MGTOW: Men Going Their Own Way

let me give you a personal example. i have to get my picture taken for a state ID. because of my past medical history, i look like death warmed over several times. my hair is a mess. i lost my teeth (all the enamel was eaten away by mass doses of vitamin c in an effort to stem rampant infections). i'm missing a breast and it makes my clothes fit oddly. i'm also aging in a very unattractive manner. so, i don't think it would be a nice thing to do, for myself, my family, or the wider public that must see me moving about amongst them, if i didn't at least try to look presentable before having the picture taken.

it's just a courtesy and a preventative measure. but i'm gonna have to fake it, cause i don't feel very good and it shows. i'm gonna have to stuff one side of my bra so i'm not lopsided (never bothered to buy a prosthesis). i'm gonna have to wash, dry, style my hair (believe me on this, if i don't, it's scary), i'm gonna have to change out of this huge cloth sack i call a dress, and put on something that doesn't make me look like i just safety pinned a bed sheet on my body. in other words, faking it, is mandatory in many cases. lol

p.s. the guy in the video is showing off cause he's prettier than the ladies and he knows it.

a reply to: undo

Undo, let's not forget that women also dress up for other women to increase their social standing. I would argue that this is the primary reason for exuberant spending on self articles (makeup, clothing, accessories, etc.)

originally posted by: ghostrager
a reply to: undo

Undo, let's not forget that women also dress up for other women to increase their social standing. I would argue that this is the primary reason for exuberant spending on self articles (makeup, clothing, accessories, etc.)

that fits into the accolades section. but let's take, for example, taste/style of clothing. a woman may or may not take advice from female friends who tell her that her new purple and pink polka-dotted pants look awful, depending on whether or not the woman herself, likes the way she looks. if she likes it, she may wear the pants anyway. and that is because she has learned that she is the final judge of her attire and when learning the meaning of "happy" you just start with yourself. if you're unhappy, how can you make someone else happy? she knows her friends will just laugh about it, and use it as a point of conversation, so no skin off their noses. so being happy, starts with you, as a woman.

my daughter might say, "mom that dress is so old fashioned," yet, when i look at it, i see something else entirely. it has meaning and artistic expression. i know she will get over it and laugh -- "ah my mom is so old school" and i will just happily go about the rest of my day, content that i'm wearing what makes me happy (without insulting people's sensibilities)

The music industry has played a HUGE part in this relationship thing, "Have you lost your love? Well there are plenty of songs to cry along with!" Just listen they tell you how to live, love, what or who to love, when to be an as*hole, criminal or player. These songs are a deeply ingrained part of our culture on the same scale with the media IMO. A lot of songs present "good" messages, but some do not. Def the media portrays unattainable bodies for both genders that most of us have no hope of ever achieving, but then we wake up and realize we don't have to.

a reply to: ghostrager

I am an old-white-dude...*I* dress-up for meetings etc. It is not a pretty-girl/ugly girl thing. I am perplexed why anyone would react so negatively to women starting to get treated the way they should in the few places on the planet where it is happening.

A culture/nation's economic stability and growth are tied directly to including 52% of the population in production.

I can't say for ALL of course but I have been married to my current angry bitch of a wife for 14 years.
NO MASKS of ANYKIND should be kept.HIDE NOTHING and you will know.
It's beyond hard to accept some truths of each other but at least you can understand the problems far more clearly.
My 1st wife was abusive and I think Bi Polar(You'll never get THAT ONE to a doctor) she just pretended to love me got to the states and found someone else. Korean bargirls DO have a sketchy record.

a reply to: undo
OK! But I think the video had more to do with the fakeness of it all, the women in the vid were just there for show, to make a point at one point one in the video they were even digitally added to the screen. To tell the truth while men may swivel there heads, it does not do much else and that pretty much would go for if they were walking around half naked or even extremely good looking, there are far more things at play which decides if some guy will go up to a woman then looks along, it could be from anything like ya looks, to money wows, to there thinking on youtube vid they saw some hours ago, to even that he stepped in dog # that morning and does not want to deal with that stuff or the ego of appeasing random strange women. Or it could just be me, I dont know your going to have to ask other dudes to get a wider range of ideas.

So ya women dress because of other women, and for the majority of the part its all in there heads, most guys do notice but they dont really care all that much, in daily life it has nothing to do with anything in general. If if females they actually had to go out and go up to guys and see if any of that stuff works. Well they would be like "why am I doing this #, it does not work" Which would kill the fashion industry and sales of things. I think for the majority most paths are set, and most people go with certain people no matter which way you slice it, so the rest its just something to do while you wait for that to happen.

a reply to: undo
WOW! That's some day you would have had. But hey look on the bright side at least a pigeon did not poop on you while you were going to get your picture taken. Poop on head is also not very attractive. Half of the stuff you described sounds like they would take you for a vagrant and kick you out of the place.

But I suppose you got a point. Got to look presentable and all that stuff, or at least make sure both breasts are semi horizontally proportionate, I mean cant have one hanging down to your stomach and the other normal. That right there, what you described, is quite a dilemma, one I am glad I will never have to go through, much less the other stuff. No thank you mam, I will stick to my peeing standing up. So ya! OK! OK! You got a point.

Oh! And the guy in the video is just acting, you know...Hes faking it, just like the ladies in the video are also faking it.

a reply to: Leonidas

Why would you be perplexed? Women aren't being "treated like they should". Again, women account for 2/3rds of divorces. They overwhelmingly obtain the position of the custodial parent, and recieve monetary funds from the parent that works to provide that money and thus is not able to spend time with their child (ren).

I have been fortunate to be in a position to meet the state appointed finacially obligations and still give my children every minute of my time with them. Most fathers do not have that. I could count on ten pairs of hands the fathers i know that caved in because they knew theyou couldn't fight the bias courts.

Take a minute to research the importance of a child's relationship with their father, and ask yourself how keeping a dedicated father in a perpetual debt is good for his child (ren).

Hint, it's not. But it does bring in the state more money.

a reply to: Leonidas

When 10% of fathers are receiving primary custody of their children...no, feminists have no right to play the gender card.

From the "old white dude" perspective; I dress sharp, hold doors for the elder and parents with children, and scuff up my shoes pushing cars stuck in snow banks.

However, I won't waste my time holding the door for a childish woman who can't say "thank you".

I'm not here to please other people, if you can't acknowledge a selfless act that I extend, well...don't expect it. I'm happy to let go of the door and have it help you in.

a reply to: galadofwarthethird

but wasn't he the cutest thing? reminded me of a pissed off captain jack sparrow.

and yes, it's likely that would've been the response, had i made no effort to look like i was at least trying. low energy levels and chronic illness does not equal vagrancy, but somehow, that's how it appears to be translated in wider society. eh, whatever.

i can empathize with this video

a reply to: ghostrager

that's not gender-related. that's just lack of common courtesy. i've had both genders do that to me, not necessarily related to holding the door, but in other ways (although i have held the door for others, most say thanks and some look at me funny, as if to say "what are you doing??" lol).

when our family was struggling financially, i decided to help out by mowing yards. you would not believe the looks i received from men and women, when a short little lady with a lawn mower showed up at their door. hehe. some hired me, most didn't. that could've been for any number of reasons, such as lack of funds, concern i might get hurt on their property, or just thinking it wasn't appropriate for women to do "men's work." whatever the case, my gender didn't give me any advantages, that's for sure. lol

Because of a personal situation, I am examining the ethics, morals and ideas concerning marriage and women in America, and it seems that this topic is associated. Maybe I can get some interesting input here.

I don't want to bring the specific situation to this thread and lead it off topic, but I wanted to share my own face-off I have experienced concerning my own conditioned beliefs and values that I have to deal with!

The values are so different here, and one of them is the idea that men want freedom and sex, and women want to be possessed and provided for.

The saying we have, "Why would he buy the cow when he can have the milk for free??" I have used... we all have at some point (or at least heard it and understood it).

But when I say that in front of french people, I get blank stares. "What?" they ask...

I am forced to back up and examine my meaning.
"Well, you know.. sex and all... men just want sex, and they don't want family, so if they can get sex and forgo the family, they will...."

"Men don't want family???? " they giggle.

"Uh... no, I mean, you know? Men want freedom first and foremost, right?"

Between bursts of laughter and eye rolling glances at each other, they answer, "So.... you are saying, men want to be homeless, hungry, and cold?"...."

I am left stumbling verbally, "Well, no... I mean, yes... I mean, I don't.... what...??"

They laugh and give me that look like "Are you a moron, or just insane?"

And I end up standing there wondering myself.

But here, online, I find people who are either as stupid or as crazy as me- we think men don't want commitment to a family, right?
That is a reality for us, it is a truth! Here I am comforted.
But then, I am also forced to examine and question myself and the world view we hold- why do our males reject commitment, when in other cultures, that is not so true?
Why do we use such sayings that compare women to livestock to be exploited or bought?
Why is a woman considered a source of sex only- and not comfort, warmth, protection, guidance, nourishment?

How did we get to that?

a reply to: Bluesma

in america, a single man who doesn't want to have a family, is called a bachelor. in times of financial/societal upheaval, fewer people marry because the legalities of it all, complicate life even more than it already is. and who in the right mind, would want to bring children into the world that they couldn't provide for or expect others to do it for them.

like a queen bee and her studs, pumping out offspring that are cared for by someone else's time and energy. i think in the ancient greek world such women were called the horai (and there are countless other names for them, as well). it's like the matriarchal form of the patriarchal harem. since it doesn't make sense in the natural sense (in that one man can make many babies at once, but one woman can only make one baby at a time (generally speaking), the concept of the horai is only useful, socially, when the environment is over populated. patriarchal harems are only useful when the population is dwindling too rapidly and the income of the patriarchy far out distances the income of the harem constituents. in that respect, it's economically motivated.

but in a world where the population is threatening to overflow, patriarchal harem systems don't work. i'd say matriarchal harems don't work either, though, because men are really not tuned to sharing their sweethearts with other men. it feels and sounds, very unnatural.

a reply to: Bluesma

Cant speak for most men .. the one thing always wanted that eluded me was family .. at least have my adopted kids though their all grown .. married and have families of their own ..
These days knowing my kids are doing well is good enough for me .. gotten used to being on my own and learning to enjoy semi-retirement ..

originally posted by: undo


like a queen bee and her studs, pumping out offspring that are cared for by someone else's time and energy.

Why is it someone else's time and energy?
Why is it assumed it is a man who provides for and takes care of, the children?
?
And why is it assumed the man gets nothing out of this? He is not cared for? Time and energy are not spent on him by the woman? He gets no pleasure from knowing his offspring is cared for and safe?

So... you're saying american men do not want to have comfort and care from another human?
American men feel nothing for their offspring, no pleasure in raising them, or forming them?



(I married a man who is not american, so now I find myself wondering what it would have been like if I had married an american man)

originally posted by: Bluesma

originally posted by: undo


like a queen bee and her studs, pumping out offspring that are cared for by someone else's time and energy.

Why is it someone else's time and energy?
Why is it assumed it is a man who provides for and takes care of, the children?
?
And why is it assumed the man gets nothing out of this? He is not cared for? Time and energy are not spent on him by the woman? He gets no pleasure from knowing his offspring is cared for and safe?

So... you're saying american men do not want to have comfort and care from another human?
American men feel nothing for their offspring, no pleasure in raising them, or forming them?



(I married a man who is not american, so now I find myself wondering what it would have been like if I had married an american man)

no, by tax payers not by men specifically, but by anyone who pays taxes to subsidize a string of children with no father (or a string of abortions) who are not practicing any kind of self control/creative abstinence or preventative measures, in the sex department, during their fertile years. they are like queen bees with a list of suitors who's only purpose is to impregnate the queen bee and move on. it's a form of harem behavior based on the matriarchal system.

contrary to the patriarchal harem, it doesn't provide support for male drones and the offspring remains in the hive under the purview of the queen bee but who are benefited directly by the labor of the workers only, rather than the labor of the queen bee. and although this increases population, the rise is much slower and quality of life degraded, than in patriarchal systems, resulting in things like shorter life span (unless one becomes a queen bee). i'd say this system is closest to marxism as it has a very narrow elite class and everyone else works to support the hive with diminished benefits.

patriarchal systems are the original model for the harem as a social welfare program which benefits the female drones as well as the rare queen bee and her offspring. the population increases faster than the harem/hive can support and as a result, the patriarchy attacks other hives, takes/kills their workers and kills their queens, replacing them with their own queens, providing an ever larger work force and supply of honey, to support the population increase. this system is closest to colonialism / empire building, as the benefits are greater (more supply for the demand) than in matriarchal systems. when it grows too large, it rolls back over into a matriarchal system, almost naturally, and when it does, the workers and drones are poorly supplied, overworked and die younger. population drops.

at least, i think that's the model they are using, both of them based on socialism as a form of welfare program, with various perks and shortcomings that moderate population size. the queen bee is secondary to empire building, in the patriarchal system, and as a result, doesn't receive the same degree of support provided in a matriarchy, so more of the benefits are available for a larger part of the hive. however, because the entire system is constantly re-enriching itself via conquest, the level of support for queen bees is similar in quality to that of the matriarchy

a reply to: cavtrooper7

I notice you are numbering your ex wives.

I've been married to my husband for 15 years and I don't think we have had a raised voice argument in all that time, arguments yes but never would I refer to him as an 'angry XXX' ever.

Being single is not the worst thing for some people.

Some people just can't share - be it love, money, space.

Cut yourself loose, you are drawn to the wrong type.

a reply to: VforVendettea

Incorrect assumptions can make fools of us all .The 2nd marrige angry bitch is FINE , who ELSE could be married to a warrior BUT a bitch. 14 years yell all the time.
WE are mutually disfuctional.

a reply to: ghostrager

With all due respect treating Child-Care responsibilities as though it was alimony is pretty much the core of that particular problem. What you are describing is a classic dodge that dead-beat dad's hang their hat on to make themselves feel better about not paying for their child's upbringing.

Father's and mother's relationship with each other - divorced, separated or together - is as important as their relationship with their kids.