Hey, fellas! Do you hate feminists but also hate doing things? Our good friend over at the Pro-Male/Anti-Feminist Technology blog has an idea for you: strike at the heart of the feminazi matriarchy by “denying marriage and denying children to women.” This, PMAFT (for short) argues, will effectively transfer “the costs of misandry … back on to women.” And all you have to do is: nothing!
Apparently, feminist ladies have an insatiable need to marry and make babies with men who hate them. All you need to do to thwart this evil plan is to not have sex with them. But wait a minute, you say, don’t ladies make the babies themselves, in their bellies? Well, yes they do. But unfortunately for them they also need a little something from you as well. No, not your money – that comes later. You know that white stuff that comes out of your penis when you masturbate? Ladies actually need that in order to make babies. And you control the supply! Cut them off! Embargo that shit.
Also, if you ever find yourself in a chapel with one of these ladies, and some religious looking dude starts asking you all sorts of questions, do not – I repeat, do not – answer any of them with the phrase “I do.” That’s how they get you.
The great thing about denying ladies your babies is that it also helps you to strike back at your parents – by denying them grandchildren! Ha HA! As PMAFT helpfully explains:
Our parents’ generation had one foot in the old system and one foot in the feminist system. This meant that many of them have completely avoided the consequences of supporting feminism. I see this with my own parents who don’t particularly think of themselves as “feminists” but have effectively supported feminism all the same. They have experienced absolutely no consequences from their support of feminism. This goes for both my mom and my dad. …
Most of our parents want grandchildren so denying them grandchildren really forces the cost of misandry back on to them. This is particularly effective when done by only children or by men who have only brothers. Even for men who have sisters, this can still be effective if it prevents the “family name” from being passed on.
In your face! No babies for you!
MGTOW, someone here’s a dumb bitch, alright. Wanna guess who?
———————–
Not me. I am not the one who called someone a moron without doing the slightest bit of thinking or research (it doesn’t take much thought to realize that some people die before reproducing thus to maintain population level somewhat more than 2 per female is needed).
I had a bet going with a friend on how long you’d last this time before resorting to personal attacks. Looks like I won 10 bucks. As for the rest, TL;DR.
For someone working so hard in the house, you sure spend a lot of time posting here though. :p
The 0.05, man. The 0.05. Or the 0.6, if you take the CIA World Factbook as accurate. That’s what accounts for people who die before they reproduce. An extra 0.6 will not only cause replacement but actual non-immigration population growth, because nowhere near 0.6% of the population dies before reproductive age anymore.
That’s why I called you a moron. Because you are stupid.
Call me whatever you like, and continue to spew your boring garbage as long as someone is interested in engaging with you. I mean, really, your points appear to be:
– Women suck because they won’t uncomplainingly do 100% of the housework and childcare anymore
– Therefore I will withhold my precious essence from them! And men are already doing so, obviously, because shut up, that’s why!
– Women cause war
– Lucky women, with their being poor enough to get extremely ungenerous welfare!
Do you really think you’re saying something we haven’t heard before? Did you read anything before you showed up to give us the benefit of your wisdom? Do you ever read or learn or listen to anyone else, or do you just drone on and on because you think you having a penis makes you some kind of guru?
I think the middle east which is also patriarchal would be peaceful if it wasn’t for the whole Israel situation.
—————
Well, of course, the oil there is another factor.
This is straight from the CIA World Fact Book for the U.S.:
Total fertility rate:
2.06 children born/woman (2011 est.)
I guess you don ‘t know the difference between 2.06 and 2.6. It is a big difference in this context — a huge difference. You are still way, way wrong. I should insult your math.
On second though, I just saw that you called me a moron again. Thus, I will insult your math. Any third grader knows that the position of a decimal point is important, dumb bitch.
Or you dumb, or are you just a liar (misrepresenting facts)?
By the way welfare isn’t ungenerous. I had a friend on welfare. By the time, you took everything into account (public housing, food stamps, medicaid, etc.) I figured she was living at a level of something like $35,000 a year for herself and one child. Not bad around here.
You’re right, I misread the decimal point. Congratulations, it is 2.06. See, I admitted that I was wrong! It wasn’t that hard!
Did you figure this the same way you figured that children born to unmarried couples is evidence of more men GTOW? By pulling it out of your ass and interpreting it in the light of your own prejudices?
I’m not an expert – or even an American! – but I believe darksidecat knows a lot about the welfare system, how shitty it is, and how hard it is to survive on the benefits you “figure” poor women get. Maybe zie can set you straight.
He’s been taking classes at the NWO school of statistics!
So if a boy causes a pregnancy, it is an accident (despite the existence of these things called condoms), but if a girl becomes pregnant, it is a sure sign that she is doing it intentionally and out of malice?
And? Oh, noes, we aren’t being close enough to hetero patriarchy, whatever shall we do? (worth noting though, unmarried does not automatically equal unpartnered or partnered with someone other than one’s children’s other parent). My issue with unintentional pregnancy is that the parties do not want it, frankly, I don’t give a rats ass if every single baby in the country is born “out of wedlock”. Wait, scratch that as an anti-marriage person, if that were to occur it would make my case in that area easier. The argument that married people do better means very little, when we give them massive legal and social rights that we deny unmarried couples. It is no surprise that couples which receive massive social and government subsidies (more than 1100 federal rights and benefits alone) for being married get advantages from those benefits.
Also, your response to my comments about income class and stay at home mothers is totally nonsensical. Really, it isn’t even close to being on topic with what I said. I can only assume that you either copied the wrong quote into that space and intended to address someone else, or have just floated further away from reality.
This is utter nonsense. There is massive discrimination in hiring, and massive on site harassment in most of these jobs.
You are really, really unaware of international current events, aren’t you?
Again, utterly contradictory with reality. Take a look at, say, all of WWII, including allied actions (just the nuclear bombs alone killed hundreds of thousands of civilians). Any quick study of history will show massive targeting of civilian populations historically, including things like selling the entire population of captured cities as slaves.
It appears that MGTOW Man has taken his knowledge directly from NWOs Big Book of Learning.
I knew her fairly well. She had a nice apartment. It wasn’t real nice like rich nice but there was nothing wrong with it. I valued the apartment at $600 per month (2 bedrooms).
I know she had the best health insurance. You could work for IBM or GE and not have any better. It paid for everything even gas to and from medical appointments. I valued that for her and her kid at $1,000 a month. This may sound high but she had a kid with substantial medical issues — probably not insurable at all except high risk pool. She is younger than me, but I know my insurance even though I am healthy is nearly $500 a month (with high deductible). The insurance she had was very, very valuable.
I know she received food stamps of nearly $400 a month.
This is as far as I remember the numbers. I know the analysis I came up with was fairly detailed and the numbers came out to like $35,000 a year.
I know this sounds strange in view of the whole MGTOW thing but she was the one woman since divorce I actually thought was marriage material. I couldn’t compete with the health insurance she was receiving from the government for her and her kid. No way.
A man like you relegates himself to the status of a noncustodial parent within marriage. You only start fussing about being a model parent once you get served with divorce papers, and that only because you want to retain control.
I’d say Russia — and it’s very patriarchal. Also, I note how conveniently you omitted tribal warfare.
I would say Saudi Arabia, where women are beaten, raped and sequestered all the time, people get their body parts lopped off in the public square, etc. Also Iran — where again, we have public hangings and other charming stuff like that. Afghanistan, with their burqas, and women getting beaten in the street if they make any noise or don’t walk behind men. But, oh, no, all that is only happening because of Israel.
Is it the same China where baby girls get abandoned to die of exposure? The same China where women are kidnapped and chained to beds because some villages have pretty much depleted their female populations? The same China where people are imprisoned and tortured for their religion or political ideas? Oh, yeah, it’s very peaceful.
I didn’t say men cause war. Seriously, you get offended when we call you stupid?
This is false. Civilian deaths far outnumbered military deaths in Europe in World War II. Or are you a revisionist, too? In fact, even before World War II, international laws about sparing civilians were enacted in response to the growing practice of either targeting civilians or indiscriminately causing their deaths. Or what, civilian deaths don’t count unless they are intended?
False. Most people I see driving luxury cars are men. But no, you only indulge in luxuries “to impress” women. How very convenient for you. Men like you are most materialistic of all because you even view women as acquisitions. For shame.
Your friend is a moron, and you are a hypocrite. You repeatedly attacked me personally, even before today.
For someone braving the awful Arctic weather and the “grueling” traffic AND doing his own laundry, you sure spend a lot more time posting here though.
No, pal, it’s only your statements that make no sense. My statements were addressed to your claim that men deserve women’s complete submission as a reward for something only some men do. I am not the one here claiming that I must be waited on hand in foot because some other woman somewhere is pregnant. THAT would be the equivalent of what you are saying. Most MGTOW’s are chicken hawks who have never served in the military and will never serve, but can’t shut up about all the stuff they deserve because “men” get shot at.
So if a boy causes a pregnancy, it is an accident (despite the existence of these things called condoms), but if a girl becomes pregnant, it is a sure sign that she is doing it intentionally and out of malice?
———————
Simply, put, yes, in many instances. I might substitute “selfish interest” for malice but regardless she is not considering the interests of the young boy. Yes, these young girls do want babies in many instances. Yes, it is the “key” to moving out to their own apartment, etc.
————————
I don’t give a rats ass if every single baby in the country is born “out of wedlock”
———————-
You should. The evidence is massive that babies born without an involved father are more likely to commit crime and be incarcerated, more likely to become addicted to drugs, more likely to not achieve a high school diploma, more likely to be ill (mental and physical), etc.
If your cared about children and the health of this society, you would care about raising children with both mothers and fathers. Marriage is usually the way that happens.
——————————-
You are just wrong about massive discrimination against women in employment. Many work places are almost all female (banks, insurance companies, schools). Women with professional degrees in many instances make more than equivalent men. Women do not apply for some high income jobs (e.g. offshore oil platforms) in significant numbers. To the extent women make less, it can be fully explained by life and job choices.
——————————–
Again, utterly contradictory with reality. Take a look at, say, all of WWII, including allied actions (just the nuclear bombs alone killed hundreds of thousands of civilians). Any quick study of history will show massive targeting of civilian populations historically, including things like selling the entire population of captured cities as slaves.
————————————-
Yes, WWII is “relatively recently” from a historical perspective. Most wars before that point did not involve civilian populations much. Yes, sometimes, cities were killed to the last “man.” But, that was not the norm. Usually, when the population was killed to the last “man” it was literally “men” who were killed. The women usually were not killed, Yes, they may have taken as wives or or prostitutes or raped or whatever but they normally were not killed.
A man like you relegates himself to the status of a noncustodial parent within marriage. You only start fussing about being a model parent once you get served with divorce papers, and that only because you want to retain control.
——————————–
You know what. You know what if you are just going to make up nonsensical untrue insults out of thin air which is of course a common feminist argument tactic, I will fight fire with fire.
You are just saying such stupid things because you have a really small ugly tits. So there. Further, you are a man hating ugly fat bitch who can’t get laid even at a party of drunken sailors. So, there. You sold your children in exchange for crack fix. So, there.
Two can play at the game of just making up insulting nonsense. I bet you don’t even know what a man is because you never had one. You obviously suffer penis envy.
——————————————–
The United States has engaged in a long list of wars since Russia’s last war.
You have no conception of world events at all.
The United States depending on how you count them is involved in 3 to 6 wars right now (possibly, more).
——————————————
The middle east does not do the things you describe all the time. It is news when it happens because it is not that common. We have our own atrocities here, plenty of them.
——————————————-
My statements were addressed to your claim that men deserve women’s complete submission as a reward for something only some men do.
————————————-
I never said anything or suggested anything about “complete submission” — or even partial submission. The notion that women should contribute to a relationship is hardly submission.
That is an argument tactic called the “big lie.”
————————————–
Well, American women kill infants all the time (abortion).
I wouldn’t be so harsh on infantacide by the Chinese.
I don’t know how common that is but I don’t think it is that different from late term abortion.
———————————–
Actually, where i am from, it is women who drive the largest and nicest vehicles by and large. Women here tend to drive large pickup trucks or large SUVs. The woman is usually driving a nicer car than her husband. That is what I see.
I think a large portion of the time when a man has a really nice vehicle it is a “babe magnet.” If the vehicle did not attract babes, he would not have it
MGTOW Man, you said this:
No, it will never work 100% but it is working. Marriage rates are way down. Legitimate births are way down. Women are having to do an “oops” in many instances to get pregnant.
I asked you this:
I’m talking numbers here. How many self-identified MGTOWs are there? What is their effect, in concrete, measurable terms, on birth rates?
I ask again, what proof, if any, can you offer that your movement has any impact whatsoever on rates of birth or marriage?
MGTOW certainly have had an impact on legitimate births. It looks like to me based on the graph referenced above the actual birth rate has been fairly stable for decades.
The fact that I cannot give a specific number of MGTOWs does not mean it isn’t occurring. I observe it in many men including myself. I hear women complaining about it.
In my instance, I had more than my share of children before I went my own way, so I didn’t personally affect the birth rate. In times past, I may have remarried and had more children.
No numbers then? So you don’t know, you just believe.
And you can prove right now all your “beliefs” with specific numbers?
You are imposing a standard on my I doubt you impose on yourself.
Irrelevant. I’m not the one making a factual claim, so doubt away.
As the blog title clearly says, this, this whole thing is mockery. But like the feminists in general, it is humorless.
Do any of you honestly believe Futrelle is out there “lurking” all the Men’s Movement forums, chatrooms and webpages; culling evidence to support these strawman articles? If you do, then it’s back to Feminist Boot Camp for you.
http://www.soapboxin…-camps-landing/
Feminist Boot Camp Links:
http://www.soapboxinc.com/feminist-winter-term/
http://www.safercampus.org/blog/2011/09/quick-hit-attend-feminist-boot-camp-over-winter-break/
http://news.clas.virginia.edu/womenstudies/x14228.xml
I thought “MGTOW” stood for “Men Going Their Own Way”, and implied a total avoidance of women. Are you suggesting that a significant number of men are saying “Meh, I’ll fuck you, but I don’t want a relationship, and if you get pregnant you’re on your own”, and this is makes them sort of MGTOW-lites?
Actually, kristinmh, that’s in part what I was wondering. Because for my part, I’ve no intention to get married or father any children, but shying away from being involved with women is most definitely not part of my life plan.
MGTOW Manmany if not most instances, the guy didn’t consent to the babies.
These were cases in many instances of women having babies from an “oops.”
[Citation needed]
There was a chunk of time, after a really badly ended relationship (It didn’t help that I’d moved 400 miles, and my life was sort of up-ended and then it all went south, in a very big way), that I “Went My Own Way”. I’d say there was about a year when I was just not interested in dating, or any sort of romantic involvement.
Not really interested in sex either.
And that was about it. No need to tell the world how I was getting back at women; because my ex had been a right bastard and treated me badly. Because I wasn’t. How would that work? We are supposed to be sympathetic to them punishing someone who didn’t wrong them, for the wrongs someone else did?
Which why this sort of thing (and the defensive reactions trying to, “explain” why we have to be generous to their nonsense) always amuses me.
Because really, “going your own way” is easy. All you have to do it, do it. No one is stopping you. I know, because I did it. No one was trying to fix me up. A few people asked if I was seeing anyone, and I said I wasn’t, end of story
Not sure if trolling or just stupid. I don’t have any knowledge about the Pacific Islanders, but South America has ongoing military forces fighting in its own borders, *RIGHT NOW*, and has for decades. They’re *STILL* dealing with drug lords that have actual, honest-to-fucking-god armies. This is your standard for ‘peaceful’? You know what mine is? Maybe, *MAYBE*, Canada.
You weren’t actually paying attention to it this century, were you? At all? Or ever, for that matter?
Where do I begin?
There was the Boxer Rebellion, the Chinese Civil War, and their military intervention in the Korean war, as well as an invasion of Vietnam in 1979….
Then there’s the fact that historically they’ve had big motherfucking wars. One of the most lethal wars, by sheer death toll, ever, was fought in China; the Taiping Rebellion. And it wasn’t fought under modern warfare principles.
In fact, the Chinese have sole credit to 4 of the top 10 most lethal wars in human history by death toll alone, and 3 of the top 5 most lethal wars by percentage of the total human population exterminated, including the dubious honor of the number 1 spot. Of course, to be fair, throughout human history there have been many Chinas, and they’re really not all the same society, but this is your gold standard for peacefulness? Even the current one is pretty warlike, and the entire region is scared to hell that China might actually militarily act *OUTSIDE* its borders again.
You’ve got a funny habit of switching between relative periods, don’t you? China can only be called ‘peaceful for a long time’ on a Meriken’s time scale, but you can’t really say Total War is a new invention on that scale either, since it got its kickstart in the USian civil war (Bear in mind elements of it have been around for a fairly long time, just not on the same level).
It’s true that you can’t say it’s just men in a serious sense; although men have engineered very nearly every war in history, they also had near exclusive holds on political power, and war is just not nearly as profitable or doable in the modern era. In fact, in a serious sense, I’d go against my peers, if they disagree, and say unequivocally that a gender equal society is not by default a peaceful one. The Nordic raiders had a fairly gender equal society until Christianization, and they were perfectly happy pillaging and killing; men and women both went on the raids, fought, and died.
Um, SUVs aren’t bought out of ‘materialism’, regardless of who’s doing the buying. They’re bought for ‘safety’ (Air quotes because it isn’t, but that’s another matter). As to houses… dude, not to burst your bubble, but most of the people I’ve heard who most wanted a house, for its own sake, were men. However, I’ve also heard both genders express a desire for it out of a warped desire that it’s the only ‘proper’ way to raise kids. Now, I don’t know which gender, if any, is in fact the most materialistic, but I do know men aren’t some spiritual purity on this count. I’ve seen far too many pissing contests over computer specs, collection sizes, etc, to fall for that shit.
Poke an MRA and ‘Nice Guy’ philosophy always pops out.
Oh really? You sure? You sure you wanna be primary caretaker? Because I *Promise you* there is are women who want kids and don’t want to be the primary caretaker. If you’re that sure you’ll love this trade, go. Go forth, Hengist. But you’ll quickly learn that it’s not nearly as easy as you think.
Really, that you characterize taking care of the kids as just ‘playing’ with them is a large part of why feminists know most men don’t really understand the role at all. You got a warped image of it from the media.
Cool story, Bro!
Just yesterday, I saw a woman at Denny’s. I could have had her several times. She made that very clear. She kept asking me how I was, bringing me food, smiling at me, and making small talk. I didn’t “have her.” She had a another guy with her and she introduced him as her finance. I suppose I was supposed to be jealous, but I wasn’t. I was supposed to feel sorry for him, but I wasn’t. I gave him “congratulations” and he nervously responded “thanks.” They walked off AND I HAD TO PAY HER!!!!
[INTERNET RAGE!!!]