The institution of marriage is in need of major repair. Marriage is unadaptable, dated, and unable to deal with today’s fast-paced culture. Everyone in our generation is a unique snowflake, and it is insulting for us to accept the one-size-fits-all system that marriage offers. Is anyone surprised that marriage, an idea that hasn’t evolved in thousands of years, has a failure rate of 50%?

Say I was a man being nagged about marriage but I wasn’t so crazy about the idea. The practical solution is to have different marriage packages that suit my needs.

Pretend Marriage Package (short): You get a fake marriage certificate and pretend being married to your friends and coworkers just to see how it’s like.

Starter Marriage Package (tall): Your marriage contract lasts for only two years, whereby at the end of that time both parties must either agree to a two-year extension or upgrade to another package. The woman is not entitled to any sort of alimony payment upon a split. In the case of a child, the father gets automatic 50% visitation rights and judges are instructed to ignore everything a woman says during custody hearings (since they will be automatic lies). Child support is optional.

Progressive Package (grande): Your marriage contract lasts for five years, whereby they automatically renew unless you cancel (kinda like a porn site subscription). At the end of the contract a man can walk away without reason and not have to pay any alimony payments. Same rule applies above with regard to children.

Traditional Package (venti): Your marriage lasts “forever.” The man is not entitled to any basic rights in case of divorce. He can visit his child one day every two weeks. He is forced to subsidize his wife’s new life while living in a cheap apartment. He gives up half of his net worth, something he has spent his life building. He watches his children get brainwashed by the mother, who leaves them home alone while she goes on dates.

Anyone want to take a guess at the percentage of women who would pick the short-term packages? Zero. It’s easy to see that after sex, the only source of a woman’s power is making a man commit to her. Women only have as much power as you give them.

Some of you guys are in relationships. My advice to you is delay, delay, delay. I recommend you hold the olive branch of marriage above her head as long as you can. She will be like a dog jumping up trying to get the ball, waiting patiently until you give in. Marriage would benefit an in-demand man only if it was designed for him. It wasn’t. Don’t do it.


  1. Mandy

    I think that our variety of options, instead of making things easier, just makes things confusing as hell for me.

    A friend and I were talking the other day about commitment and relationships…she and I have both travelled around a lot, and we feel like the timing for a good, solid relationship can be very tricky. The people we know are always moving around, following different career options, or just want to keep their options open in general (everyone is guilty of this at one time or another–I mean, people can be like kids in a candy store when it comes to the opposite sex, always looking for more, trying to find the next best option). It can be frustrating, because it?s not enough anymore to meet someone and be interested. You have to be at the “same place” in life, and THAT?s what sucks so much.

    Meanwhile, EIGHT of my friends got engaged this year (6 of the 8 are hardcore Christian). I wonder sometimes how much of it is love, and how much is the result of family and religious expectations. I?m just hoping for the best for them.

    I have to admit that the question of dating in a world full of STDs, bad blind dates and seedy bar encounters (paraphrasing gisella) is enough to influence me to make it a Blockbuster night when Friday rolls around.

    Someone recently told me that he thinks men were made to be solitary–that they should never marry, so they can “spread their seed,” and that nature made them this way on purpose. But in response to that, I said, “So–according to nature, society should be composed of single mothers?” He didn?t like my response too much.

    That said, I think marriage could be wonderful, if you do it for the right reasons and give it your best shot. If you?re not sure, then maybe you should re-evaluate who you?re with.

  2. Mandy

    By the way, the other (non-serious) responses to this post had me laughing my ass off.

  3. Jafa

    ” :banana: ” DCB sort of reminds me of Madonna. Always keeps it edgy and sure knows how to get people talking. This blog site reminds me that opinions are like belly buttons.. everyone has one. Having said that, I prefer to remain an optimist when it comes to marriage. I do like the concept and believe in TRUELOVE and COMMITMENT. Even with the high rate of divorce and “unhappy marriages” out there.. I sincerely believe that with the right person and if you both marry for the right reasons it can be a beautiful lifelong experience.

  4. Q

    It’s true that marriage is not going to work out for anyone who is unwilling to move past the selfish perspective of always wanting his/her own way in every situation (an approach to life which is unfortunately taken by too many members of both sexes). However, being in loving relationships has taught me that if I’m with the right person and deeply connected, the more satisfied he is, the more satisfied I am.

    This makes it easy to be generous. It feels so wonderful to see the smile on his face when I cook him a great meal, or do something thoughtful for him, or get really passionate in bed. So I’m generous with him, which softens him right up and inspires him to be generous with me, which then encourages me to be even more generous with him. So we’re both always looking for ways to please the other, and the situation just gets better and better.

    Since we both strongly intend to keep this dynamic in place, I feel pretty secure about the prospect of marriage. The problem with marriage as DCB envisions it is that it’s based on both people selfishly trying to get everything they want without regard for the other. By all means don’t get married if you or your partner has this sort of attitude; it will only lead to pain and misery. If you can broaden your perspective, though, there’s the opportunity for a lifelong partnership where both parties are dedicated to making each other happy emotionally, sexually, physically, spiritually, and materially.

  5. Anonymous

    This is almost complete plagiarism of a Men’s Health article written last year.

    I would provide the URL, but this article is not included in the online version.

  6. Smug Engaged Girl

    A while back, DCB wrote a post and mentioned that when he was very young, his parents stuck him in daycare and worked long hours, and he was always feeling abandoned and scared that they wouldn’t come back for him. Maybe this is why he has a negative view of marriage and family, and sees the whole thing as a gyp? I mean, proposing marriage packages in which the father can walk off and not support the kids at all? In whose world is that okay? There are clearly some serious psychological/emotional/spiritual issues here on DCB’s part.

    Even if it were true that 50% of marriages failed, it’s a glass half empty vs. half full thing. I’m just happy to think that at least half of marriages work out, which is way better odds than, say, getting picked for a Fulbright fellowship or winning the lottery.

    Marriage can be a wonderful thing, or can be a prison/hell. It depends profoundly on the character and intentions of those entering into it.

    Advantages of being married/engaged-and-cohabiting with a great person who loves you and with whom you have a great relationship:

    – Snuggling into bed together every night
    – Keeping each other warm on cold nights
    – Sex every other day or so
    – Getting groped a lot while making dinner
    – Being able to make better meals because you have an assistant chef
    – Saving money by eating at home, and eating healthier meals
    – Food doesn’t go bad in the fridge because there’s someone else there to eat it
    – Both of us saving hundreds of dollars on housing costs
    – Free household repairs and personal chef
    – No more smoky bars, bad dates, or cover charges
    – When you get home someone hugs and kisses you
    – Hearing “I love you” every morning before you leave for work
    – Always having someone to go on vacation with
    – Cheaper vacations because you have someone to share hotel rooms and rental cars with
    – Having someone there to make you soup and nurse you when you’re sick
    – Having someone there who’s promised to always be there for you, no matter what
    – Having someone who tells you all the time you’re pretty/hot/sexy/handsome, even when your hair looks like it was done by, say, troll dolls
    – Having someone in your life who supports your dreams and goals
    – Having someone there to comfort you when you had a bad day
    – Having someone who knows your deep dark secrets and still loves you anyway
    – Being with someone who wants to raise a family with you and thinks you’ll be a great parent
    – Being with someone who respects and appreciates your abilities and talents

    I could go on and on, but I’ll stop. Basically, compared to being single, this cohabiting life is sweet, sweet cocaine, and I’m never going back.

  7. Anonymous

    Marriage as an institution is timeless.

    Choosing the wrong spouse is a timeless blunder.

    The latter is not the fault of the former.

  8. crazygirl

    The bottom line is that marriage is the right option for some, and not for others. I think this all depends on where a person is at in life (emotionally). You can probably go back a year in my blog and see where I spewed off that I never wanted to get married again(yes, I realize the divorce rate is ridiculously high). My boyfriend was right there with me, and now we’re getting married in a few months. It works for us at this point in our lives. Hopefully, we’ll do better than we did last time around, but to say “we’re different” and “it will be forever” is just silly. We want to try though.

  9. spcwby

    The Economics Of Prostitution
    Michael Noer, 02.14.06, 12:00 PM ET

    Wife or whore?

    The choice is that simple. At least according to economists Lena Edlund and Evelyn Korn, it is.

    The two well-respected economists created a minor stir in academic circles a few years back when they published “A Theory of Prostitution” in the Journal of Political Economy. The paper was remarkable not only for being accepted by a major journal but also because it considered wives and whores as economic “goods” that can be substituted for each other. Men buy, women sell.

    Economists have been equating money and marriage ever since Nobel Prize-winning economist Gary Becker published his seminal paper “A Theory of Marriage” in two parts in 1973 and 1974–also, not coincidentally, in the Journal of Political Economy.

    Becker used market analysis to tackle the questions of whom, when and why we marry. His conclusions? Mate selection is a market, and marriages occur only if they are profitable for both parties involved.

    Becker allowed nonmonetary elements, like romantic love and companionship, to be entered into courtship’s profit and loss statement. And children, in particular, were important. “Sexual gratification, cleaning, feeding and other services can be purchased, but not children: Both the man and the woman are required to produce their own children and perhaps to raise them,” he wrote.

    But back to whores: Edlund and Korn admit that spouses and streetwalkers aren’t exactly alike. Wives, in truth, are superior to whores in the economist’s sense of being a good whose consumption increases as income rises–like fine wine. This may explain why prostitution is less common in wealthier countries. But the implication remains that wives and whores are–if not exactly like Coke and Pepsi–something akin to champagne and beer. The same sort of thing.

    As with Becker, a key differentiator in Edlund and Korn’s model is reproductive sex. Wives can offer it, whores can not.

    To be fair, Edlund and Korn were merely building an admittedly grossly simplified model of human behavior in an attempt to answer a nagging question: Why do hookers make so much money? Prostitution is, seemingly, a low-skill but high-pay profession with few upfront costs, micro-miniskirts and stiletto heels aside.

    Yet according to data assembled from a wide variety of times and places, ranging from mid-15th-century France to Malaysia of the late 1990s, prostitutes make more money–in some cases, a lot more money–than do working girls who, well, work for a living. This held true even for places where prostitution is legal and relatively safe. In short, streetwalkers aren’t necessarily being paid more for their increased risk of going to jail or the hospital.

    Notwithstanding Jerry Hall’s quip when she was married to Mick Jagger, about being “a maid in the living room and a whore in the bedroom,” one normally cannot be both a wife and a whore. “Combine this with the fact that marriage can be an important source of income for women, and it follows that prostitution must pay better than other jobs to compensate for the opportunity cost of forgone-marriage market earnings,” Edlund and Korn conclude.


    Another zinger: “This begs the question of why married men go to prostitutes (rather than buying from their wives, who presumably will be low-cost providers, considering that they can sell nonreproductive sex without compromising their marriage).” Guys, nothing says “Happy Valentine’s Day” more than “low-cost provider.”

    Of course, it’s easy to pour cold water on some of the assumptions made in Edlund and Korn’s mathematical model. But these so-called “stylized facts” are supposed to predict human behavior; they don’t necessarily pretend to mirror it.

    In particular, the assumption that there is no “third way” between wife and whore is problematic, if not outright offensive: “The third alternative, working in a regular job but not marrying, can be ruled out, since we assume that the only downside of marriage for a woman is the forgone opportunity for prostitution.”

    Be sure to let all your married friends know what they’re missing.

    Also, the emphasis on the utility of children is puzzling. In most Western democracies, fertility rates have plummeted as wealth has increased. Empirically, men not only buy fewer whores as they get richer, but they have fewer children.

    Still, the economic analysis of marriage explains one age-old phenomenon: gold digging.

    “In particular, does our analysis justify the popular belief that more beautiful, charming and talented women tend to marry wealthier and more successful men?” wrote Becker. His answer: “A positive sorting of nonmarket traits with nonhuman wealth always, and with earnings power, usually, maximizes commodity output over all marriages.”

    In other words, yes, supermodels do prefer aging billionaires. And Gary Becker proved it mathematically decades before The Donald married Melania.

  10. mstfd

    So how come its mostly women who initiate divorce? Most of them don’t get alimony-this isn’t 1956 for God’s sake. Love ya, mean it

  11. Clarence

    This is to inject some reality into this discussion, esp given comments from hedonistic.

    I recommend reading the entire article. You all might learn something.

    DCB your intuition does you well.

  12. Pingback: Richmond Pictures » Roosh V

  13. Tania Winter

    The difference between marriage and prostitution is that whores do a better job of faking it!

  14. Pingback: What To Do If She Has A Boyfriend ยป Roosh V

  15. Pingback: 14 Problems With Americans In One Picture

Comments are closed.