So over on MGTOWforums, the regulars are pondering the age-old question – should these committed women-avoiders deal with their continued desire to stick their penises in the women they’re allegedly avoiding by resorting to prostitutes?
In the midst of a lively discussion on the advantages of “going pro” over trying to pick up a “bar hog,” one regular by the nom de internet Xtc sets forth some thoughts that, for a moment at least, seem to transcend the usual MGTOW crudity and bitterness.
“I don’t think it’s really about sex,” he writes. “I think what a lot of people are looking for is love, respect, and intimacy – which you can’t buy.”
Why, that almost seems like an insight!
Alas, in his very next sentence he spoils the moment by returning to the standard MGTOW narrative of female perfidy:
I think what put me off women altogether was the realisation that you’ll NEVER get [love, respect, and intimacy] for real. It’s sad and sobering, but that’s the way it is.
Thinking that the attention of women validates you as a person collapses once you realise they are attracted to the worst qualities in the worst men.
Thinking that the attention of women equals affection, intimacy, or love – collapses once you realise they will leave you in a second if they sense any weakness or if a BBD [bigger better deal] comes along. Then you’ll realise that the meter was running all the time, whether this was clear at the time or not.
Women are like a bitter medicine that you force yourself to swallow because you believe it is doing you good. Once you realise it’s a quack remedy, and the whole thing is a scam, you’re free to spit it out and never partake again.
That leaves you with sex alone, which is really rather easy to come by.
If women really and truly are “attracted to the worst qualities of the worst men,” why aren’t they lining up at these dudes’ front doors?
You DO understand that there were many organizations fighting bravely to end Jim Crow in 1932, right? Why didn’t the majority white electorate support them?
[cloudiah adds Red Summer, by Cameron McWhirter to Bob’s remedial reading list.]
“My problem with the way MRAs state this is the boredom accusation, and also if I have communicated to my spouse that the relationship is not meeting something I need and they do nothing about it or refuse to, what then? The assumption is always that the wife did not stay for a time after letting her spouse know the need isn’t being met or even suggested or went to counseling.”
I agree with you. If a husband or a wife has repeatedly communicated what they want and need and are not getting it, then morally speaking they are in the clear. We have no-fault divorce in this country, so people can initiate at any time and for whatever reason they want. They don’t have to try and work it out first. They can divorce their spouse because they don’t like the way they eat their peas or the way they laugh or whatever. But I would not want to be partnered up with somebody who doesn’t take their marriage vows seriously.
Haha yes who wouldn’t take their marriage vows seriously? It is such a sacred and ancient bond, that until very recently was a major means of acquiring property.
I really don’t though. We live in a time when people can escape social pressure to enter into something they don’t want to enter. Obviously lots of people won’t want to commit to something they’re not sure about. This is a good thing.
Citation please on the accusation that wives are doing this in large numbers.
“You DO understand that there were many organizations fighting bravely to end Jim Crow in 1932, right? Why didn’t the majority white electorate support them?”
My argument is that racial justice was not on the ballot whether you voted for Hoover or FDR. Ugh is saying people that voted a certain way were complicit in social norms because the laws were not changed. i think that’s a dumb argument. What if you’re antiwar and had to choose between Bush and Kerry in 2004? What if you’re against torture of suspected terrorists and you have to choose between Obama and Romney in 2012?
“I really don’t though. We live in a time when people can escape social pressure to enter into something they don’t want to enter. Obviously lots of people won’t want to commit to something they’re not sure about. This is a good thing.”
Then don’t get married in the first place.
“Citation please on the accusation that wives are doing this in large numbers.”
I’ll ask again since you didn’t bother to answer the first time. I guess you’re not really interested in giving an opinion on people that don’t take their marriage vows seriously. What do you think of a married man or woman that decides to bail on their marriage without first attempting to mitigate differences and dissatisfaction through couples counseling or other means of mediation?
Why do you get to define what marriage is for everyone else, Bob? Not everyone subscribes to a Judeo-Christian worldview in which marriage is a sacred pact that can never ever be ended. The arrogance, it burns.
Bob, just because you believe marriages were happier in some rosy past you don’t know, it doesn’t make it true.
“Why do you get to define what marriage is for everyone else, Bob? Not everyone subscribes to a Judeo-Christian worldview in which marriage is a sacred pact that can never ever be ended. The arrogance, it burns.”
Marriage has never been meant to be a temporary arrangement whatever your religious belief system. Why not just simply cohabit if you’re unsure about spending the rest of your life with somebody? Personally, I would want to steer clear of somebody that doesn’t have a problem with legally codifying our relationship, but isn’t sure about whether or not she wants to spend the rest of her life with me, even if I am doing my best to keep up my end of the bargain and meet her relationship needs and desires.
I will say first, I do not think people do this. I think when someone has a dispute, they talk to their spouse about it and attempt a resolution that works. Not everyone has medical insurance to pay for counseling anyway. I believe people try and divorce when it does not work.
However, I’ll play devil’s advocate and answer the question as you put forth, even with the implicit accusation that people do this (especially women, according to your other comments). That would be I think they should try to resolve the issue first.
“Bob, just because you believe marriages were happier in some rosy past you don’t know, it doesn’t make it true.”
Also, just because a person believes that far more men were raping and beating their women than not, doesn’t make it true.
No one here actually said that. Way to strawman, Bob!
“It would be pretty hilarious to hear the same argument for slavery. “Sure, millions of people had no rights to their own bodies, legal status, or freedom of movement, but on the whole employment relations were much happier for arr involved.”
Nobody is making that argument. Slavery only benefited rich white plantation owners. Your analogy would only work if you’re willing to argue that the vast majority of marriages before no-fault divorce law and the advent of domestic violence laws were terrible and dysfunctional. There were lots of good, caring marriages even when the patriarchy was in full bloom.
So, GLBTQ individuals have no “biological wiring” to want companionship? All straights are exactly the same, all non-straights are exactly the same? And it’s all biological and has nothign to do with societal norms, right? Nice display of homophobia there, Bob.
Also why do you care? Why should I give a shit if people are making “mating choices” (Jesus wept) based on superficial traits? You MRA guys are the ones insisting women owe it to men to look like supermodels, and that we have a sell-by date (I can’t think of anything more superficial than choosing a partner based only on her fertility – you claim people want companionship and love, but it’s entirely possible to have those things in a relationship without having kids. Basing your relationship choices on “who will make the best incubator for my spawn” is appalling. Or is that more of the alleged “biological wiring”?)
“My personal anecdata trumps all the rest of human history.”
I tend to think that’s none of my business since I don’t give a shit if other people are married or not, or stay married or not.
Yes, and?
Um, no, we don’t. Nobody here to my knowledge has said anything about men becoming commitment-phobic. There have been silly articles in major media about this, but they weren’t written by anyone here and most of the commenters here don’t particularly give a damn about this supposed phenomena.
You clearly care a great deal for reasons passing understanding, but please stop projecting your hysterical obsession with marriage onto us. We’re here to mock misogyny. I will say you’re providing some banner entertainment for that purpose though.
It also has never, prior to the last thrity years, been seen as a voluntary legal partnership between equals.
Things change.
“No one here actually said that. Way to strawman, Bob!”
Actually, from what I can tell, since it is not exactly clear, Ugh is either arguing that spousal rape and abuse back in the day was extremely common, or because of the lack of domestic violence laws, the median marriage was not happy, functional or fulfilling to women.
This is true, however, the institution itself involved the surrender of bodily autonomy to another human being. This is obviously going to lead to a lot of abuse, and currently leads to a lot of abuse in countries where wives are still legal property.
Yes.
The implication that abuse and spousal rape are only a problem if more than 50% of men are doing it is hilarious… wait, no, fucking scary, that’s the right word.
Fun abuse statistics: 25% of women have experienced domestic violence over their lifetimes
20% of high school girl report that they’ve had a boyfriend sexually or physically abuse them.
But I’m sure things were much better back when sexual assault in the workplace was SOP and women were viewed as dependents.
Where rape and abuse were leagal and accepted by society, more people rape and abuse!
#thingsthatshouldbeobvioustoeveryone
“Marriage has never been meant to be a temporary arrangement whatever your religious belief system.”
This doesn’t answer my question of why you get to define marriage for other people. This is just a statement of something you think is true. My husband and I would like to be married our whole lives, but we’re both open to renegotiating the terms of that arrangement or the arrangement itself, if in the future one or both of us were miserable. We both signed on to that agreement. Who are you to tell us that our marriage is wrong because we’d entertain the possibility of it ending before death?
Here’s a fun thought experiment: do you think that rape and domestic abuse are more common in Saudi Arabia, where women have fewer rights in marriage, or in the modern United States?
*not actually that fun
“So, GLBTQ individuals have no “biological wiring” to want companionship?…Nice display of homophobia there, Bob. ”
Where did I say that? We were discussing male/female courtship and mating rituals, to my knowledge. I don’t recall a discussion about homosexual courtship and mating rituals. So how does that make me homophobic? I believe people should be able to pursue happiness and whoever they want, regardless of what the plumbing is between their legs.That’s incredibly puerile and stupid on your part.
“Also why do you care? Why should I give a shit if people are making “mating choices” (Jesus wept) based on superficial traits?”
I was stating a personal preference that I would prefer a partner that is mature, adult, kind, intelligent, etc. What other people pair off isn’t my concern. Why should I care what you think?
“You MRA guys are the ones insisting women owe it to men to look like supermodels, and that we have a sell-by date. (I can’t think of anything more superficial than choosing a partner based only on her fertility – you claim people want companionship and love, but it’s entirely possible to have those things in a relationship without having kids. Basing your relationship choices on “who will make the best incubator for my spawn” is appalling. Or is that more of the alleged “biological wiring”?)”
I’m not an MRA. I never said I want or am entitled to any woman, much less a woman that looks like a supermodel. If I want to start a family, however, then I am necessarily by biology limited to a woman that has not gone through menopause yet. Adoption laws make it very hard to adopt if you are over a certain age. Do you understand basic biology and science?