The ones who wish they never made the commitment and the ones who are looking for a way out.

For the record, there is nothing wrong with being in a committed relationship. However, as any woman will tell you, guys of all walks of life are genetically designed not to commit.

But the rules are simple for men who claim they are not in or looking for a committed relationship. Guys who are playing the field must be up front and honest in announcing their intentions to any woman they date.

But there is a well-known portion of Woman's Law that also matters here. No matter how many times a man tells a woman he is not looking for a serious relationship, she doesn't believe him and will do all she can to test his will power to stay uncommitted.

Now, it is also important for every man to know, his words mean nothing to a woman. Actions, even what men consider as innocent gestures, speak volumes.

Unfortunately, a regular reader to the For Men Only blog finds himself in what can only be defined as having moved from single hood to a committed relationship. David W. of Pasadena is trying to say he is not in a committed relationship, but we are afraid he has crossed the line.

Thus, he is officially Whipped.

Now, what could a man do -- short of getting down on one knee or asking a woman to move in with him -- that would convince her that his deceleration that he is not looking for anything serious relationship wise?
One -- if a man ever goes to a wedding with said woman
Two -- if a man ever goes to a funeral with said woman
And if a man does both? Sorry, Man Law dictates that he can no longer claim his single hood or that he is in an uncommitted relationship.

Poor David W. finds himself having attended both a wedding and a funeral with the same woman. That my friends means all bets are off and it moves him into a category of manhood that we must all 1) offer our condolences and 2) move to an intervention as soon as possible if he insists that he doesn't want to be in a committed relationship.

Now, David W insists that he has found a loophole to the Man Law on this subject.

He claims he only attended the funeral with the woman because one of her girlfriends is dating a big client of his. Thus, he has evoked the "I only did it for business" clause of the Man Law.

Now, this clause is allowed from time to time to give men an out on certain questionable actions that would normally be considered in violation of Man Law. See the section on taking clients to a gentleman's club for business section of Man Law.

But, and this is why we have the Man Law, it is of the opinion of the lower court of Man Law that David W's attempt to apply the "I only did it for business" clause does not apply here because his client is also a man and thus could not hold David W. responsible for not attending the funeral.

Now, if David had tried to apply the "I cannot leave my client alone at the said wedding/funeral," clause, then it is possible the court would have ruled in his favor.

But unless he makes such argument on appeal, we are afraid the court's ruling stands.

It should be noted, that under the Guy's Code, saying, "I'm sorry" has to be handled with the proper protocol. Just like asking for directions or reading the owners' manual, men should resort to saying, "I'm sorry," or apologizing on a very limited basis.