Why Men Don’t Get Women
Sugar & Spice
The basic premise of all my writings about men and women is that they are essentially the same and have the same desires, but that they are socialized differently and programmed for conflict. To wit: as children, we learn the gender myth that boys want sex and girls want relationships. Not only is that myth patently false, but my book, Under the Clitoral Hood, goes a step further: it demonstrates that women are more sexual than men.
Teaching kids gender myths ultimately leads to dysfunctional relationships, an intolerable divorce rate, and fatherless homes. It also encourages society — especially feminists, journalists, university presidents, lawmakers, policemen, district attorneys, and judges — to presumptively categorize men as predators and women as victims.
In the past week, we saw Lindsay Lohan arrested again, Nicole Richey going to jail, and Paris Hilton losing her inheritance for sullying the family name. We read about Mary Byrne Smith, who ran away from her family and took an assumed name, causing many to unfairly suspect her husband of foul play. We also read about a disturbing tendency of some miltary wives to abuse and neglect their children when their husbands are fighting in battle. What about sugar and spice and everything nice? It’s nonsense. Wake up.
Libido & Ladies’ Night
According to a recent study at the University of Texas, US college-aged men and women agree on their top reasons for having sex: attraction, desire for physical pleasure, and “it feels good.” The results of this study, in which 20 of the top 25 reasons given for having sex were the same for men and women, were published in the August edition of Archives of Sexual Behavior.
“The more we look, the more we find similarity,” said Dr. Irwin Goldstein, director of sexual medicine at Alvarado Hospital in San Diego. Goldstein, who was not part of Meston’s study, said the Texas research made a lot of sense and adds to growing evidence that the vaunted differences in the genders may only be among people with sexual problems.
The myth about sexual behavior has fostered a disappearing, sexist practice in many bars around the country: ladies’ night. New York attorney Roy Den Hollander has filed a class action against certain Manhattan nightclubs for “invidious discrimination” against men in their policies for admitting women. Hollander alleges that the clubs are violating the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection under the law, and, in addition to declaratory relief, he is seeking nominal damages and an injunction to halt the nightclubs’ practice of admitting women at a lower price than men.
Ladies’ nights are illegal; they already are outlawed in California, Hawaii, Iowa, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. Women who drink for free prove they aren’t equal to men and don’t want to be equal to men. On July 31, 2007, Lis Wiehl and Megyn Kelly — both lawyers — told Bill O’Reilly, host of Fox News Channel’s The O’Reilly Factor, that, if Hollander prevails in his lawsuit, they won’t be showing up at any more bars. Bingo. If men are stupid enough, ladies will own every night and every day.
Why do ladies’ nights exist? Because men don’t get women and don’t require much of them, either. Worse, they think little of themselves. Men know little about the female libido and, therefore, don’t realize that booze is not required for sexual leverage. As I’ve stated ad nauseam: women do not get sexually aroused because of cash or booze. Men mistakenly think that, because women accept cash and booze, it equates to sexual arousal. Wrong. Unfortunately, ignorance is a stronger and more-enduring force than change.
Last week, I appeared on Maxim Radio’s Covino & Rich Show, on Sirius Satellite. I discussed the stupidity and danger of mixing booze and babes. Stupid because it is compensation for lack of skill. Dangerous because rape laws allow women to accuse men of incapacitating them with alcohol. Despite the shocking calls from men who were destroyed by women using the booze excuse to falsely accuse them of rape, at least half of the callers were outraged at me. I ruined their day.
One caller, a newly minted lawyer from New Jersey, told me that, if he doesn’t ply Manhattan women with alcohol, they’ll think him a loser. It’s all part of the game, he explained. Really? Newsflash, pal: you have it exactly backwards. The more money you spend on a woman, the more she’ll think you’re a loser. And, she’ll think this while taking your money!
The NoNonsense Bottom Line
In January 2007, AOL and Woman’s Day magazine teamed up to survey 3,000 married women. Results: more than half probably wouldn’t marry their husbands again, and 33% definitely wouldn’t marry their husbands again. Also, more than 75 percent fantasize about men other than their husbands, and 39 percent admitted to constantly flirting. These are alimony and child-support checks waiting to happen.
Why do these unfulfilled marriages occur? It’s very simple: Men wine & dine women, and women go along with it. Women are not turned on by these guys. But, their mothers taught them to marry providers. So, they bypass the men they really want and marry the men who please their mothers. After popping out some kids and purchasing the house, the unfulfilled wife divorces her husband, takes the house, the cash, and the kids, and then starts dating the men who really turn her on.
To get women, men must “get” women. Women like sex and are more sexual than men. Use this knowledge to your advantage, and stop operating from a point of weakness and ignorance. If you wine & dine women, it proves that you don’t “get” women. You think you will get them, but it will be temporary. In fact, they will get you.
About the Author
Marc H. Rudov is an internationally recognized author of 60+ 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 © 2007 by Marc H. Rudov. All rights reserved.
Possibly related posts...
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, August 1st, 2007 at 12:08 pm and is filed under Men and Mating, NewsWax, Vox Populi.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. | 834 views |
Trackback | 
Print This Post
|
| More from Marc H. Rudov
Stumble It!
Perhaps he is right. I find that men have not even a clue into what women really want, and the thought that it may be some kind off emotional care that they need brings males to freak out and run mode… Sadly enough most women personally don’t need anything from the opposite sex other than that (we have made ourselves males in an attempt to be closer to find a mutual sense of self and to understand what was this that you all male reject… or you actually all thought it was out of some rebellious female doll play party, or senseless pursuit because we got tired of baking at home?), but we create all the above to shake you males into some kind of clues, you all don’t hear it when is directly asked, you don’t even hear it when is scream at you… I think we women ran out of ideas on how to clue you and us all into finding a middle way in which we can all get love. I also find that some, or most males get very angry and upset and in their self righteous attempt to change or avoid this, the emotional aspect of the female, you all simply bit up on us or ignore it or look down at it -when I say emotional I mean the emotional body, don’t you all think is hard enough for us to deal with it and understand it to then have to suffer the rejection of males about it, how about some love with no questions asked and no conceptualizations- the very thing that makes males grind their teeth and want to run is the very thing that keeps us being females.. so Forest run.. It is funny & sad to see how the whole idea that women should do or say or even act in a particular will secure or assure their prize in line. I prefer to sit and sip my tea and have nothing, because buying into the whole manipulative game that are being sold set out there is just ridicules to the human development, just like “the reality series or version of dating”, hysterical. I think that females sex drives are higher, and even speeding or growing at a larger rate to substitute the love that we don’t get. No?
Burton wrote:
I read an article this morning that is a fantastic response to that:
http://no-maam.blogspot.com/2007/08/which-came-first-dishonesty-or.html
The problem I have with Rudov’s article is that it goes on the premise that men have to chase after women. The question then becomes: what is the best tactic for a man to “get” a female into his life? Be a NiceGuy? Be indifferent? Be a thug/alphaMale? Learn PUA tactics?
…ad nauseam.
Where men and women are inherently different is that women gain their power from men chasing after them.
I used to date a lot. But I learned a long time ago that the best way to deal with females is via a form of Zen: abolish desire in oneself and one can free oneself of the endless games that Rudov’s article implies. It’s no mystery why one of the leader’s of the men’s movement online calls himself the ZenPriest.
Take the Red Pill, Neo…
> Ladies’ nights are illegal; they already are outlawed in
> California, Hawaii, Iowa, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.
I don’t know about the other states, but this is an inaccurate statement so far as New Jersey is concerned. There, a court ruled ladies’ nights were against the law, so the legislature subsequently passed a law saying they were legal.
PolishKnight,
I didn’t just ask why there are ladies’ nights: I answered my own question. My answer is the sole purpose of my article. You are really missing the point.
Marc asks why there still are Ladies’ nights.
It’s good question and I’ve heard it before so I’m going to give out the myths that people believe, and the realities (which many are not aware of) in addition to Marc’s remarks above.
Myth: Ladies nights bring in the women, they bring in the men, so everyone is happy!
Reality: Ladies night does bring in the women, but not necessarily women who are interested in meeting men! The kind of women that go to ladies night tend to go out with their friends and they are prepared to shoosh away the men. They also needn’t be terribly attractive or in the right age range.
In addition… more men coming in means more competition, right? So this “spooks the fish” and sets higher standards.
So who benefits? The barmakers who hope that drunk men are suckers thinking lots of “ladies” will be around for ladies night that they can hook up with (drunks aren’t known to think things out) and also, to try to get women to binge drink more and become regular customers just as with any promotion.
Seduction movement? Which one? I use several.
http://www.mattweeks.com/strike.htm
That is one hell of a convinceing article on the “marraige strike”
Marc, what do you think of the seduction movement?
Some articles on the unofficial, unorganized, marriage strike:
http://www.mattweeks.com/strike.htm
http://www.ifeminists.net/introduction/editorials/2003/0812.html
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/711656/posts
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_strike
The more money you spend on a woman, the more she’ll think you’re a loser. And, she’ll think this while taking your money!
Damn I would love to argue that with you. But since it’s the truth I’ll pass on that.
You young guys, if you want to make sure you never have a real relationship with a woman, then be “sensitive” to all her needs. If you always put her first she’ll never ever respect you as a man. All you’ll be to her is a stepping stone.
Scottkirk,
I know nothing about a marriage strike on MND, but it’s a terrific idea! Taking action in your personal life gives you power.
Virtue,
I guarantee that, after you read Under the Clitoral Hood, you will change your arguments completely. Once you learn how a woman really functions — forget your theories — you will realize what a sexual animal she is. Then, you can have some fun.
I only disagree with you on one Point and that point is that women’s sex drive is inherently higher than men’s and its only socialization that hampers women’s sex drive.
This is my reason. When you look at homosexual behavior you see male homosexuals having multiple partners with huge number counts on a almost daily baisis…….on the lesbian side you have lesbian bed death where lesbians just stop having sex with each other.
Now the first response to this how can you equate homosexual behavior and hetrosexual behavior.
When you look at enforced single sex environments (prisons single sex boarding schools, military training etc) you always have an increase in the rate of homosexual contact (lack of choice) The increase is greater in men than with women.
However I do admit I still need to read your book (Ordering it this payday I swear!) after which I might very well modify my arguments or change them completely.
marc..good information!!
What do you know about this marraige strike I keep hearing about on MND??
who proposed it?? and are their any organizational efforts under way??