It’s always handy when one of the MGTOW brethren sums up one of the tribe’s beliefs in a handy little post. The following is what every single MRTOWer out there (not to mention many MRAs and PUAs and even some non-acronymified misogynists) seems to believe about how women live their lives today. When I say “every single MGTOWer” I’m not really exaggerating for impact – well, maybe a teensy bit. But I don’t think I’ve ever run across an MGTOWer who doesn’t take all of the following on faith.
Like many manosphere beliefs about women – like the whole “women only fuck the top 20% of men” thing – there is of course not a shred of evidence for any of this. It’s an essentially religious belief, accepted on faith. MGTOWers are like monks in the douchiest religion ever.
Anyway, fresh from a post by “Rogue” on NiceGuy’s MGTOW forum, here’s how all you ladies are living your lives:
The modern woman’s life plan goes like this:
Step 1) From first sexual awakening throughout her twenties, fuck as many Alpha Asshole men (hereafter referred to as AA) as she can in a quest of sheer narcissistic hedonism. May give birth to an AA spawn during this time; party lifestyle and general female educative path (elementary teacher, social worker) results in shaky finances.
[citation needed]
Step 2) Oops, getting close to or past age 30? Find a Nice Guy Beta (hereafter referred to as NGB), dupe him into marriage with sex (he’s generally grateful for the attention, having had less than stellar success with women throughout his twenties), use his money to stabilize shaky finances. Strong likelihood of having another child or two; may again be AA spawn due to affairs. Pack on 30 pounds of fat (at least!). Cut off sex with NGB since she now has him over a barrel and was never really attracted to him in the first place. Get steadily angrier and more dissatisfied.
[citation needed]
Step 3) Divorce at or slightly before age 40; attempt to remount AA cock carousel, this time as a cougar. Fail miserably because no AA wants an old, fat female body and a loose pussy that looks like a hunk of roast beef that’s been worked over with a dozen ball-peen hammers for a month. Said failure twists her mind until her only remaining pleasure in life is to fuck with ex-NGB in various ways such as taking him back to court to raise CS payments, or denying him visitation rights to his children.
[citation needed]
Step 4) Accept that she’s past her time for the AA cock carousel; become a companion to many cats.
[citation needed]
And what’s with all the cat-hatred, anyway? Cats are adorable, endlessly fascinating little monsters who do no harm to anyone, unless you count all the times my cat has attacked me without provocation and the fact that she just threw up her dinner and is now insistently demanding a second dinner. To paraphrase Samuel L. Jackson’s character in Jackie Brown, you can trust cats to be cats.
Anyway, back to the sermon:
The marriage strike is just an attempt to short-circuit steps 2 and 3, and force women to ride step 1 as long as they can, then transition directly to step 4. Will women like the result if, instead of rushing to save them at age 30, men just shake their heads and walk away? I think it’s an experiment worth trying.
Once again: please, please, please walk away. Walk far away. Become monks in your douchy religion. Just remember that most monks who take a vow of chastity don’t spend the rest of their lives whining about how women are a bunch of filthy bitches.
Oh, and before anyone pops in with a “why do you pick on the outliers, this guy doesn’t represent bla bla bla,” the post (which naturally got nothing but huzzahs on NiceGuy’s forum) was also highlighted on the MRA blog What Men Are Saying About Women as an example of “superb” discussion of the Woman Question. This bullshit is Manosphere-Approved bullshit.
Step 5: get job at sexy robot factory to support children
Step 6: build trans spider robot in off hours.
Step 7: take over world! 😀
FoS: Lovely photos. Best of luck with the translating. My Russian has never been good enough to make money at. Recruiting sucks but at least he’s local, when he’s not working.
Hey, man, why do you always pick on the outliers. This guy doesn’t represent all mgtow!
Thanks, Pecunium. my Russian is damn rusty- the last time I had a class in it was Fall05-Spring06 school year- My freshman year at NIU. But not many people speak it, and I am all about future earning potential. Luckily FoSB was a Reservist at the station here in Madison(not that I’m thrilled about that, either- I didn’t want to date another military man. It just sort of happened), and yes, recruiting sucks. He hates it, but he knows I wouldn’t be OK with another deployment, or him going active duty. He cares enough that he wants me to stick around, and not just be like “Well, ok, it’s your life, see ya!” He also wants to stick it out, retire at 42, get his pension and either stay at home or work part time as- gasp- a counselor or teacher.
I guess it was just my little anecdote that I’m not following this weird path the MRAs imagine.
At the other end (someone who vastly understated partner numbers) the variance would have to be widespread (and one sided) to not be lost into the median.”
What’s the point in making a study if you magically know what the outcome should be?
We have proven some of the men and women lie, a priori we don’t know who lies.
Maybe the big percentage of men who say they had 1-3 sex partners in their life, lie (in a huge part of them didn’t have any), maybe the small number of men who say they had sex with many women lie. We don’t know!
Of course it’s easier to believe, a small number of people is lying than a big number. But honestly, that argument is much too weak to refute the MGTOWers’ claims (note: I’m not saying they have any evidence to support their claims).
Who knows if the men who tell large numbers of sex partners are lying? It could just be the way the MGTOWers see it: there is a huge percentage of men that don’t had sex or had it very rarely (these men then are lying that they at least had one or two sex partners) and a small percentage of men that had sex with many, many women.
Result: There’s no evidence to support the MGTOW-scenario and there’s no evidence to support any other.
“Current theory is that the genetic component of homosexuality is carried on the X chromosome, so gay guys got it from their mother, not their father.”
But with a 50% chance that’s the X chromosome the gay guy got from his grandfather.
“I can’t trust men going their own way to go their own way and leave polite society alone? What kind of messed up world is this?”
As I said very often I honestly believe there’s some of the worst cherry-picking going on on this blog (and sadly many are trying to generalize the things he finds somewhere.)
Either way, what do you expect of those MGTOW board? Go on a support board for software xy, 90% of the threads are about problems with it, nobody posting something how great it works.
If you feel great and happy living without women maybe you might post one or two threads about your epiphany and how society fooled you into thinking that they are important (you won’t see those threads here). But that’s it. 90% of the threads will be about problems you have with your lifestyle.
(Interesting to note: No matter what insane beliefs you hold, whether you are creationist or a climate change denier, there’s no “David” making a blog about you and your ilk, collecting your forum posts or your comments on articles. 😉 )
Right. And we’re saying, as women, we don’t [value success more than men].
The world certainly doesn’t look that way. And the argument that this is only because there are more “successful” (in the sense of rich) men than women is just to weak. Then only the proportions should be different, like there are more women chasing rich men than men chasing rich women.
And a priori you should expect to see differences in what men and women value in their partners.
Though there are differences throughout the cultures, heterosexuality was a pretty common thing, even in ancient Rome. 😉
But the male body looks different from the female body, very different, so different that it’s an exception that you can’t tell if s/o is male or female.
There are much more men, who think sleeping with a man is repulsive than there are women who think the same way.
So, though imho it can be strongly influenced by culture, there is still a very strong correlation to which sex(es) one is attracted to most and one’s own sex.
So that proves that attraction is fundamentally different between the sexes. Why then should we assume that there is a “symmetry” in this attraction, like that women value the same things in a man that a men value in a women?
Is English a second language for you?
Yes.
I studied at DLI. My grammar is so-so, my vocab both rusty, and oddly skewed (want to talk about airplane wrecks, machine gun platoons and train crashes, I’m your guy… otherwise… not quite so much).
I have all the tools, what I don’t have is practice. If I got Rosetta Stone, or found a way to make myself study, instead of just working on not forgetting, I’d be a lot better. He knows his Pension won’t come for another 20+ years after he retires, right? Though is recruiting duty is adding points to the dollar value, reserve component types get screwed.
I think of this with practically every post on Manboobz, but it’s not even a question of whether all women are like this… it’s whether any women are like this at all. Seriously, does any of the OP bear any resemblance to any people or relationships out in the real world?
I mean, for all I know there may be a woman out there who spent her teenage years sleeping with hundreds of handsome rich guys who abused her, had kids out of wedlock with her hundreds of paramours while working as an elementary-school teacher, then married an ugly guy with no money just so she could have more kids and divorce him for the fat chid-support payments (why didn’t she seek child support from the rich “alphas”?), then magically made all those kids vanish so she could be a 40-year-old spinster in a house full of cats, but somehow I’ve missed meeting her.
It’s like the hilarious idea about 80% of men being dateless virgins for life, which can be easily discounted by, I don’t know, walking outside.
Pecunium- I don’t discuss his pension with him too much- It’ll be his money whenever he gets it. But with Russian- taking it at a state college, I learned a disproportionate amount about clothing, food, and location/destinations. But I’ve forgotten a great deal of it by now. But then, learning German in high school and throughout college, was much the same way. the basics were clothes, food, places, then we moved on to abstracts and complex literature. If you want to practice without spend the, what, 400 or more on RS, I recommend reading Russian news online, and watching Russian films, while you parrot what they say on the screen. S’how I’ve retained so much German, even though I dropped out of college in 07.
Marc says: “No matter what insane beliefs you hold, whether you are creationist or a climate change denier, there’s no “David” making a blog about you and your ilk, collecting your forum posts or your comments on articles.”
Have you never read/heard of STFUconservatives? I’m sure there’s a whole slew of sites dedicated to mocking EVERYONE.
Tiredofitall:
“So, the MGTOWs know nothing about what life is like for women, and thus should shut up. Yet somehow the female commenters here know everything about what life is like for men and what they are doing wrong.
I smell a double standard.”
We’re not speculating as to what life is like for men. We’re looking at this charted out life path and essentially saying, “That’s funny, this does not match my life experience at all.”
Quite honestly, I’m sure that there are some women out there for whom this post may match up to. But to try to apply such an idea to an entire gender…well, it’s as silly as trying to develop just one format for how men’s lives are supposed to go.
Also, I’m sorry that you were bullied. Nobody deserves to be treated that way. However, congratulations on your fifteen years’ experience in martial arts. I know very few people who have practiced it for that long (save for the handful of people whom I’ve trained under).
@Shaenon: He’s not saying that.
AA = Alpha Assholes != rich guys
“then married an ugly guy with no money just so she could have more kids and divorce him for the fat chid-support payments”
“No money?” No, beta, as I understood that term is just a nice, a little awkward guy with a good income (but not rich).
Btw, isn’t there such a thing “alimony without children”?
“(why didn’t she seek child support from the rich “alphas”?)”
As I understood that, these alphas aren’t sexually frustrated, so they don’t need to enter a relationship.
“It’s like the hilarious idea about 80% of men being dateless virgins for life, which can be easily discounted by, I don’t know, walking outside.”
What about: 80% of the men don’t get the sex they want? 😉
Crap… This time without the open tag.
Marc: At the other end (someone who vastly understated partner numbers) the variance would have to be widespread (and one sided) to not be lost into the median.”
What’s the point in making a study if you magically know what the outcome should be?
We have proven some of the men and women lie, a priori we don’t know who lies.
Maybe the big percentage of men who say they had 1-3 sex partners in their life, lie (in a huge part of them didn’t have any), maybe the small number of men who say they had sex with many women lie. We don’t know!
Sigh… more innumeracy.
If there are X quantity of people having sex, then the number of total partners (Men with women, and women with men) has to come out equal.
Lets say there are 10 men, and 10 women.
The MGTOW model has 2 men having sex. Each of them says they have 1 partner, for a total of 20 acts of women having sex.
If each woman says she has had sex with one man, then there are 20 acts of women having sex and the numbers are right.
Now… lets say one of the women says she has had sex 20 times. The men’s sex = 20, and the women’s sex = 40.
The numbers are wrong. It’s not a case of we know what the answer is, it’s that the answers aren’t possible.
When a regression is done, and the outliers (like the person in my example) are controlled for (by doing some analysis of the errors), then what we get is a much more reliable number.
So, what does Occam’s Razor tell us
It posits that the answer with the least comlex explantation is probabaly correct. When it would take 2 guys to skew a survey one way (and such a skew is visible… in that most men report similar numbers over a similar period of time, hence the term outliers) and 2 times the difference understating by the same percentage (that is if 20 guys padded the numbers by 100, it would take 20 understating by 50 percent [because it’s a ratio problem) to hide them.
Since we have a controlling factor (we are trying to norm two halves of an equation that must balance) we can look for the anomalies and remove them.
WHen we do that, the numbers are in keeping. To get the MGTOW scenario to work, 80 percent of men would have to be lying, in a way which balanced out all the women. That is a condition which is, to be blunt, practically impossible. All the guys who aren’t getting any would have to know what the number are; for women having sex, and have to know what their, “fair share” of that would be if they were getting laid. Enough so that when all the guys who aren’t getting sex (but decided to lie on the survey) were collated, it matched the number the women were getting; That would have to be balanced by the alphas telling just the right sort of fibs (shading down) to hide the disprportionate numbers they are getting.
Becase (to forestall you saying the outliers are the only one’s getting sex) if you take the average guys out of the equation… then there aren’t enough sexual encounters on the part of the braggarts to match the numbers the women are providing.
But with a 50% chance that’s the X chromosome the gay guy got from his grandfather.
No. XY = Male. For someone to be a male homosexual require that they be male. That means the sex determining Chromosome they got from their grandfater is Y.
No. XY = Male. For someone to be a male homosexual require that they be male. That means the sex determining Chromosome they got from their grandfater is Y.
You have two grandfathers 😛
Tired– Have you ever seen the documentary “Crumb,” about the great underground cartoonist Robert Crumb? He complains constantly about how much he got picked on in high school, although as far as I can tell he didn’t get picked on so much as ignored; the one who got picked on was his brother Charles, mostly because Charles insisted on going to school dressed as a pirate because he was sexually fixated on the movie “Treasure Island.” (To say the Crumb family was odd would be an understatement.)
One scene that’s stuck with me is Crumb going through his high-school yearbook, drawing sketches of girls he had crushes on. One girl was called “The Shelf” because she had a butt that stuck out like a shelf. Another got picked on for wearing handmade clothes. Crumb casually mentions that of course he would never dream of talking to any of these girls, or being nice to them, because they weren’t considered “cool” girls and the other guys would have made fun of him.
What interests me about this scene is that Crumb shows no empathy for the bullying these girls went through. The fact that this girl got picked on and called “The Shelf” only matters insofar as it made it unthinkable for the young Bob Crumb to try to date her. Meanwhile, the bullying the Crumb brothers went through is, of course, the greatest injustice imaginable.
Crumb then brags about how he was able to get tons of girls with big butts once he became famous.
I guess what I’m saying is, everyone was an asshole in high school. You can bitch about it, or you can move on to the happier world of adulthood. I recommend the latter, because nobody likes a rage-filled STEM major except other rage-filled STEM majors.
an open tag too
FoS: I’ve managed to retain a fair bit of my Russian (it was ’93/’94 when I as at DLI). DLI is an intense place. A college quarter of Russian (or whatever one’s language is) every 9 days. I was there for a year.
I will ask if you’ve ever watched Russian News? The go a mile a minute. I read, I listen to tapes. I don’t own a television, so I get films on occasion. I read Russian websites. It’s work, but I do it.
Just not enough.
Sorry… I made an arithmetic error. If one woman says she has sex 20 times, it’s 39-20 =19 too many, not 40 -20.
Evidence for a single “gay gene” is iffy, and we certainly don’t know if it’s sex-linked or if it’s dominant.
Homosexuality could be the result of a combination of genes that are inherited from multiple ancestors. Or it could be a gene that’s only expressed sometimes, under certain circumstances.
Genetics isn’t always as simple as “gay dad has gay son.”
Marc: No matter what insane beliefs you hold, whether you are creationist or a climate change denier, there’s no “David” making a blog about you and your ilk, collecting your forum posts or your comments on articles.”
Have you looked at the internet?
Try climaterealists.com
Try Pharyngula for smackdowns (often with ridicule) of creationism.
I really like Stonekettle Station for more generic mockery, but I’d wouldn’t recommend going in there and trying to defend Creationism/Climate Change Denial/Sexism/Racism or other forms of stupidity. Jim is a retired Navy Master Chief… he takes no nonsense, and no prisoners.
Sigh… more innumeracy.
Beware, I studied math.
“WHen we do that, the numbers are in keeping. To get the MGTOW scenario to work, 80 percent of men would have to be lying, in a way which balanced out all the women.”
Ok, if that’s the MGTOW-scenario, that’s too extreme, that’s really unreasonable.
I’m just saying that there could be much more “male virgins” than this study suggests. Especially if there is such a strong stigma against it.
So, what does Occam’s Razor tell us
I knew somebody would come with this one.
I already said that it is easier to believe that few people lie than many.
I also said, that this is a weak argument.
In general, Occam’s Razor is a weak argument. Every internet-know-it-all uses it and nearly always the wrong way. Very annoying.
Marc: I have two grandfathers. Ok, so there is some chance that I got an X from my mother’s father… that would be the gay one? 🙂
There is a lot in the ways the genetics of homosexuality are mentioned which is problematic. And… I don’t care. If it were 100 percent choice I wouldn’t care. So long as people aren’t exploiting each other, I don’t care.
Have you never read/heard of STFUconservatives? I’m sure there’s a whole slew of sites dedicated to mocking EVERYONE.
Yes, but it’s very different.
No blog on the internet cares that much about the comments of anonymous people. It’s really unique. David writes a long article about every *** he finds somewhere.
And pharyngula etc. those sites don’t bother with forum posts or comments. If you mock the stuff William Dembski writes on his blog that’s a much higher standard. Also, they don’t cherry pick ALL THE TIME!!!
AA = Alpha Assholes != rich guys
No, beta, as I understood that term is just a nice, a little awkward guy with a good income (but not rich).
Oh, dear, the “who’s an alpha?” game again. Didn’t you spend the entire first part of this thread arguing that women are irresistibly attracted to successful men? Then “alphas” would be rich, successful guys, right? Now you’re saying they’re poor guys, and the successful guys are “betas”? I’m completely confused.
“(why didn’t she seek child support from the rich “alphas”?)”
As I understood that, these alphas aren’t sexually frustrated, so they don’t need to enter a relationship.
But in this fantasy scenario, she had kids with the alphas. Even the kids she had during her marriage to her poor beta husband (you can tell he’s a beta because he had to have sex with a woman in her THIRTIES! EWWW!) are actually the products of affairs with alphas. Why doesn’t she get some DNA tests and hit those guys up for child support? You don’t need to have been in a relationship with someone to get child support.
“It’s like the hilarious idea about 80% of men being dateless virgins for life, which can be easily discounted by, I don’t know, walking outside.”
What about: 80% of the men don’t get the sex they want?
I dunno. Maybe. So?
Oh, hey! Trojan reports that sexual satisfaction is on the rise, but they would, wouldn’t they? According to the annual Trojan-sponsored sex census, 76% of Americans report high levels of sexual satisfaction.
http://www.ramanmedianetwork.com/sexual-satisfaction-on-the-rise-survey/
There is a lot in the ways the genetics of homosexuality are mentioned which is problematic. And… I don’t care. If it were 100 percent choice I wouldn’t care. So long as people aren’t exploiting each other, I don’t care.
If there’s a “gay gene” on the X-chromosome and homosexuality is maladaptive, natural selection would have gotten rid of it.
And goodbye for now, you’re all posting way too fast.
Pecunium- I meant reading the news 🙂 I do that with der Spiegel for German. My Russian class, when compared to the speed in my German class, was about one HS year per 18 week semester.
Shaenon – “Hypergamy” seems to have two different meanings, which can be switched between as necessary:
1) Women all want a rich man who can support them as bon-bon eating housewives.
2) Women all want a swaggering, hyperconfident, hypermacho bad boy who can melt their panties with a single smoldering glance.
The first definition is visibly less true as women become more able to support our own bon-bon habits, so the second one is taking hold. And although I think the second one sorely misconstrues what’s attractive to women (I’m a lifetime nerd groupie and quite happy about it), there’s part of me that just want to say “so what?” Yes, women are attracted to men who are attractive. What would you expect?
And what would you like us to do–distribute our affections randomly?