It’s been a long time since we’ve checked in with Trogdoor005, a young Man Going His Own Way with a vivid imagination, a love of bold text, and a deep hatred of all things female. In a recent post on MGTOWforums.com, the Trogger reports on a visit to a local drugstore, where he witnessed a loud argument between two women cunts. The argument is actually the least interesting part of his story; it’s what happens afterwards that really got my attention, suggesting that Trog spends most of his days in a constant state of boiling rage not only towards women but towards pretty much anyone and everyone who crosses his path.
In search of the chips aisle, Trog ended up over by the pharmacy.
As I pass by the pharmacy, I notice that most of the people standing/sitting there are older people … what looks like a handful of 60-75 year olds, baby-boomers getting their last few drop$ of blood drained by big-pharma before they croak. Perhaps a comeuppance of sorts, these are, afterall … the SAME people who embraced and got behind liberalism/feminism back in the day … effectively laying the “foundation” for the Matriarchy that we currently live under, among OTHER things … .
Damn those old people and their MATRIARCHY. Trogdor continues his wandering, and we discover that he hates young girls as well:
As I continued to make my way thru the store, I was particularly disturbed by a lot of the younger girls and their dress/ demeanor. Some of these girls didn’t look a day over 13 and here they were, already wearing those short-shorts that go all the way up to the ass, kind of like the ones described here. They of course, had their little “smartphones” in one hand whilst txting away feverishly … and some of their faces were already showing signs of a developing “thousand cock stare”, which should come as no surprise considering the rotten feminized culture they were raised in, having absorbed countless hours of Jersey shore and MTV poison.
What the fuck is a “thousand cock stare?”
I overheard a couple of brief comments as I walked by some of them, totally superficial bullshit … you can tell right away these girls are (unfortunately) gonna grow up to be more of the same generic, hypergamous, narcissistic American sluts that we are all-too-familiar with, TOTALLY worthless women just like their mothers in all like-li-hood were as well. You can tell just from the tone of their voices and their snobby remarks that these girls have no substance, no redeemable qualities … they emphasize and accentuate their “curves” because … that’s all they are! That’s all they have to “offer” … sex … their slimy hole. The future does not bode well for America with such a bad crop of “native” women having >51% of the vote and being “in charge” of reproduction …
Dude, if all you want is a slimy hole, buy a fucking fleshlight – there’s no shame in it — and shut the fuck up about actual women and girls.
Eventually, after witnessing another skirmish in what has become an ongoing battle between the two women cunts he overheard earlier, Troggy leaves the store. While he’s walking through the parking lot, a car drives by:
[A] busted-up piece of shit full of “gangsta” dressed caucasian younggins passes a couple of feet in front of me. The windows are open and it absolutely REEKS of weed … no doubt another batch of young men raised by single moms who, lacking the stabilizing influence of a father, turn to such things as a way to cope with their lack of direction in life.
I like how quickly he moves past hating on these guys to hate on their hypothetical single mothers.
Of course I also see a few single moms, thug-lets in tow, making their way to the store as I walk back to my car.
Evidently Trogdor has quite a developed single-mom-dar; I myself am unable to tell if a woman with kids is single or married or even the mother of the children in question. I’m also unable to tell by looking at young children whether or not they will end up as “thugs.”
On a last-minute urge, I decided to head over to the nearby 7-Eleven to get some of those chicken taquito rolls. On my way there, I pass a high-school baseball field, which was in the middle of a game. Something that stood out to me was the high percentage of Hispanic youth at this baseball game, virtually all the players on both teams as well as the parents present were Hispanic … a sign of the times and changing demographics.
Dude, I hate to break it to you, but these “changing demographics” are also responsible for the ready availability of chicken taquito rolls at your local convenience store.
Trogdor ends with some broader reflections on the end of civilization as we (or at least he) knows it:
Gents, when I step back and look at the “society” that we live in, I can’t help but think … “what a fucking mess” … and I’m sure I’m not alone. Anyone else feel the same way?
The whole thing is so warped, so backwards, so corrupted …
It seems that one of the key differences between a declining society such as ours and lesser “advanced”, but longer-lasting civilizations which have actually stood the test of time is that places like China, the Middle East, and India never gave power to/listened to idiots, hence their longevity and stability relative to a place like the United States … which is starting to come un-hinged/fall apart after only a measly 50 years (LOL!1!) of feminist assault.
Dude, the only thing unhinged here is you.
What must it be like to live inside the brain of an MGTOWer like Trogdoor, where everything from old people waiting for their prescriptions to women walking through parking lots with their kids somehow becomes evidence that civilization is in its final days?
I don’t actually have any issue with gay bars banning straight people in general. That’s not even what’s going on in this scenario, though, but between the Spearhead nonsense and straight women on the Jez article about the same thing whining about discrimination I’m pretty much out of patience right now.
of COURSE jezebel is upset by this
If I owned a non-gay bar I’d ban bachelorette parties, they’re annoying. I’d also ban scavenger hunts and backwards hats on principle.
I’d love to ban the people who say “wooooo”, but then my hypothetical bar might go out of business.
Basically I don’t really want to own a bar, I want to own a cocktail lounge that plays trip hop and has nice mellow customers.
@hellkell: I…..think so. It was a long time ago, and my memory for names sucks, but that rings a bell.
I corrected your typo/grammar that one time because it was really annoying me — if I wanted to correct all your errors to prove my superiority I’d probably bore myself to death trying, I really don’t care that much (how can you care that much about a typo, or grammar error, in a comment online FFS?)
The point of “You can do better than just playing spot-the-typo though!” was that your comments lend themselves to being torn apart by various commenters here, mine occasionally have a typo, if I’m nearly as wrong as you are, then you can do better than merely spotting my typos (note that the post I corrected yours in was rather long, with one line about your grammar — reply to the rest of the comment if I’m so terribly wrong)
I’m really curious how you make “you are correct on that” into “I’m better than you”. Had you replied to my note about your grammar with anything along the lines of “oops” or “thank you” or “you’re correct on that” — I’d have let it drop, because I really don’t care that much.
Where did you ever get the impression I thought you spotting my typo was childish though? Pointless, sure, but so was mine really. Since you apparently take it as a serious blow to your ego to have made a simple mistake, I won’t point out your grammar anymore, unless in the form of “what does this mean? please explain”
Not really at NWO, but there’s a difference between a typo and a grammar error — the former can be assumed to be a mistake, the latter is generally an error in one’s understanding of grammar. One cannot improve one’s ability to hit the right keys (especially not half-asleep, as I was by the point of offering ice bars) but one can improve one’s grammar. And being human, we all have room to improve.
In other words NWO, there is actually a difference of substance between correcting grammar and fixing typos, but as I said, since you apparently consider correcting your grammar a blow to your ego, not room to improve, I will stop correcting your grammar.
Now to read the rest of this thread!
Sharculese — NWO’s math is technically correct, highly oversimplified for looking at society at large, but technically correct. (If you saw where I said I understand the “breeding white women out of existence” thing because it’s the same way Native Americans are being “bred out” then yeah, same math -ish)
Difference being, and the problem in NWO’s math — he completely ignored interracial marriage (not surprising) and also ignored the really complex math involved in immigration rates and birth rates. If the non-white Germans are also having 1.1 kids, and immigration holds stable, then the percentage that is white Germans won’t decrease, just the overall number.
This is, of course, the least unethical solution to overpopulation — have less kids. (Not that overpopulation won’t solve itself, but that’s not really on topic)
NWO — I know I *just* said that I won’t mock your grammar, but I can’t make heads or tails of this sentence — “The majority of shrinks are now women. Are we socially are psycologically on the upswing?” — I was a psych major, so if you explain your sentence, I can try explaining wtf is going on. The majority of psychs are women because the majority of psych students are women, which is because psychology is considered a “soft science” and men (well, HS boys really) are not generally interested in the soft sciences because patriarchy hurts men too.
I’m not really sure how you got “more women in charge is inherently more better” from Cliff’s comment, particularly considering — “Basically whose in charge, gender/race, has no bearing on who in society is privileged as a whole, correct?” — correct, yes. Well, mostly correct, swap out “no bearing” with “very little bearing” as it does reflect that the group the person comes from is not totally disadvantaged, they may still be very disadvantaged however. (Obama is a good example actually, can you see those “witch doctor” ads being used against a white man?)
Oh and plenty of us are white btw, or at least look white — you want to bash me you should go for how I’m a sneaky Native American not having a sign on my head announcing I’m of Native descent and thus carry non-white genes (if this sounds hilariously stupid, it’s because it is)
“Would you like a link to a white man being falsely accused? There’s loads of them. Is it less of an injustice if he’s white? Is it more of an injustice if he’s black? Does justice have a race or gender?”
You’d need an example where his lawyer specifically said no one will believe him because he’s “a big white boy”. You’re conveniently ignoring how his shitty lawyer made his race an excuse not to actually fight for him — which is a travesty of justice.
CrazyLadyBlues — maybe he means Harriet Jones? She’s fictional, but awesome (Doctor Who spoilers at that link)
Re: divorce — this is going to blow the MRMs minds, but when my cousin and his ex divorced he didn’t want full custody, as he put it, his ex is a more mature adult and better suited to raising children, while he’s better suited to playing video games with them and taking them for ice cream. The latest I’ve heard from them was the ex and the current girlfriend got together civilly (they divorced years ago, about a decade now). The only time they’ve ever fought over custody was a tiny out of court spat when I announced last minute that I would be in town for Christmas, but she already had other plans for the kids — he said that made sense given the last minute notice, they agreed I’d get to see the kids next trip up, and I did.
Sometimes it really just doesn’t work out but everyone is still friendly — they got married straight out of HS and divorced a few years after his tour of duty was up, the marriage they thought they were creating just wasn’t what life had in store for them.
Mind blowing, a man got partial custody without a fight and that’s exactly what he wanted!
Actually, one drop rules and such are part of why the “white birth rate” is counted so low in some places, as are somewhat reduced in some places pressure to pass. My half Haitian nephew is as much my white mother’s grandchild as my blond and redheaded nieces, but you can be damned certain the former won’t ever be counted as white on any legal measure. My father lists himself as white on official paperwork, his brother lists himself as native american. My uncles daughter will be legally an asian-native american birth (or perhaps an asian-native american-white birth), despite our having the same Irish grandfather.
There are a lot of “white” people with non-european origins. Shit, my own white Spanish grandmother (mother’s mother), revealed upon my nephew’s birth that some of her Spanish relatives had been Moors, and it was just something the family knew but kept secret once in the US.
Whiteness is a social categorization that revolves around certain phenotypes or known ancestries, it isn’t some sort of discrete biological phenomena.
Seconding everything darksidecat said, with the note that the “certain phenotypes or known ancestries” part changes over time — my great-grandmother (maternally, in all generations) came over from Italy through Elias Island, back when southern Italy was considered black. I’ve had relatives go from being classified as black to being classified as white in other words. And the inverse, because of racism and one drop rules my generation on my father’s side is the first to openly admit we’re of Native descent — if you could pass as white, you damned well did — which seems similar to darksidecat’s “family secret” that they’re related to Moors.
Sorry for my oversimplification, I get pissy about this as I get shit from older family members for not hiding my non-white genetics (some it’s racism, my father is a prick, some it’s remembering how important “being white” was 70 years ago)
I`d feel more intimidated if MRAs could give me an actual timeframe for the Fempocalypse. One MRA said ten years. That Jimmy kid said 3. Paul Elam and Friends are very vague and just say “soon”.
True! Now that you mention it, growing up in the 80’s, my shorts were pretty damn short. But in some of these cases we’re talking about dudes who are sexually attracted to teens and kids, and anything really, so of course they are gonna see a kid wearing shorts in the summer time and think it’s a trap.
But I mean, there is a line. If your ass cheeks hang lower than your shorts you should probably not be out in those at any age.
Yeah, it’s not like they don’t spend all their time gossiping about “girls,” and most of them are adults!
It’s simple to say that 70% of divorces are initiated by women, much more difficult to research and understand why. But you just assume that it’s on a whim, and the woman just doesn’t want to be with him anymore just ’cause.
Uhh, men pay while women play? Because raising a child is like playing. Clearly someone hasn’t even babysat.
As for women choosing to keep a child, the initial choice is on both parties, the second choice is so much more complicated. When you consider the moral implications that abortion has for some people, because not everyone is in agreement with whether or not it’s acceptable to abort a fetus, how can you simplify it to be just that a woman chose this? You seem to be consumed with oversimplification. It’s as if you believe that everything is simple, cut and dry, there are no circumstances that inform people’s actions.
Regardless of whether or not NWO is sane, he could absolutely benefit from counseling. It’s not just for the insane. Someone could absolutely help him with his missplaced rage and paranoia.
Half the stuff they claim is due to some other aspect of the man’s life besides being a man, such as class and race.
I do sometimes wonder if that’s due to a fundamental understanding of the concept of privilege, ie if they’re interpreting the concept of male privilege to mean that you can’t also lack privilege in other ways like race, class, etc, and male privilege can’t entirely shield you from the societal crap that goes along with being not the privileged class in other ways.
I’m probably being much too generous here, but I suspect there are a few people who’re genuinely confused.
MISunderstanding.
@Cassandra:
I think you`re being too generous. There seems to be an unsurprising overlap between between people who think men are discriminated against and people who thinks white people are discriminated against. In fact there was a recent whinefest ob r/mr where they were all afraid of anti-white discrimination.
Aw sweet, I got a hamster!
Sorry, wrong thread.
Crumbelievable — within the MRM, probably too generous, yeah. In general though, I think a lot of people do have that issue, have you ever tried explaining male privilege to real life men you know? Because I get the “but I’m poor” argument a lot, and have had success letting Emilie Autumn do the explaining (time for a random video!)
Oh goodness, anyone else getting the Olay ad first? Thanks for proving the point youtube! (And since NWO is almost certainly lurking, it’s sarcasm, the entire song is sarcastic)
@ Argenti
I love that song. In fact, remind me to pull it out in the event that our annoying former troll who shall not be named pops up again to tell me that I have no right to have opinions on dating or gender relations because in his opinion I am “looks privileged”. That particular privilege is a. always temporary and b. accompanied with rather more unfortunate side effects than most privileges (though still definitely a source of privilege in many ways).
And yeah, I was thinking more of people who go “what do you mean I have male privilege? I’m not rich!” in general, rather than MRAs, though I’m sure there’s some overlap at the less, um, virulent end of the spectrum.
Cassandra — I love EA in general, so mental note made.
“That particular privilege is a. always temporary” — yep, one day EA will be old (fuck, that crazy girl better live long enough to be old!) — but she’ll still be a master violinist, brilliant songwriter, etc
“b. accompanied with rather more unfortunate side effects than most privileges (though still definitely a source of privilege in many ways).” — like being the subject of MRA rants about bitches who won’t let them buy them drinks, or who take the drink but don’t give them “the sex they deserve”, or do and are thus prostitutes because they bought sex with a drink…yeah, you just can’t win — though those pink collar jobs they insist are made up positions, there’s definitely still a sense of who’s “front desk material” and who should be kept “to the back office” >.<
"at the less, um, virulent end of the spectrum." — that exists? I have yet to see proof of these moderate MRAs.
Oh and EA is a crazy girl, not woman, because she regularly calls herself a crazy girl, so I'm just going to roll with it.
The thing about women and appearance and society is that there is no way to win that game, and you don’t get the option of not playing no matter how much you’d prefer not to. Beautiful? That can help you out in some ways, but will fuck up your life in others (take a look at the rates at which models are sexually exploited some time, especially in high fashion), and it’s fleeting. Ugly? Well, you’re in for a whole lot of harrassment about that, and some outright discrimination. Plain/average looking? Get ready to spend your life being exhorted that you could be pretty if you just made a bit more effort and blah blah and by the way if you’d just buy this product…
The focus on women’s looks fucks things up for all women at all points on the conventional attractiveness scale, just in different ways. In fact, gain or lose a lot of weight and you might get to experience several of them in your lifetime! I’ve found that women who’ve been in that position have a particularly acute sense of the ways in which the system is designed to suck for everyone and to keep women at each other’s throats.
Short version – the societal focus on women’s looks is in part a mechanism of social control, and an exceptionally effective one.
(Watch NWO come back and whine at great length about this conversation, and understand absolutely none of it.)
Cassandra — I’d thought about posting this when it was random quote day, but figured NWO/etc would flip shit, but whatever, it’s both on topic here and more EA (and more EA is definitely always more better)
“And, what’s more, this ‘precious’ body, the very same that is hooted and honked at, demeaned both in daily life as well as in ever existing form of media, harrassed, molested, raped, and, if all that wasn’t enough, is forever poked and prodded and weighed and constantly wrong for eating too much, eating too little, a million details which all point to the solitary girl, to EVERY solitary girl, and say: Destroy yourself.”
― Emilie Autumn, The Asylum for Wayward Victorian Girls (from the autobiographical bits)
This bit “demeaned both in daily life as well as in ever existing form of media, harrassed, molested, raped” is wtf Dworkin’s line about all men are rapists was about as well, just worded less well. (“less well” sounds more wrong than “more better” but I think that’s proper grammar…English is weird)
And now I need to find that line in the book and see if “in ever existing form” is really EA failing grammar, there are typos in there, but that seems wrong, like it was a typo on the part of whomever typed up the goodreads quote. (omgs the book is excellent and well worth the money if you can afford it)
Typo is in the book, that’s from one of the bits straight out of her diary though, so I can see why she didn’t correct it.
I’m bored, and thus decided to research this NWO claim —
“The highest rate of divorce by far is when women are the breadwinners and men are stay at home dads. The divorce is almost always initiated by the women when they’re the breadwinners. We were told by women that the exact opposite would happen.”
1) divorce rates when women are breadwinners
2) divorce rates when men *choose* to say at home
Not the same thing! The former appears to be semi-valid though, I can’t access the study itself, but I dug up this press release. It would appear that in marriages where the mother works, and the father does not, a whole bunch of unexpected results happen, and unsurprisingly, NWO is misrepresenting them. So some bullet points!
*unemployment, whether by choice or economy, results in increased chances his wife will leave
*or that he’ll leave
*even if he’s happy in the marriage (WHUT?)
“In contrast, women’s employment alone does not encourage divorce initiated by either party.”
So it’s not about women being breadwinners, but about unemployment among men.
I also found this — and apply salt to that, it’s aol not a journal, but I can’t access full text reports.
This one is actually about female breadwinners though, but again, does not say “The divorce is almost always initiated by the women when they’re the breadwinners” — says that women are more likely to initiation divorce when breadwinners than women who are not the primary breadwinner (this is important NWO, the study is comparing women to women, not women to men). Can anyone access the full text on that to tell if that’s looking at who initiates divorce or just the rate of divorce? It’s moot to NWO’s point if it’s the latter, and that’s the only way this makes sense — “Teachman speculates that male egos might also contribute to the increased split rate.” — but that’s worded like the study does actually say that.
I can’t find anything on stay at home dads that doesn’t bring up the correlation between male unemployment and male depression though, which is implying no one’s studied whether there’s a difference between unemployed men and stay at home dads or not — not surprising given the study above is from late last year, research in the works wouldn’t be published yet.
I’ve got nothing on “We were told by women that the exact opposite would happen.” — you were? By whom? And do you understand that a woman leaving a depressed, unemployed, husband has more to do with depressed people being annoying to be around than his income? (depressed people are annoying to be around is TRUFAX because this depressed person said so, if we’re making unscientific claims I get at least one freebie, it’s only fair considering the frisking of everyone else’s unscientific claims XD )
NWO — XD is not some secret girl code, it’s internet emote speak for X = crossed-eyes and D = smile type mouth; ie laughter, a joke. Wiki’s got a whole list of these for easy reference (and yeah wiki has issues being user edited, but if there’s one thing general consensus is good for, it’s “wtf does this internet thingy mean?!”)
Idk if this is relevant to NWO’s claims, but regarding single parents —
11 + 1.2 = 12.2% of children are living with a single parent and are not the product of divorce, while 15.6% of children are living with a single as a result of divorce. (I’m not sure where the missing .2% of children are living, might be a rounding error) That works out to 56% of single parents households being the result of divorce, and 44% being the result of either one parent dying, or the parents never marrying. There’s a solid case here that men leaving their pregnant partners is a substantial cause of single mothers in other words (it’s truly rare for a never married couple to have the father have sole custody and it not be the result of the mother dying, though I have no numbers on that).
*awaits NWO’s twisting of statistics*