Boycott Valentine’s Day!
Compelled to Give
It’s February again. This can mean only one thing: the dreaded, compulsory Valentine’s Day is just around the corner. If you forgot, fear not: the onslaught of TV and radio commercials will remind you and remind you and remind you. There is no escaping them, and they all share a common theme: women are entitled to receive; men are compelled to give. Nothing quite captures the essence of love like female entitlement.
Ask the typical woman to define romance. I’ll lay odds that she’ll describe a man buying and/or doing something for her, without a word about spoiling him. Why such narcissism? Simple. Most women are raised to be self-absorbed takers, and insecure men continue to tolerate and enable them.
Are men worthless? Only if they never demand fairness and reciprocity from women — and many men don’t. Valentine’s Day, and all of its pathetic rituals, represents the failure of men to stand up to women — who, ironically, don’t respect these eunuchs and don’t sexually crave them, either.
Visualize the annual V-Day ritual: women clucking around their office water coolers and late-morning Pilates classes in anticipation of receiving Vermont Teddy Bears or long-stem roses, while men are wringing their hands, dreading this day, resenting the pressure, wondering what, if anything, would please their wives and girlfriends. Why such anxiety? No man wants to end up in the proverbial doghouse without sex.
What a pathetic picture: women using sex as a weapon; men living in fear. The evidence of “romance heaven” is clear: alimony and child-support cash registers are ringing nonstop, the marriage rate is falling, infidelity is rampant, the out-of-wedlock birthrate is skyrocketing, and children — society’s future parents — are more dysfunctional and immature than ever.
Tribute to Legal Prostitution
What is Valentine’s Day, really? An annual tribute to legal prostitution. After all, traditional dating and marriage are the chief platforms of an age-old prostitutional bartering system through which women receive gifts, cash, bling, stock, cars, meals, homes, vacations, clothes, college tuition, business partnerships, and spa memberships in exchange for sex.
Accordingly, Valentine’s Day is the capstone of legal prostitution — its epitome — because of the inescapable, pervasive societal and commercial pressure to perform that it imposes on men. Think I’m crazy? On February 14th, will your woman withhold sex if you don’t roll out the red carpet for her? Think about it.
Men humiliate and emasculate themselves by worshipping women throughout the year. And, it’s totally unnecessary: women are more sexual than men, and men must learn how to turn the tables. But, the groveling is never so acute as on Valentine’s Day, when men pay premiums for flowers and dinners and baubles. For what? To avoid a fight? To get laid?
What’s worse is that women continue to crave and demand these gifts that they know, by definition, are given insincerely and begrudgingly. Nothing quite defines romance like perfunctory obligation, as men told me in a survey I conducted in 2005 (read “Why Men Dread Valentine’s Day”). Expected generosity, the crux of Valentine’s Day, is oxymoronic and moronic!
NoNonsense Bottom Line
Never, ever allow your woman to be the center of your relationship, as is too often the case. If that’s your unfortunate situation, you have no balls and no relationship. Valentine’s Day is the least of your troubles.
My solution to cure your Valentine’s Day blues is this: boycott it. That’s right, stay home. If February 13th and February 15th aren’t happy days for you, why would February 14th be an exception? If she insists on wasting money on February 14th, she’s a selfish, immature golddigger.
Here are three, quick rules to gauge your relationship’s temperature on Valentine’s Day:
- If she’s a selfish taker who expects you to entertain her, dump her. Valentine’s Day is the perfect day to do that.
- If your woman threatens to break up or withhold sex if you don’t take her out on this commercial occasion, end it with her on February 13th. Imagine what she’ll tell the girls at the office the next day!
- If your “relationship” is so utterly boring and empty that you use February 14th as an excuse to pretend that all is well, break up ASAP — do yourselves a big favor.
Real romance is about spontaneity, choice, and reciprocity. Valentine’s Day, on the other hand, is contrived, commercial, unilateral nonsense. If you want to do something special and genuine, choose her birthday and other times when she least expects it. Anything done on Valentine’s Day is a joke.
Parting words: If you kiss a woman’s ass, at any time and for any reason, especially on Valentine’s Day, you can kiss your own ass — and the wallet attached to it — goodbye.
Marc H. Rudov is an internationally recognized author of 40 articles and the books Under the Clitoral Hood: How to Crank Her Engine Without Cash, Booze, or Jumper CablesTM (ISBN 9780974501727), and The Man’s No-Nonsense Guide to Women: How to Succeed in Romance on Planet EarthTM (ISBN 0974501719).
Rudov’s books, articles, blog, and podcasts are available at http://TheNoNonsenseMan.com/.
| More from Marc H. Rudov
Stumble It!
February 10th, 2009 at 12:58 pm
[...] guess for some men, it is. Via Dr. Helen, I found a post from a man who thinks that men should boycott Valentine’s Day. It’s February again. This can mean only one thing: the dreaded, compulsory Valentine’s Day is [...]
October 15th, 2007 at 10:42 pm
If women were more sexual than men they would be waving at each other under toilet stalls. Lesbians would have more sexual partners and more sex than Gay men, and most readers and writers here wouldn’t be wasting time bitching about women.
I am looking foward to Valentines day to give my wife a nice gift, she deserves it. She is a good woman, a good partner, and I have meet other women who are good women and good partners too. She works harder than I do, earns more money, initiates sex, and we are not young.
I expect some readers to think, ya, sure, … the problem with most men and women is that the want to go up a level or two for a partner. Ask a man or woman what they want from the other gender and you get this impressive list: fun, kind, smart, exciting, beautiful, sexy, on and on. And you look at them and they are a f*&$^ troll. They are not in shape, the are not funny or kind themselves, they are not half of what they are looking for yet they are too lazy to go to the gym, read about enough topics in a well-rounded way to be interesting, they talk to f&#^# much (like I do) on and on, and then, so sad, they can’t fet the beauty queen.
March 3rd, 2007 at 6:40 pm
[...] and emblematic of it. I didn’t have enough time to fully develop my arguments (see “Boycott Valentine’s Day!”), but I made enough valid points to hit my [...]
February 25th, 2007 at 5:54 pm
[...] To me, Valentine’s Day — compelled giving, expected generosity, female entitlement, and fear of female retaliation — is not the elevation but the denigration of women. Worse, it is an annual “celebration†of male irrelevance, symptomatic and emblematic of it. I didn’t have enough time to fully develop my arguments (see “Boycott Valentine’s Day!â€), but I made enough valid points to hit my target. [...]
February 14th, 2007 at 2:07 pm
Comments like those from roxtar and win make everything I do worthwhile.
For those of you who missed me on Cavuto, here’s the link:
http://www.foxnews.com/video2/player06.html?021307/021307_yahoo_valentine&Yahoo_Cavuto&Valentine%26%2392%3B%26%2339%3Bs%20Day%20Boycott%3F&Valentine%26%2392%3B%26%2339%3Bs%20Day%20Boycott%3F&FOX%20Business%20Now&-1&Business&221&&&exp
February 14th, 2007 at 1:43 pm
My girlfriend and I just came back from a vacation together where we split costs 50/50 as Marc instructs in his book. It was great. She had the time of her life. Each time we spent money she was asking me to write it down so we could keep it fair.
When she brought up the valentines day subject I told her I don’t do that and she accepted it without question.
Marc, you make it so much easier. Thanks.
February 13th, 2007 at 10:25 pm
Foxnews.com has a link to video of Rudov on Cavuto’s program. Pretty short segment unfortunately, but a good back & forth. Nice exposure though.
February 13th, 2007 at 7:38 pm
Most of the commentors here, as evidenced by their comments, have lived in darkness all their lives. When the blinding light of truth is shone at them, they run from it & deny it. For them no proof is sufficient, while for me no proof is necessary.
I have made my own odyssey from date-hungry teenager to self-confident 30-year-old. With the help of various books, including Marc’s, I came to realize what spoiled princesses most women are, & how much better it is to be alone than to even try to relate to them on an intimate level. On a just-friends level they’re fine, but once dating enters the mix they turn into Ms. Hyde. Neither the feminist left (who incessantly advocate laws like VAWA) nor the religious right (who incessantly tout marriage as the bedrock of society) are any friends of mine.
The mate selection process is a 2-way street. Just as women mercilessly analyze our intentions toward them, WE must read between the lines in THEIR motives toward us–on V-day or any other day.
February 13th, 2007 at 7:31 am
alot of us are going to be missing cavuto because of work. looking for a rerun.
February 12th, 2007 at 11:24 pm
Yeah, it would be good if someone could cap his appearance on there. Unfortunately, I won’t be in during those hours.
February 12th, 2007 at 11:14 pm
amfortas wrote:
amfortas, I don’t see what is so objectionable about Marc’s message. It’s quite simple, actually. Men benefit in relationships when they reject double standards, and reject the idea of female privilege. Men also benefit when they make themselves more sexually appealing to women, rather than more financially appealing. It would seem, based on your last comment, that you believe women simply are incapable of enjoying the sexual company of men without resorting to pretense. If she’s faking it sexually, and not getting financial goodies either, what is her incentive for being in the relationship? Even the proverbial girlfriends you mentioned might call her on that one. Perhaps it is true that women are the less rational, more emotional gender. But I highly doubt that women would seek out a relationship with absolutely no benefits to themselves. Marc is merely saying that their primary benefit ought to be sexual and emotional. Any financial goodies (bestowed by the man, not earned on her own) are completely the prerogative of the man — and the less entitled she feels to these financial goodies, the better.
What could be simpler?
Marc: Good luck on Fox News channel tomorrow!
February 12th, 2007 at 9:07 pm
Sometimes, Marc, I think you don’t bother even to read what people here write. You just take offense, reach for your sex-shooter and blast away.
If you know anything about anything about the message I constantly give you could not possibly come up with – ‘The way to stop playing the game is not to play it. That is precisely what KateM is telling you’. As though this was news! As though Kate actually said that.
I have been saying ’stop playing the game’ for years, cloth ears. And lots of other ‘games’ women wanna play.
As for this – “It matters not what you learned at 13″ – so what do you say to the 14, 15, 18 year old who has the ‘no pay, no play’ reinforced every ten minutes? Don’t play? Good idea. So get thee to the school playground and give your lessons there and don’t be so patronising to grown men here.
Not a good idea to proposition your married female correspondents either.
How about this sage advice – “You must take responsibility for your choices and stop thinking of yourself as a victim”. Wow, Dr Phil. Reminds me of the hippy, hit by a truck. He looks up at his friend and says “call me an ambulance, man’, and his friend replies, ‘OK man, you’re an ambulance, cool’.
Frankly, if women were the sex fiends that you describe, they would not sabotage themselves so readily by playing stupid games. But let’s be realistic. The average woman is pretty thick when it comes to sex. To her it is a game to win and the prize isn’t an orgasm. She will take ‘one of those that she’s having’ of course like a dog with a piece of string but her objective is to lure Marc in and tell her friends after. “The jerk actually thought he gave me an orgasm, hahahaha”
On here you may get the occasional woman appluading your books, but what do the woman you have actually been with say afterwards, Marc, when you are out of earshot and your sex-shooter has been fired out of ammo?
Perhaps you are amongst the most fortunate men who have only ever met adult women. Most women however are children, They never get beyond the schoolyard where they taught the 13 year olds to ‘pay before you play’. They keep doing it all thir lives. Instead of lecturing men, maybe you should turn your talent to writing ABOUT women instead of for them. You don’t seem to write for men except to call them jerks.
February 12th, 2007 at 8:17 pm
Interesting ideas. Some man once said that every woman is a whore in the hands of the right man. It wasn’t an indictment but his reflection on the nature of female sexuality. There exists though a double standard, and many women are made to feel guilty about their desires. Trip to Jamaica anyone?
Author Michelle Langley said the following on the Leykis program some time ago: (paraphrasing)
“Men spread the seed, but women GATHER it”
What do you think? Thanks,
February 12th, 2007 at 6:36 pm
Are women more sexual than men? Depends on how you look at it. They’re not in the same way as we men. Line up 100 women in from of an average man and he’d bang about 60% of them. Put 100 men in front of a woman and she’d choose one, maybe two who might appeal to her enough.
They’re choosier than we men. A man wants to have sex and will accept it from a wide variety of women: her personality or character often doesn’t matter. A woman can look at a man, find him extremely attractive, yet not find him sexually desirable. A woman wants to have sex with a man she wants to have sex with. Their sexuality is deeper. It’s beyond looks and attractiveness. But when she meets that man who flips her switch, she can’t get enough of him…
Now if this doesn’t help, in the past three years I’ve been blown away by how many women I’ve met who have confessed to having or have had vibrators, dildos, “rabbits”, etc. They love to orgasm, but, in lieu of the right man, most will use the substite.
Just my thoughts.
February 12th, 2007 at 5:23 pm
Hey man, Charles (Fockaert) I think you got it right. The American model of female(ism) is chased/pursued for exactly what? Sure Koochie is fun but only if you’re willing to dance to whatever foolish/outlandish price she thinks she can get for it. Overweight, self serving, demanding and uninformed and you all are after them buying them chocolate and flowers?
Buy them for yourself. She’ll steal your home, your kids and your pension for ?????? And please, spare me and everyone else the “you just don’t get love there Ed” look at the divorce rate and who is initiating the overwhelming number of divorces.
And hey, hows about that Astro-nut. Now, how long before they spin this till it’s a man’s fault for what she did. The Astro hunk she was gonna shoot the Air Force “Other Woman” for, the ex-husband, daddy, the dog (male of course). Then she’s on Oprey Windbag crying and sobbing as Oprey and Dr. Silly tell the all female audience how valuble they all are and how, if only Ms. Astro-nut’s husband had attended his “husband camp” her “needs” wouldn’t have been neglected and “Dang, what wuz he thinkin”.
Then we’ll hear about the brand new “BREAKTHROUGH FEMALE ASTRONAUT DIET PLAN: EAT EVERYTHING IN SIGHT AND LOSE WEIGHT”. For only $699.
The movie rights to her “victimized” life will be sold and a new line of female “impowerment” clothing will hit the mall.
Later, gotta get back out on the ledge.
February 12th, 2007 at 12:52 pm
Forbes magazine just published a special section called “The Business of Love.”
Emphasis on BUSINESS. Read it now!
February 12th, 2007 at 11:46 am
“el cid: so are hookers victims? what’s the spin on that? are smokers victims? drinkers? druggies? the astronaut? help me balance the equation. i’ve spun myself silly. just who is responsible for their actions and who gets a pass? i’m not smart enough to figure this out. toss me a bone.”
Not sure how your question relates to anything I’ve said. Perhaps you can clarify…
February 12th, 2007 at 11:07 am
On page 1A of the 02.12.07 San Jose Mercury News, left-hand column called ‘The Week Ahead,’ the blurb reads:
“WEDNESDAY — IT’S EASY TO SAY I L-O-V-E YOU. In case you forgot, Romeo, it’s Valentine’s Day. Find ideas by clicking on the events calendar at mercurynews.com.”
More proof that Valentine’s Day is officially and institutionally devoted to women. Men can stop this any time they want. But, they won’t. Too chicken.
February 11th, 2007 at 1:16 pm
Nice work Marc,
Keep it up.
Here is a nice comment from earlier:
“We guys need to keep our hearts just soft enough not to hate women, yet hard enough to say no to their little-girl demands.”
I believe this.
February 11th, 2007 at 11:52 am
I found a fascinating statistic in the San Jose Mercury News of Sunday, February 11, 2007.
Lindt & Sprüngli, notable Swiss chocolatier, did a Valentine’s Day survey of men and women — presumably in the US, where the so-called holiday is prevalent. What did it find?
What I expected, that’s what. According to Lindt & Sprüngli:
That says it all for me. American men — vaginized eunuchs — are the reason women feel entitled. Until men start acting like men, demanding reciprocity from women, women will continue to treat them like ATM machines.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Lindt & Sprüngli is recognized as a leader in the market for premium quality chocolate, offering a large selection of products in more than 80 countries around the world. During the nearly 160 years of Lindt & Sprüngli’s existence, it has become known as one of the most innovative and creative companies making premium chocolate.
February 10th, 2007 at 9:54 am
Amfortas,
KateM is right on target. It matters not what you learned at 13. You know TODAY that female entitlement is NONSENSE.
If you CHOOSE to comply with female nonsense, knowing full well its destructive properties, then live with the consequences.
You must take responsibility for your choices and stop thinking of yourself as a victim. If you wine & dine any chick, it’s YOUR fault. The way to stop playing the game is not to play it. That is precisely what KateM is telling you.
February 10th, 2007 at 2:35 am
Felicia seems to have the better of the ideas here. Reciprocal, loving, constant. Real, genuine and authentic – and not a game.
Kate has an ingenuous take. “I can easily figure out if a man wants to purchase me. Men who think they can buy women are as offensive as the manipulative, self-serving women you speak of.”
But men, Kate, are taught from around the age of thirteen, by girls, that being purchased is the name of the game. You are blaming the victims by blaming men. Offensive indeed! They are taught that ‘if you wanna play, you gotta pay’. It is the manipulative, self-serving women who teach the girls and create many more. The message in these posts is ’stop playing the game’.
February 10th, 2007 at 1:26 am
Really? Wow, neat. Is there any audio available from your appearance on Bax/O’Brien? I wasn’t able to see one on their site. Thanks.
February 10th, 2007 at 12:48 am
Yes, Mr. Zoid, I will be on Your World with Neil Cavuto, Fox News Channel, on Tuesday, February 13th, at approximately 4:30PM ET/1:30PM PT.
It turns out that Neil, like The NoNonsense Manâ„¢, believes in relationships that have equality and are fair and balanced. That’s why he wanted me on his show.
I hope you can watch.
To see all my media gigs, CLICK HERE.
February 10th, 2007 at 12:27 am
I was listening online to Leykis today. Quite a few of the commercials said things like:
“Women are hard to understand”
“Women like to be pampered”
“Buying product X will get her to take off her clothing”
…and so on.
Not surprising of course, we’re all out to earn a buck. Will you be appearing in person on “Your World” w/ Cavuto? He’s always struck me as a more old-fashioned ‘chivalrous’ guy. It will be an interesting exchange, I’m sure.
February 9th, 2007 at 3:02 am
LMHO, I guess I won’t be giving myself flowers after all.
February 9th, 2007 at 2:53 am
[img]http://www.eurofiori.it/foto/rosa_rossam.jpg[/img]
February 9th, 2007 at 2:53 am
I didn’t know this software support images. That’s going to open things up quite a bit. I’ll see if I can get an image on this post.
Now that I’m not buying flowers for the ladies anymore, I’m buying them for myself.
[url]http://www.eurofiori.it/foto/rosa_rossam.jpg[/url]