By David Futrelle
The MGTOWs of the world, it’s safe to say, didn’t enjoy the royal wedding any more than the white supremacists did. In the Men Going Their Own Way subreddit, the regulars are still grousing about it, lamenting that the over-the-top spectacle of it all was giving women hope that they too could land a prince — or, failing that, at least a man with some cash in his bank account.
The royal wedding, one British MGTOW complained, assured ordinary women
that no matter how much of a train wreck you and your life is….you can still fool your dream cash cow in to signing that contract to make him your cash cow for the rest of your life.
Most of the MGTOWs ire, like that of the white supremacists I wrote about on the royal wedding day, has focused on the person of one Meghan Markle, the new Duchess of Sussex.
The white supremacists hate the fact that she’s mixed race. The MGTOWs, well, they hate pretty much everything about her, from her age (an ancient 36!) to her background as an actress to her allegedly inadequate arse. Oh, and they hate the fact she’s mixed race, too.
While most royal-wedding-watchers oohed and ahhed over the photos showing the happy couple looking at one another with obvious adoration, one MGTOW Redditor managed to find one picture of Markle with a slightly strange expression on her face that, in his mind, indicated the presence of pure evil. (It’s the photo at the top of this post, minus the demonic redness I added to it for this post.)
Needless to say, the MGTOW community agreed with this assessment, and then some.
One fellow, whose reach exceeded his grasp, vocabulary-wise, suggested that Markle’s “evil” look was evidence that this golddigger was staking her claim to an exceedingly rich vein of gold.
In another thread on Markle, MGTOW Redditors expressed their astonishment that an actual prince would marry such an allegedly average-looking woman.
No doubt her knees are too pointy as well.
But the alleged longness of Markle’s face was less distressing to Reddit’s MGTOWs than her extremely advanced age. Why on earth would Harry allow himself to be ensnared by a women “pushing 40” — she’s 36 — instead of a 19-year-old virgin of the sort that MGTOWs and other Manospherans fetishize? Why would Harry accept a used woman when he could have gotten one mint-in-box?
![DTreatz 32 points 1 day ago I can't believe that this is the best Harry could do, a 36 year old non-virgin divorcee. If you're going to get married (shouldn't) least you could opt for was some prime exclusive good stuff. permalinkembedsavereportgive goldreply [–]AngryDeer 14 points 1 day ago Prince Harry of England. Literally hand pick any 22 y/o virgin rose of the realm. permalinkembedsaveparentreportgive goldreply [–]NoThirst 24 points 1 day ago Have you seen British women? Not a lot of "virgin roses" left/ permalinkembedsaveparentreportgive goldreply [–]itzhyde 8 points 1 day ago They lose them at 14, Muslim grooming gangs and getto schools.](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/tdycrfugvibhjo.png?resize=580%2C828&ssl=1)
Yes, by all means, slip some Islamophobia in there alongside the misogyny.
When one commenter ventured the opinion that she was actually sort of a hottie, he was quickly put straight.
![magx01[?] -7 points 1 day ago She is still hot af for her age though. I'll say that. permalinkembedsavereportgive goldreply [–]dayone_27 9 points 1 day ago The wall is only days away permalinkembedsaveparentreportgive goldreply [–]t353tfb 2 points 1 day ago Within six months you'll be looking at a 300lb bbw. Her obnoxious politics will also be loud and proud. The whole freak show is a total embarrassment for everyone involved. Harry Hewitt is having revenge on behalf of his mother. permalinkembedsaveparentreportgive goldreply [–]FortyandLifeToGo 1 point 1 day ago I wouldn't argue that...but who do you think she gave her best years to? It wasn't her now husband or anybody like him.](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/tjoiy8gu.png?resize=580%2C776&ssl=1)
That’s right: Handsome Harry, Afghanistan war veteran and literal prince, is no Chad but rather a betabucks cuck.
A few commenters have convinced themselves that Markle isn’t a “real” woman at all.
![TheImpossible1 2 points 1 day ago Is it just me or does she look trans... permalinkembedsavereportgive goldreply [–]LimousineLibtard 1 point 21 hours ago She looks like John Kerry with a wig and a spray tan.](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/cfyhvguibhjon.png?resize=562%2C302&ssl=1)
![that_nast 1 point 1 day ago Her body structure is weird as fuck permalinkembedsavereportgive goldreply [–]LimousineLibtard 2 points 21 hours ago That’s because it is a man.](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/rytf7uy8giho.png?resize=559%2C273&ssl=1)
Have we covered all the forms of bigotry yet? Not quite, but this little exchange should take care of most of the rest.
![Logiman43 3 points 1 day ago Harry married an older, catholic, feminist, american (for uk folks), half-white/half-black, from crazy&poor family, divorced actress. I mean, you cant find lower than this. Maybe if you added crack addiction and kids. But just maybe permalinkembedsavereportgive goldreply [–]DogsOfParadise 2 points 19 hours ago Could've been also a fat, trans, refugee woman. It's not that bad. permalinkembedsaveparentreportgive goldreply [–]Logiman43 2 points 14 hours ago You are right. It could've been worse](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/8gyi9huojip.png?resize=580%2C613&ssl=1)
Bigotry Bingo!
And then there’s this fellow, who combines a vivid imagination with a somewhat limited understanding of how women conduct their careers.
MGTOWs, so consumed by jealousy and desperate sexual longing that their sour grapes have blue balls.
Yep, those grapes are awfully sour for these guys, aren’t they?
I was hooked by the expression-on-her-face comments.
I mean, isn’t it just possible that she simply had to suppress a belch or fart? Maybe she had an ovulation twinge or her feet were aching or she was hungry! I’ve been known to make some odd faces while in public over such things.
Of course, any such charitable thoughts toward any woman are galaxies away with these garbage people.
It could just be plain nerves….at that moment, she was about to go on stage to play the biggest role of her life: Duchess of Sussex, wife of the sixth person to the throne and second son of HRH the Prince of Wales, who is in turn heir to the throne of 16 nations.
Her life’s schedule is going to be made for years in advance, down to her exact clothing choices. I’m not surprised she’d be nervous.
Oh yeah, we all got King Charles III to look forward to. Yay.
Man, guy’s been heir apparent since he was four. As big a fop as he is, I kinda feel for him. Gotta be weird preparing for something your whole life and it hasn’t happened even when you’ve reached retirement age.
@ katamount
I find so many parallels here with what happened to Tiberius.
The motto of the Prince of Wales is right on his Coat of Arms: “Ich Dien.” It means: “I serve.” They are very aware that they have to spend years — sometimes decades — awaiting their moment. During that time, all they can do is “serve,” and the current Prince of Wales supports a lot of charities.
As a matter of fact, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, rather than go off on a honeymoon right away, are doing the 70th birthday party for the Prince of Wales today, which is being done to support those charities. These include the World Wildlife Fund, Boy Scouts and Girl Guides, and Commonwealth veterans’ organizations.
People forget that the Prince of Wales served in the Royal Navy as a line officer and went through the training course for the Parachute Regiment, of which he is Colonel-in-Chief, so he’s familiar with the military, too. When he was on active duty, he donated his RN Officers’ pay to a charity fund for sailors’ families — he had enough money.
You might (or probably don’t) remember that in 1981, when Charles married Diana, the honored guests at the Buckingham Palace reception were disabled people from throughout the Commonwealth who had succeeded in various endeavors, who were being honored for those achievements. The reason was because 1981 was the “International Year of the Disabled Person” and the Royal Family wanted to put their issues and resilience front and center. Instead Princess Diana’s dress was front and center.
This is the kind of stuff that the Royal Family works on that the media never covers — there is more attention to their clothes, their hats, their food, than their actual activities.
This wedding and marriage is going to have a big impact on the British Commonwealth and the larger world — as the new generation of the Royal Family will be more active and visible on social issues, while at the same time, meeting the requirement that the Monarchy be “a step behind the times” in order to provide people with a reassurance that traditional values of family, home, and faith are still valid in a complex and changing world — which is NOT changing, in many ways, sadly, for the better. Misogynists and racists achieving high levels of power are proof of that. Meghan and Harry are a great answer to Trump grabbing women.
Katamount…
As a fellow Canadian, I see this a just further indictment of the monarchy. We’re a nation built on theft and genocide, and our treatment of First Nations people and our respect for treaties to this day isn’t particularly stellar. Sure, the residential schools are finally gone but we still have senators wanting us to look at the bright side of those murderous institutions.
“I find so many parallels here with what happened to Tiberius.”
Please don’t say that! A naked Prince Charles frolicking naked in a pool with naked little boys trained to swim between his legs is an image that requires brain-bleach.
That being said, now that you pointed it out I completely agree to the comparison. One hopes that he is not as twisted as Tiberius got, though there is lots of leaks about him being extremely difficult to be around as he is prone to temper-tantrums and impossible demands. The staff at his various charities brace themselves when he turns up and there is always a turnover of staff.
Apparently people also absolutely hate to have him as a house guest as he brings his own linens, plates and food with him, is very critical of everything, ignores other guests, and often will walk out of a party/dinner/entertainment if he is bored or just in a snit. That can be a problem, as when a royal is your guest for dinner; you start eating when they do, and stop when they do.
It is a bone of contention between his mother and himself as she is wildly noted as the perfect guest. Whatever bedroom she is given is pronounced “charming”, she eats whatever is presented to her with apparent enjoyment, and goes out of her way to speak pleasantly with every other guest.
Katamount:
My copy of The Invention of Tradition seems to have disappeared, but much of what we think of as “olden times” royal tradition was cynically invented out of whole cloth in the 19th century to seem old timey then, at a time when the institution was in sore need of a popularity boost. Sadly, it worked.
That also must be a weird tightrope to balance. I was watching a lot of old Air Farce over the long weekend (The Royal Canadian Air Farce was a satirical sketch comedy show that ran on the CBC from 1992 to 2008) and they made a lot of hay out of the British Royal Family and its related 90s dramas (Diana’s split from Charles, Diana’s death, Andrew’s split from Sarah Ferguson, the great Buckingham Palace mouse infestation of 1997). Luba Goy was hysterical as the aloof yet capable Queen Elizabeth, while Roger Abbott played the Queen Mother with her ever-present gin glass.
The down-to-earth nature of the William, Harry and their respective spouses has been a welcome change since all the black eyes the Royal Family received in the 90s. I can only wish them all the best as time marches on.
@Moggie
I was thinking more of the concept of a divinely-chosen head of state rather than the trappings, customs and rituals. You’re right, those mostly date back to the Victorian or Edwardian times. But then, I live in a colony that only goes back to Georgian times, so they seem old regardless. *shrug*
Truthfully, I think Meghan Markle gave this new life role a lot of thought, and the combination of the love of a good man and an opportunity to be a leader on an international scale made the decision easy for her…and I think she will enjoy this new role.
As a Brit, I’m against the monarchy, but I’m more concerned about their rights than ours. Like freedom of speech… they don’t have that. If they have views, they’re free to keep them to themselves. They’re practically under a constitutional obligation to appear shallow in public at all times. Freedom to choose a career? Yeah, well, depends which one. Freedom to choose a marriage partner? Charles’ first choice got nixed and look what happened there. If we think things are better now, ask yourselves what would have happened if William had been gay?
There is definitely as sense in which countries need heads of state to shake hands with people and cut ribbons and so on, but those people should not have that role enforced on them at birth.
There is a constitutional problem with members of the (unelected) royal family acting as ‘leaders’ in anything except old-fashioned style and basic do-gooding charitable endeavours. So no, I’m afraid that probably isn’t what she’ll be doing.
Even that doing that can generate thought and action. Doing good is what people should be doing…preferably without being told to do so. But we don’t. So someone has to do so.
Re: referring to black or biracial women by slurs for trans women, and how those bigotries cluster…I spent all morning and most of the afternoon searching for the correct phrase (and I knew there WAS one) that summed up that phenomenon of multiple flavors of bad coming together to make utter shit. And finally I found it: Crank magnetism. Granted, it refers to kooky, insupportable theories in general, but since racism, transphobia and sexism are all pretty damn irrational and inane, I’d say the phrase applies here all the same.
And now that my farting brain has finally resumed normal digestion, it’s time for my esprit to crawl back under the escalier and call it a day.
I think so too. I mean, she’s been dating Harry for a while and it was made clear to her what she’d have to do and give up to be his wife. She’s literally sacrificing everything except her family on this one. And I think that’s a big gamble to take, but she clearly knows what she’s doing and is willing to do it for the person she loves.
“Why didn’t Harry bag some 20 year old virgin?”
Yeah, cuz that worked out so well for HIS MOTHER, you ignorant shit stains. Being cheated on, gaslit, treated like a brood mare, and having NO ONE on her side to tell her, “He’s already making you unhappy. You don’t have to marry him. Give him back the ring and tell The Firm to get stuffed.”
Harry’s far from perfect, but I doubt he’d want to inflict the same pain his mother went through on someone else.
Actually they say 19 is already “pre-wall”. And they’re always talking about how age of consent should be lowered.
About the “she looks trans” thing. There’s this “youtube community” of conspiracy theorists who say most celebrities (and “global elites” so that would include world leaders like royalty and government) are trans. Most famous Hollywood men were born female and most famous Hollywood women were born male. They say that Donald Trump was born female and Melania was born male. You should watch their videos sometime. Absolutely hilarious. And they are serious about this too. It’s called “transvestigation” where they take a famous person and deconstruct them showing how they are trans.
It’s even more ridiculous than the “Brad Pitt is Benicio Del Toro” conspiracy where the guy does the ear analysis. That’s the conspiracy that says famous people are each other. They take two celebrities who vaguely resemble each other (or not even) and analyse their ears because supposedly ear tissue cannot be replicated or faked or cloned or whatever.
So what’s the takeaway? “The Elite” are toying with us by presenting guy celebs who are really girls and girl celebs who are really guys. The Elite doesn’t stop there but they even use one celeb to play two, or even 3. The evidence is in the ears. Why exactly “the elite” would do this is still not entirely clear, but they throw out a bunch of crazy reasons.
I guess this is all “crank magnetism”. Never heard that phrase til now.
My wife was also 36 when we married (and, like the relationship under discussion, she’s also slightly older than me) and somehow we’ve managed to last sixteen years without divorcing, either of us straying, or indeed either of us feeling that we’ve massively compromised in order to tick the relevant social-convention boxes. Even if I could plausibly have had my pick of all the partners I’ve had over the decades, she’d easily be my first choice, and I have reasonable grounds for believing that she feels the same way.
And one of the major reasons is that we spent our twenties doing precisely this:
…which amongst other things meant that we went into our marriage with our eyes wide open, knowing precisely what we wanted and with a pretty good idea of how to ensure that we’d achieve it.
Compare and contrast with the yawning gap between Princess Diana’s fantasies about a royal marriage and what sounds like the utterly hellish reality of being forced to share a life under the brightest imaginable spotlight with a man who regarded her as little more than a brood mare in a marriage arranged by others against his personal wishes.
@bina Crank magnetism I like it!
There’s a really shitty dynamic of people who hate throwing in some extra hate just for spite. I’ve seen my ex go through this – he’s basically went from one insupportable theory to another because of the company he was keeping online.
“Transvestigation” OMG that’s a new one on me, I thought they just did it to Michelle Obama. As for the celebrity doubles, I can’t even. Reality is a faraway country to them.
They are wrong about the ears. You can grow ears in a lab. Does everyone remember that mouse with the ear on it’s back? Well they don’t even need a mouse anymore:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/children-new-ears-grown-own-cells-china-scientists-worlds-first-operation-transplant-a8187776.html
They would probably say it was fake news.
Sad.
I just goog’d transvestigation. Faith in humanity was ruined again. I should probably just go look at some baby ocelots instead.
@idli
Mind the comments policy, please.
@Katamount
I’m usually 100% in agreement with your posts, but not quite so much this time. Disclosure: I’m a complete nerdgirl fan of British history, and just this evening binge-watched Dr Lucy Worsley on the Wars of the Roses. However…
Like in Canada, the British monarchy is a large part of what Australia is today – and that’s a problem. From declaring this place terra nullius to dumping all their “unwanted” here, and leaving them to rot, they have a lot to answer for. As for my Sikh partner’s perspective on how the monarchy and its traditions have impacted India? I don’t have the space or the time to list the atrocities committed there, legal and moral. But every time people like him see a “royal monogram,” it’s a reminder of the destruction of an ancient culture, or a tradition, if you will.
There are a lot of fans of the royals here, so I’ll try to clarify: I have nothing against them as individuals, and I’ve already said I’m super happy that this marriage has made Nazis and MGTOWs cry. But I don’t value a tradition simply because it’s a tradition. And the damage of this tradition is still hurting people right now.
Not to mention I’m an incorrigible opponent of social hierarchy in general.
Katamount, you know how much I respect you (I hope!) and I’m not trying to be polemical. Just had to respond to that 🙂
@ mish
I love Lucy Worsley; but have you read this? It’s brilliant. And does a really good job of providing a simple to follow narrative despite the fact that, at the time, they appear to have only come up with three first names.
https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/1038051/lancaster-and-york/
@Mish
Oh no, don’t apologize at all! You’re absolutely right and I actually blame myself for not being more forthright about how the royal monogram is a symbol of oppression as well. I think it’s my straight flush of privileges that has influenced my outlook on the monarchy, as even in urban Toronto, being white, male, English-speaking and Protestant was the key to success when Toronto was growing, whereas if one was aboriginal, black, Francophone and Catholic, it would have represented something far different and still does to this day.
I think my point is that it’s always been there to represent something to everybody, rather than the fleeting ephemeral trappings of capitalism, like what kind of phone you use or what herbal tea you drink.