NOTE: This page is in desperate need of revision and expansion. In the meantime, I suggest you use Rationalwiki’s Manosphere Glossary.
For newcomers to this blog, here’s a handy guide to some of the strange acronyms and lingo you’ll encounter here and in the “manosphere” in general. (For a definition of that term, see below.) I will update this entry periodically as needed.
First, the acronyms you’ll see most often here:
MRA: Men’s Rights Activist
MRM: Men’s Rights Movement
MGTOW: Men Going Their Own Way MGHOW: Man Going His Own Way.
Ok, so what do those terms mean?
MRM: The Men’s Rights Movement: A loosely defined, but largely retrograde, collection of activists and internet talkers who fight for what they see as “men’s rights.” Unlike the original Men’s Movement, which was inspired by and heavily influenced by feminism, the self-described Men’s Rights Movement is largely a reactionary movement; with few exceptions, Men’s Rights Activists (or MRAs) are pretty rabidly antifeminist, and many are frankly and sometimes proudly misogynistic. Those who oppose the MRM are generally not against men’s rights per se; they are opposed to those who’ve turned those two words into a synonym for some pretty backwards notions.
MGTOW: Men Going Their Own Way: As the name suggests, MGTOW is a lot like lesbian separatism, but for straight dudes. MGTOW often talk vaguely about seeking “independence” from western and/or consumer culture, and a few MGTOW try to live that sort of zen existence. But most of those who embrace the term have a deep hostility towards and/or profound distrust of feminists and women in general. Many MGTOW refuse to date “western women” and some try to avoid women altogether. I think the Man Going His Own Way acronym MGHOW adds another layer of confusion to an already awkward acronym, so I use MGTOWer instead.
Some other terms and acronyms you’ll run across here:
Anglosphere: Countries in which English is the primary language, or, more narrowly, those countries that used to be British colonies. They are full of evil Western Women (see below).
Incel: Involuntarily Celibate. A term, and identity, adopted by some dateless guys (as well as some women, but it’s the men we’ll focus on here). While there is nothing shameful about being dateless, or a virgin, or having a really long dry spell sexually — most of us have been there at some point — the term “involuntarily celibate” seems to suggest that the world owes incels sex, and that women who turn down incel men for dates or sex are somehow oppressing them. For those (male, straight) incels who are genuinely socially awkward or phobic, this can be a self-defeating stance that can lead to bitterness towards women. And often does.
Mangina: Derogatory term used by MRAs, MGTOW, etc. to describe guys who disagree with them — e.g., me. You can figure out the various connotations of this term yourself.
The Manosphere: The loose collection of blogs, message boards, and other sites run by and/or read by MRAs, MGTOW, and assorted friendly Pick-up Artists. The primary source of material for this blog.
NAWALT: Not All Women Are Like That. Dudes in the manosphere make so many ridiculous and untrue generalizations about women that they’ve come up with their own little acronym to describe the most common reaction to their nonsense: “not all women are like that.” Remarkably, many seem to think that making a reference to NAWALT is actually some sort of clever rebuttal of their critics.
PUA: Pick-up Artist. PUAs are obsessed with mastering what they see as the ultimate set of techniques and attitudes — known as “Game” — that will enable them to quickly seduce almost any woman they want. There is a vast literature on “game” online, though PUA (insofar as it is not complete bullshit) is at its essence simply a male version of the age-old ploy of “playing hard to get.”
Western Women: Also known as WW. Evil harpies, at least according to many in the manosphere. Contrasted with “foreign women,” a term that (in the manosphere, at least) sometimes refers to all women outside the Anglosphere, but often refers to a subset of these women from poor and/or Eastern countries, mostly Asian, who are regarded as more pliable and thus more desirable to haters of “Ameriskanks” and other WW.
@Dar
“Only in a feminist world does logic and realioty not exist. Let us all live in a fantasy world in which most socities has “equality” and women were soldiers and rulers as often as men, and men stayed home to tend the children as opften as women.
That’s the version of history according to feminists.”
Sorry dude,but you really have a jelly brain,in my society,a very primitive ones actually had both men and women fight against invaders in the past,and yes there are women rulers too and men who stayed home to tend to the children..More coy stupidity from you
@Dar
“Means nothing. Even in non-agriculutral cultures, women are still the primary child-rearers, and women the fighters and leaders. That is so among the beduins, for example. The presence or absense of a “building called “house” makes no difference.”
Take a look at early hawaiian societies then,or minang or the akans of Ghana..Dumbass
@Dar
“Or has it been an egalitarian equal society whence you can draw inspiration? Which is it?”
It used to be former until some creatures like you come and screwed everything.Thank god the mosuo and the minang still maintained their system.It seems they haven’t followed the natural pattern yet.
“No surprise given that your whole accursed movement was heavily made up of lesbians.”
So you’re saying the MRAs is full of gays?
I’m confused I am feminist but I am not a lesbian and I am a mother too.Does that make me unnatural for not going against my natural inclination.Apparently if I am supposed to be a feminist,i can’t be a mother.But if I am a mother,I can’t be feminist.Which one is it? Lemur brain?
“Yes, so do humans,. It’s called abortion, which you feminists love.”
Abortion is not infanticide you dumbass.It involved foetus not infant,if it’s considered as an infanticide,then so should masturbation.
Thank god the bonobos don’t have any infanticide.Why is it so difficult for creatures like you to understand??
“If so, how dio THAT come about, if not from biological impreatives.”
So you’re saying that tibetan and the kinnauri polyandry comes from biological imperative as well?
@Dar
“As for the bonobos, again 100% irrelevant! I never claimed that women don’t enjoy sex, therefore that female bonobos have sex year-round means zilch.”
YUp,the bonobos female lack of interest in following natural inclination as submissive mate to their males is 100% irrelevant.
TIL that exposing daughters to choices and opportunities, and allowing them to choose a life path of their own free will, is “brainwashing”.
And stifling alternative beliefs and options so that women are more easily coerced into the role of homemaker with threats of social ostracism and junk biology is totally not brainwashing.
@Dar
“Ah yes, another feminist tactic, analogize your bullshit with racism.”
I’m just gonna ignore your previous attempt at anologize feminism vs MRAs with Democrats vs Republicans.
“I never said women were inferior. YOU, as a moron feminist thinkgs that being a woman doing womanly things is “inferior”. You want women doing man things.”
We want women doing whatever that suits them.
@Dar
“Anyone who suports abortion (as feminists do) can never truly love their children.”
Excuse me you IMBECILE!!!!
My mother and I support abortion,she had an abortion herself!!
Are you actually questioning whether or not she loves her children???
Fuck you
“A “non-binary trans person”? Bullshit! You’re either a transwoman or transman. Anything else and you’re some bisexual asshole.”
So I said BULLSHIT TO YOU!!
You’re either a closet misogynist or closet MRAs,don’t pretend to be some kind of neutral libertarian.We seen it through you!!
@Buttercup Q. Skullpants
Yes, you’ve said it better than I could. 🙂 It’s been bugging me for a long long time, but it’s hard to describe exactly what I’m trying to get at. Thanks for that.
What absolute codswallop. The people I know who’ve had abortions, without exception, did so either because they didn’t feel ready to become mothers or because something had been discovered during the scan that would drastically impact on the child’s quality of life – which in some cases may be all but nonexistent.
How on earth is that compatible with the claim that they “can’t truly love their children”? Surely this suggests the exact opposite?
My wife could hardly be more pro-choice (if there’s a pro-choice rally within a couple of hundred miles of where we live, the chances are she’ll be on it), and anyone who claims with a straight face that because of this she can’t truly love our children is worth taking about as seriously as someone who claims that the world is flat and the moon is made of green cheese. Because the evidence to the contrary in all three cases is overwhelming.
Oh looky, a bog-standard right-wing troll!
Bullshit. My aunt had an abortion because she developed rubella during her second pregnancy and the fetus was severely deformed. She terminated that pregnancy in the second trimester not because she hated her child, but because she loved it and couldn’t bear to inflict catastrophic disabilities upon it. And because she already had one child, and couldn’t bear to deprive her existing daughter of care. A severely disabled infant would have made family life rough, if not impossible, for all her family.
You naturalistic fallacy spouters really need to get an education. You know nothing about life OR love.
Actually, dipshit, I have NEVER “naturally” wanted to submit. And I don’t gravitate “naturally” to your set-in-stone gender roles. So you can just fuck right off, Durrrrrr.
@Dan Urdangarin
I’m late to the party, Dan (you posted on August 6), but I did click through on your link. I see that you promise “Gorilla Like Sex Drive” and “Raw Masculine Power.”
Hmm. Wouldn’t my own sex drive do?
And this raw masculine power you speak of–I prefer my own raw feminine power. But thanks for the offer. I understand that the information is free, and all I need to do is provide you with my email address. No chance that you’d be sending me all kinds of unwanted spam if I give you my email address, right?
Here’s your argument in your post (I’ve added my thoughts in all caps):
So, Dan, you’re saying, To get sex, be mean. Don’t be sweet. Don’t be caring. Don’t give and provide everything to your lady.
Citation needed.
Probably you’re saying to yourself, Well, of course she’d say that. She’s a woman. My product is for men! (Men who’d like to treat women badly and just need the textbook to tell them how.)
Dude, you’re on a website read by lots of women and a few men.
More than a few, I think. It seems like a good dozen of the regulars/semi-regulars are fellas.
Which is why you’ve been spending days adamantly defending those roles.
How did all this societal degeneration you’re so worried about come to be if everyone naturally gravitates to their “correct” roles?
If your position is actually “a tiny minority of the population overtook the government and orchestrated a massive brainwashing campaign that successfully overrode the natural instincts of the vast majority and no one was able to stop them,” then you might as well admit that we have the more successful evolutionary strategy and that your kind is on the rocks, O biological determinist.
@sunnysombrera
You’re right. My wording was imprecise. I think that I’ve fixed more than one problem with my revsion.
Rewording:
Probably you’re saying to yourself, Well, of course she’d say that. She’s a woman. My product is for men! (Men who’d like to treat women badly and just need the textbook to tell them how.)
Dude, you’re on a website–read by people of various genders and sexual orientations–that mocks a person who would treat others like objects to be used for that person’s gratification.
@katz
Yes! We iz teh WINNERZ!
Homo superior.
I was gonna snark, but apparently just some bisexual asshole. I’ll see myself out then!
Thank you Scented Fucking Hard Chairs, Paradoxical Intention, San!
As for letting the religious façade slide, this is the exact moment:
“I say men are generally taller than women, I don’t need a God-damned citation, it is YOU who challenge such an assetion who needs a citation.”
Not only has our new friend turned as swear happy as I am, but he took the lords name in vain. (Yes, I’m serious. My mother lets me drop f bombs left and right, that one gets that glare that only parents can give.)
Katz — 1) I love that biologically incorrect raptor, even if it lacks feathers, 2) I think that actually is the correct Latin, because Latin is weird. Mostly I love the raptor though (inb4 “see! Queers love animals!”)
Yeah, of course I remember wtf I was forgetting as soon as I hit send >.<
Somebody up there used the nice general singular "they" for me and I wanted to note that I use ze/zir (they is fine, just a footnote to my last post!)
Dar: Since Katz sand many others have already eloquently deconstructed the Biological determinism argument lets talk about the exceptions that proves the rule. Firstly that’s a lot of exceptions to the rule. I only brought up three examples but there are many more.
Secondly Your the one who brought up older societies views being superior in the first place. By your own logic we could easily say that homosexuality is the natural state of humanity and its only because of years of mass brainwashing that people are now opposed to it. Now obviously I don’t believe all people are bisexual, but you certainly haven’t given any proof that heterosexuality is some kind of natural state. Evan your counterexample is a natural state. You admit that it can happen in nature therefore it is natural.