenups more than others do; before even considering marriage, it's incumbent upon men to find out if their state is prenup friendly. Those are my thoughts.

Oh, and if you want to see the video, it's right here. Enjoy, Fellas!

Things to Know and Understand before Buying a Home

 Folks,

This comment was left in response to a video on Chow Time Pod's channel. The video was about women losing their houses. They lost their houses because they bit off more than they could chew. Below is my comment, which has my thoughts and experiences from the home buying process...

---------------

Didn't these women-gasp-do RESEARCH prior before buying a home? I know I did! Buying a house is the biggest purchase most of us will ever make, so it would seem prudent that one would carefully research that purchase first. I was in a unique position to do so though. While I was between jobs back in the early-mid 2000s, I took a temporary office job at a title company. I didn't know such companies existed, but they do. I learned a lot there. When things were slow, I'd read industry and trade publications and websites, and I read about the home buying process. I wasn't in position to buy a home then; it would be another 10 years or so before I was, but I took advantage to learn about buying a home, as I knew that was something I wanted to do at some point.

I learned a lot of things. One was to get a home inspection. One thing I read about was horror stories of people who, in the rush to buy their dream house during the real estate boom back then, would skip the inspection. Weeks or months later, they'd wake up to find a cracked foundation or something serious like that, and they'd be on the hook for tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars. While part of me felt bad for these people, another part of me didn't. Why? A home inspection would've caught something serious like that. Moral of the story: don't buy a home without an inspection; don't even think about it, People!

Let me tell you a story. There was a house in my city that I loved. I put in two offers on it, but I walked away from it. Why? Because the seller played games with the inspection. It was a foreclosure. When a home is foreclosed, they turn everything off: the water, furnace, electrical, the whole smash. Before you can do a proper inspection, you have to get the utilities turned on in your name; you have to have everything working before you can inspect it, right? It's elementary. Depending on the utility company and their backlog, this can take a week or so. The seller wouldn't work with me on this; they wouldn't give me sufficient time to get the utilities turned on in order to do a proper inspection. I walked away without thinking twice about it. As much as I liked that house; as much as it pained me to do so; I walked away. Why? Long before I started the home buying process, I'd made up my mind that, if I couldn't get an inspection or the inspection results had bad news, I'd walk away from that house; my motto was: no inspection, no deal.

Long before you even think about buying a home, you have to establish boundaries; you have to figure out what your personal non-negotiables are, so you can override your emotions and walk away from a bad deal. One of mine was the home inspection. I'd learned from my research that an inspection before purchase is a must, so as to avoid any unpleasant and expensive surprises after signing on the dotted lines and getting the keys to the house. Buying a home is a very emotional process, so you have to have your boundaries in place long before you start looking for a house. You have to figure out that, if X happens, I'll walk. People who skipped home inspections to buy a house they loved didn't do this; they didn't figure out what their boundaries were before they started looking at houses. They got caught up in their emotions, and they bought a house that they shouldn't have.

Another thing I learned from my research is that, if you're going to buy a home, you have to set aside at least 1% of its purchase price annually to pay for repairs. There are at least two absolutes when it comes to home ownership: 1) things WILL go wrong; and 2) you're on the hook for them when they do. There's none of this calling the landlord to fix something when it breaks or dies; as a homeowner, that's on you. Your water heater went out? That'll be $1,700, please. Does your HVAC system need replacing? That'll be $12,000, TYVM! I speak from experience, as I had to replace both over the last two years. This is especially true if you buy an older house, which is all you'll likely be able to afford for your first home. An older home will have older systems, and older systems will sooner need repair or replacement-again, elementary. When it comes to home ownership, the Boy Scout motto applies: be prepared. Things WILL go wrong, and you have to be ready when they do, Folks!

A third thing I figured out was that I didn't want to live somewhere with an HOA. It's not just because of the sometimes petty rules they have, though that's part of it. No, it's because, if your HOA doesn't set aside enough money for maintenance (of the roofs, streets, etc.), you can be hit with a special assessment. That's right; you can be hit with a huge, one time fee above and beyond your monthly fee. This can be in the thousands of dollars or more, and you have to pay it all at once! Can you afford to eat that kind of expense? You may have to if you have a bad or shortsighted HOA. Even if you have a good HOA, circumstances beyond their control or ability to anticipate them can trigger a special assessment.

Do you all remember the condo that collapsed in FL a few years ago? It was in Surfside, FL, a Miami suburb. In the wake of that disaster, FL tightened up their building codes and inspection requirements. Guess what? Owners of older condos found themselves hit with SIX FIGURE special assessments! Thanks to the new building codes, older condos required serious structural work to conform to the new building codes. This work cost millions of dollars, which was divided among all the owners of that condominium building. That often worked out to hundreds of thousands of dollars per condo owner. Many people had to sell their condos because they couldn't come up with the special assessment. If you don't have an HOA, you, as an owner, can be more proactive, so as to head off such disasters before they happen.

A fourth thing I learned was that, when you buy a home, you're tied down. When you rent, you can easily walk away, as the property isn't yours. If you're not sure about wanting to stay somewhere long term, do NOT buy a home! If you walk away from a rental, the most you'll be on the hook for is whatever rent is due for the remainder of the lease. If you have a good landlord, you can negotiate that; you can let them know that you're searching for a home or awaiting a promotion that'll necessitate a move, etc. However, it's a lot more difficult to walk away from a mortgage. Keep this in mind before buying a home. You cannot appreciate or understand how owning a home ties you down until you buy one.

Those are just a few things I learned about buying a home. Before you even think about buying a home, you MUST do research! You must have an idea of what you're getting into, as it's the biggest purchase most of us will ever make. You have to figure out your boundaries, and you have to be willing to walk when they're violated. You have to have a fund set aside for home repairs, as things will go wrong; it's not a question of if, but when. Finally, buying a house ties you down, so don't buy a house until you're sure you want to settle down somewhere. Those are my thoughts...

Why I Became MGTOW

 Guys,

Erin, host of the Far From Eden YouTube channel, is doing a series on Esther Vilar's book, The Manipulated Man. The below post is a comment I left in response to her latest installment in the series, which ran this past Saturday night. It's my MGTOW story.

---------------

Erin, for me, it wasn't hard to accept that I would never marry or have a family; it was simply a matter of logic and risk assessment combined with personal experience. I'll explain...

When I was younger and had my first car, I had a CB radio in it. That was the forerunner of social media. I'd often listen to the truckers' on channel 19, and I heard a TON of horror stories about how their exes had taken them to the cleaners in their divorces. Those stories got my attention.

Secondly, because my first car was a 1966 Chevy in good shape, I used to have guys come up to me all the time talking to me about it. Many of them were married guys who'd tell me about the classic car they'd once had; they'd fondly speak of their old Ford Mustang, Plymouth Barracuda, etc. The married guys spoke of their old cars in a sad, wistful tone. Why? They'd go on to say that their wives made them get rid of them. That got my attention too.

SO! So, I knew that, even as a young man, that marriage was a huge decision; it was something that could make or break me, so I'd better be careful. That said, I still believed that I could find a good woman; I could still get married if I were careful and deliberate. Like a young teenage boy playing baseball, I still had "The Dream" (of making it to the bigs); I still believed that marriage was possible.

Fast forward about 15 years, and I got falsely accused a couple of times. One false accusation was from a woman I'd dated; the other was from a female colleague who wanted me out. Though both shook me up and traumatized me, it was the one outside of work that really bitch slapped me with reality, as that's the one that got me into family court.

This gal I dated briefly made it known that she didn't want to see me. She didn't tell me; she ghosted me, basically. I was like, okay, I'll get on with my life. Then, she started FOLLOWING me! If I passed her on the road, she'd follow me. She drove by my house. She drove by my work. She'd show up where I hung out, even though that was away from where she lived. You get the idea. After this went on for a while, she called the cops, and she accused me of stalking her. The cops arrested me on that criminal charge, and they informed me that there was a restraining order against me.

That meant I had to go to two court hearings: one was in criminal court, and one was in family court. I had to go to criminal court to have the stalking charge adjudicated, while the family court was about whether or not to make the court order permanent. When a DV PPO is taken out, it's temporary; you're instructed to go to a hearing in 10 or 14 days time to determine if it'll be permanent or not.

For the criminal charge, that went well. The judge was scrupulously fair to everyone, which helped. Secondly, she didn't show up for the trial, so the charges were dismissed. It's a little more complicated than that, but that's the gist of how my criminal charges were handled. The details aren't relevant; what's relevant is family court, which I'll tell you about now. To make that long story short, my charges were dismissed with prejudice, meaning that they could never be brought against me again.

Family court is where divorces are handled. Domestic violence restraining orders are also handled in family court; it's in family court where the decision is made whether or not to make them permanent. Hint: they almost ALWAYS are made permanent! My case was during the latter half of the 1990s, which was post OJ. Judges would pass out restraining orders like candy, as they believed it was better to be safe than sorry.

My case came up at the end of the day; it was literally the last one handled. I'll come back to that. Because my case was handled at the end of the day, I saw everyone else's case ahead of mine. Boy it was an EYE OPENER! One, the judge favored the women all day long; all day, the women got favorable rulings. OTOH, the men got screwed. Here is but one example of what family court was like all day.

There was a memorable case that came up in the middle of the day. A couple was divorcing, and it wasn't pretty; to say it was acrimonious would be an understatement. The husband and wife told the judge about a heated argument they'd had. Hubby said that he was going to burn the house down. Wifey threatened to kill him, and she pulled a knife.Their kids, who were present, corroborated what was said and done during that argument; that is to say that these were uncontroverted facts. You can guess what happened next: the judge scolded the man for making terroristic threats, while totally ignoring and absolving the wife for hers!

Finally, it's late afternoon. Our case is literally the last one of the day, so only I, my mom, my attorney, my psychobitch, and the biased judge are left in the courtroom. Psyhcobitch got up and told a bunch of lies; she basically accused me of doing what she'd been doing to me over the past year. After she spoke, my attorney spoke. He began to argue a relevant legal point that could have and should have undermined the court order, and would have if we'd been in a fair courtroom. However, we weren't in a fair courtroom; there were kangaroos jumping around all over the place!  As my attorney was speaking, the judge cut him off. You read that right; the judge CUT OFF my attorney in mid-sentence! He basically said that he didn't want to hear it, and he made the court order permanent.

A year or so later, when I was working on a long term temporary employment assignment to a company that was a household name back in the late 1990s, there was a woman at the company who didn't like me for whatever reason. One woman, who I was friendly with, was in charge of the temp group; we'll call her Katie. Towards the end of my time there, another woman, Mindy, took over. Mindy and I had never gotten along. We'd could barely be civil or cordial with one another. For me, it was no big deal; that happens sometimes.

So, I came in one morning, and all of a sudden, Mindy's acting all nice; she greeted me warmly, asked me how I was doing, and so on. Caught off guard, I played along and was polite to her too. While part of me was hoping that things would be better between Mindy and me, another part of me was wondering if she was up to something. It turned out that she was, and she'd engineered a false sexual harassment  accusation against me. My assignment ended soon thereafter.

I was upset, of course; I was hurt. However, my assignment had lasted 3-4 months longer than originally planned. Secondly, the department head, who was above Mindy, knew that something shady had happened, so he put in a good word with my agency. My agency got me another assignment soon thereafter, I did well at that assignment; the company bought out my contract, and I worked there for 2.5 years.

As the comedian always says, I told you all that to tell you this: my life experiences taught me that women can be DANGEROUS! They taught me that, especially in family court, men have no rights. Between that and the fickle, flaky, and emotional nature of women, I knew that marriage was an almost impossible dream at that point. If I wanted to marry, doing so in the US was out of the question.

To wrap things up, I became a Passport Bro before it was a thing. I met a gal from Peru. We had a relationship that progressed to the point of living together down there for four months. I saw things about her personality that I didn't like, so I ended the relationship. It's a little more complicated than that, but that's another story. In August of 2018, I came back with a street cat my ex had rescued. I've been on one date since then; I've been on one date over the past 6.5 years. That was in September of 2023, and the date was a disaster. I've all but given up. I keep my eyes and ears open in the unlikely event I come across a unicorn, but I'm not holding my breath. I'll just live out the rest of my days as best I can. That's my story.

Thoughts on Prenups

 Guys,

Here's another comment that I'm saving and sharing here. I made it in response to one of Karyn Seitz' recent videos; this video, released three days ago as I write this, is about the five ironclad boundaries every good man has for his woman. For those who don't know, Mrs. Seitz' is the hostess of The Happy Wife School channel. There's a lot of good info on there, so I'd recommend my readers checking out her channel. Now, on with the comment...

--------------

Ma'am, all five boundaries are good. I'd like to comment more on prenups though. One, some jurisdictions are more prenup friendly than others; i.e. they're more likely to honor a prenup. Two, if a woman won't sign a prenup, that tells a prospective husband everything he needs to know; if she has any objection at all, calling off the wedding is the only option. Three, prenups cannot eliminate child support in any jurisdiction, so that's something to keep in mind. Four, even if man doesn't have a prenup, there's already a prenup in place: that state's laws governing marriage and divorce.

Think of it as you would a will. If you die without a will, your state's probate laws dictate how your estate is liquidated; i.e. there's already a will in place: the state's probate laws. Likewise, when a couple marries without their own prenup(s), the prenup in force is that state's marriage and divorce laws; in the event of a divorce, your state's laws will dictate how the marriage is dissolved. OTOH, if there's a prenup in place, then that, like a will, empowers you to decide how the marriage will be dissolved in the event of a divorce. SO! There's always a prenup; the only question is whether or not it's yours or the state's.