>
A female friend of mine asked me the other day how Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW) handle the question of sex — as in, how can these guys deal with their desire to have sex with women if they swear off women? It’s a good question, and one I still don’t have a comprehensive answer to. Some pine for sexbots, some masturbate, some seek salvation in supposedly more pliable non-Western women.
And then there’s Christopher in Oregon. He’s got his own plan, which involves motorcycles, Beethoven, and Robert Frost. Here’s how he spelled it out in a mini-manifesto he posted as a comment on Marky Mark’s blog.
First, Christopher defines the problem, as he sees it:
Women are whores. They are far more likely to have STD’s than men. Be aware of this. Handle with extreme care. Women are filthy, and they will lie about their infections. Condoms will NOT protect you.
So what can a poor boy do?
The simplest and wisest choice is to be as I am- a gender separatist. I have no social dealings with women (with the exception of my two lesbo neighbors).
LEAVE THEM ALONE, fellows!
But some of them are kind of, like, all sexy and shit.
Women are walking cesspools of filth! Most of them have or will have a permanent STD infection. It is unavoidable. These are FACTS, and not the rantings of an unstable misogynist.
(I’m a very STABLE misogynist, thank you kindly)
Women are DIRTY creatures, pure and simple. Be dignified, and don’t lower yourself to engaging in any filthy behavior with them. You WILL be infected with the diseases they are carrying. A moral, dignified man does NOT rut like an animal with one of these creatures. Sexual intercourse and oral sex are filthy, disgusting activities, and ruin a man morally. They spread disease.
Ok, ok. But what if you still want to rut like an animal with filthy women? Sublimate, sublimate, sublimate. And pull out some of the books you picked up in that one English-for-non-majors class you took in college.
Elevate yourself above such filth of the flesh.
Listen to classical music. Read Shakespeare and Frost. Meditate. Take long walks. Ride a motorcycle or bicycle. Think good thoughts. Purify yourself from the evil in our society.
And avoid any unnecessary stimulation:
I very recently tossed what little pornography I had left. Amazing the effect on my mind and soul. Do not lust after women in your mind. Masturbate only as a last result to relieve tension. Do not lust after women sexually. It weakens you.
Remember, women aren’t just filthy whores, they’re Satan’s representatives on earth:
God made man in His image, and women was made in the image of Satan. Squeal all you want, but history proves me right. A woman is a test; a stumbling block for man. Our life is an adventure. A journey. A pursuit of our creator, and a pursuit of excellence in our personal lives. A woman and her filth is part of the obstacle course set before us. If we are wise, and avoid them, we will grow stronger as a result. We will finish the race successfully.
Women was not put here to support us as such, and we will only grow stronger if we AVOID her snares.
Christopher, I support you in your quest. Please do not have sex with any women. The thought of you reproducing, even accidentally, is truly scary.
>This is why I am an advocate for moderated forums. In the MRM, there's this idea that it is a universal good to tolerate the expression of a wide variety of views no matter how unusual, on the pretext that the ensuing subsequent debate against the wackiest statements will somehow squash the legitimacy of them. "It should all get hashed out in the comments, so don't censor! That's what feminists do!" is the typical battle cry. Personally I think that this is a politically stupid approach that forum admins on MRA and MGTOW forums should reconsider, to whatever degree that permissiveness is practiced there to a fault. When I was an admin for Antimisandry.com a few years ago, for example, I banned a notorious misogynist known online as "Bob" (he's fond of signing his rants with the phrase "Blessings, Bob"). Over time, Bob had made a series of violent statements in the comments section of various posts, culminating in one comment which attempted to justify the murder of Nicole Brown-Simpson, the former wife of O.J. Simpson. Although some of the other registrants on that forum disagreed with the idea that any user should ever be banned, the owner of AntiMisandry.com stood behind my decision. Other similar crazies that were banned from A.M. included MikeeUSA.Expel the wackos from within your midst, lest your entire forum and all of its users be unfairly maligned by your opponents. If you're trying to get the laws or cultural attitudes changed, then you're not going to get very far by giving succor to the small minority of lunatics who would sully the legitimacy of your cause.
>Oh, for pity's sake, at least some of these guys'd be a lot happier if they just get the hell out of the closet, don't you think?
>For better or worse, I think the vast overwhelming majority of those in the MRM/MGTOW community are completely straight. No one sexually uninterested in women would spend so much of their time obsessing over them, or get so angry at them.
>Hey David, now you have an example of MRAs being accused of being gay in your own comments section.
>Oh yeah, and someone sexually uninterested in women could get pretty damn angry with them after being falsely accused of rape/sexual harassment or after getting passed over for a job or promotion because he didn't have a vagina.
>To be honest, if it's retreating from all thoughts of women he's wanting, he's not going to do himself any favors by reading the Bard. Love and sex are some of the most highly recurring themes in his work, and the innuendo gets positively scorching at times.Frost is maybe less overtly sexual but still extremely sensual in his own way. See: Putting In The Seed.
>@David Futrelle:"No one sexually uninterested in women would spend so much of their time obsessing over them, or get so angry at them."This is my take on what motivated George Sodini to commit mass homicide against the women in his gym. His problem was an obsessive preoccupation with women. If he had been celibate, he would never have committed those murders.So mock celibate men if you like, but remember that if they don't care enough to hate the opposite sex then they probably won't be inclined to hurt them either.
>@Christopher:Go donate to a sperm-bank.If for no other reason – just to piss David off.:)P.S. all that said, YOU SMELL.
>Graze on my lips; and if those hills be dry, stray lower, where the pleasant fountains lie. – William ShakespeareYeah….Shake is totally non-sexual lol
>Cold: … And here's an example of MGTOWs talking about how much life would be easier if they were gay:http://mgtow.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=4120Also: why would getting falsely accused of rape make you angry at women in general, rather than at the particular false accuser? There are evil women; there are evil men. Doesn't mean all women or all men are evil. John: I'm not mocking this guy's celibacy in itself; I'm mocking the whole toxic cocktail of anger and hatred and weird rationalizations. It's one thing to be celibate because you're asexual. There's no shame there, and no real issue; these aren't the sort of people who are obsessing about evil women on MGTOW message boards. It's another to have strong sexual desires for women but to avoid them because you think women are stuck-up, or evil, or all the laws are unfair, etc etc. That's what leads to unhealthy obsession and anger.
>Yeah, the key word is IF; there is nothing in that thread to substantiate the feminist fantasy that MRAs are closet gays, not that there should be anything wrong with that if we are to believe that said feminists are not homophobic.I said that being falsely accused of rape COULD make a man angry with women in general, I never said it WOULD.
>I don't know what MGTOW is, apart from the obvious men going their own way. So I cant really comment on it, from whats been c/p'ed onto this post it looks a little like a mirror image of feminism circa 1970s. I notice more and more this mirroring of feminism in the mrm, Im not saying that its deliberate mirroring.. its just that men are in the same position that women were in in the 70s and seem to be responding in a similar way.I completely agree with you John, I think allowing a minority to generate rhetoric like that is bad for the whole movement as it will be cherry picked and used to suppress more legitimate issues. Looks like that guys consciousness is growing, its a shame about the misogyny.
>Oh was that guy falsely accused of rape?
>I have no idea if Christopher in Oregon was ever falsely accused of rape; I was speaking of a hypothetical man who is sexually uninterested in women.Unfortunately, banning people like Bob and MikeeUSA from forums doesn't make them disappear; they can always find a place to air their ideas and people like David will find them and cherry-pick them. All you accomplish by banning them from a specific site is preventing that specific site from being associated with them. It's worth doing, of course, but it's not going to put any kind of stop to the constant smearing of the MRM.
>"I said that being falsely accused of rape COULD make a man angry with women in general, I never said it WOULD. "Oh my god, Cold, do you see how little sense that makes? Because it makes no sense.What are you trying to say? That it COULD make them hate women, but in fact does not? What is your point?Hating an entire group because a member of that group wrongs you is called forming a prejudiced belief. Yes, people can and do form prejudiced beliefs, that doesn't make it right or justified.
>@ Eoghan, on the issue of censorship, I think even designating moderators hand having them encourage people to not post comments that do not contribute to the discussion can help reset the tone, without the need to actually remove the comments. Also establishes and official stance against the offending comment.
>@Eoghan:"I don't know what MGTOW is, apart from the obvious men going their own way. So I cant really comment on it, from whats been c/p'ed onto this post it looks a little like a mirror image of feminism circa 1970s."The MGTOW concept was conceived sometime during the last decade by two men who we only know through their online aliases. One is named Ragnar, and the other is named Meikyo. Of these two, Meikyo is the more prolific writer, and if you want an idea of the true concepts behind the MGTOW "theme" (don't call it a "movement") then here is Meikyo's blog, which has been inactive for two years now:Mirror of the Soulhttp://mirrorofthesoul.blogspot.com/You'll find a lot more information about what MGTOW is about on the above co-founder's blog than you will from commenters on MGTOW blogs. I will agree that a substantial number of embittered men gravitate to MGTOW blogs, but most probably don't have a true grasp of what MGTOW means.
>"Oh was that guy rightly accused of rape?" @DavidLove the kitty and caption btwMy first response to the post was fuck this guy must be joking because no human being could possibly move through life with such vile and be well, surviving. But then my second response after reading John Dias' its wiminz faultz (TM) version George Sodini, yeah this guy is a rageaholic and a ticking time bomb and I wouldn't be surprised if he was/will be a murderer, but of course, I wouldn't excuse it. "Also: why would getting falsely accused of rape make you angry at women in general, rather than at the particular false accuser? There are evil women; there are evil men. Doesn't mean all women or all men are evil. "This is what always baffles me. It was brought up by another poster here: http://jimhines.livejournal.com/519379.html?page=1#comments"I said it elsewhere, but I'll mention it here, too. Why if a guy gets falsely accused of rape—if it's one of the cases where it actually happened—and he gets to hate women for ever, but nobody else gets the same dispensation? I got mugged by a black guy and my best beloved coworker asked me an amazing question: "Do you feel differently about black men now?" Well, no, duh, because the guy who attacked me wasn't a black guy, he was a black mugger, and so he's a mugger, period. And I didn't have a good opinion of them to begin with. People who say they distrust and fear women after a false rape charge are basically revealing that they believe all women are liars, if not worse and more."And she's right. If you're attacked by someone who's a mugger/liar/etc. then you hate muggers/liars/etc., not the incidental group that they happen to be apart of. Unless of course you already hate that group and are looking for an excuse to be racist/misogynist/etc.-ist. Even if that incidental group is proven more often to be the culprit in such situations, that doesn't justify it. Otherwise, if societal problems wrt rape mean that rapists are more likely to be men, and false rape accusers are more likely to be women, then generalizing that all women are liars necessitates you generalize that all men are rapists and vv. Which is exactly the question I posed to Yohan and other MRAs previously: how come women who are raped/abused don't get to hate all men if men who are falsely accused get to hate all women? It's bullshit and nothing more than a doublestandard.
>@Cold"Yeah, the key word is IF; there is nothing in that thread to substantiate the feminist fantasy that MRAs are closet gays, not that there should be anything wrong with that if we are to believe that said feminists are not homophobic."It's a common belief that hard-core homophobes are really homosexual. IMO, feminists are just incredulous that anyone who hates women so much could simultaneously be attracted to women and let's face it, it's easier to think they're gay then to assume you're not going to have to be worry about dating a secret MRA/rapist/misogynist/etc. I mean, look at the misogynistic Ancient Greeks, who practised pedophilia/pedastry – sex with young tween boys and had prostitution and complete control over their wives.
>@Tec:"Which is exactly the question I posed to Yohan and other MRAs previously: how come women who are raped/abused don't get to hate all men if men who are falsely accused get to hate all women?"First of all, there's a difference between justification and explanation. Just because there's an explanation for a victim's hatred at an entire group it doesn't mean that the victim's bigotry is justified.Secondly, when anyone has been abused then they don't have a right to get into positions of authority and/or psychological influence and then use the leverage that they have attained to project their bigotry against their abuser onto distinctly different individuals. MRAs want the bigots to get out of the psychological profession, off the bench in the courtroom, out of law enforcement, out of the classroom, and especially out of public office. A lot of damaged people take their pain into such positions of influence and authority and then use their harrowing experiences to make assumptions about people who don't necessarily confirm the victim's pre-determined template.For example, female victims of domestic violence may go on to become intake personnel at a battered woman's shelter. Imagine if you were a man whose wife had just threatened to pour boiling water on you as soon as she found you asleep. If you had no recorded evidence that she had said this, and your report to the police didn't result in an emergency protective order against your wife, then how credible would you be perceived by such an intake worker? The first thing on her mind may in fact be that you are the abuser, because her abuser was male just like you are. These people need to get therapy and be professionally assessed to guard against any possible bias that arises due to their victimization. Unfortunately, it's often considered extremely insensitive for victims to be expected to take such assessments. In fact, DV training that is given to law enforcement, and funded by taxpayer money through VAWA grants, presents just such a gender-polarized viewpoint (i.e. "men are perpetrators, women are victims, end of story").
>I'm made in the image of SATAN! Kick ass! Fear me! LMAOI think maybe he got herpes from sleeping around. Spreading your seed doesn't sound so good when you got that crazy itch that just won't go away. LOL. David, honestly, I don't know how you read through it all and post so much. It's good for a laugh but I'd go mental after a time. Good on you!
>Thanks for that John, I like the idea, I can relate and consider myself disengaged from the system by choice in some ways.
>Oh, wow.So the MRAs are agreeing with the feminist separatists? Awesome.To all MRAs: Uh… NO. PLEASE! Don't stop having sex with us! We neeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeed your precious man-juices/penis/whatever to survive. We won't be able to heartlessly and bitchily dominate you without it – uh, I mean, LIVE WITHOUT IT. YEAH.xoxoxoxo
>John Dias seems reasonable until you get to the part where he doesn't understand domestic violence shelters or the difference between "one perpetrator abuses you" and "one perpetrator abuses you, and then almost everyone else continuously supports him, minimizes the abuse, and puts you on trial instead."Abuse is widespread and also heavily ignored by our society, no matter what combination of identities you have there. Minimizing the fact that, when men abuse their partners, they do it worse? Not okay. Minimizing the fact that men commit the vast, vast, vast majority of all rapes? Not okay. Ditto for men committing the vast majority of all child molestation? NOT. OKAY.That and Sherrod was persecuted on similar terms, and equally falsely.Also, with pretty much every woman I've ever known being abused, how exactly are we going to keep abuse victims out of power? Are we going to then put the abusers INTO power? And point of fact, WHY IS KEEPING ABUSERS! ERS! OUT OF POWER NOT FUCKING IMPORTANT ENOUGH FOR YOU TO TALK ABOUT ON THE INTERNET?
>@DelianthAwesome posts! My fav is when MRAs go off on feminists who talk about rape – who are by and large rape survivors. Oh yes, rape victims are so in support of false allegations! Yup, nothing they support more than having real rape victims minimized as liars and real rapists running free to rape! Asshats…@John – there is quite a big difference between justification and explanation, yet MRAs like you consistently do both quite often. George Sodini killed women because he was an anti-social violent misogynist. Same goes for Mark Lepine. Having serious psychological problems and targeting a specific group isn't going to be solved by avoiding that group. It's like saying, "Oh we can solve homophobia by having those homophobes avoid homosexuals!" You're understanding is, at best, childish, and at worst, delibrately malicious.