MGTOW: Don’t Talk About It, Be About It

Why does it seem like MGTOW is more of a tribe that many are trying the be the leader of, instead of the simple phenomenon of men going their own way?

Since the time I first heard of MGTOW, I have seen dozens of proclaimed “leaders” come and go, trying to define it for everyone else and tag on riders that mirror their agenda/ideology.  As much as I appreciate themes like free economics and personal ownership per say, I don’t really see that they are integral components of MGTOW.  What’s wrong with MGTOW being exactly what the acronym stands for, nothing more and nothing less?  Maybe it’s because the phrase men going their own way is too vague by itself; what it needs is proper elaboration, not constant evolution or modification by a loose group of online self-proclaimed experts.  

The tribalism seemed the worst in the MGTOW Forums, and thank goodness those days are gone…well, as far as I know, or care (please take note).  Still, there is a cetain amount of tribalism around bloggers, youtubers, etc. and their loyal hangers-on.  By the time you have online social media wars driven by pack mentality against “intruders” who bring contrary ideas.  It’s also pathetic when you have certain MGTOW pundits like Sandman whom guys actually pay to sound off on the issues, as if they were fortune tellers or prophets.

For one thing, tribalism is antithetical to MGTOW in the first place, is it not?  For another thing, if these guys have really gone their own way, how much left is there to talk about?

I’m not pitching the line from the blue pill folk, saying that once you go your own way, you need to be silenced and made to go away.  I think that the most valuable information in the mgtowsphere are the basic facts and stories about what happens to guys who stay in the matrix.  That said, the last thing MGTOW needs is a sense of community.  It’s called going your own way, not going into a huddle.

So how would I elaborate?  How would I define describe MGTOW?  I would simply put it this way: to go one’s own way is to avoid entanglements, as much as possible, with females.  Does it really need to be more complicated than that?

I think that if everyone accepted that simple principle, we’d at least have more people knowing where they stand on the issue.  Right now, most people on the inside and outside probably think that it’s synonymous with MRA.  Well, when you have guys who carry the MGTOW sign while preaching men’s rights activism really loudly and still getting entangled with women, how can people not be confused?  Oh, that’s right…there are “different levels of MGTOW”, which is strange because everyone seems to want to stay a green belt, right?  Guys want to divorce themselves from womankind, but they still want to get laid somehow — being a monk or a recluse isn’t cool.

No no, I’m not getting back on cocaine…I’m just going to nibble at it.

Turd Flinging Monkey has some of the best commentary on the subject, and I respect the fact that he is being real about the sexual side of things, going all-out on love dolls.  On the other hand, I was a little bit disappointed at his video, “Talking Shit with Jaydie” (what I saw of it anyway, because I could only bear so much of it)…I mean, why someone like him would give time and attention to, and throw pearls of wisdom under a little twat like that is hard to explain, other than chalking it up to that good ol’ hardwired leash of influence that few men acknowledge, and many others think they can somehow beat — kind of like those people who think that they can drive drunk.  Now I’m not saying that Jaydie is going to worm her way into TFM’s brain or anything, but I do know that that’s how it starts.  Just because the average woman may not know how to change a car battery doesn’t mean that they aren’t very clever social tacticians and manipulators — never underestimate the amount of leverage they have on you as a man.

Avoiding all path-crossings with them is kind of hard, if you don’t live in a deserted island; but there is a difference between doing what you have to do in order to navigate around them through life, and becoming entangled.  Where is the line?  I would take it to the point of refusing to give them your contact information or befriend them on social media, unless it’s for strictly professional reasons (in which case you can put up the professional barrier and compartmentalize that engagement off from everything else).  I also think it’s wise to steer clear of any non-essential conversations with them, thus preventing them from finding a way to get into your head.  It’s understandable to make an exception for females in the family, but in some cases, even they may use female manipulation tactics on you, and it may be necessary to limit those relationships as well.  

Once you realize what MGTOW really entails, you may decide that it’s not quite for you, but unlike the futile exercise of trying to appeal to women, at least you’ll be clear about what the terms are.  No, you don’t have to be part of some online club and cheer on MRA rants — and as a matter of fact, you don’t even need to identify with the MGTOW acronym, because it’s a phenomenon that needs no name.  It’s a simple matter of having a true understanding of the hazard known as modern females, and staying away from that hazard.  It’s not a misogyny thing either — to quote a line from The Gods Must Be Crazy…

Even a poisonous snake is not bad.  You just have to keep away from the sharp end.

Just always remember: women, like men, are people…and that’s where the similarities end.  Do not become entangled.  Even the most innocuous and innocent-seeming entaglements can turn into big entanglements..and before you know it, you are in a bind that you wish you were out of.  It’s like one of the pilots’ favorite sayings: it’s better to be on the ground, wishing you were in the air, than being in the air and wishing you were on the ground. 

Advertisements

Remember This Guy?

jeremy-meeks-mugshot

Yep, it’s Jeremy Meeks – the swingin’ dick bad boy thug from Stockton, California whose mugshot set women’s genitals on fire around the world.  The nice-guy incels took a slight bit of solace in the assumption that he was on his way to prison, and the immature women mooning for him would never get to see their hero rise to the glory they wanted for him…

Ah, how naïve.

According to the news, he’s now rich.  Apparently, modelling agencies and advertisers – who remember damn well what go them in business – knew right what to do with this phenomenon known as Jeremy Meeks.  Now he’s reaping the well deserved (?) (it doesn’t matter – you’ll just drive yourself nuts thinking about it) spoils of having women attracted to him.  Without their help, this genetic god wouldn’t be…well, the genetic god that he is.  Remember women decide a man’s worth – they are the voters.

meeks car

Do you have a car that nice?  Do you live in a mansion like that?  No?  Well then, you should have been a thug with good genes.  Crime pays…when you live in a world where crime turns women on.  Did you think you were going to work hard and make the right choices in life, and that was going to get you where he’s at?  Come on…  And by the way, don’t expect him to get cleaned out in divorce court, because there is no way that his wife is going to leave him.  Women only do that when they want to get the money away from the unsexy guy; conversely, this woman stayed with him in poverty because he was the sexiest man alive.  He may blow it all, just like Dave the bread maker – that I kind of expect because he didn’t get where he got by being smart and resourceful, and those skills are usually required to hang onto prosperity…but then, there will always be plenty of opportunities to rebound for a guy like this, and there well never be any shortage of pussy.

If everything or anything else on this blog hasn’t helped you to unlearn the lessons you have been taught about the opposite sex, and life in general, hopefully this will.

Cougars and Cubs: Gender Revenge?

Perhaps you never would have thought that you’d see women spitefully laud relationships between older women and younger men as a kind of revenge against men for the much more common arrangement of older men and younger women, but now that it’s on full display, you shouldn’t be surprised.

Apparently, French presidential candidate Emmanuel Macron, 39, is married to a woman who is 64 years old.

That cliche-busting fact — a candidate young enough to be his wife’s son, rather than old enough to be her father — is a little social “revenge” that delights many French women

It’s almost not worth hooking up with an older woman just to deny other women the satisfaction…oh, but even more, you would be denying them hope that they don’t deserve.  It’s not just about spite, but also about making older, worn-out sluts feel like they still have high sexual market value, which in turn prolongs their catty, hypergamous high school behavior.  Women don’t “mature” until circumstance forces them too.  Giving older women access to younger men rewards bad behavior.

Lilach Eliyahu, a fashion designer, said the fact that Macron has a wife who “has wrinkles and cellulite makes me think of him as a feminist. He is the opposite of Donald Trump.”

This brings us to an important question: how might this affect the election?

First, one has to understand that women vote with their vagina; meaning that women vote for the candidate that they are the most attracted to, when it’s man vs. man.  Even in the case of Clinton vs. Trump, it was the Donald’s hyper-alpha qualities that gave him a heretofore unheard of 53% of the white women’s vote, against the first major-party female candidate in history.  Try to imagine Jeb pulling that off…(yeah, I know you just laughed, because I did too).

Marine Le Pen is not helped by her gender any, because she’s right-wing, and women are natural socialists, plus you have to consider the Sweden factor – women in France are likely turned on by the influx of violent Muslim rape gangs taking over the country, and Le Pen vows to put a stop to all that.  While this hurts her with the women’s vote, this issue with Macron being seen now as an invirile beta and even a male feminist is a new and important development.  Even some feminists may turn against him over this, though they wouldn’t tell anyone.  A guy like that is good enough to get a pat on the head for being a good little boy and marrying his old hag teacher, but women are going to shrivel up between the legs at the thought of putting a milquetoast cuck like that in charge of it all…yeah, even in France.

I don’t know who is going to win this election, but my prediction is that he under-performs with women, by as much as five percentage points less than current polls predict.  If a man is estimated to be an under-performer in bed, he’ll be an under-performer in all aspects of life regarding women.

No Such Thing As “Divorce”

Most people define a divorce as the end of a marriage, but that’s not actually true, if you think about it.  Certain aspects of marriage end, but others continue, sometimes for years.

Civil marriage is a contract, forming a corporation between two people, of all of their financial and many other legal affairs.  Unlike other contracts, parts of it can be dissolved by one of the parties, for any reason or no reason at all — completely arbitrary.  The parts that are dissolved include: the man’s right to his children; fidelity and exclusivity; shared residence; and of course, sex and love.  Of the aforementioned, the part about children is really the only halfway enforceable one — all of the others are ceremonial, and not actual commitments at all.  The parts of the marriage that continue are the fiancial aspects, most of which are burdens that fall on the man and are predicated on “maintaining the lifestyle that she is accustomed to”.  Yeah, just try to get un-married from those legal obligations.

So many times, I have heard men say it at the time they get married: “Well, ya know, it’s for her.”  Oh, famous last words…  He thinks he’s talking about the wedding ceremony itself, which he couldn’t give a rat’s ass about, but she’s been dreaming about since she was a girl.  What he might stop to think about is the fact that the marriage itself is also for her.  Think about it — what protections and benefits are built into marriage for the man’s sake?  You’ll hear propagandists hock a buch of specious statistics about higher average salaries and healthy lifestyles, as if marriage is an easy substitute for personal motivation toward those things.  The bottom line is that the civil protections of marriage are pretty much all for the benefit of the woman, and what the man got out of the deal was sex and children.  Guess what: in the modern age, all bets are off when it comes to the woman’s “duties”, but like never before, the man’s legal ensarements are enforced with unreasonable callousness and enthusiastic gynocentricism, often by a female family court judge.

So this makes you wonder if the only reason marriage still exists today is because men just aren’t thinking about it, or are ignoring the facts, or if pressure of tradition is really that great — or all three.  If a man ever brings these obvious problems up, the typical retort will be something like, “Well, you have to make sure that you marry the right one, see…”  Do these people ever stop to think about this?  Essentially everyone who gets married thinks they’re marrying “the right one”, but at least half of them are wrong, so what makes any man think that he’s got a handle on vetting women any better than the next guy?  If anything, those who pressure young men into marriage (parents, aunts, etc.) only cause them to ignore inhibitions that might save him from disaster…ah, but then, it’s all for her, after all.

The Bandito and the Biker

Just think…  This piece of shit has a woman, and you don’t.

You can bet that she stayed with him after this.  Hate to break it to the biker, but she was probably impressed with her boyfriend’s behavior – it showed that he has good genes.

Women’s choice in men says everything you need to know about them, not just as individuals but about womankind generally.

 

Researchers Blame Millennials Yet Again For the State of Marriage

It’s starting to become a joke.

Another blaring headline, this time from Bloomberg, that reads Young Americans Are Killing Marriage heads up an article with “new” research showing how the marriage rates have declined for 25-30-year-olds since 1980, and draws the same predictable conclusion: that the blame rests squarely on these despicable “kiddults” who are failing to grow up.

Every time you see an article like this, there is never any shortage of voices bringing truth and clarity to the issue, usually found in the comments section.  There’s usually no way to know for sure the age of those commenting, but they almost all speak the truth – that the rise of feminism and no-fault divorce has killed marriage, while poor economics and worthless education delays it further.  It’s no mystery to regular people what has happened in the last 50 years or so.

You would think that the think tanks who come up with these socially conservative studies, like this National Center for Family and Marriage Research or perhaps the National Marriage Project at UVA, would have picked up on this stuff by now and would have pushed it to the forefront, right?  Yet, you never seem to see that.  Even if they give those ideas a token acknowledgement, the conclusions they draw always seems to whitewash that, and leans right into traditional Protestant/feminist/complementarian male-shaming.  The dishonesty of it is troubling enough, but do they think that their strategy of pressuring men to marry with these things is actually going to work?  Seriously, is whining about the status quo, and ignoring the reason that are obvious to everyone else, going to produce even one more marriage?

It’s never a good idea to assume that people are in a vacuum, but sometimes their rigid agenda really makes you wonder.

How Women Use Pepper Spray 

This is an example of what modern women think is a justified use of self-defense spray..


It’s called “female entitlement”.  It’s only going to get worse if allowed to go unchecked.  What can you do about it?  Simple: carry pepper spray also, and make sure to get in the first shot.  Always assume that when a woman is getting angry with you, she’s about to spray you…because she probably is.

Oh, and don’t let the NAWALT cucks tell you that this doesn’t represent most women.

The Billboard of Gender Futility

A headline on Drudge Report today read, “BLLBOARD FURY: PROTEST PLANNED“, and featured the picture below…

billboardrevised1

Now when you see this, what is your first reaction?  Most of us probably think that the sponsor is some socially-conservative Protestant do-gooder, who thinks they can shame men into returning us to some Victorian era of chivalry and male headship, despite impossibly feminized modern headwinds.  That’s likely an accurate description of those responsible, although the “organization that bought the space doesn’t want to be identified”, the article said (how very interesting).  They are probably on the same level as those who posted billboards years ago with sayings like, “Just keep swearing…God is going to make you sit in traffic even longer.”

For a moment, the idea of a protest over the sign was refreshing, as this should offend every man who feels that he shouldn’t have to be a walking ATM to have worth — not that “real men” have the time to go out and protest things like this.  Ah, but of course, it’s not men protesting…yup, it’s women who are up in arms, and not on men’s behalf, but because they feel that it’s sexist against women.

“We are NOT protesting that the sign is capable of existing, or the people who put it up, or the ad agency, or the right to put it up. We are protesting patriarchy and sexism, and that this antiquated way of thinking about women exists at all.”

There you have it.  It is sexist and patriarchal to expect gratitude from women.  Of course these women aren’t against men providing, as taxpayers and bureaucrats, providing all kinds of help and incentives for women — as well as handicaps for men — so that they can “compete” in the real world and someday close that (fake) gender wage gap.  But the thought of a man and a woman living in a traditional “nuclear family” situation, and the wife having gratitude for her oppression?  Totally unacceptable.

This is another example of what you are dealing with in modern women.  This is how impossible, irrational and inclement they are, and why going your own way is the safest and most practical life plan.

You’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t: they’ll get angry if you provide for them, and get angry if you want them to take care of themselves; they’ll get angry if you “ogle” them, and get angry if you give the the cold shoulder; they’ll get angry if you don’t chase them, and get angry if you don’t take the hint and buzz off; they’ll get angry if you make more than they do, and get angry if you make less than they do; they’ll get angry if you don’t treat them like a “lady”, and get angry if you “put them on a pedestal”; they’ll get angry at men for dominating the workplace, and get angry at men who don’t have a job; they’ll get angry for suggesting that men are better at anything, and get angry if you don’t grab something off the top shelf for them; they’ll get angry if you favor traditional gender roles, and get angry if you don’t pay for the date; they’ll get angry if you believe that there are differences between genders instead of “gender” being a social construct, and they’ll get mad if you dare hit a woman.

In modernized women, you are dealing with immature people who are always angry, confrontational and don’t know what they want.  Don’t ever give someone like that a vote on the course of your life.  There may have been a time when marriage worked, but that is a bygone era…and don’t let some anonymous billboard social trolls convince you otherwise.  Let modern women tell you themselves, in their actions and reactions.

 

 

 

 

How Women Discard Men, and Why

Rarely are women straightforward about why they will discard a man like a used paper plate, because that would involve a lot of emotional heavy lifting that they don’t feel it’s their job to do.  There are a couple of ways to get around that:

1. They wait for him to say or do something that they can be offended by, sometimes even provoking him to say or do it, and then they jump on it, hold it over his head and throw him in the waste basket.

2. They raise the bar of expectations to some unattainable height — often progressively — and then when the man fails to meet that bar, they treat it like a betrayal and in the waste basket he goes.

A woman does this so that she can feel like it’s all his fault.  It’s a real bonus if she can make him feel like it’s his fault as well.

This is just one of many tactics that women have evolved to use throughout the ages, and realizing it can help a man from going into the rut of delusion about what he supposedly did wrong.  If a man thinks that the woman dumping him or not is all up to him and what he does, then when he gets dumped simply because he doesn’t measure up, he won’t understand it.  Leaving a guy is not about making him understand anything, it’s about trading up for another man who has better genes, even if there are no current prospects for her.

The sad truth is that women generally don’t have the kind of attachment to men that they feign having, and that men often have to the women.  It’s more of a utilitarian setup, but that doesn’t mean that women themselves even realize this.  They want to believe that the glue that binds them to a man is more of a complex mixture than it actually is, and that actually explains why they would play games like this in order to protect their egos.  To realize that love is usually not “true” when the rubber hits the road is the kind of self-reflection that women are not inclined to want to do.  They have been taught to believe that they are more than utilitarian opportunists, but not amount of well-intended upbringing and pop culture can change what they really are.

So, if and when a woman discards you, don’t take it personally, no matter what she says.  It wasn’t what you said, it was what you are, and you are not the author of your own genes.  Before you blame yourself or whatever it was she said you did, just keep this in mind: if women actually left men because of what the men supposedly did, there wouldn’t be battered women’s shelters in every major city.

The Lesson of the Pussy March: Modern Women are Beyond Hope

img_4046

As all men should know, the only way to win with a woman is to simply agree with her, and even at that, it’s only a temporary win – you’ll lose in the end, in a big bad way.  Women don’t reason like men do – they tend to emote.  Oh sure, they are capable of being reasonable, but that doesn’t really matter when they are choosing not to be.  Like all other creatures, they are going to do what comes naturally unless there is some kind of reason or incentive to do something else.  For as long as women have been getting their way by running their mouths, throwing tantrums and leveraging their sexuality, what reasonable interaction they may or may not be capable of is irrelevant.

It should come as no surprise that they are going to be pretty easily regimented and used as pink-headed pawns for both the obvious and the more shadowy political forces against President Trump, and the worldwide movement against globalism.  It’s not like they even had to build a new straw man from scratch – the die was cast long ago for this.  The globalist left, which thrives and conquers by dividing people into various groups and then pits them against each other (identity politics 101), makes the most use of those groups that are easily riled up.  While a lot of what we see today of this is a product of long and careful political cultivation – as is the case with Obama-era race baiting and race riots, which any race would be susceptible to – there is a special kind of hair-triggered reactionary utility in women, especially in the 3rd wave of feminism.  For example, all it took was one inarticulate comment from a police chief in Toronto to spark a worldwide movement of “Slutwalks“, which are an assertion of the narrative that women should be able to dress as provocatively as they want and not be raped – which is valid from a legal, moral and idealistic standpoint…just not from a practical one.  When you look at it from a simple risk management perspective – something they don’t merely overlook but explicitly reject, saying that we should “teach men not to rape” instead – it should be easy to see that there isn’t a lot of hard thought and reasoning behind the movement.

If leftist/feminist reactionary movements like the Slutwalks, or yesterday’s Women’s March on Washington and sister movements, were just a comical display of a few fringe kooks here and there throwing tantrums over the inauguration, this discussion would be unnecessary…but no, they are pretty huge – in the millions at a time, albeit not all in the same place.  Of course, the enormity of it all is something they want us to notice, and we do, but not in the way they are hoping.  The message we are supposed to get from yesterday’s demonstration is…well, there isn’t really a coherent message because (owing to the leftist political origins of these things) it basically turned into a mishmash of liberal dog whistle issues.  It reminds me of Occupy Wall Street – does anyone really know what exactly that was all about?  No, because it wasn’t really about anything specific – it was just a big feel-good tantrum being thrown by social justice warriors who felt like they weren’t getting their way.  In the case of this weekend’s vaginal protests, at least it was spurned by them actually not getting their way in the election last November (and it’s about damn time).

So what is the real lesson from all of this?  That is, beyond the fact that women are angry about the election (between Donald Trump winning and Hillary Clinton losing, who knows which is the more bitter pill for them to swallow, or if it even matters)?  I guarantee that it isn’t over any practical considerations, since I haven’t heard anyone say that they are worried about Donald Trump’s “locker room” behavior translating into federal policy that would hurt women.  No, I think that the lesson from it can be found in their numbers: that you could have that many women, all over the country and the world, join such an aimless, thoughtless, pointless blind rage like that is not only a testament to what extent the female gender is marbled with poisonous ideology, but a testament to just how stunted the gender is on the whole.  Look: nobody is perfect, and we all need to be reined in by voices of reason sometimes, but these massive demonstrations makes clear that there is a catastrophic proportion of human females who cannot and will not respond constructively to being contradicted or rebuked.  They are pulling the whole gender off the rails.

Some may say that this is nothing new: when a woman makes her mind up about something, she cannot be swayed, and will not listen to anyone.  While that may be true for most of them, when you have a massive, generations-long infusion of ideology that is carefully designed to dovetail into that tendency…well, it’s like Vladimir Lenin’s seed that will never be uprooted.  Not only does the ubiquity and intensity of this stuff make gender relations utterly hopeless, but when you look at the fruit salad of leftist narratives and proclamations being expressed in these female marches, it’s easy to see where this all comes from.  In this current pussy march (not to be confused with Pussy Riot, although there is enough overlap that it doesn’t matter) you see plugs for everything: socialism, homosexuality, transsexualism (kind of ironic), Islamophilia, abortion, russophobia (the new “red scare” – oh if only the friendly Soviets were still running things!), misandry, anarchy and lawlessness, all mortared together with a sludge of degenerate language, imagery and innuendo – just look at some of their signs, and that will tell you everything.

Now remember, these women are far, far beyond being contradicted or even reasoned with, and they are in the millions – and that’s just the ones who actually took the time to buy a stupid pink hat and go stamping around in the cold.  Sadly, I’m afraid that these women aren’t in the minority – this is what most women are like today.

What can you do about it?  As far as the women themselves are concerned, pretty much nothing.  You can, however, evaluate your own circumstances and plan accordingly – be pragmatic.  This may involve taking some conscious steps in order to get through this life with 21st century females in one piece (maybe):

  1. Limit your interactions with females to the minimum
  2. Avoid forming any new ties with females
  3. Navigate through necessary interactions defensively and with caution
  4. Never invest any time and effort into trying to level with or understanding a female
  5. Learn their mind games, and how to avoid getting snared
  6. Learn how to assert yourself, when the time comes, in a way that disgusts them enough to get out of your life without pissing them off so much that they want revenge
  7. Always be vigilant – remember that females today are legitimately dangerous in ways that they never were before, and you have to stay one step ahead in order to protect yourself

This all boils down to going your own way (MGTOW) in the true sense – that’s not joining a discussion forum with other bitter guys and feeding off each other’s red pill rage, allowing these women to live rent-free in your head.  It’s about going your own way, and not looking back.

Or, if you don’t believe me, take the blue pill…and good luck to you.  You’re going to need it.