Ah, the good old days, when me were men and women were c**ts!
You know, just regular c**ts, not the pampered, stuck-up, fat c**ts of today.
Such is the argument of an unusually spirited, if sometimes incoherent, mini-manifesto winning plaudits from the regulars in the Men Going Their Own Way subreddit today.
In a post titled “Women/society made us think we were losers,” a proud MGTOW warrior calling himself shogunronin looks back with nostalgia on what he sees as the golden age of the nineties.
As a man who was gifted with growing up in the nineties, I experienced a time when women were c**ts but not as egotistical, a time where political correctness only was conjured in parliamentary buildings.
Ah, the nineties, “a time where SJWs were too busy listening to Korn or Marliyn Manson” to cause much trouble and when “fat women [weren’t] trying so hard to raise their sexual market value above men.” (Or at least above the sort of men who post angry manifestos on the MGTOW subreddit.)
How far we have fallen! In the nightmare world of today, some of these fatties actually have the gall to think of themselves as valuable human beings who deserve respect from others.
Now, we live in the times of self-made female celebrities, single mother culture, the media who language shames anyone who speaks the truth, down to the gagging of conservative thinkers on popular social media platforms, fat shaming and it’s reactionaries,
Er, in case you had trouble diagramming that last sentence, I think that bit at the end means he’s mad anyone complains about fat-shaming.
He continues, making up words as he goes:
And lastly, the detasteful rise of Feminism and their eternal hatred for anything with a dick. As a result of the army of manginas, white knights, beta-facebook pleasers, man-begging on dating platforms, women now are in control of the dating market and are free to act how they wish.
Imagine, women — some of them fatties! — actually having the gall to reject good and decent, if maybe just a teensy bit misogynistic, men like shogunronin!
They are free to treat a man like crap because 50 others are queing up on her social media account. Some women are even calling themselves celebrities as 5,000 manginas cheerlead her on Twitter in the hopes of one day bagging those golden vagina lips that could never do anything wrong.
You may wonder what exactly shogunronin thinks vagina lips are doing wrong. Robbing banks? Writing bad checks? Going to see Lady Ghostbusters?
Shogunronin does not specify. He is apparently more angry at the owners of these “golden vagina lips” for refusing him and other perfectly decent woman-hating men access to said lips.
I believe MGTOW is a reaction to the woman uprising. Men who are sick and tired of female priviledge in both society and the court room. If you noticed, MGTOW on the internet had risen just about the same time that online dating went mainstream. It is a F**K YOU to all women who think they’re above men. We are going our own way, bye hunny.
But shogunronin isn’t just angry at women and the manginas who love them too much. He’s also mad at pickup artists for suggesting that the value of men is determined in large part by the hotness of the hot babes they date (or date rape).
Yes, that’s right. There’s actually a portion of his manifesto that sort of has a point.
As a man in my early twenties, I was indoctrinated into the PUA cult. I was led to believe that if i couldn’t attract a woman than I was a failure with women which equaled a failure at life. It was only after reaching my later twenties that I began to realise how dangerous this mindset can be.
Alas, after this brief moment of clarity, shogunronin is once against swallowed up by the ideological fog of MGTOWism.
Women were the only ones who benefitted from the PUA movement.
Because nothing benefits women more than having an army of aggressively creepy dudes using every psychological trick in the book to overcome “last-minute resistance” and get them into bed. (Or just plain date raping them if that don’t work)
It turned awesome men into tools. It provided women with a stream of unappreciated attention. It was full of men who went out building their entire confidence around women. I know this because we would discuss how shitty we felt when being rejected multiple times in one day and successful when we got laid. Women were constantly pressuring men to impress them, and now with the rise of social media dating, women have a eternal pool of meatheads and manginas who are thirsty.
Sorry, MGTOW dudes. Your self-esteem problems are not the fault of women who don’t want to have sex with you.
We now live in a culture that demonises men and rewards women for their shitty behaviour.
Apparently he’s very angry that women are “rewarded” for saying no to sex with men they don’t like by, er, not actually having to have sex with men they don’t like?
THE HORROR.
A fat whale now has access to the more attractive men while the average joe has to ‘brand’ himself both metaphorically and physically just to meet the outlandish standards of modern women.
How dare these “fat whales” only sleep with men they’re attracted to and who want to have sex with them!
The truth is none of us were losers because of these women,
TRUE. Your loserdom has nothing to do with these women.
the truth is women priced themselves out of the dating market.
NOT TRUE. They just said “no” to you when you came at them with your PUA bag of tricks.
Upon being MGTOW, I have been financially better off, I have been happier, I have more time to follow my passions in life other than chasing some egotistical self-made celebrity c**t.
Apparently one of these passions is posting bitter, woman-hating manifestos on the MGTOW subreddit.
Life is good for me now.
I don’t … actually believe you. This manifesto is pretty obviously not the work of a man enjoying the good life.
Not surprisingly, the regulars in the MGTOW subreddit disagree with me on this point, applauding shogunronin’s mini-manifesto and responding with mini-manifestos of their own.
2045_revolution laments how exploitative the current sexual marketplace is. Exploitative of men, that is. Sure, he admits,
Men may use women as wet holes attached to a uterus, but women use men as wallets and sources of high quality genetic material. It gets demoralizing. As a man, the best you can hope for is to be a strong and healthy host for a female parasite to latch onto. When you think of guys in their expensive clothes, expensive cars, etc just advertising how filled with resources they are to parasites, it loses its appeal.
Meanwhile, 2045_revolution complains, some women he thinks aren’t so hot are trying to date men he thinks are hotter!
Internet dating and the rise of PUA culture have created a generation of crap women who think they are amazing catches. It used to be that a woman who as a 6 knew she was a 6. Now the 4s and 5s think they are 8s because of all the validation they get from thirsty men.
How dare women have the gall to try to date men they find attractive!
People can ridicule MGTOW all they want, but the exodus is really just starting. I think there will be sociological consequences. In ten years there will be tons of angry MGTOW men and bitter, used up women who got kicked off the CC. A society full of angry, bitter women (many of whom will be single mothers) who chased a hypergamous fantasy and ended up feeling used and empty handed, and lots of angry, bitter MGTOW men who felt ignored and devalued is what we are looking at. Nobody will win.
And if single mothers think they can have 2045_revolution’s “beta bucks,” well, NUH-UH!
Just as there is not an infinite supply of male 9s and 10s willing to enter committed, monogamous relationships with female 5s, 6s and 7s, there is not an infinite suppply of gainfully employed male 6s and 7s willing to clean up these women’s messes as they push 40. I say this as a BB who has had a half dozen single mothers try to use him in the last few years.
A fellow calling himself cheaperautoinsurance puts the blame on “smartphones and social media” for “basically destroy[ing] american women,” presumably because so many dudes who want to have sex with them say nice things about their selfies and sometimes send them lovely photos of their penises.
For blackierobinsun2, though, the roots of our current situation are rather more basic:
Women f**ked up America when they wanted jobs
Most of these btches going to college only work for a couple of years to end up getting pregnant and not wanting to work again, stupid whore just wasted a college degree and stole a job opportunity from a man feeding his family
Such a tragedy that blackierobinsun2 is taking himself out of the marriage market. What a lovely husband and father he could be!
Let me say it again: If you’re going your own way, fellas, just freaking GO. Lead your own life however the hell you want, as long as you’re not hurting anyone else in the process. Just stop cluttering up the internet with your ridiculous rants.
Oh, look, I get to use some things I made!
To go with the article:
In regard to Mick Dash:
Holy shit this list is getting long. “dogma” no wait, I think we already had this one, “article of scriptural faith”.
Dude, if you really can’t tell the difference between the Constitution and the Bible (or any other similar text), then you’re dumber than I thought.
Brony!
Long time no see! I hope you’re doing well, friend <3
So, then it’s not true that 96 per cent of alimony payments are forcible wealth extractions going from men to women? Women do not play the marriage/divorce gain for financial benefit? Ok, pardon me, I thought perhaps the facts mattered in debate…
“Dude, if you really can’t tell the difference between the Constitution and the Bible (or any other similar text), then you’re dumber than I thought.”
How is it different? I asked for evidence, instead of presenting any, I was presented with citations of sacred authoritative words on magic paper that I am apparently supposed to take on faith… tell me what exactly is the difference, did the constitution fall out of heaven or something…?
This is a thing someone typed, thinking they were being smart. This right here.
If I ever need proof of a lack of a god, I can just point to this comment, because I have never seen intellegence design debunked so hard than when I read these sentences, right here.
I weep for humanity.
EDIT: Also, I know that’s technically not intellegence design, I’m just being an asshole here because that’s the stupidest shit I have ever read, or at least top five.
Does ‘hypergamy’ mean something other than ‘screwing around in your twenties before finding a partner’, or is that all it means?
Did I? Link to where I said that, because I don’t remember.
I have no idea what you are talking about. So laws are as concrete as the ten commandments? And Judges are what? Priests? And who doesn’t follow the feminist religion live in anarchy? Can someone translate what he is saying? Are you a real person? Do you live in planet Earth? Just to make sure.
So, tell, Mick, what percentage of divorcing women are granted alimony these days.
@Sinkable
Poor him, he’s trying to mix up multiple forms of concepts and thoughts, like a knot too difficult to be unwound. These non sequiturs only work when the other person is not willing to continue.
Oh my stars, he’s doing what he did, he is going through every single claim in the MRA checklist.
@Mick Dash
Sources links sites and more,
Can you go show us at least
One of these?
To back up your claim
As you shift the blame
Back up your con game
Or make this more lame?
The old use of the word was “marrying up”, i.e. a woman looking for a rich man, or a man looking for a rich woman.
These guys, though? They use it to mean “women are incapable of love and are only looking for sex and to take as much money out of men’s wallets as they can.” So, yeah, pretty blatant, that.
Are you a “sovereign citizen”? Just checking.
The alimony gap exists because of the wage gap, @Mick Dash, and the alimony gap is decreasing.
Gott in himmel!
Firstly, I think you should understand something. Not everyone here is from the USA. Our various countries have their own constitutional arrangements, and most of them don’t line up with the USA constitution.
When we talk about society and social roles-constructs-relationships, we’re talking in a Margaret Mead-ish sense of generalised sociology or anthropology. So you’re already making a fairly big mistake when talking about “alimony” as a rights issue because that isn’t a thing in many/most places.
Kupo,
I love that Windows noob screencap. My favorite is the Altavista search bar.
Santa most certainly does exist! The majority of his remains are in the care of the Archdiocese of Bari-Bitonto, which is a great holiday destination, if you’re into dead Santas.
I don’t believe anyone has any rights, if feminists assert that such a thing as rights exist, they have the burden to present some evidence right? Or is it a dogma I’m supposed to take on faith in magic paper (without actual proof)? If so – how exactly is such an organized faith based (as opposed to evidence- based) belief system not a religion?
The alimony thing is quite simple.
(1) Women tend to do the majority of child care, whether or not the father is in the home
(2) Women, particularly those who need to take time off fairly regularly to take care of small children, have much more trouble finding and keeping a good-paying job.
Alimony is for the child, not the mother. If you knew anything at all, you’d know that a child’s standard of living generally goes down significantly when its parents separate.
But I can’t understand why you’d have any interest in the subject of alimony. You’re going to go your own way, so you won’t ever have to worry about causing a pregnancy. Isn’t that what MGTOW means?
Sounds like Mick Dash has read Death’s Hogfather speech and missed the point entirely.
Good lord this poor child.
I’m going to bed before my headache gets worse.
Scildfreja
And we notice now that that happens a whole heap less than it used to. The classic case of doctors marrying nurses is now much less common than it once was. Doctors tend to marry other doctors now that women are also doctors. Women nurses are now much more likely to marry men from equivalent status occupations – nurse, police officer, paramedic, teacher – rather than doctors.
These are not facts. It’s bullshit that MGTOW and MRAs have pulled out of their asses for years. WWTH specifically said that unacceptable sources included your ass. That also extends to anyone else’s.
You want to talk to me about “forcible wealth extractions” ? Believe me, this would be getting personal.
You do not want to go there, trust me.
Hey, by the way.
So you’re saying that men have no right to their wealth not being “forcibly extracted” ? Make up your mind.
Yes, I asked for evidence that any one has any rights, as feminist dogma postulates, or shall I take it on faith?
Ugh…. this is the closest you have come, so I’ll entertain it. It’s not, actually, a gender studies issue, its an ethical/philosophical issue that long predates the women’s movement. By like… thousands of years. But OK. Sure.
Are you asking whether some important-looking person in a white lab coat has ever conducted a study, held up a smoking beaker and said, “Eureka! I’ve discovered the Human Rights molecule! It’s a real thing, now!”
Obviously, no. Because human rights are a concept, not a scientific law.
There are some that believe in moral absolutism (i.e. morality being hard, immovable laws) and many that believe in moral relativism (morality being an idea that shifts due to social/cultural factors) Among the feminist movement you may find moral relativists or moral absolutists (though I suspect you will find more relativists than absolutists) but it actually doesn’t matter whether you believe rights are solid and real or you believe that rights are socially imposed – you can still be a feminist.
At the end of the day, the concept of human rights extends to every facet of our sociopolitical existence. They don’t have to be a core law of the universe to be relevant to our lives. Human rights are the reason our government prohibits murder, rape, etc. Human rights are why we are permitted to live our lives as we see fit, so long as we do not harm another’s human rights. The concept of human rights are a core reason why we have a civil society at all. And if we are to have a society based on
these ideas, why should these ideas extend to men and not women?
So do “rights” even exist in some solid, inalienable way? Maybe, but it’s not relevant to this discussion. As long as our legal, social, and communal lives are centred around this idea, we cannot function as a society until we entertain them. And feminists believe they should be entertained for women equally as they are for men.
If you want to know more about moral relativism/absolutism, you are going to have to do your own research because that question is too big and too old for me to explain to you in some comments section.
“So you’re saying that men have no right to their wealth not being “forcibly extracted” ?”
No, what I’m saying is that I have no basis to believe that they do have any such right – or any other such hypothetical “rights” – you haven’t presented evidence, apparently the constitution is magical so I’m supposed to take it on blind faith that whatever the magic paper says I’m supposed to just believe
Ktoryx
Nice post!
S”o do “rights” even exist in some solid, inalienable way? Maybe, but it’s not relevant to this discussion. ”
It’s relevant to the discussion on whether feminism is a religious faith-based or an empirical evidence-based belief system – if it’s not a religion then why am I supposed to take these supernatural (no existence in the natural physical universe) powers as real on faith ?
@Mick Dash
Okay that is it,
Voltaire, Jefferson, and Locke
Would love to hear this.
You are in the US
Founded by those rights
You quickly deny.
Silly hypocrite,
Did none of your school teachers
Explain this to you?
Can you grasp concepts?
Can you taste uncertainty?
Can you smell justice?
These silly questions
Are meant to mock such meager
knowledge you waste.
http://pre01.deviantart.net/a946/th/pre/f/2013/019/4/c/fluttershy_shows_her_manface_or_something__by_zutheskunk-d5rzarg.png
No, feminists don’t need to provide proof. Because the concept of rights isn’t a feminist concept, it’s a widely-known philosophical concept. Feel free to wander over to a philosophy blog and tell them that rights are bullshit, and ask them to provide support for them.
Thing is, honey, dig deep enough into any science and you get to its basic philosophical foundation. This includes physics, chemistry, and the “hard” sciences. there’s a point at which you have to say “okay, these are the assumptions.” If you have a problem with those assumptions, you talk to the philosophers who examine them.
So, if you want to say “I don’t believe in rights”, that’s fine, but you turn into a solipsist pretty darn quick going that path, where nothin’ means nothin’, cause nothin’ exists.
Ugh, I hate it when they think they’re being clever. Go read some John Locke or something.