Who says men need to get married to be happy? - Times Online

This, to me, is pretty much spot on. Men don't "need" to be married to be happy. In fact we don't even need a constant woman in our lives to be happy. I don't think this is ideal --> ideally we would find our heart's love and be perfectly compatible and have a wonderful, passionate, long term married relationship with hot sex, wonderful careers, and spectacular kids.

But that doesn't happen very often. That's why I advise my younger male friends to avoid getting married for as long as they can ... preferably forever. The current state of marriage is a prison for men, and is just a very bad idea overall for any man to get into.

News flash

If you are a wealthy man you won't need females to make you happy! I know I don't.

Quite agree, as a Batchelor myself, I decide what I want to do and when..

Fit and healthy and no one to remind about my imaginary faults or issues..

It definitely does have it's positive side..

I blame the American Constitution, myself, for putting such an emphasis on 'Happiness'. And 'pursuing' it, with a rugby tackle in mind.

Happines is a consequence; it is an epiphenomenon of things that 'happen'. It is a consequence of full knowledge of oneself.

The modern MRA issue isn't so much about finding 'happiness' like George Cloony might have (frankly having 'role models' who have millions of dollars, is fatuous) as avoiding unhappiness and misery.

But what is this thing with happiness anyway? Who is it we are talking about here?

You?

Who are you?

Do you know?

Finding who we are is a damned sight more important than simply being 'happy' but ignorant of yourself. Any half-wit can be 'happy' as he/she dribbles from his soup spoon and grins innanely at flies walking up the wall.

What passes for 'happiness' these days is gibberish and childishness when you can be made 'ecstatic' by a friggin' ice-cream and your face light up with joy at the sight of an electronic 'thing' that will be obsolete in two years..

No-one can fully know themselves without the aid of an intimately trusted other person. It is not possible. It is as not possible as a 10 year old doing an appendectomy on himself on a desert island is nor possible.

Men and women are designed in such a way that each is essential for the other to know their own humanity; know who they are.

That intimate trust needs to be guaranteed. It used to be commonplace to recieve that guarantee with a wedding vow. No longer.

It is not a choice of one or the other. One can have both. But in sequence. Knowledge of oneself leads to happiness. Seeking happiness without fully knowing oneself is a wasted effort. Seeking an intimately trusted other is the first adult step.

I didnt include the whole post, but I agree fully with it all percy.

One thing that has me wondering and shaking my head at the state of men these days is this pathetic infantile belief that "happiness" is something we have to aim for as if it is some sort of bloody ambition or something!!

This attitude is perhaps acceptable in 3 year old girls, but I think it shows how infantilised adults, even men, have become, if "happiness" is regarded as an ambition in life!

If you asked 100 men "what do you want out of life?"

I bet a good number would say "I just wanna be happy.."



Aye, so now men are supposed to admire the clooney?

Just like the women do..

Well, I dont put childless old bachelors on the top of my person role model list, no matter how rich or popular with the ladies they are, they have what I consider a fairly empty and pointless existance.

Where are his sons? His daughters?

As for advice for men to put off women and children as long as they can, I find that to be advice that is a destructive as the similar advice given to women by the feminists years ago..

A man who fails in a marraige when young can recover by his middle age...

A man who marries in his middle age.. Will hardly fail in something he is largely unable to do very well anyway!!

And when his wife goes, what fight will he have left in him?

Women admire him for his money, power and fame. The three irresistible attributes. Oh and Clooney is handsome too.

Clooney is very smart not to marry given the current state of marriage which is an secretive anti-male defunct marriage institution. It would be utter stupidity for him to marry given the high risks and brief sustainability of celebrity marriages.

Uhm no, because men can use that time to become successful as to better support a family at a later age. For women there is not as much time due to the faster biological clock.
Why feed a system that puts you in a bad, risky position? It's better to not take part in it at all until marriage for men becomes a decent option and the marriage contract is restored.

So men should use their time to make money for women later on while women party in the meantime?

A lot of women think their boyfriend/husband will bail them out of financial issues. That's also a reason why not as many women save money or are parsimonious. She'd think Dexter will take care of that as he's good at managing his finances and saving.

This is primarily for yourself as money buys you freedom. If you decide to have a family, a portion would go to fund that expensive venture.

Just as long as we're all clear on the distinction between the fortune found in an intimate partner, children, household, etc. -and subjecting ones self to the "new" extra-institutional legal and civil pitfalls, and eroded assumptions once ASSUMED in a
sanctified rite recognized by the same community where one was ASSUMED to become a viable and productive contributor.

The ritualized "business" of engaging, usurpation, and disengaging, in marriage law no longer has much to do with the rite set fourth above by Percy.

I could be wrong.

Yea but then you would be the guy bailing her out of it?

Why would a responsible hardworking man want to be with a woman who is any different than him?

Marriage is no longer marriage. The term and outward shell exist, but the content of the institution, as a contract of exchange between men and women, no longer exists. This was eroding long before second wave feminism, but the changes made to the family law in the west in the last 30 years or so were really the nail in the coffin.

Simply put: something called "marriage" continues to exist. But this "marriage" is not at all anything like what "marriage" was for 10000 years, prior to the last 30 years.

"""...is no longer a boy but not yet a man;...."""

the Holy Grail of a married man better a bonded man

so if butthead signs the Contract he morphs into a man from the tweeny world ;a sort of waiting room for thereal thing ( her and her off of the planet agenda for him )- now that is a leap of faith !!!


""""...This is when a man should start thinking about finding a good woman and settling down..."""

a good wimyn - good for whom and for what ha ha ha good wimyn must be as scarce as hen's teeth or rocking horse shit nowdays

always the Family Court in the offing to severely correct men's delusional thinking

my heartfelt recommendation for young men contemplating marriage nowdays - don't

Even though this article seems to support a man's absolute right not to get married it still reflects much of the bone headed bigotry that almost always accompanies a discussion on this subject. Notice that it is inferred that men have some sort of explaining to do if they are not married by their mid thirties.
I am 38 now and have never and do not currently intend to get married. This is my choice and mine alone and I always shoot back when someone points this fact out in a derogatory way. This happens a lot and sometimes I have been met with outright hostility, especially from women, when I announce that I have never been married. This is much worse for men than it is for woman and we get in not only in social and family situations but also at work. It’s amazing, you just mention the fact that you have never been married and people think that you are Jack the Ripper or something. It's wrong.