Everyone knows that choosy mothers choose Jif. But when it comes to men rather than peanut butter, apparently choosy women are choosing THE END OF CIVILIZATION by not choosing to date the sorts of nice fellows who later become bitter misogynistic Men Going Their Own Way. In a post over on MGTOWforums.com, Todd1968 spells out the dire “societal cost of women’s pickiness.” (And, yes, we’ve heard this complaint before.)
“[N]one of us came out of the womb as MGTOWs,” he writes.
Most of us arrived here after a long process, during which we struggled to resist taking the red pill.
While some of us arrived here after a nasty divorce, many, I believe, came here as a result of the “nice guy” syndrome: After discovering the extreme superficiality of women’s preferences in the dating market, we decided that the game wasn’t worth the candle. (This often included an encounter with a cynical gold-digger single mom who wanted us to foot the bill for a “bad boy’s” offspring. For me, this was the final straw.)
I’ll have “shit that never happened” for $500, Alex.
And so we become “loners.” The media likes to portray us as “dangerous”, and the .00001% of loners who do turn violent animate the news and the fem-centric blogosphere. The fact is, though, that 99.999% of us simply drop out of social interaction and courtship, or “ghost.”
While this is a solution that works for us, it is not socially optimal. Society would have been better served if we had become husbands and fathers.
Having read a good number of these bitter MGTOW rants, I’m pretty sure most of you dudes would make terrible husbands and/or fathers. I’m thinking that “society” dodged a bullet here.
And I believe that this is what most of us wanted at one time. For example, I talk a lot about escorts and sugar babies; but this wasn’t what I envisioned for myself at 20 or 25.
Women choosing not to date Todd1968? Superficial. Dudes paying money to have sex with “hot” women half their age? Super smart!
Here is the point: By choosing to exclude so many men from consideration, alpha-hunting feminists have taken a large number of good fathers (and their children) out of the population.
Uh, dude, you hate feminists. Why would you even care who they’re dating? Or have you conflated “feminist” with “all women,” as is so often the case with you dudes?
How many intelligent men will never be fathers because they were “boring nice guys” in their teens and 20s?
On the other hand, many women are going out of their way to breed with “bad boys,” who will shirk fatherhood completely.
In the world of MGTOW, when a father abandons a mother and child it’s always 100% the fault of the mother.
When looked at in the aggregate, modern feminist behavior in the dating pool has some quite deleterious effects for the future of society, wouldn’t you say?
Again, I’m having trouble seeing “women not dating so-called ‘nice guys’ who are actually misogynistic dickheads” as a major social problem.
Just in case you thought Todd here might actually be casting aspersions on Alpha Males, he clarifies his intentions with a second comment:
My point is certainly not to imply that all alpha males are dicks, or irresponsible. (The “bad boys” are another story, of course.) The problem isn’t the existence of a male hierarchy; the problem is the unrealistic expectations of the average woman.
Never blame men for anything; the blame can always be traced back to some evil woman.
The problem arose when feminism and entitlement ideology caused women to lose their grasp of what psychologists call “reciprocity.” It used to be that the 10% of alpha males took the top 10% of women; and everyone else paired up with their opposite gender equivalents. This meant that almost everyone got paired up.
[citation needed]
But … today’s woman regards the majority of men as “below average” or unattractive. That is a recipe for 90% of the female attention directed at 10% of the men–with the rest being all but ignored.
[citation needed again]
This doesn’t serve either men or women. Many of us know first-hand how it doesn’t serve men. But it also results in a lot of women becoming “Sex-in-the-City” spinsters.
Sex AND the city. Sex AAANNNNDDDD the City.
Seriously, dudes of the manosphere, if you’re going to cite a TV show that ceased production 8 years ago as your go-to cultural reference, at least get the name right.
For example, my cousin is 40 years old and single. In her prime, she was just attractive enough to become the second-tier choice of some alpha male; but she never made the final cut. Throughout her twenties and into her thirties, she slept with guys who were a notch above her league.
Uh, if they were happily sleeping with her, wouldn’t that suggest that they were actually in the same league? How do these leagues work, anyway?
Meanwhile, I remember a responsible “nice guy” who patiently hung around in her “friend zone” for years. (She used him as a social spare tire.)
If a woman hooks up with a “bad boy” and gets abandoned with a kid, this is completely the woman’s fault. If a “nice guy” hangs around with a woman who’s not interested in him for years on end, this is completely the woman’s fault also?
Finally, Mr. Nice Guy went away–along with the alpha males.
My cousin is no longer hot at all. Now she laments at Thanksgiving dinners about how her biological clock is ticking. I have tried to set her up with a few of my male friends. But of course, none of them match her expectations–which are still calibrated to the days when she was a mid-tier hottie.
Women rejecting a “nice guy” in favor of guys they think are hot = social calamity, and the fault of evil women.
Men rejecting women because they’re no longer “mid-tier hotties” = sweet, sweet justice!
My tampons are made of dictionaries, aren’t everyone’s?
All I saw was “blah blah blah ALAN RICKMAN ALAN RICKMAN ALAN RICKMAN blah blah blah”.
Alan Rickman is totally a bad boy.
This guy sounds like he hates women or something.
He hedged too much to get a straight answer, but as far as I could tell, the answer largely boiled down to “my boyfriend will cheerfully mock willfully stupid people like Mr. Whiny when they are being willfully stupid.”
Then we’re all bad boys…and girls.
@whataboutthemoonz – now you’ve got me totally thinking about this Far Side cartoon.
Indeed! I, for example, am SUPER bad. Why, just the other day, I found a nickel on the ground, and I picked it up rather than leaving it for its rightful owner to find and reclaim! BAD!
(…the worst part is I make a point of tossing any change I find on the ground into the next collection jar for a (good) charity I see. BAD!)
Oh, you think that’s bad? Well, I went to bed without doing the dishes the other night! And I didn’t make my bed ALL weekend!
Interesting datum: Married men drink less, married women drink more, than their respective single counterparts.
I used to take my tea black. Then I spent time with the British Army. Milk and sugar. It’s hard to explain just how reborative a cuppa from the pot/norwegian (brit army slang for a jug of tea, often a 5gal. jerrycan) is.
As to the datum I mentioned… The data suggest that people are more prone to social drinking. Single women, and their friends aren’t as prone to regular drinking as single men and their mates. So when a couple get married the guy drinks less, because he is more often at home, and the woman drinks more, because; for all that he’s drinking less, she’s drinking with him, and that’s more than she was drinking when single.
Is ‘Norwegian’ rhyming slang?
@Pillowinhell OLYMPIA? which one?
@Cassandra I think saying you want a fertile women is a way of saying you want a young women for the MRA folks.
A jug of tea is a norwegian? Because that would be amazing.
No, it’s because in WW2 there were a lot of Norwegians (like the Free French) training in England. They introduced the idea of large insulated jugs for soup/tea. There is a very nice training location in the Cairngorms of Scotland named, “Norwegian Lodge” because that’s where a lot of them were billeted.
Kitteh:
My parents have a copy of The Barchester Chronicles, we used to watch it a lot as kids. Rickman was deliciously oleagenous.
You left out:
– dark skin
@ pecunium
Milky tea is comforting, even to someone like me who doesn’t prefer it – to pretty much any Brit it’s a drink you associate with your granny, coming in from outside on cold days, etc. It’s the first thing someone will make for you if you’re having a crisis and they want to help but aren’t quite sure how to.
I suspect this may apply to a lot of the countries formerly associated with the UK, like Canada, Australia, etc. I’ve had Chinese friends order for me in cafes a similar but much sweeter concoction referred to as “Hong Kong milk tea” – it seems to occupy a niche that’s sort of not-really-proper-tea but comfortable and familiar anyway for people who spent time in Hong Kong as children.
A lot of this stuff is about what feels like home to you. As much as I dislike having either green tea or herbal tea sweetened in general, the traditional green tea + mint + sugar drink that you tend to get if you ask for tea in North Africa definitely tastes like home to me.
With the alpha versus bad boy thing, it seems to break down into men that lots of women are attracted to that pissed off sexist guys grudgingly approve of (successful businessmen, etc) and men that lots of women are attracted to where the pissed off sexist guy does not approve at all because wait, that’s not how hypergamy is supposed to work! One of the most obvious differences is that the people being described as bad boys tend not to have very much money, which undercuts the whole hypergamy theory, so no wonder it bothers guys who’re attached to that theory so much.
Seranvali – isn’t he just! 😀 I can’t imagine anyone else playing Mr Slope.
For that matter, when the first Potter film was being made, there was a little article in the paper saying Rickman would play Snape. I asked my mum (we’d both read the first couple of books) “Who, of all the actors in the world, would you choose to play Snape?” and she said Rickman, without a moment’s hesitation. And no, she hadn’t seen the article! 😀
I was talking to my brother’s father-in-law at a family dinner, recently, and he went off on a rant about how when he was in High School, he would go on dates with girls or take them to a dance, and after the first or second date, he would always get the, “You’re such a great guy, but I think of you like a brother. Do you want to just be friends?” So he would accept the friendship offer but inwardly seethe. You know, typical “nice guy” behavior. (Side note: it’s kind of pathetic how these guys all sound alike. I could have written his script; I really didn’t need to hang around for the conversation, because I knew within 30 seconds all the things he was going to say.)
He then began to rattle off the names of all the women who had rejected him in High School, and what happened to them after High School (because that’s not creepy and stalkerish at all), Annie, Joanne, and Kim* all got divoced. Vanessa got cancer. Susan and Dee both ended up in abusive relationships. And all this misfortune was said with a sense of glee, like, “Those b*****s got what they deserved, they should have stayed with me, I wouuld have treated them right. But, nooo, they always want the bad boy, until it’s too late.”
And the whole time I’m thinking, dude, if you can gloat and feel happy about the tragedies in the lives of women you claim to have cared for, you’re not exactly one of the “good guys”. Maybe those women dodged an even worste fate.
But I kept my mouth shut for the sake of family harmony.
*Not the real names, of course.
EEB – gah, another creep. Makes me wonder just how he thought he was going to save all of them with his Good Guyness. Polygamy, maybe? Or would it be acceptable for them to have married someone else after His Mighty Niceness had made his choice?
They really do want a frickin’ harem, don’t they.
LOL! “His Mighty Niceness” /snicker
I may have to steal that!
Nothing says “nice, kind person” like gloating about the fact that someone who wouldn’t go out with you in high school has cancer.
The definition of “bad boy” is much simpler than any of you understand. It means someone who is actually gauche enough to make his intentions known to a woman, as opposed to expecting her to read your mind. In the minds of “Nice Guys”, those people are assholes because something something something. (Actually, a lot of them, if my experience is any indication, have a really fucked up concept of respect and politeness, and probably think that something’s gone wrong when you don’t have to trick or transact your way into a woman’s pants. They essentially resent the “bad boys” for failing to follow rules that only exist in their own heads.)
@pillowinhell – use it with my blessing! 🙂
I’m just stuck on kiwigirl’s Cushions Not Crucifixions. Worth starting a religion to be able to shout that.