t’s PLEDGE DRIVE time again! If you’re a fan of this blog, please help fund its continued existence by clicking the button below. THANKS!
By David Futrelle
If men are from Mars and women from Venus, then MGTOWs must be from Uranus. Or, rather, Theirownanus. In any case, they live on a different planet than the rest of us. Proof? They take nonsense like this to be the literal truth:
This post has gotten nearly 400 upvotes from Reddit’s MGTOW population, with 95% of those voting on it giving it the thumb’s up. But it’s complete balderdash.
According to a recent CDC survey, the median number of sex partners for women between 25-44 is 4.2. Over a lifetime, not per week. (The median for men in the same age range: 6.1.) And while sex surveys are not the most reliable surveys ever — people lie, and may define sex differently — most surveys I’ve seen put the number of lifetime partners in the single or low double digits. In other words, your typical woman doesn’t have an army of Chads on booty call speed dial.
I also like the idea that the typical man suffers because he has to make his own food. I know that’s surprisingly tough for MGTOWs to manage, but boo fucking hoo. Do they think that the Chads are bringing women delicious home-cooked meals every time they stop by for sexy times?
Honestly, MGTOW theories about women make about as much sense as QAnon.
Maybe it’s a reference to the manospherian myth that women frequently score free restaurant dinners paid by some beta boyfriend or aspiring boyfriend or “orbiter” friend?*
Obviously, another alternative for home cooking would be paying your own dinners or buying ready meals. This could be also what was referred above, since some manospherians seem to complain about how “modern women don’t cook”.
* This trope comes up so often, combined with the notion that women date “beta” men mainly just for the free food and drinks, you’d think dating women is basically like feeding wild animals in your backyard.
@Lumipuma:
I’m guessing that this is a leftover relic from the era when young, middle-class white men typically had jobs, and young, middle-class white women typically did not because they expected to be housewives eventually (whether they wanted to or not). These days most women work and have money. I go dutch or pay for the food sometimes. So do most other women I know. I can cook. So can most of the men I’ve dated, at least adequately. I’m sure this anti-egalitarian (for lack of better term) trope is still common in some places, but it doesn’t have to be. I’m also sure that a lot of manospherians would be offended by the woman paying, anyway, because it shows a degree of power and independence and that threatens their ego.
@Snowberry Absolutely! I think to them it isn’t so much the paying for dinner they don’t like, but women failing to provide the reward they think they deserve afterwards. The injustice is that women will just give it away to Chad without bestoying poor Beta Bux (who is doing courtship properly, and has *good* intentions) with his due compensation. Not only does he miss out on women’s virginity and “prime years” – which should be his by right – he doesn’t even get the shag that surely paying for dinner should provide, seeing as women as such sluts anyway.
Also, kind of off topic, but some bad news from the UK:
https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/half-of-young-men-oppose-feminism-uk/
I encourage all lonely single men to explore the exciting world of friendship, where they may find companionship, emotional support, shared meals and social hobbies, just like women have with their friends.
@Snowberry
And of course in typical manosphere no-win fashion, they think that if a woman doesn’t pay for dinner she’s stealing mens’ money, but if she does pay she’s emasculating him.
@Fetch
Unfortunately, they seem to have confused “friendship” with “group of angry entitled dudes rambling about women.”
O/T: I regret to inform you all that S.E. Hinton has outed herself as a transphobe.
@The Red One
Please abide by the comments policy and avoid “crazy” talk like this. Assholery is not a mental illness, and we don’t go in for armchair diagnosing in these parts.
@snowberry
I think median may be more appropriate than mean in this case. The median is definitely more appropriate for $, since money is unequally distributed. *If* a few individuals are having a lot more sex partners – I don’t actually know – then the mean might be pulled way up by those few individuals, but the the median would be sort of typical for an ordinary individual.
O/T, but people might be interested.
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2020/aug/06/the-matrix-director-lilly-wachowski-trans-identity-metaphor
Thanks all, as usual, for your awesome support. Today will be better than yesterday!!
@Snowberry
I think you’ve got median and mean mixed up. Mean (or average) can be easily skewed by outliers, whereas median is not nearly as sensitive to outliers.
It sounds like Chad is single to the same degree that Stacey is; if having a ton of sex but not being committed to any particular partner = single, then Chad is equally single. How does that comport with our MGHOW’s categorical statement that all single men are truly alone? Is Chad not really a man? I thought Chad was the ultimate, highest-quality man. But he’s both single and not truly alone, and also a man, so the categorical “all men” statement is obviously untrue. It sounds like we can’t trust men to be “truly alone” when they say they’re single 100% of the time. Hmmm … that really throws a wrench into the validity of this argument! I wonder how that happened!
@Alan Robertshaw
There are also some hints and allusions in some other Wachowski films and TV shows. For instance, in Sense8 one of the main antagonists bears a striking resemblance to Ray Blanchard.
@PoM
Since the MGTOW says this only applies if a man says he’s single, maybe Chad never says he’s single?
My Someone makes more than I do. He likes to pay for our food because it’s no hardship to him and it would add up fast for me… But I ALWAYS buy breakfast. Whether he stayed over or we meet up in the morning, breakfasts are mine.
In off topic news, my roommates are still sick. They’ve been sick since February and the doctors don’t know what’s wrong since the Covid tests keep coming back negative.
The alternative to single is partnered-up, and I don’t hear Chad claiming that, either, in this scenario. Chad’s perception of his partnered/single status isn’t mentioned at all.
However, it would be reasonable, from the information given, to assume that Chad believes himself to be single. He isn’t tied down; he fucks many women. And he’s clearly not in agreed-upon open relationships with all these women, as the women that he fucks are angry that he’s fucking other women. So either Chad believes himself to be cheating on every woman he fucks, or else he believes himself to be single. The most reasonable conclusion is that he believes himself to be single, and therefore free to sleep with whomever he chooses regardless of the women’s jealousy.
@PoM
Is it possible there’s another option like friends with benefits or some sort of polyamory? And since Chad hasn’t said anything about how he views his status, I don’t think we can infer that he thinks he’s single.
Do people with FWB think they are not single? Do they stop looking for romantic relationships (presuming that they are looking for a romantic relationship) once they achieve a FWB?
I think I addressed that.
@Yutolia
Guy you reported is both an asshole and an idiot. Back when I was online dating, “gal from two or three weeks ago actually wants to talk” was about the best thing to discover upon logging in. Way to work against your own interests there, guy.
It’s common enough on dating sites to be regularly featured on subreddits mocking Nice Guys.
@morethangeek:
I know! That was part of what shocked me about it, too. Wow, entitlement… Glad I don’t have to meet him!
The range of what romance is to people ranges pretty widely. And what each partner in a relationship feels can change over time and change back again.
I get cast sometimes as “polyamorous” but that’s not how I think of myself because it’s a label that somebody else made up and that means certain things to other people that can’t really get at what I feel.
I have romantic feels for some of my guys sometimes. They are my partners and I respect them always and I’m very sexually attracted to them but they are never, ever my “friends” in the conventional sense that most people mean that word. I am always, always sexually attracted to them to though, or I would not have picked them in the first place because we have to feel sexual attraction for each other in order for the type of creative relationship we have to work. But they are not my friends because that implies a kind of informality that I don’t want (and would never tolerate). It’s not always easy to explain to people with rigid categories in mind that physical intimacy and attraction and trust and mutual reciprocal respect can exist between partners even when their relationship depends on formality and protocol within a mutually agreed upon hierarchy.
It’s a complicated relationship but not “complicated” in a bad way. It’s complicated in a good way as in richness and uniqueness.
If someone ever tried to make me answer the question “So, are you single or not?” I would refuse to answer.
(And if it was a guy trying to make me answer that confining question I’d make him talk to me standing a certain distance out of physical range because my verbal response wouldn’t be the only sound he hears and if you know me you know why! 🙂 🙂 )
@LindsayIrene
I adore any site or activity that mocks NiceGuys.
I try to set aside a few hours each week dedicated specifically for openly mocking them to an audience. 🙂
The more elaborate the planning and show, the better but I like to think I’m pretty good at improv. NiceGuy mocking when I encounter one.
I hate so much their sense of entitlement.
@PoM
I don’t know, I haven’t been in that situation before. I also don’t really know how Chad views his relationships since he’s a fictional character.
@ Ariblester:
Hope springs eternal?
POM:
Good point. Though I suspect these generalizations about “men” and “women” were only meant to apply in most cases rather than in literally all cases.
Could be. After all, Chad is a not most men, and any rules, limitations or common sense do not apply to him.
Then again, I gather it’s a common manospherian belief that men are naturally heartless bastards when it comes to dating women. As in, they don’t care to get committed in a relationship if they can have an easy access to sex otherwise. But if they do have that easy access, then they are functionally partnered anyway, because that’s all a man needs or wants.
Besides, even if Chad is sort of settled down with some Stacey, he certainly wouldn’t care to consider whether he’s “free” or not before he goes on to casually fuck the Beckys of the world. Because he’s Chad, Stacey would be reluctant to dump his ass over mere cheating, and even though she’ll probably eventually dump him, he doesn’t care. It’s not like he’ll run out of sex partners.
It’s kind of sad that even in this elaborate fantasy scenario, a woman being upset when she’s not chosen by a man who has better options is somehow all about how little this affects her and how women have it so much better than men, and there’s no thought given to the fact that everyone faces rejection.
I’m actually a bit surprised that women not getting relationships from all the easy and care-free sex they have all the time is even acknowledged. Usually it’s all about the amount of sex tokens you can get and how much effort it takes.