Category Archives: MGTOW
>Women Are … Part 5: Romance is Dead Edition
>
 |
| Earth girls ARE easy! |
Part 5 in a ten quadrillion part series. What today’s entries lack in coherence they make up for in vehemence. And general crackpottery. I’ve bolded some of the best bits.
Women are: dumb cowards happy to open their legs to space aliens.
Females do not understand and are unwilling to participate in war or power politics on an international level. The classic female response to war is to lie down and fuck whichever MAN wins. If the Nazi, Arabs, Huns, Romans, Tutsies, English, or space aliens win the next war it won’t matter to the female mind. If they kill her father, brother, and husband it won’t matter to the female mind. She is happy opening her legs and breeding with a winner.
Women are: Feminizazis?
These socialist, feminizazi, ball breaking c@#ts can go jump off their lesbionic herstory produced bridge and hopefully the goddess will welcome them into feminazi distopia where they will get 70 virgin boys, 14 year old (that’s the way those teachers like em) and 70 slutty girls, so they can lap each others worn out slut produced disease pouches.
Women are: Sexified diseased blobs of flesh
American women were whores 40 years ago, they became sluts 30 years ago, 20 years ago they were free prostitutes, 10 years ago, they became walking Sperm banks / Mobile Sperm Units, and today they are a sexified diseased blob of flesh waiting to infect their next encounter with their contagious excretions. They are a grotesque form with female organs without any spirit of femininity – a polluted and decayed creature! They are totally ruined by their own hands… minds!Romance is dead and whores killed it!!
>WTF is an MGTOW? And other weird acronyms and lingo.
>
 |
| Not the real MGTOW logo. |
For newcomers to this blog, here’s a handy guide to some of the strange acronyms and lingo you’ll encounter here and in the “manosphere” in general. (For a definition of that term, see below.) I will update this entry periodically as needed.
First, the acronyms you’ll see most often here:
MRA: Men’s Rights Activist
MRM: Men’s Rights Movement
MGTOW: Men Going Their Own Way MGHOW: Man Going His Own Way
Ok, so what do those terms mean?
MRM: The Men’s Rights Movement: A loosely defined, but largely retrograde, collection of activists and internet talkers who fight for what they see as “men’s rights.” Unlike the original Men’s Movement, which was inspired by and heavily influenced by feminism, the self-described Men’s Rights Movement is largely a reactionary movement; with few exceptions, Men’s Rights Activists (or MRAs) are pretty rabidly antifeminist, and many are frankly and sometimes proudly misogynistic. Those who oppose the MRM are generally not against men’s rights per se; they are opposed to those who’ve turned those two words into a synonym for some pretty backwards notions.
MGTOW: Men Going Their Own Way: As the name suggests, MGTOW is a lot like lesbian separatism, but for straight dudes. MGTOW often talk vaguely about seeking “independence” from western and/or consumer culture, and a few MGTOW try to live that sort of zen existence. But most of those who embrace the term have a deep hostility towards and/or profound distrust of feminists and women in general. Many MGTOW refuse to date “western women” and some try to avoid women altogether. As one MGTOW site puts it:
It is basically a statement of independence, and irrelevance – men declaring themselves free of the social expectations of women and western culture as a whole, because both have come to hate men. …
Men basically have most of the rights we need, as long as we treat women like they have the plague. … If the only way men can avoid “oppressing” all these strong-as-men-but-oh-so-fragile-when-offended princess wannabes is to steer as clear of them as possible, a lot of men are quite ready to do that.
Some other terms and acronyms you’ll run across here:
Anglosphere: Countries in which English is the primary language, or, more narrowly, those countries that used to be British colonies. They are full of evil Western Women (see below).
Incel: Involuntarily Celibate. Perpetually dateless guys, though the term “involuntarily celibate” seems to place the blame for this situation on the women who aren’t dating these guys rather than on the guys themselves. For those incels who are genuinely socially awkward or phobic, this can be a self-defeating stance that can lead to bitterness towards women. (There are a few female incels, in which case reverse the genders of everything I’ve said above.)
Mangina: Derogatory term used by MRAs, MGTOW, etc. to describe guys who disagree with them — e.g., me. You can figure out the various connotations of this term yourself.
The Manosphere: The loose collection of blogs, message boards, and other sites run by and/or read by MRAs, MGTOW, and assorted friendly Pick-up Artists. The primary source of material for this blog.
NAWALT: Not All Women Are Like That. Dudes in the manosphere make so many ridiculous and untrue generalizations about women that they’ve come up with their own little acronym to describe the most common reaction to their nonsense: “not all women are like that.” Remarkably, many seem to think that making a reference to NAWALT is actually some sort of clever rebuttal of their critics.
PUA: Pick-up Artist. PUAs are obsessed with mastering what they see as the ultimate set of techniques and attitudes — known as “Game” — that will enable them to quickly seduce almost any woman they want. There is a vast literature on “game” online, though PUA is at its essence simply a male version of the age-old female ploy of “playing hard to get.”
Western Women: Also known as WW. Evil harpies, at least according to many in the manosphere. Contrasted with “foreign women,” a term that (in the manosphere, at least) sometimes refers to all women outside the Anglosphere, but often refers to a subset of these women from poor and/or Eastern countries, mostly Asian, who are regarded as more pliable and thus more desirable to haters of “Ameriskanks” and other WW.
>Johnny’s Turn to Cry
>
 |
| Boo fucking hoo. |
As many of you have no doubt noticed — what with the literally dozens of news stories and op-ed pieces on the subject that have appeared in the media in the last week or so — incoming Speaker of the House John Boenher is a bit of a weeper. While some have scoffed at his public crying jags, quite a few people, including some who don’t like his politics at all, have stepped forward to defend his right to cry.
Women have been especially quick to jump to his defense, at least when it comes to the crying thing. In the Washington Post, Ruth Marcus announced that she wanted “to celebrate the lachrymose speaker-to-be and hope that he helps make the world safe for public crying.” Rachel Maddow devoted a whole segment of her show to a defense of his shows of emotion — while pointing out that while Boehner has been moved to tears by the plight of American schoolchildren, his policies will inevitably result in massive budget cuts for education.
But the most, er, original interpretation of the whole crying thing comes from one commenter on NiceGuy’s MGTOW [Men Going Their Own Way] forum, who sees this female defense of Boehner’s right to cry as … an evil female plot to make him look bad. As Phloridian put it in a recent posting:
By now many of us have become aware of the crying episodes of John Boehner who is soon to become the next Speaker of the House.
Women all over the media have been insisting that it is alright, but snickering about it covertly. The piece on 60 Minutes has virtually doomed any chance of becoming President and he is beginning to become a laughing stock.
This is why women are not to be trusted. They will encourage men to cry, and expose their vulnerabilities all in an effort to weaken the man. That’s what’s being done here and it sickens me.
Women are devious creatures indeed! It makes me want to cry.
>Two "manosphere" blogs have now posted the contact information of Assange’s accusers
>Two influential blogs in the “manosphere” — there may be more, I don’t know — have now posted the names and contact information of Julian Assange’s accusers; I won’t link to the posts. Clearly the purpose of doing this is to encourage harassment of these women. Disgraceful.
EDIT: Some asshole keeps posting the contact info here so I am moderating comments for now.
>All I want for Christmas is low self-esteem
>
 |
| Ho, Ho, Hoes! |
Don’t let it be said that Men Going Their Own Way lack Christmas spirit. On the MGTOW message boards today hanzblinx asks the rest of the fellows to “suggest a holiday gift for my gf.” Nothing fancy, just something that makes her feel special. Well, not that special. Actually, not very special at all:
OK I know the first answers will be..
apron
oven mitts
mop
dustcloth
g-string
but what exactly can I get my GF for Christmas for about $30 that would not inflate her ego too much? Is there a book? A CD? Anything?
Hmm. Given that she’s dating a dude who hangs out on the MGTOW message boards, I wouldn’t think there would be much danger of hansblinx’s alleged girlfriend having an excess of self-esteem, or really any at all, but what sort of gift do you give a gal that will help keep her ego permanently deflated? A framed picture of a female friend you think looks prettier than her? Sexy lingerie several sizes too small? A “Does My Fat Ass Make My Ass Look Fat” bumper sticker? An “I’m a Cunt” t-shirt? A “Shut Your Whore Mouth” needlepoint kit?
Actually, that last one sort of rocks.
>How to blame feminism for everything: Airport Lesbians Edition
>
 |
| Gropes for everyone! |
So I had been assuming that the creepily intrusive new airport screening procedures — you know, the whole “let us look at you naked or we’ll grope you” thing — was the fault of a government willing to trade away our last vestiges of privacy for an illusion of security. But apparently, it’s feminism that’s to blame. And lesbians. “Rex Patriarch,” a blogger who is definitely going his own way, suggests that the new procedures are the “final result” of feminism gone bad:
Look who now runs the TSA, a bull dyke control freak. Look at who works for TSA, bull dyke control freaks and mangina white knights. This army of control freaks was created by feminism. Feminism is not about equality it is about upsetting the natural order creating female superiority through the abuse of men which then mutates into government superiority through the abuse of men and women outside the system.
Mr. Patriarch’s post was, ironically, inspired by a news story about India’s (female) ambassador to the US being groped — er, patted down — by a female Transportation Security Administration screener. I’m not quite sure how that promotes female superiority.
>He’s quite the Caulksman
>
 |
| Hello, lover! (When they say “All-Purpose,” they MEAN IT!) |
The Happy Bachelors of the Happy Bachelors Forum may not be so happy, but you can’t say they’re not ingenious — and thrifty! In a recent discussion of masturbation, onezero4u asked
anybody tried the “fleshlight” before????
i made a homemade one out of half a empty caulk tube, about 10″ of bicycle inner tube to line the inside & some duct tape to secure it on the outside. dammmmm i didnt leave the house for a month after that.
That’s right. He turned a caulk tube into a … cock tube.
I also like how he specifies he used ten inches of inner tube. Because this guy having sex with a caulk tube wants you to know he’s hung like Ron Jeremy!
Great. Now I’ve got to get THAT image out of my head.
Some MRA/MGTOWs sure are obsessed with fleshlights.
>Spanking and Civilization
>
 |
| Some dude made this. |
Always funny: Pompous misogynist doofuses who can barely string a sentence together pontificating on how “Men made civilization.” That’s the topic of a recent thread on NiceGuy’s MGTOW Forum started by the mighty Ragnar — you may remember him as the co-inventor of the whole Men Going Their Own Way thing. In it he asks what he thinks are some profound questions about the past and future of civilization itself. And spanking.
There’s not much doubt that men made civilisation. …
If men really are the ones that took us out of the animal kingdom and the price payd for that is the occasional spanking of women.
Can spanking of women then be regarded as oppression?
If families are the building stones of society and thus different from primate promiscuity.
Can restrictions of female sexuality then be regarded as oppression?Could it one day be regarded as ethical and higly moral to spank and restrict women, because it is related to a higher principle that is good for Mankind, their women and children?
Well, that sort of restriction was seen as ethical and moral in the past — here’s a good starting point for anyone interested in reading more on the subject — and still is among a significant number of people in the world (though not any I’m going to invite over to play videogames anytime soon). As for the future, I’m going to go out on a limb and say that the answer to that final question will be “no.”
>My favorite oddball critic of the Men’s Rights Movement
>
 |
| From Not an MRA |
I discovered an odd little manifesto the other day put forth by a raging antifeminist … who also hates the Men’s Rights Movement. “Not an MRA’s” site looks like a blog, but it’s essentially a long rambling rant cataloguing all the reasons “why I am NOT an MRA.” His basic thesis:
I hate feminism. I hate the destruction it has brought onto our society and culture. I hate male-bashing. I am sick and fed up with all of it. That said – I realize that the MRM – or MRA’s are doing way more harm than good in the efforts of getting rid of these things.
As the lead-in to a manifesto, it’s not quite up there with “a spectre is haunting Europe — the spectre of communism,” but it certainly grabs your attention. As do the illustrations he uses to illustrate his various points, taken from Disney’s version of Alice in Wonderland. (Don’t tell Disney!)
So what exactly does notanmra hate about the MRM? It’s a idiosyncratic list of irritations, some perfectly understandable, some just sort of cranky. Here’s a partial list:
He hates the endless blather about “manginas” and “White Knights,” and the slew of of oddball acronyms that litter most MRA discussions (PUA, MGTOW, MGHOW, NAWALT, and of course MRA). He thinks MRAs cheapen the notion of “male bashing” by complaining endlessly about ads in which men get kicked in the balls are the victims of slapstick violence. He hates the undercurrents of anti-Semitism and generalilzed bigotry that infect some MRA forums. He hates conspiracy theory in general. He hates the endless denunciations of “chivalry.”
Holding doors open for people is common courtesy. If you approach the door first, hold it open for the PERSON behind you. Where I work, men do this for men, men do this for women, women do this for men, and women do this for other women. It’s called being a human being. A few MRA blogs/sites label this as “chivalry” – poppycock. Come on out of that rabbit hole and stop acting like a screwball.
Holding doors open for PEOPLE is not what leads to male-hatred or male-bashing.
He hates that “some MRAs call themselves “”masculists” or “masculinists”. This makes me sick. I have no desire to “follow in the footsteps” of feminism by calling myself this, or even by associating with people who call themselves this.” He thinks all the talk of circumcision as “genital mutilation” is completely backwards, and that the procedure is actually beneficial. (I’m guessing of all his opinions this is the one that gets MRAs most angry at him.)
Of all his various complaints, I think my favorite is this one:
Observations have convinced me that the MRA agenda is not one of getting the laws changed or eliminating male-hatred, but rather – to argue the same points over and over.
Don’t I know it!
EDIT: I corrected a testicle-related error in the text above.
>Unfunny Girl
>
 |
| Was it all based on a lie? |
You know what’s always hilarious? Humorless douchebags pontificating on “why women aren’t funny.”
Our text today: A set of comments on the Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW) proboards forum. Madashell gets the ball rolling:
In my entire life I haven’t met one single women who is funny especially compared to the numerous men who are able to make myself and many other people laugh. I’m sure this is true for almost all of us.
If you can’t think of a single funny women you’ve ever met, you either 1) have no sense of humor whatsoever, or 2) you’re such a flaming misogynist your brain simply can’t process humor when it comes from females or 3) you live in a hole in the ground eating bugs. Or some combination of the above. In the case of Madashell, I’m guessing it’s a mixture of 1) and 3). (He just seems like a bug-eater to me.)
Now, I’m not even going to bother to provide a little list of women in history who are fucking hilarious, because every single reasonable person on planet earth should be able to come up with a little list of their own.
Instead, let’s hear what the MGTOWers have to say on the subject. Here’s Whytry:
Because laughter is a sign of joy and women aren’t capable of emotion. They’re literally creatures of lust and animal behavior.
Hanzblinx, meanwhile, offers a little list:
1. humor is related to wit which is related to intelligence
2. humor requires seeing the world outside of the 1st person perspective
3. humor is used by men as a tool to attract women by display of wit, however, women attract men with display of skin, no wits required.
Of course, when a woman laughs at your joke, it doesn’t necessarily mean that she actually has a sense of humor. At least according to dontmarry, who suggests that laughter is sort of a female version of a boner:
Interesting theory, but I’m a little stuck on the notion that George Carlin and Rowan Atkinson represent the highest pinnacle of achievement in human humor history.
rebel has a somewhat more elaborate, if somewhat less coherent, explanation:
Because le rire est le propre de l’homme- laugh is specific to man.
MAN is the only creature on the planet that has a capacity for humour and laughter. When you really think about it, humour is a gift from God. It sets MAN apart from all other creatures: on a higher level of existence.
To me, the question is irrelevant. Does my dog have a sense of humor? The question is irrelevant because only Men have a sense of humor. By design.
Adam was the first sentient creature (so they say… I don’t know). Then Eve was produced to provide some blow jobs whenever Adam felt bored. Eve was content to be Adam’s receptacle (in Latin: vagina):she didn’t have to be funny: only have a deep throat. But that was before feminism took the bag away…but humor has not returned…
LOL!!!
“LOL!!!” Really?
I guess I just don’t understand humor after all.
EDIT: Looks like the humor-discussers have discovered this post.
