Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 3456789 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 87

Thread: Why Men Are Afraid of MGTOW

  1. #71
    Senior Member
    Meister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Online
    Sunday, August 4th, 2019 @ 03:05 PM
    Status
    Prolonged Absence
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Don't know
    Country
    Australia Australia
    Gender
    Posts
    691
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    57
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    78
    Thanked in
    44 Posts
    Thanks Chlodovech, that member is now harassing me off the thread which I have reported.

    It is an interesting topic but one that cannot be understood unless you are non blue pilled/non feminist or at least open minded. Before I address your points I would like to bring up another one.

    Mixed Signals - Men have and still do receive mixed signals from women/society. Being 45 I was in my late teens/early 20's when the SNAG (Sensitive New Age Guy) thing started. Women (or at least the media) were promoting the idea of men who were sensitive and spoke about their feelings. All good, but of course as we have seen with this very thread, society does not like men who talk about their feelings it is awkward and takes attention away from women. This goes 100 times over if the feelings men are talking about clash with whatever agenda is popular for the moment.

    Men also receive mixed signals in terms of equality. We keep being told about equality of the sexes until of course it is more convienent that men are needed for their strength in particular or a woman wants a seat on public transport for example.

    Cowardice/Shaming - This is a term that has been thrown about a fair bit on this thread. Once upon a time it would have hurt me. I no longer care what others think of me. As I and others have stated on here, the rules of society and it's expectations of me no longer apply. Men are shamed for everything in our society. If you like women then you must be paying them or are a sleaze bag, if you are good at getting laid you must be drugging them or paying them. If you can't be bothered you must be queer, if you prefer to be left alone you must be weak. It just keeps going and going. It doesn't matter which side of the debate you want to sit on, you will be shamed one way or another.

    What women want? - To quote a female friend, "women don't know what they want". I agree, I think when it comes to men and relationships women are like men with a remote control and a TV, it's all about what else is on. Constantly trying to find something better and as Chlod mentions disqualifying men for the most trivial of reasons. It matters little if the woman doing the disqualifying is well below A grade material herself. The whole dating game is skewed far too much in their favour and yet they still end up single. How do you lose a game that is rigged?! Rhetorical question, we know why.

    Going back to the SNAG thing when I was in my late teens and early 20's women were going crazy over rather effeminate looking males. Short, skinny, delicate features. I was told by more than a couple that masculinity made them sick. So even back then the anti male brigade was in full swing.

    Expectations have only changed for men - Similar to above. Men have been expected to change in many ways. I can do things that my grandfather was never capable of, this is one of many unintended side effects of Feminism. I do not need a woman to do my washing, cooking, housecleaning etc. Meanwhile women get to go on many playing both sides of the coin as it suits them, damsel in distress one moment, tough independent woman the next. The problem is they are neither really and not many men care for either variant. Many of the tough independent women I have come across go to pieces the second they are challenged.

    Women aren't feminine anymore - This doesn't mean I want or can only handle wall flowers. I am a big fan of old films and those women were tougher than the uber bitches we get in modern films and yet are still feminine. Women simply aren't feminine. Tattoos, stumbling around in high heels like rugby players dressed in drag, pornified, shallow, entitled etc. If Feminine mystique ever existed it is well and truly dead now. I see nothing compelling about the modern woman at all.

    Female's aren't perfect - We have been led to believe that women are perfect. This is in part a throwback to the chivalry era but in recent times is about female dominance. We have seen though a rise in women committing sex crimes, most notably female teachers with male and female students. Domestic violence committed by females against children is also a huge problem. The propaganda just makes these crimes worse due to the angelic image that women are painted with. Often times violence committed by women, especially against men is applauded. Abortion is another good example, why would women or anyone celebrate the legal right to destroy the unborn?

    Treachery - We have been sold out by our own women and males. White women in their quest to want more and more have sold their men out. Why would I stand up for one?

    MGTOW - Is a state of awareness and freeing oneself from a rigged game. As Chlod states in what men should and shouldn't do, don't play THEIR game. Don't reward or help women, don't pay attention to them, treat them as equals because they especially hate that!

    To me MGTOW is passive resistance. I don't have to have a march through the streets, I don't have to do anything special. I just have to avoid and not play the game.
    I grew up on a belief of honour, courage and the old world values. The world isn't about that anymore, preferring to die a slow death of fast food and cheap thrills.

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Meister For This Useful Post:


  3. #72
    Active Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Norman Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Canadian
    Ancestry
    Anglo-Norman & German
    Country
    Canada Canada
    Gender
    Politics
    Libertarian
    Religion
    Heathen
    Posts
    264
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    131
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    215
    Thanked in
    92 Posts
    There is nothing of greater importance in a just world than holding oneself to the same standards as one expects from others. In the case of the MRM the hypocrisy is rife, in this sense. They understand the dangerous generalisations that come with feminist philosophy regarding male nature, but are far less inclined to see it right under their noses in the case of a cult within the MRM, known as Men Going Their Own Way, shortened to the acronym, 'MGTOW'.

    Most in the MRM understand that feminists are enablers of misandric policies and theories, used as a justification to label all men as either direct or indirect beneficiaries of male power. This leads to consequentialist values that deem all men as deserving of punishment, regardless of how complicit they are. Either they are directly involved in oppressing women, or they are indirectly benefiting. Why make a distinction between the two given that both are living off the suffering of women? To some feminists this behaviour is inherent to male nature, while those claiming to be moderates feel they are tolerant because they see this behaviour as something that hurts men too, though still define masculinity as the root problem.

    This thinking is driven from a leftist interpretation of struggle. Marx called it class consciousness. The theory is that an entire class suffers due to the tyrannical rule of the oppressive class. The consciousness of the oppressed class will eventually unite them, leading to the overthrowing of the oppressive class. Like everything Marx postulated, this is highly simplistic, and a theory that appeals to the ego of the victim class, while dehumanising the oppressive class. This is called ‘othering’ in psychological circles, which perpetuates different standards for those in the group, to those outside it. Those in the group are subject to conditioning that fosters supremacy over anyone that doesn’t belong in the circle, and those outside the circle are deemed inferior, and deserving of scorn due to the shortcomings of their oppressive nature and values. This entire process is called 'groupthink'. It was endemic in 20th century totalitarianism. Whether it was Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, both worked to foster such demagoguery, and inevitably a strong man later emerged to take charge and lead the group to utopia. The useful idiots then got more than they bargained for.

    MGTOW are a carbon copy of feminism. This fit is so snug that leftists are flocking to the MGTOW banner, already accustomed to reinterpreting class struggle to different groups, be it race, sex, sexuality, or economic class. MGTOW believe that men have historically been kept down by women through obligations to protect and provide for them, and the entire system has been shaped for their benefit. By appealing to the ego of MGTOW, painting them as a victim class, this sets up the climate for groupthink. Pseudo-intellectual theories, backed by nothing but conjecture, are rife within MGTOW circles, deeming women as parasitic and incapable of virtue. Any exceptions to this rule are somehow dismissed through talking points, as either a statistical anomaly or a case where the woman has not yet taken advantage of the man in her life. Chief among MGTOW pseudo- intellectualism is Briffault’s law, created a communist, no less. It’s therefore unsurprising that class consciousness is central to his thesis, and has thus become endemic within MGTOW circles.

    MGTOW constantly redefine terminology and facts to suit their outlook, thus gradually building up the mythology of oppressive female nature. The acronym ‘NAWALT’ (not all women are like that) was originally created to counter the deflection that women are not all like that, when it is used by feminist apologists to sideline any arguments that oppose feminist hegemony. It was supposed to indicate that while all women are not like that, this does not excuse the fact that many women can and will take advantage of men. This runs counter to the feminist notion that masculinity is the problem. Even when feminists acknowledge that some women are part of the problem, somehow the ‘problem’ always comes back to masculine nature or values. MGTOW have appropriated this term to suggest that ‘all women are like that’, using this as a deflection against anyone that challenges their fatalistic interpretation of female nature and intent.

    Even the acronym MGTOW has been appropriated in this fashion. It was originally a term that had nothing to do with fatalistic female nature and class consciousness, and certainly not the marriage and relationship strike now compulsory to the participation in the MGTOW cult. This website here shows that MGTOW was originally an outline to encourage masculinity in men, femininity in women, limited government, and personal responsibility. None of those things are acceptable to the leftist interpretation of MGTOW, however.

    Today MGTOW is centred on a denial of objective morality, and a total fixation on self-gratification. This is called egotism (a form of narcissism) and is why I often call MGTOW nihilists. Many MGTOW will openly acknowledge their adoration of Nietzsche, who is the quintessential nihilist, no matter what some philosophers might say - anyone that rejects values in nature, deeming all worth to be centred on individual perspective and desire is, by definition, a nihilist. It’s for this reason that leftists are all nihilists. They act as though nothing matters when shaping their reality, whether it’s socially engineering a utopia, or living like nothing matters except personal desire.

    Such moral primitives care nothing for reason, like a gorilla moving around in the undergrowth, relying on instincts being fired within its limbic system, and occasionally making use of its barely developed neocortex. MGTOW do not feel that reason can be used to extrapolate objective values, such as the need to conceptualise reality and adhere to rational self-interest. Essential values for life do not factor into their reality, be it eating, sleeping, or reproduction. MGTOW act as though these things are not values, even though they are essential to virtue, for without reason, life as we know it will cease to exist. In this state humanity will be reduced to other primitive life. This is the biggest irony of all, since MGTOW consider themselves free of obligation, yet they stumble around like beasts in the wilderness, claiming that the world they exist in is subject merely to their hedonistic desires. Only animals lack reason in this manner. Conversely, human beings are creatures of reason, capable of discerning objective values from their superior minds. Without this human beings are nothing more than animals.

    Thus these morally primitive MGTOW rail against nature. They call it ‘traditionalism’ (just like feminists and leftists) and attempt to conflate religion with rational values. While religion is an attempt to explain natural values through divine intervention it does not follow that these values are created by religion itself. This is akin to believing that the conceptualisation of an apple creates the apple, although the apple existed long before the act of naming it. Religion has always been a mystical attempt to explain reality. This is not the process of reason, but one based on superstition. When one steps back and examines nature rationally it’s clear that the relationship of the sexes is one based on complementation.

    It is this relationship that has allowed men and women to traverse through the ages, men acting as protectors and providers, and women as nurturers. Without this survival and progress would have been impossible. It was essential that men and women accepted their strengths during periods where divergence from this could have resulted in great risk in a very hostile environment. To deny this is to deny reason. There is no war of the sexes, only survival and human progress. Those that attempt to frame this as a class struggle are like gorillas moving around in the undergrowth.

    I do not use the word cult to describe MGTOW purely for dramatic effect, since the word is entirely applicable. As already demonstrated, groupthink is inherent to MGTOW, but this is also a critical part of cult behaviour. It is essential that cults perceive themselves as superior, be it morally or biologically. This is the justification to alienate those outside the group, while also alienating those inside the group from anyone that isn’t a part of the collective. Cults are also renowned for making participants feel there are stages of awareness that must be reached before enlightenment can be achieved.

    Here we can see that this is also applicable, there being five levels of MGTOW awareness and participation. Level 0 is considered an awareness of the problems men face. These men, however, do not feel the need to drop out of the system. Level 1 is a rejection of all long-term relationships with women. Level 2 is a rejection of all personal relationships with women. This includes friendships. Level 3 denotes the refusal to produce anything more than is absolutely necessary for survival. Level 4 is the total drop-out of society, often called “going ghost”, and involves bare minimum contact with the “blue-pill” world (in contrast to the red-pill world, who are ‘aware’ of the truth).

    It is worth noting that it is claimed on the site that these levels are not a necessary progression, although anyone with any contact with MGTOW will realise very quickly that the parroting of the risks of involvement with women are forced down everyone’s throats through hyperbole and conjecture, and that the only acceptable way to defeat the misandric system is to starve the beast through non-participation. Stoicism is rejected, and Epicureanism is at the forefront of MGTOW philosophy. Thus a realistic standard of expectation in life (the stoic approach) is vehemently opposed, and the Epicurean philosophy of doing as little as possible in life is elevated as virtuous. All these values are fiercely promoted through harassment of anyone that disagrees with this belief system. This becomes very vindictive indeed if anyone has the strength of character and integrity to refute these blatant logical shortcomings.

    It is also interesting to note that according to mgtow.com “conservatives” of all stripes are not considered acceptable candidates for the MGTOW cult. How could they be, considering that they do not base their values on egotism, and respect the reality of nature and personal responsibility when upholding rights? At the same time no mention of the fact that feminism is a socialist ideology can be found on the site, or the fact feminism is entirely based on leftist thinking, through the very class consciousness already set out here. So it seems that the very left-wing ideologues that alienate men as an oppressive class are not considered out of bounds to MGTOW, while true conservatism (the belief that individuals have unalienable rights and responsibilities) are not welcome in a cult that bases all its assertions on class consciousness.

    The men considering themselves MGTOW overwhelmingly give the impression of suffering with post-traumatic stress disorder, almost certainly originating in childhood. Indeed, everywhere that I encounter them online they are highly confrontational and vitriolic, repeating arguments that divorce is 50% probable, even though this is not initiated by women in every instance. The Critical G made a video explaining that, while divorce is at 50% in many places, this is not randomly assigned, and it is perfectly possible to screen potential females by maintaining standards of virtue. I have essentially been saying this for well over a year, and I would add that this can be further enforced by understanding how personality disorders operate, and generally being well informed on human psychology.

    Alas, already Critical G quickly received a typically ignorant response from your common MGTOW egotist, believing that morals are subjective, and that even though divorce is not randomly assigned it is still more likely to be enacted by women. This does nothing to prove that a man has no control over the woman he associates with, much like the manner in which feminists deny agency to women. It merely denotes that where divorce occurs women initiate it more. This does not invalidate any of the arguments based on personal choice.

    It is common for MGTOW to deflect in this manner, inventing acronyms like SATF (same as the feminist) to dismiss anyone that exposes the similarities between MGTOW and feminism, and reverting to the same type of apologism for extremism as feminism. MGTOW often state that people do not understand the MGTOW philosophy if they criticise it. We therefore have a situation where NAFALT (not all feminists are like that) becomes ‘Not all MGTOW are like that’. Meanwhile MGTOW, just as with feminists, do not connect the dots between theory and practice, and realise it has become exactly what it is fighting against. Feminism is supposed to be about ‘equality’ for example, but in practice it is a platform for extremely divisive class warfare. Yet MGTOW supporters seem to think that they are immune from such pitfalls.

    Above all, it’s very easy to see how vindictive and hypocritical MGTOW are by dissecting this comment below, wherein I was accused of being a ‘traditionalist’ by those claiming to be supporting the adaptation of men away from traditional expectations:

    "The only tradition you've broken with your wife is that you've managed to become the stay at home parasite, and she picks up your slack. I'd expect women to frame that as an equitable exchange but coming from a man it just sounds pathetic. You're a failed rocker housewife with no marketable skills, of course you'll support the traditionalist lifestyle when you dont [sic] have to actually do any of the work involved other than "homemaking" of course."

    This vile person is a YouTube user called ‘Tom Odd’, and the comment can be found on my video “Men’s Rights & the “Traditionalist” Smear”. The user has no activity on the channel page, which leaves me to question whether this is a sock account. I suspect this account belongs to one of the more popular MGTOW YouTubers. The account is regularly used to harass me in video comment sections, accusing me of being a parasite for looking after my daughter in the day, while my wife works. This is a common type of hostility I’ve received from MGTOW, who blatantly despise any attempt to make relationships work with women.

    As it happens I do work, and run my own business in instrumental tuition, which suits my family for financial and parental reasons. However, this is unacceptable to MGTOW thugs, shedding light on the claim of MGTOW being 'whatever you want it to be'. Only by rejecting relationships with women altogether, and buying into the mythology surrounding corrupt female nature, are you allowed to be a part of the cult. If you try to point out the similarities with this attitude and feminism, or even just explain that it is perfectly possible to wisely associate with women without being exploited, then you will be increasingly attacked, until this is reduced to the type of ferocity that feminists are infamous for.

    This sort of behaviour is what I’ve grown to expect from MGTOW – a vicious bunch of thugs that are no doubt a product of a fatherless and broken family system, where males substitute families with gangs. We’ve seen this throughout the Western world as feminist policies have been enacted, the UK riots, for example. It is for this reason that demagogic thugs like Barbarossaaaa are so popular within the MGTOW cult. He is a man that, by his own admission, was raised in a ghetto culture, and it seems that his idea of virtue is to spread this fatherlessness everywhere, in spite of the fact that it’s decimated countless communities across the Western world

    (Update: Barbarossaa, being as manipulative as he is, has tried to suggest in a video response that this is an accusation he was raised in a single-mother home. Nowhere has this point been made in relation to him personally. He has, however, condescendingly suggested he has been around ghetto culture in the past, though it looks as though his attempt to deny that the area he hails from is "ghetto" is yet more manipulation of the truth for his own benefit. It is also irrelevant to the fact that he does not make the connection that fatherless homes, in the areas he has previously drawn on to make a point, are not something to model, despite what he says).

    What is the difference between this attempt to destroy family life, and that of feminism? The answer is, of course, none at all. Those in the MRM that do not stand up to this are indeed the hypocrites I set out at the start, and it’s high time that any attempt to fight for men’s rights includes the ostracisation and destruction of the MGTOW cult.
    http://www.rockingphilosophy.com/201...w-is-cult.html

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Norman Pride For This Useful Post:


  5. #73
    Senior Member
    Herr Rentz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Last Online
    1 Day Ago @ 11:42 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Emmingen, Baden-Württemburg
    Subrace
    Don't know
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    Baden-Wuerttemberg Baden-Wuerttemberg
    Location
    US
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Taurus
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Retail Sales Management
    Politics
    Nationalsozialist
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    680
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    463
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    732
    Thanked in
    364 Posts
    Maximum gross take-off weight never scared me...

    Make sure your trim is set correctly and your CG is within limits.
    American by birth, made of parts from Emmingen, Baden-Württemberg.

    Der Familie Rentz seit 1535 - Meine Ehre heißt Treue

    Das Leben ist zu kurz, um billiges Bier zu trinken!


  6. #74
    Senior Member
    Gegenschlag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Last Online
    Tuesday, May 19th, 2020 @ 03:07 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Ancestry
    Swiss-German
    Subrace
    Pred. (Hallstatt) Nordic
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Politics
    to every man a woman of his race
    Posts
    205
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    36
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    64
    Thanked in
    43 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Chlodovech View Post
    So very true. Crucial red pill.



    "Stop believing that everyone lives the exact same way and therefore you have to make these stupid assumptions to write off anyone who you feel like is threatening your reality. No."

    As a MGTOW, men get angry at you because they're too enamored with social status, which is in no small amount based around their relationship status and/or how many chicks they bang.

    And women even more so than men assume there's something wrong with you because there's no way (or they should be no way) a man can go MGTOW - not unless there's something deeply wrong with him (the assumption is that a man with access to women is wise enough to keep his mouth shut if he knows what's good for him) - and women are also upset because, to put it irreverently, you can't be harvested and you may give other men ideas, who then also become impossible to harvest. You're shrinking the market as a MGTOW and this becomes relevant when celebrities and high status men also decide to lead the MGTOW lifestyle, as some of them have.

    In the near future, and you can already see this with the so-called "trad-thot" phenomenon on YT, more and more women will declare themselves to be traditionalist or socially conservative while they aren't - it's an instinctual, adaptive strategy. This is the female chameleon, radically switching positions and personal interests, disregarding principles or former loyalties, shape shifting and becoming someone else, in order to attract a mate.
    I'm not afraid. I guess I am practically MGTOW because I no longer chase women. But I would like to be in a relationship and more importantly have children. It is just not worth the endless time and effort it takes to even get a date... and there are too many problems in my life otherwise.

    So I have to be honest with myself and say that I am incel, which is fine. I have felt this way for along time and now there is a name for it, it is time to own it.

  7. #75
    Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Gefjon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Family
    Married parent
    Posts
    1,418
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    104
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    295
    Thanked in
    161 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Gegenschlag View Post
    I'm not afraid. I guess I am practically MGTOW because I no longer chase women. But I would like to be in a relationship and more importantly have children. It is just not worth the endless time and effort it takes to even get a date... and there are too many problems in my life otherwise.

    So I have to be honest with myself and say that I am incel, which is fine. I have felt this way for along time and now there is a name for it, it is time to own it.
    You're an incel cause you're setting yourself up for it. Every chick you don't approach and ask out, some other dude is going to do it instead. And the chick might accept him. One less for you. Chicks going after dudes just ain't the trad thing to do, and it's probably not natural/evolutionary either. Chicks like to be wooed, they like to see some effort. Otherwise what's the point? If you're not going to invest as much effort as going on a date, why should they? Such men are seen as red flags by many women. Look at how breeding takes place in nature. Two bulls go at each other and the strongest one who wins the battle gets to breed. It's how it is. You either get with the game, or you miss out. But then the pity party won't suit you. You can't win the lottery if ya don't play, if ya know what I mean.

  8. #76
    Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Nachtengel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Gender
    Posts
    6,311
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    175
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,074
    Thanked in
    613 Posts

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Nachtengel For This Useful Post:


  10. #77
    The lion's gate
    Chlodovech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    5 Hours Ago @ 12:55 AM
    Ethnicity
    Flemish
    Ancestry
    Frankish
    Country
    Holy Roman Empire Holy Roman Empire
    Gender
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    3,528
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,802
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,017
    Thanked in
    1,366 Posts
    Thanks for posting that video, Nachtengel. I had not seen it before but I'm sure it will be scrutinized by the manosphere in the coming days and weeks and BPS will face plenty of criticism. The first 5 minutes and a half were sensible though.

    Let's go through this point by point and reanimate everyone's favorite thread.

    Statement #1) MGTOW is eminently logical for western men in the 21st century

    In the first chapter of the video BPS lists a number of plausible reasons for going MGTOW here, all valid. There's really little one can add to that but nod and smile. I don't think anyone can dispute what he's saying here.

    Statement #2) MGTOW is a much bigger problem than everyone realizes

    I would call it the solution rather than the problem, but indeed, MGTOW and the manosphere have experienced a growth spurt in the past half year; the language of the red pill is now slipping into the mainstream in a big way, mainstream media are becoming aware of manosphere concepts and ideas - more men are getting red pilled every single day, perhaps partially on the back of meme culture. When I enter random chatrooms on the internet, I see people talking about Chads and simping - and explaining these terms to others who don't know them yet. That's the stage we're at. I don't even participate in these debates, I just watch and let nature run its course.

    BPS says: "I don't think society needs to worry about self-identifying MGTOW, as they constitute probably less than 1/2 of 1% of the population and are generally harmless."

    Sure, likely true. The group of self-identifying MGTOW is still bigger than that of traditional millennial women though, self-identifying or not.

    And he continues: "I think the bigger issue here is unofficial MGTOW men that have dropped out of society or have been left behind."

    And here's where the presentation begins to go off the rails. Unofficial MGTOW men exist, probably a bit more than before, but they have always existed in some form, and of course the older a man gets, the more likely he is to become an unofficial MGTOW. I'm not sure how big this group is, but it's probably larger than that of western and Germanic men who have heard of MGTOW at this point or identify as MGTOW. These are men who haven't heard of the red pill, but who are nonetheless largely red pilled in their own way.

    But you can sense there's a but. There is. BPS is conflating (non self-identifying) incels with non-selfidentifying MGTOW in this chapter of his video, as well as what I would call doomers who simply dropped out of society.and may now be playing vidya games all day while living with one or more family members, they don't even care about anything more - neither submitting to feminist rule nor revolting against it, and they're certainly not interested in dating. BPS is basically adding all men who either don't want to commit to a woman with those who do but can't and those who don't even care, making them a single cohesive "non self-identifying MGTOW group", as he erroneously calls this segment of society - the truth of the matter is that there's as of yet no term to label this motley group of men with very aspirations and there probably won't be, unless all these men would rally behind a single philosophy (it's unlikely). BPS does not seem in the least aware of this mistake - it shows you he is not the supreme authority on this subject though. But the group in its entirety is of course huge, it could be as much as 40% of all men at this point in any given Germanic country.

    Keep in mind that BPS is behind statement #2 as well, he does view MGTOW (+incels and doomers) as a significant socio-cultural force. We'll come back to this - because in this chapter he is upselling "the threat MGTOW constitutes". But in essence statement two is correct. And most of what he has to say on the subject as well.

    Keep also in mind when you watch this chapter and the rest of the video, that BPS is a tradcon. And that means he still believes in being a traditionalist or conservative man as far as dating & relationships go in a decidedly feminist society. That I would say is sheer madness and suicide. It's the stupidity of being duped while you know you're being duped - and the result is failure. And failure is like onions.

    BPS is not fully red pilled yet, so caution is advised. Entertain his opinion, but do not do as he says. Showing chivalry to barbarians has never been rewarded. To hell with the notions of the past, do not enable matriarchy any more than you already have in your life. As long as you keep on cucking for women they will have no incentive to change anything about themselves, nor does it reanimate the patriarchy.

    Statement #3) MGTOW is good for the individual. Bad for society.

    MGTOW is primarly simply shock therapy for Millennial & gen Z men - a bit less for Boomers and gen X-ers, but in the case of the latter two the context is different - it's likely not about making babies anymore for them, for instance. But because Boomers and gen X-ers are some of the worst chumps and supporters of feminism and grew up blue pilled, and without the internet, they too can benefit from shock therapy.

    Is shock therapy good or bad? It is good when you need it. When it's the only way to realistically dismantle feminism within the time space of a generation.

    This is our war, the one of millennial and gen Z men. MGTOW is about being a sacrifice: if the sacrifice we millennial men bring is big enough feminism will be killed and BTFO'd. If our sacrifice means the fifteen year old boys and girls of today, whom are our only hope, become tradcons en masse - MGTOW will have achieved its aim and it will have been worth it, it will have been worth not having become fathers and husbands ourselves. If that thought makes you sad I have to tell you: all war is sad. We're setting an example for centuries to come because our nations are at stake. MGTOW should not be promoted to gen Z people however, they need a dose of tradcon-ery instead. If teenagers watch this video and come to the conclusion that BPS is correct, then that's fantastic. MGTOW is simply a tool to smash our enemies with.

    Afterwards we can concentrate on taking our countries back, otherwise, as long as women continue to oppose and betray us men, it's hopeless anyway.

    And be aware that you're mainly just missing out on some miserable marriage to a jaded 35 year old feminist single mother with an extensive sexual past and a bottomless hole in her hand, a hole your shekels go into, it puts everything in perspective.

    Do not keep feminism going. Sabotage feminism by not ever giving women who are not part of your family what they want the most: commitment, resources and validation through complimenting, simping and white knighting. The sabotage needs to happen on the interpersonal level as well as on the level of state policies. Take feminists down a notch. And remember: every euro not going to the state is a euro going to you and not to the feminist utopia, a euro not flowing to our oppressors, a euro undermining feminist tyranny.

    BPS' point #3 is just terrible and can safely be ignored. He rejects the shock therapy. He doesn't believe you can convince a large percentage of men to go MGTOW as forming relationships is natural and he lists some reasons for it, all of them disputable ... and here I also simply point to statement #2, as he contradicts himself: what is it? is MGTOW "a big threat" or not? He should make up his mind. But since he made it clear it is a big threat, even without men identifying as MGTOW, one can safely say it will take less convincing than he thinks to make the threat even bigger. Getting another ten % of (millennial) men off the dating market could be the tipping point. That means another 10% of (millennial) women will lose their shit. Not all men need to be convinced before women (and hence the state) are convinced that things need to change. Polygamy is still illegal, you know. And are women going to be able to maintain gardens and houses when there's no man around to do it? They can pay for the service, sure - but it's an expensive annual bill. A husband would be cheaper and increase their social status. BPS also seems to think the current economy will continue to drone on forever - which of course it won't - a new crisis will hurt women too and create a new strategic environment.

    So if you find yourself on top of a slope, gazing into the sunset, just think of BPS being fleeced in a family court after a decade of mental terror while you dodged that bullet.

    Statement #4) MGTOW is a symptome of a maladaptive culture.

    Yeah, too true. Everything BPS has to say on this topic is accurate - but he fails to see that we need the shock therapy, the economic collapse, the social unrest, ... otherwise we'll have to continue to bad status quo. Men will continue to end up in relationships with feminists, feminism will endure. The cycle needs to be broken. The more damage, the better. He fears the damage, I welcome the damage. BPS believes our governments will simply imort more migrants to make up for millennials not having babies. But who believes that here on Skadi? Our governments were doing that well before boomers made only two children per family and they're going to do that anyway because diversity. And also: although more immigration is bad in and of itself, that doesn't change anything from the perspective of the relations Germanic men and women have, it doesn't necessarily strengthen feminism either. BPS is not an ethnonationalist and distances himself from the far right, so this take is rather odd. He lives in Japan and there are a few things you could find out about him that will make you roll your eyes when you hear them, but this thread is not the place for that.

    Statement #5) MGTOW is a white people thing

    Yes, it's because feminism is a white people thing. And as far as migrants goes, they are less affected, they live in a parrallel society - they of course have to deal with living in a feminist sytem too - BPS will point to black men still making children unlike us, but what an example they are! They're the worst possible fathers precisely because the make children everywhere without being able to afford them. Can you see us emulating black men, should we? Black men are probably too dumb to figure out what kind of country they flooded - this explains a lot, actually; migrant men not going MGTOW yet being poor that is. It's not the only reason of course, but Tyrone still has to pay alimony for his seven children raised by single mothers too - whom will then go on to wreck entire cities. And their women still want to become mothers and avoid a career - big difference - another partial explanation for migrant povery, too.

    BPS will then go on to say that the Korean, Chinese and Japanese phenomena of men abandoning society and the dating market, something which Japanese women are doing as well, can not be likened to MGTOW. I disagree, he's correct believing the reasons for the existence of "Japanese MGTOW" are of a different nature, although not entirely, but Japanese "grass eater" men as they're called over there, are just the equivalent of our doomers. So there is a clear overlap between westernized Japan and the West. There are several different shades of doomers and grass eaters of course, some still work and pay taxes, but BPS never mentions doomers as he's probably not really aware of what they are, yet he does think western men who dropped out of society are unemployed while believing grass eaters are not. This isn't necessarily the case for doomers either. Both just continue to vegetate everywhere they go, usually they don't go very far.

    Statement #6) MGTOW is not for high status men

    Anyone can contribute, especially high status men - they more than other men - they can easily afford not commmitting and are well placed to undermine feminism - because they may have power and it's they who do all the talking to women. Smart male celebs have gone MGTOW some time ago. Take for instance Leonardo Di Caprio. What does he do? He smashes and dashes and smashes and dashes and smashes and dashes and trades in his girlfriend for a younger one as soon as she turns 25. A degenerate? Yes. But also a smart man, that Di Caprio, in his own way.

    It's the celebs who are crucial too: all it takes is three celebs using the MGTOW label to define their actions et voila, you've gone mainstream to some extent.

    BPS however believes MGTOW will be ignored by women as long as they (can) chase Chad/high status men. I beg to differ, although female hypergamy would be checked under patriarchy and less of an issue, as in that case women can not ignore "low status men", that's to say 80% of men, evidently. Historically speaking, that's what happened. But BPS does not understand what all women need from all men, and then I'm not just talking about repairing a broken shower for free, I also mean to say that heterosexual women still simply have emotions and desires, they still crave love and validation. And we don't have polygamy and it's not likely western feminists are ever going to get behind the introduction of polygamy too, so who is going to meet those needs? Not low status men who have gone MGTOW. Not simps who have taken the red pill and aren't sponsoring e-girls anymore or aren't buying girls drink any longer. And high status men can not be everywhere at the same time. It puts on pressure and pressure is good. Women will notice MGTOW eventually, 30 to 40 year old women are already wondering where all the good simps and betas who will wife them up have gone on.

    There's nothing scarier to women than men across the board going MGTOW. Yeah, they'll notice for sure. They care.

    And when I'll stand on the deck of my pirate ship, gazing into the sunset, I shall think of BPS being cheated on by his wife with his 55 year old neighbor, which he can't do anything about because she threatens to invent fake rape allegations.

    BPS' conclusion is especially terrible, it's obligatory manshaming - tradcons tend to do this: men fought in foxholes and trenches, braved mountains and oceans, built civilization, survived diseases... blabla .... and hence you must still wife up a woman, BPS believes. Wow, that's so dumb. Dumb di dumb dumb. A false equivalency if there ever was one. So what, men will still climb mountains, build stuff, fight in trenches, survive the coronavirus also when they go MGTOW. Feminism isn't exactly the Mount Everest as he suggests. But what MGTOW won't do is support matriarchy, BPS on the other hand is doomed to do just that. And men of the past, at least in the last few thousand years, didn't have to deal with their own womenfolk opposing and betraying them. Men didn't have to fight with their own women to, as he puts it, pass on their heritage. It's a very specific challenge and it does change everything - yes, you can still easily pass on your heritage if you fight wars and climb mountains under patriarchy, but you can not pass on your heritage with feminists in a matriarchy. That's not hard to understand.

    In the conclusion BPS lands on the MRA (Men's Rights Activists) side of things - MRA are mild mannered and advocate equality, not patriarchy, and I would say BPS does so as well - and that's not the worst possible position to occupy (although it's hardly enough and in some cases contraproductive as MRAs are too similar to feminists and accept feminism) ... but MRA aren't achieving much, and obviously BPS isn't going to wait for 30 more years before entering another relationship with someone - anyone - if he isn't already married. BPS mentions a bunch of MRA causes men should support - we probably should - yet none of that is in contradiction with going MGTOW - and all the measures he suggests, such as boys having decent male rolemodels for men, none of it is enough. Women themselves too have to change, for starters. BPS doesn't talk about that. If women continue to find careers more important than marriage & motherhood, then you can have all the perfect role models in the world, and all men will do is still just enable feminism while being abused on a scale bigger than is the case today. Men would be traditional and hence vulnerable for modern women whom exploit their chivalry. Look at the simps, they still believe they're the stars of some rom com.

    BPS also suggests moving off grid to make a family: I say good luck finding a millennial woman who signs up for that - nor will be that simple - nor do I even understand why. Feminists are not going to change in the woods, they'll go home before you can say "family". Another one of his brilliant alternatives to going MGTOW is marrying foreign women - and we know he's not talking about Germanic or even western women here - ... and I have to ask - for what purpose? How is that going to end feminism? And if it would, it would come at the cost of destroying our nations. And I'm only writing this rather lenghty post with the ultimate goal of saving our nations in mind, so go figure.

    And it's clear what women think of marriage today: they view it as boring and a burden - an obstacle to whatever else it is they want to do. That's why they delay marriage until they're 30. BPS formulates no solution for that "minor" problem to pass on his heritage, but the patriarchy and MGTOW do. Whatever he may suggest is ultimately useless if he can't fix women's perception of marriage. And if the dating market does not become regulated again as well - so women's options become limited and they will have no other option again than to give attention to "lower status men", as was the case in the past, when women's natural tendency to date Chad, bad boys and criminals was curtailed. Women may be the ones to select whom gets to procreate, but if there's no guiding hand of patriarchy their selecting directly undermines civilization - as it means only a minority of men and women get to procreate - amongst all the other benefits a relationship could potentially bring. This can not be disputed I would think because we taste the bitter fruits of feminism every single day and we can look at demographic charts to demonstrate how this is true.

    BPS is not reactionary, he remains a liberal in his heart. And that won't fix things. Half assed alt lite crap never does.

    In his conclusion, BPS looks down upon MGTOW as a too passive and unmanly form of resistance as well - I say he has nothing better to offer. As for passive: if you notice the extreme reactions MGTOW invokes in women and men, then I would say MGTOW brings us as close to a hot conflict one can have in a civic libturd democracy. It's not more passive than him putting videos on Youtube - or decades of nagging for men's rights in the hope that maybe - MAYBE - men can have some crumbs - and yet that's what he wants us to do. Shock therapy seems a whole lot manlier to me. He wants to see an innovative and aggressive response to the current challenges men face, I say MGTOW is such a response. And again, what did he offer himself? Tradcuckery.

    "But what if women dig in their heels in response to MGTOW?" - is one of his "very manly" objections to MGTOW - then so be it, we'll see what happens from then on - the result may be infinitely more preferable to what we experience today, even if feminists cause a ruckus it could actually make more moderate women move in the trad nat direction - but BPS doesn't even have the slightest intention to roll back feminism. And he's scared of how women will react to shock therapy. He's scared of a confrontation with SJWs. I would love to see feminists rage against MGTOW in massive demonstrations, because then they acknowledge and fear a threat to their utopia, it means more power to MGTOW, it would also mean more political polarisation - beyond gender issues too. Funnier still would be to see women march for the right to husbands in overwhelming numbers during "where have all the good men gone?" protest marches - that could happen too. BPS thinks too narrowly - and if you carefully listen to his objections to MGTOW, he sounds like a teenager who doesn't want to get out of bed, or better yet, a drunk guy whining about how nothing he ever does in his life can turn out right and hence he must consume even more alcohol, BPS isn't going to climb moutains and fight in trenches then. He's anything but innovative himself with his own list of proposals either.

    He doesn't believe "a boycott of women" can work, I say how can it not work, how, indeed, can it be not the only thing to ever work? He's frightened of MGTOW but he should be frightened of himself. Taking away women's toys - resources, commitment, validation - automatically means they'll have to be more feminine and pleasing if they still want to play, and they always do. The way of the carrot and the stick leads to a return to normalcy.

    Lastly: Inb4 meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeh Chlodovech, not all! Not all! My aunt knows a woman who is not a feminist, to which I respond with:

    Your aunt knows Bärin?

    “When a nation forgets her skill in war, when her religion becomes a mockery, when the whole nation becomes a nation of money-grabbers, then the wild tribes, the barbarians drive in.“ – Robert Howard

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Chlodovech For This Useful Post:


  12. #78
    Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member


    Rodskarl Dubhgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Angelfolc
    Ancestry
    Angles, Frisians, Saxons
    Subrace
    Anglo-Saxon
    Y-DNA
    Y
    mtDNA
    X
    Country
    United Kingdom United Kingdom
    State
    Hannover Hannover
    Location
    Between your ears
    Gender
    Family
    Yorkist
    Occupation
    Once More Unto the Breach
    Politics
    Welf
    Religion
    ex-U.C. of England & Ireland
    Posts
    2,973
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4,209
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    254
    Thanked in
    215 Posts
    I just don't like successful undertakings trivialised by a minority of hardcore quitters, simply because it seems like the majority are messy excursions making the former seem entirely unattainable and unworthy of effort to bother at all. The only reason I can see MGTOW as a deliberate choice for perpetual bachelorhood, is due to celibacy requirements of some clergy or Shakerism. In no way ought this challenge the normality of being married with children, but as receptacles for misfits filling out roles unsuitable for most men on the planet.

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Rodskarl Dubhgall For This Useful Post:


  14. #79
    Jacobin Extroadinaire
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Skadi Funding Member
    Captain Blackpill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Online
    3 Hours Ago @ 02:40 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Saxon
    Gender
    Age
    27
    Occupation
    Thrower of Rocks
    Politics
    WigNat/Anti-Judaist
    Posts
    816
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    142
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    251
    Thanked in
    129 Posts
    Black Pidgeon Speaks is another grifter, like any other "Tradcon". I can't believe you devoted so much time to dissecting his video to prop up just another grifting ideology. The idea that we live in a matriarchy or that our women exist as the social-political force in society is such a deflection of epic proportions.

    How often does the JQ come up in MGTOW circles? They still have a subreddit...

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Captain Blackpill For This Useful Post:


  16. #80
    Funding Member
    „Friend of Germanics”
    Funding Membership Inactive
    Gefjon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Gender
    Age
    39
    Family
    Married parent
    Posts
    1,418
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    104
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    295
    Thanked in
    161 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Chlodovech View Post
    But you can sense there's a but. There is. BPS is conflating (non self-identifying) incels with non-selfidentifying MGTOW in this chapter of his video, as well as what I would call doomers who simply dropped out of society.and may now be playing vidya games all day while living with one or more family members, they don't even care about anything more - neither submitting to feminist rule nor revolting against it, and they're certainly not interested in dating.
    Sounds like incels to me. Your typical incel fits that description perfectly and it's part of why he's an incel, he doesn't go out in society or clean after himself. Only difference is that incels will feel entitled and delusional about dating & sex. Reality is, chicks don't fall out of the sky and into their laps.

    Keep also in mind when you watch this chapter and the rest of the video, that BPS is a tradcon. And that means he still believes in being a traditionalist or conservative man as far as dating & relationships go in a decidedly feminist society. That I would say is sheer madness and suicide. It's the stupidity of being duped while you know you're being duped - and the result is failure. And failure is like onions.
    And how is the white race gonna survive if the majority of white dudes become all incels & Puritans? That's only gonna lead to the extinction of the white race. Birth rates are already looking grim, look at all those non-whites, breeding like rabbits while millennials jerk off to video games. Cmon, that's silly. Even if you get the technology to create kids in test tubes, who is gonna raise them? The state? Well then that's simple, they get an army of libtards & NPCs while whites get nothing.

    Marriage is only suicide if you marry a non-trad chick and you're foolish enough not to get prenups & postnups, but that would be suicide in any type of society. If she's gonna screw you over, she's gonna do it either way. The smart solution is to marry a chick who shares the same values as you do and to look at marriage as a contract. Or don't marry and just cohabit. If ya wanna save trad values tho, then marriage should still be the rule. Otherwise you'll get all these broken couples with kids and baby mommas & baby daddies around.

    This is our war, the one of millennial and gen Z men. MGTOW is about being a sacrifice: if the sacrifice we millennial men bring is big enough feminism will be killed and BTFO'd. If our sacrifice means the fifteen year old boys and girls of today, whom are our only hope, become tradcons en masse - MGTOW will have achieved its aim and it will have been worth it, it will have been worth not having become fathers and husbands ourselves.
    MGTOW is a set of contradictions and this statement explains exactly why. On the one hand they claim to oppose feminism and wanna become trads, on the other hand they embrace the celibacy, bromance, Shaker/Puritan lifestyle. But what are trad gender roles? They're husband and wife, at least the majority of society are. It's only the broke, fugly or socially inept incels who embraced the celibate lifestyle, and even then, they had to join the army or the church and not just mope around in their basements, bitching & moaning about red pills. And the macho, solitary Don Juan lifestyle is no different. Back in the day, most of those macho dudes who smashed & dashed countless chicks were still married & had kids.

    And be aware that you're mainly just missing out on some miserable marriage to a jaded 35 year old feminist single mother with an extensive sexual past and a bottomless hole in her hand, a hole your shekels go into, it puts everything in perspective.
    Only if you're a 40-50+ y.o. incel or some low-status beta. High status dudes will have options in any kind of society.

    Getting another ten % of (millennial) men off the dating market could be the tipping point. That means another 10% of (millennial) women will lose their shit.
    See that's where you're wrong. In a feminist society, dudes are no longer seen as a necessity. They're like some feminist chick said, a nice dessert or smth like that. It's a nice distraction to have, but nobody is gonna die if they don't get any dessert. Lots of feminist chicks reject marriage on their own, not because there aren't any dudes around but cause they see it as some type of enslavement, much like the incels & MGTOWs do. They're all about "empowerment", whatever that means, lol. I suppose smth like just being independent & self-sufficient, not needing a dude to get around in the world. And just like some MGTOWs are turning gay with their bromance stuff, so have plenty of feminist chicks. After all, men are seen as inherently evil, so what best alternative for a partner than another chick. Someone who understands the essence of womanhood, and stuff like that.

    And there's another modern component: the sex industry is growing. Sex toy sales have skyrocketed. And soon as those sex robots become more affordable, they ain't only gonna be a threat to chicks, like incels believe, but to dudes as well. Especially in an era where folks are used to having cyber romances with folks they've never physically met, artificial, robotic e-partners are becoming more popular. Those you can design according to your fantasies and program to send you unlimited compliments & flowers. And a few other things that dudes are usually sloppy at.

    And if the dating market does not become regulated again as well - so women's options become limited and they will have no other option again than to give attention to "lower status men", as was the case in the past,
    Sounds like a cop out to me, force chicks to marry beta dudes just so betas can get any. Nah, if a low status dude wants to have a high status wife, he's gonna have to give her a very good reason why she should lower her standards. When it comes to the person they date & marry, folks are gonna look out for their best interests. And who wouldn't? Marriage ain't some charity auction so folks will rarely marry down, there's nothing in it for them. Now I do know some rich chicks who married down but there's always a catch: either the dude is young & has perfect abs (aka trophy husband) or the chick is just downright fugly & insecure. Still the minority tho, usually even the fugliest of well-off chicks

    Plus it never was like you describe it. Even back when the dating market was more regulated, high status chicks marrying low status dudes was a social, not to mention financial no-no. It's especially unfeasible in a patriarchy, or in a society where chicks can't get a higher education, work or become career junkies. In such a society, marriage is the only way for a chick to advance socially, so she becomes more selective. And if her parents have something to say about it, as they did traditionally, then usually marriage has a financial side too. All these incels & betas who rave about arranged marriages forget this aspect. If some unemployed incel living in his mom's basement asked for some high status chick's hand in marriage, her father would kick him out of his house faster than he knew what happened to him.

    And when I'll stand on the deck of my pirate ship, gazing into the sunset, I shall think of BPS being cheated on by his wife with his 55 year old neighbor, which he can't do anything about because she threatens to invent fake rape allegations.
    What is there gonna be for you to gaze into the sunset when you're 55 and single? Here's a less glamorous reality, not all dudes can afford to do a Di Caprio and plastic surgery will only go so far. And even some of those rich or good looking dudes who can pull a Di Caprio will end up miserable & lonely when they get older cause younger Chads will take their place. Like Bärin said the other day, old age ain't forgiving anybody. Sure it's fun to live in the moment, but folks's prime only lasts a few decades at most, if they're lucky, after which it's all down hill from there. Let's talk again in 10 years and see how many MGTOWs will be happily gazing in the sunset. More likely they're gonna end up twice as miserable & bitter, if ya ask me.

  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Gefjon For This Useful Post:


Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 3456789 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Do Men Want Children, Too? / Are Modern Men Afraid of Commitment?
    By Adalheid in forum Men, Women, & Relationships
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: 1 Day Ago, 04:12 PM
  2. Why I’m Not Afraid of Hell
    By Nachtengel in forum Agnosticism, Atheism, & Irreligion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Thursday, June 14th, 2018, 07:47 PM
  3. Who's Afraid of the Saxon Wolf?
    By Nachtengel in forum Natural Sciences & Environment
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Thursday, December 31st, 2009, 02:01 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •