TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

97

Of all the different branches of the manosphere, MGTOW is going to have the most impact on future generations of men. Mark my words, MGTOWing will become the de facto lifestyle for men in no more than 20 years.

I base this on the following:

  • Women are becoming increasingly annoying. I'm not saying all, but the majority. This is due to feminism fucking up gender relations, causing even non feminist identifying women to become infected with this vague sense that men are selfish, lazy boors who are taking advantage of them - and that they therefore need to complain a lot in relationships. "What can I do to please men/the man in my life" is an idea increasingly foreign to women.

  • Increasing availability of REALLY high quality entertainment, at dirt cheap prices. The kind of porn, videogames, tv shows, websites, etc available today blows away anything seen 20 years ago. With all this VR porn, AIs making fake celeb porn for you, etc... the bargaining power of pussy is going to take a nosedive. That's not even talking about sex bots. If THOSE ever truly take off, then gender relations will quickly become an unrecognizable wasteland populated by female incels.

  • The recognition that marriage and LTRs with women tend to skew against men's interests is spreading. The Redpill worldview is gaining more traction despite media's intense antagonism towards it (didn't stop Trump). More men are abstaining from rushing in to marry chicks just because she popped out a baby. Marriage rates are dropping. Male birth control will happen within a decade, meaning no more getting trapped by a kid. It took a while for men to catch up with the realities of the market and stop being simps, but it's happening.

  • Everything is just too fucking expensive. The upper middle class lifestyle that is marketed intensely at women, that many of them crave, is becoming unreachable for the average western family. The middle class is disappearing across the globe thanks to globalism, automation, etc. When 90% of people are lower class, lower class values will become the norm... and that means more broken, single mom-led families being supported by the welfare state while men live out one giant extended adolesence. Not like there's much else to do when there are no meaningful jobs (other than drug dealer/gang member) in your community.

  • Culture -- whether it be in the sphere of dating, politics, sex, marriage, or whatever -- is not going to shift back in favor of men any time soon. Feminism and leftism is too entrenched, and women don't have a strong biological impulse to seek out men for anything, be it sex or relationships - they can essentially live without men for extend periods of time, rather than be pursuers. Women also struggle to lower their standards... the lack of eligible college educated men has created angst and disappointment among women, rather than a lowering of standards. That means women will still be demanding the same dreaded 6-6-6 (six pack, six feet tall, six figures) for decades to come at least.

  • TRP, while laudable in a sense, is by definition inaccessible to the majority of men. Not everyone can be alpha (or no one would be). Furthermore, the kind of lifestyle TRP espouses (building "value") doesn't appeal to everyone. If you have to be really bad ass in order to get your money's worth out of the SMP, only a fraction of men are going to pursue that and only a fraction of them are going to succeed. Meanwhile, the bulk of men are going to choose being lazy and doing whatever the fuck they want with their free time.

In contrast, MGTOW is an option open to everyone, doesn't require you to bow to the feminine imperative in even the most general sense, and provides an enjoyable level of freedom in a world where there is so much to enjoy besides women. That's why it's going to become the norm for men, sooner or later. Eventually, you might see a market readjustment where women start trying to be more pleasing, less demanding and less of a hassle to men -- but it will take a very, very long time. Much longer than the initial correction of men dropping out of the market.


[–][deleted] 42 points43 points  (36 children) | Copy Link

The real question is:

will men with reasonable access to the sexual market voluntarily forego it?

Since men without reasonable access to the sexual market aren't really making a choice.

Seems pretty doubtful that men who have access to sex would forego it en masse.

Now marriage, on the other hand...it's surprising to me that any men marry now that marriage is not a prerequisite for sexual access. It strikes me as bizarre and idiotic: like aliens mimicking a past that doesn't exist anymore

[–]throwaway13107212 points13 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

will men with reasonable access to the sexual market voluntarily forego it?

Yeah. Anecdata, but I've got degrees, I've got a very respectable, future-proof and social career, I'm in above average shape and work out, I can and do make friends with women often. But I've been close with a few women, and I've experienced what a hassle it can be to have constant communication with her and try to keep her woo'd. Granted they had their own issues beyond their control, but doesn't everyone? Now in my mid-20s that the hormones are a little less extreme, sex used to be (and slightly still is) enticing, but the balance has shifted. The one who is hot-ish requires far too much constant emotional support, is always as negative as possible about everything around her, talks OPENLY about how awful men are, etc. The one who isn't attractive, is emotionally fulfilling and can have genuine 2-way conversation, but she's a whale, but she's becoming more enticing than the former, but I just don't care to get serious with her when I'm disgusted by her physically. (She is still one of my best friends.) Casual sex isn't really that interesting, I don't want herpes, or a surprise "oops, must've missed the pill" baby. I'm finally prepared to be a provider, but the women who prepared to be a receiver, behave at least as disgusting as the kind overweight womanfriend looks. Just having a vagina (and not being overweight) doesn't mean she's still attractive when she can't stop spouting repulsive opinions. Still hoping to meet my unicorn, ideally sooner rather than later, but I'm more comfortable with waiting now, just fighting to not let my own opinions get so damn repulsive in the meantime.

[–]Profligate-Prophet7 points8 points  (13 children) | Copy Link

I dunno. I have reasonable access to sex if I so choose. But the requirements to be a womans tool isnt really much of an inspiration for me to put effort into trying. I could spend tons of energy trying to make a relationship work or I can just do whatever I want. Granted I am comming around to thinking if I want to try another relationship with some one I probably will quickly find out that putting a rediculous amount of effort into someone will change my mind.

I will admit it is nice being an attractive man with a decent job. But the perks are filled with hidden negatives that far outweigh the positives.

Sorry ladies you can either love women or understand them but you cant do both... my recommendation is that women should put a lot of effort understanding themselves before men feel they need to understand you...

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

I could spend tons of energy trying to make a relationship work or I can just do whatever I want.

Why not split the difference and stick to flings?

[–][deleted] 15 points16 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Flings are still an effort because women are nowhere near desperate enough to be the approachers or initiators of anything. They'd probably let the population dwindle before that happens.

Flings are also risky. Condoms are not perfect and not every woman can be trusted when they claim to use contraceptives. The amount of vetting required to drastically reduce the risks would put you closer to relationship territory. The kind of place women tend to say they want more control over, but despise men who give them that control. Hence the previous poster's aversion to making relationships work.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Flings are also risky. Condoms are not perfect and not every woman can be trusted when they claim to use contraceptives.

Vasectomy.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Vasectomy.

You could, but if the poster wasn't willing to put that much work into relationships, having a medical procedure you have to pay for and recover from is a lot of work. Then factor in the effort required to even find some women DTF on a semi regular basis and you're cutting your balls when jerking off to porn or visiting a brothel would yield more guaranteed results.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

If the poster has no interest in relationships it's safe to assume he doesn't want kids. A vasectomy is much much muuuuch cheaper than child support, the procedure takes like 30 mins max, and recovery takes only 1-2 weeks (really just one week unless your job is physical labour). Small price to pay for the benefits.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Expecting Chad to snip his balls just so women get their fix of Thundercock.

[–]whatyoucallaflip 1 points [recovered]  (4 children) | Copy Link

Flings are also risky. Condoms are not perfect and not every woman can be trusted when they claim to use contraceptives

She can't sue you for child support without a last name

[–]-Radical_Edward1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

She can find the nearest family member with a DNA test.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

How?

[–]-Radical_Edward2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

There are websites were you enter DNA data and they give you names of family members who have done the same. Tons of people find siblings or bastards this way. Let's say you find a cousin of the child. With this information you can quickly find the father.

[–]mgtow_14 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Still requires a lot of time, money, and effort to get flings on the regular.

[–]incelinthirty0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

But the perks are filled with hidden negatives that far outweigh the positives.

What are the negatives?

[–]bonusfruit1 point2 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

Men who have access in the smp are suffering afterwards from false accusations, oops babies, dick eating STDs, and female insanity. The sex drive is powerful but eventually the cost will stifle it

[–]aretournerPPD = mimophant party2 points3 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

The sex drive is powerful but eventually the cost will stifle it

Disagree. Unless men are literally starving, drowning, being burned alive etc., they're gonna be trying to fuck and nothing (except life-threatening situations) will stop them.

[–]bonusfruit2 points3 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

Disagree. mgtow, whether by its name or the general pattern of men avoiding relationships in increasing numbers bears it out. You could have said it's just loser men and sour grapes before. But when a list actors like Henry cavill are doing it, and corperate CEOs in power are openly talking about the Mike pence rule... men's self preservation instinct has finally caught up with their sex drive. Its happening right in front of us. Men are not the mindless horn dogs they are portrayed as

[–]aretournerPPD = mimophant party2 points3 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

Are you talking about MGTOW-but-still-has-sex (i.e. no relationships, just banging) or are you talking about MGTOW-and-no-non-trivial-contact-with-women-ever? I assumed you were talking about the latter. I was talking about the latter. if you're talking about the former, and saying men are still gonna fuck but not get into relationships then yeah, that could happen. It probably already is, and not just with men. it's easier to be single these days, for both sexes.

But if you're saying men are gonna en masse and long-term go without sex? NO. NEWP. Not gonna happen.

Men are not the mindless horn dogs they are portrayed

They are when a laydee hasn't touched their dick in a long time. Women have it in them to be just as bad, don't get angry.

[–]bonusfruit1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

I'm talking about both types. less men are pursuing, and those who are pursuing are exercising more caution than ever. Men can and have demonstrated the ability to reign in their sex drive or divert away from women. You can ignore the changing pattern of mens behavior if it's more comforting. Women like to think they will always have an irresistible hold on mens libido. Clearly it is subsiding

[–]aretournerPPD = mimophant party1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

less men are pursuing, and those who are pursuing are exercising more caution than ever

You have no proof of this and literally nothing I have seen or heard about irl backs it up.

Men can and have demonstrated the ability to reign in their sex drive or divert away from women

Have they? Like, as a group? When/where?

You can ignore the changing pattern of mens behavior if it's more comforting.

I literally don't see a changing pattern so in this case there's nothing to ignore. Men wanting to bang is as reliable as the sun rising.

Women like to think they will always have an irresistible hold on mens libido.

This isn't about my personal ego. You guys aren't reading the room correctly when you think women are getting buttmad about this. First of all, as I said, we don't see it happening. Second of all, the idea that a certain percentage of men are gonna get with their sex dolls and leave us alone is actually awesome. If there are fewer undersexed creeps macking on my daughter in 15 years all the fkn better.

[–]bonusfruit6 points7 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Western birthrates and marriage rates are declining. Both sexes grow increasingly dissatisfied with modern dating and relationships. Mgtow grows both online and naturally with men who know nothing about it deciding women are too toxic to engage with. Celibacy increasing in men in their 20s and 30s. Your response is to claim you dont see it happening, tell me not to get mad, then ask for sources to obvious occurrences happening nationwide. You attempt to gaslight and obfuscate. But I'm not invested enough to react. Things are going to decay whether or not I win this internet argument. Find a cozy bubble of denial if you want. Makes no difference to me

[–]aretournerPPD = mimophant party1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

You attempt to gaslight and obfuscate.

Disagreeing with someone is not gaslighting or obfuscating, guy. I'm not lying - I genuinely don't see what you're saying is some widespread thing happening. And you haven't been able to provide me with anything beyond your own belief that it's happening.

So if we've got your belief (and no actual evidence beyond that belief) on one hand and if we've got my belief on the other, why should I change my mind? Why should I believe you?

Western birthrates and marriage rates are declining.

I think this is a much more complex situation than "women are shitty, men are going to quit fucking them."

Find a cozy bubble of denial if you want.

What's with people like you? It literally doesn't even occur to you that you might be wrong, does it? You just think a thing is true and so it magically...is. You should be harder on your own beliefs.

[–]bonusfruit2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Telling me not to get angry when I've displayed no emotions whatsoever and demanding sources for commonly known occurrences are the examples of gaslighting. Claiming not to see clear patterns in human behavior is the example of obfuscation. Covering over this by saying you are simply "disagreeing"... I don't have a term for that, but its annoying. If we can't agree on any premises at all then I'm happy to just leave it at that. Perhaps where you live men and women are getting along better than ever. Glad to hear it

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Some men don’t need sex NEARLY as bad as you are trying to make it seem in this stupid slap fight.

[–]PlCKLERlCK0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

To the contrary it's the carrot not the stick. When sex was the highest pleasure around, sure. But life is too good these days to risk fucking it up over a fling.

Even on the pay to play side, spending 300 for NSA with an escort is nice. But in the age of porn, most of the time it's better to jerk off and go out to dinner an extra 3 times a week.

[–]RadChadswell 1 points [recovered]  (3 children) | Copy Link

will men with reasonable access to the sexual market voluntarily forego it?

No. This is anecdotal, but the ones I know have not. They're either enjoying casual sex or in LTRs.

Others are forgoing it - some perhaps convincing themselves it's voluntary - but they're not attractive. None of them would actually have reasonable access unless they did a lot of self-improvement. Maybe they're "voluntarily forgoing" the effort because they're lazy?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Maybe they're "voluntarily forgoing" the effort because they're lazy?

I think things like technology, availability of drugs, etc. are taking away the edge at the margins. Everyone is just willing to try a little bit less in current year than they would be in times that were more, for lack of a better word

boring

[–]RadChadswell 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

I disagree. High-value people I know are no less willing to try. People don't just try when they're bored and have nothing else to do. Booze was always around. Modern technology and drugs are just copes/excuses for people who would have wanted to stagnate in past societies too.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think that's true as a general matter, but I believe there are people at the borderline. High value people try in any time. Low value people try in no times. Perhaps it's the ones in the middle who in other times would he nudged toward effort that are nudged in these times toward not.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

will men with reasonable access to the sexual market voluntarily forego it?

In time. When sex toys for men become as mainstream as dildos, even Chad will prefer a quick splurt in a silicone vag. instead of having to waste time *"charming"* some needy woman.

They won't swear off women entirely, but a lot of true female incels / FA will start appearing.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

You can still fuck women or take part in the sexual market while being MGTOW, you just can't make it the focus of your identity like redpillers. Cohabitation is where the line is generally drawn - that's taking things too far, sacrificing too much. It's also conveniently where female libido tends to tank, and bitchy behaviors start to crop up en masse.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You can still fuck women or take part in the sexual market while being MGTOW, you just can't make it the focus of your identity like redpillers

What's the difference if you make it the focus of your identity or not if you draw the line at cohabitation?

[–]WhatIsTheMeaningHere107 points108 points  (39 children) | Copy Link

The only way I will disagree with you is the way you've framed this as a revenge fantasy. Think about the fat feminist who says "I don't need no man." Some of the stuff you said, to women, sounds just the same.

[–]planejaneRemove head from sphincter, THEN type.45 points46 points  (32 children) | Copy Link

Pretty much. I read the post and kept thinking, "I mean, he's right, but not for the reasons he thinks he's right."

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas20 points21 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

His death of the middle class reasons are spot on imo

[–]planejaneRemove head from sphincter, THEN type.5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Now that I agree with.

[–]throwaway1310723 points4 points  (24 children) | Copy Link

Then why not share the "correct reasons" you think he's right?

[–]planejaneRemove head from sphincter, THEN type.0 points1 point  (23 children) | Copy Link

Your tone is a bit nasty, don't you think?

Why, would you like to read my list?

[–]throwaway1310725 points6 points  (15 children) | Copy Link

Didn't mean to be nasty, it's a serious question. Yes I would. Don't tone police. I could say your tone is quite nasty in your original comment, because you didn't bother to expand, but that's not productive conversation. Let's just stay on topic.

Edit: Yawn. The list wasn't for me, it was for the public debate.

[–]planejaneRemove head from sphincter, THEN type.2 points3 points  (13 children) | Copy Link

I don't think so. Looking through your profile you seem to come across as a bit of a troll and kind of an asshole. Even on this board, where assholes are common, I try to avoid them.

There's also a difference between disagreeing and being a tart just to be a tart. I don't know you see the difference and because of that I've no interest in continuing in good faith with you here.

Have a nice day though.

[–]ayywumao 1 points [recovered]  (10 children) | Copy Link

What a cunticle you are.

[–]planejaneRemove head from sphincter, THEN type.0 points1 point  (9 children) | Copy Link

Enough you feel the need to come in to say another nasty thing? For shame.

[–]throwaway1310721 point2 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

that wasn't me lol

edit: since mods are removing my attempts at smashing my head into a brick wall having a real debate with you:

you're trolling us because you baited with a list of debate points you can come up with, but you won't deliver it

i returned to the thread because someone else replied to me, hurupu

the other guy who got removed is genuinely someone else

any other questions?

[–]planejaneRemove head from sphincter, THEN type.0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy Link

My gut response was not to assume it was. It's a sperate username.

The fact that you've come back to respond to the comment thread a few hours later actually makes it look like an alt of yours, though.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'd like to see the other "real" reasons too, outside the disappearance of the middle class.

Yeah a big issue is a poor economy that leads to less interest in LTR & marriage (the prime traditional driver of reproduction for less attractive men). And for flings & hookups women prefer attractive men.

But it's not like men aren't giving up on this too. Right now it's not much since most women still have a lot of thirsty chasers, but it will dry up pretty soon.

Sex toys for men are becoming more "acceptable" too, as women prefer ugly men using fleshlights to pestering them. And women's involvement is a big card for male shaming.

[–]surething_fella0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

I don't think his tone is nasty at all. Share your version of these events and then we will gauge your tone.

[–]planejaneRemove head from sphincter, THEN type.-1 points0 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Obviously you didn't continue reading this comment chain.

[–]surething_fella 1 points [recovered]  (4 children) | Copy Link

Oh absolutely not. Ive already decided your a dumb cunt

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband[M] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

Be civil.

[–]surething_fella 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy Link

Ban me faggot.

[–]LittleknownfactsAutomod is my husband[M] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Gladly.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Well women are getting pickier. Men are increasingly more shut-in. Their hobbies and jobs are increasingly female-repellant.

There's only so many men who can work jobs women see as attractive AND high status, especially with women also competing for most of these jobs.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

it’s always been the opposite for me, men are getting pickier because they’re exposed to beautiful women on the regular (the explosion of porn and instathot models) and regular girls want to imitate that for their boyfriends. meanwhile i’ve become a shutin and only fantasize about men who don’t exist or are dead.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Most "instathot" models just use filters and photo angles.
Most men don't see women in porn as realistic either.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

there’s a shit ton of males out there who believe those models just look like that regularly, and the more porn they watch the more they probably want pornstar level sex from a girl.

it’s the same situation with males believing a woman is wearing no makeup even though she’s wearing a “natural look” made with hundreds of products.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

the more they probably want pornstar level sex from a girl

Great way to end up in the ER for your average Joe & Jane.
Other than that, I'm pretty sure the average guy just wants to have his "itch" scratched on a semi-regular basis.
Those actors are generally very fit and a lot of the more outlandish positions take great effort & coordination to pull off without breaking / tearing something.
Some ordinary couples can have "porn-like" sex but, in the end, most men aren't former athlete Chad & most women aren't former cheerleader Stacy.

The funny thing is your plain Jane is willing to endure some level of pain to sexually satisfy Chad but is loathe to having semi-regular "normal" (with mutually consented kinks) with a guy actually in her league.

it’s the same situation with males believing a woman is wearing no makeup even though she’s wearing a “natural look” made with hundreds of products.

It's pretty easy to tell a woman is wearing a lot of product.
Never really seen makeup that perfectly mimics skin until now.
Besides, being obese hurts a woman's SMV & RMV a lot more than just having acne.
Women who want high quality & fit men should focus on looking as fit as their body type allows.

[–]TheReformist949 points10 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Men ask for a lot less from women then women do from men

[–]WhatIsTheMeaningHere4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Men are forced to ask for less from women due to their greater demand for them.

[–]TheReformist942 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

It's not just supply and demand. It's the entitlement from women. When I'm concurrently seeing a 6 and an 8, I appreciate both of them. Both women can bring good stuff to the table. The 6 can even be more nurturing with better sex. And that's not just coz she's compensating for lesser looks.

[–]WhatIsTheMeaningHere0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

They can afford to have that entitlement though, so it ultimately becomes supply and demand. I'm basically sexy blind between 7-10/10. At that point range, each point seems to add a negligent amount of attractiveness.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that way to women.

For a woman mere friendship with an ugly man is torture unless they're "like brothers" (i.e. know eachother from very early childhood).

[–]LCOSPARELT1Purple Pill Man0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

MGTOW is never going to be the de facto lifestyle for men. A sizable minority of the bottom 80% of smp men will adopt MGTOW but that won’t be a majority of overall men. The majority of men will continue to attempt relationships with women and most outside the top 20% of smp will experience little success.

But even if 1/3 of overall men adopt a MGTOW lifestyle (either voluntarily or involuntarily) that’s still tens of million of men in America alone. No one knows what the social implications of that will be, but I’ll bet they aren’t good.

[–][deleted] 67 points68 points  (36 children) | Copy Link

I think MGTOW is far too bitter to ever become "the future". I think it will work as a rubber band effect. As more and more men drop out of the game and fall to porn, obesity, mgtow, etc. the bar to become Chad gets lowered. When men wake up and realize how low that bar is they will ditch their vices (porn, food, videogames, mgtow) and improve themselves to become "Chad".

[–]Jackpot807Purple Pill Man18 points19 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

We’ll all be fifty by that time

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

The bar will be that low you'll be nailing hot college chicks in your 50s.

[–]Jackpot807Purple Pill Man17 points18 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I'd rather have a college chick while I'm still in college, I wanna have a partner not a sex doll

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Well, there are probably divorced women around but they tend to raise their standards.

Look, you can have the demanding ones past their prime or the young sex dolls who have perfected the art of suppressing their gag reflexes. You can't have both.

[–]blackedoutfastRed Pill Man12 points13 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

it's already at that point and has nothing to do with MGTOW bullshit.

get fit, don't wear retarded clothes or have a retarded haircut, have a decent job, be a socially outgoing and interesting person, have a decent social life with cool friends who do fun activities, and be able to approach and confidently flirt with attractive girls and you'll be in the magical top 20%. seriously that's all it takes. sometimes even less.

the majority of dudes out there are complete fuckups at life. fat, lazy, awkward, boring, weirdos. they may be signt above average in one or more areas, but instead of fixing their problem areas, they just double down on their strengths (typical human nature). they just work even harder to try to up their income, while ignoring the fact that the reason they struggle with women is because they are skinny-fat and awkward af.

you don't need to be amazing in any particular area to do well with women. you just need to be well rounded and at least "ok" in every important area

[–]MrShakedown112 points13 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

So basically you need to be a full package and a man of renaissance with your hobbies.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Pretty much. And that's just to attract a haughty self-important woman from reddit. :))

[–]MrShakedown10 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

haughty self-important woman from reddit. :))

But, but... they don't exist on Reddit o_o.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah I forgot, they're all FBI agents

[–]MrShakedown10 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Exactly !!

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

get fit, don't wear retarded clothes or have a retarded haircut, have a decent job, be a socially outgoing and interesting person, have a decent social life with cool friends who do fun activities, and be able to approach and confidently flirt with attractive girls and you'll be in the magical top 20%. seriously that's all it takes.

That's a whole fucking lot. That's like, literally another fucking life.

Let's pick these off one-by-one:

don't wear retarded clothes or have a retarded haircut

This is incredibly subjective. Being fit makes all but the most retarded clothes look good on you.
Being overweight makes almost all clothes look retarded on you.

have a decent job

This is about the easiest thing on your list and it can still be bloody difficult in a lot of places.
Also subjective, given decent can mean "decent paying" or "decently socially acceptable" and a lot of those jobs are mutually exclusive.

be a socially outgoing and interesting person

A lot of people are introverts and not very much into being outgoing. Being interesting is, again, subjective.
Tall guy with muscles who plays a bit of guitar > Short, skinny guy who does base jumping and surfing.

have a decent social life with cool friends who do fun activities

That's not a "decent" social life. That's a preppie's social life.The average guy goes out once-twice a week to see a show, drink a bit throw some darts / play bowling / dancing / w.e.
Maybe twice a year skiing / snowboarding / surfing.

and be able to approach and confidently flirt with attractive girls

"Just be confident, bro."

[–]blackedoutfastRed Pill Man6 points7 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

no wonder you guys are complete failures.

this is like the most basic, easiest shit imaginable that you should be doing anyway. and you just want to whine about how it's sooooo much work

you're just a bunch of lazy crybaby bitches. i have zero sympathy for you

[–]doctor_awfulChad ThunderDoc6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Reminds me of people complaining about how hard being fat is, while not reducing their calorie intake. It's not that fucking hard, jesus.

THIS is why Western culture needs proper Men to give some guidance to their fellows again, not the bloody Gillette ad

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I'll agree with you that men should go to the gym and take care of their styling.

But other than that, please WOW ME with your cool friends , fun activities and "decent" job.

Tell me how socially outgoing and interesting you are.

Bedazzle me with your ability to approach and **confidently** flirt with attractive girls.

> this is like the most basic, easiest shit imaginable that you should be doing anyway. and you just want to whine about how it's sooooo much work

Maan being an interesting dude with cool friends is the MOST BASIC, EASIEST SHIT. You MUST BE A FRIGGIN LOSER if you can't even do THAT! :P

[–]blackedoutfastRed Pill Man0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

But other than that, please WOW ME with your cool friends , fun activities and "decent" job. Tell me how socially outgoing and interesting you are. Bedazzle me with your ability to approach and confidently flirt with attractive girls.

lol wtf is wrong with you dude? none of this stuff is unusual or weird. IT'S WHAT NORMAL PEOPLE DO. they have jobs and friends that they regularly go out with and do interesting things together and have fun. and they talk to girls. and girls EXPECT that they guys that they date/fuck do all that stuff too.

for me personally, i take it way beyond that. last week, tuesday was the only night i took it easy and chilled at home. every other night i was out drinking and partying and dancing and karoke and hookah and whatever else. couple of those nights didn't get home til dawn. and fwiw, i didn't plan or initiate any of those things, other people invited me because i've put in a lot of work building up those social connections. but that's just me, you don't neee to do quite that level of social shit to be successful.

Maan being an interesting dude with cool friends is the MOST BASIC, EASIEST SHIT.

it seriously is bro. all you have to do is stop being lazy, stop making excuses, grow a pair of balls, and then just go out, start enjoying life and talk to people. that's all you have to do. and the more you do it, and the less of a loser you become, the easier it gets because people want to be friends with you

You MUST BE A FRIGGIN LOSER if you can't even do THAT! :P

to be honest yes. it's almost incomprehensible to me that you are acting like all this stuff require some incredible amount of work and/or luck, and that you think most normal people don't regularly do all this stuff every single day without even thinking about it.

i mean seriously bro, what do you think other people do?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Where I live? Already told you. The working Joe & Jane go out maybe once or twice a week and the rest is go home from work and watch Netflix or similar.

Clubs are mostly filled with teenagers and college students.

As for my person, I can't really drink too much and don't find going to clubs all that fun. Obviously have a job (well paid too). Before winter hit I cycled every day. So for me it would be a 100% change.

It'd require me to enjoy things that I don't for starters.

So other than working out, good style and discipline yeah I disagree with you quite a bit.

[–]doctor_awfulChad ThunderDoc2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That's a whole fucking lot. That's like, literally another fucking life.

If you're that far from it that you need to start from zero, sure. Long road ahead of ya. But you should've been working on this from day one, you know? It's pretty obvious

Whine less and work harder.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

get fit, don't wear retarded clothes or have a retarded haircut, have a decent job, be a socially outgoing and interesting person, have a decent social life with cool friends who do fun activities, and be able to approach and confidently flirt with attractive girls and you'll be in the magical top 20%. seriously that's all it takes. sometimes even less.

Pal, stop portraying all that shit as if it is as easy as trying your shoelaces. You can't get all that done in a fucking afternoon lol, it's a massive time investment that continues throughout your entire life. Being a turbo normie is a full time job, and it's not a lifestyle that appeals to everyone, or men would all be doing it automatically.

And that line RPs frequently trot out about "you should be doing all this anyway, to be a better man" is just self delusion. Some of the most accomplished, satisfied men in history were completely skewed towards one activity in life, there's nothing inherently wrong with specialization. Especially if you're into the arts and sciences.

[–]blackedoutfastRed Pill Man4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

your laziness and sense of entitlement is absolutely disgusting. all of that shit isn't even very hard. and it's shit you should be doing even if it didn't help you with girls at all. staying in shape and having a decent job should be like bare minimum level stuff. i can't believe you are whining and bitching like it's soooooo hard to do that stuff.

and yes it will take some time and effort to get there but so does everything worth doing.

YOU AREN'T ENTITLED TO ANYTHING. NOTHING IS FREE. IF YOU WANT GOOD THINGS TO HAPPEN TO YOU, YOU HAVE TO MAKE IT HAPPEN. YOU HAVE TO WORK FOR IT.

and that's great for all those great scientists who made such great achievements. but unless you yourself have also made some similarly great contributions to humanity, you don't have the right to imply that you belong in the same group.

and you're just proving my whole point. Issac Newton developed calculus....and died a virgin. Tesla invented a bunch of neat shit......and died a virgin.

if you want to "specialize" and try to make great discoveries in the arts or sciences, realistically you probably won't discover anything amazing because of your lazy entitled attitude. but even if you do youbeill probably still just be a permavirgin loser like Newton or Tesla

[–]Xemnas813 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Between feminists and tradcons this sub is more misandrist than misogynist, always remember that.

[–]edge_lord_super_170 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Based.

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas5 points6 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I think we could extend “MGTOW” in a more general sense of actual behavior, not literally every dude going on r/MGTOW to bitch about women

[–]ElderSignChildless post-wall cat lady13 points14 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

"Single, not looking" and "happily single" have been descriptors of relationship status since at least the 80s, for both genders. I'd even go so far as to say that "single" without clarification implies "not looking". "Bachelor lifestyle" probably goes even further back. Bitching about women online is the one thing that separates MGTOW from these IMHO.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Indeed. I got all the value i needed to out of MGTOW dot com by reading the "testimonials from married men" section. The forums area clusterfuck of incessant and pointless bitching, but I guess they at least serve the same purpose as the philosophy itself, which is to encourage men to steer clear of women for any purpose other than cheap sex. It just gets repetitive after a while.

[–]toysjoeMGTOW4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Speak for yourself bud.

MGTOW is not mutually exclusively with being physically fit or having friends.

[–]YetAnotherCommenterPurple Pill Man, Sexual Economics Theory5 points6 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I think MGTOW is far too bitter to ever become "the future".

Are we talking about explicit identification as MGTOW or simply "not following the standard life-path of marrying a woman and being a provider/protector for the wife and kids" here? Because the latter is clearly getting much more popular irrespective of how people describe themselves.

[–]FalseBuddhaSomething borrowed, something Blue5 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

We already have a word to describe the latter: bachelor. MGTOW, in my mind, is defined by that self-identification and bitterness.

[–]YetAnotherCommenterPurple Pill Man, Sexual Economics Theory1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

But that just biases the argument. If we're looking at the various costs and benefits that influence men's relationship/commitment decisions, why is it important if someone simply chooses bachelorhood because they think the cost-benefit analysis is disfavorable, versus someone making that choice for exactly the same reasons yet rants angrily on the internet about it during some of their spare time?

[–]FalseBuddhaSomething borrowed, something Blue1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Words have meaning. Different words mean different things. MGTOWs are not just bachelors. Just like incels aren't just people who haven't had sex in the last 6 months. Those distinctions are important. Someone with that level of vitriol and the need to label themselves is not making the same decisions for the same reasons.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Not probable. More probable is that there is gonna be a great inequality. The top with most of women. Maybe instead of top 20% having 80%. The top 1% would have 80% of women. While the t majority see that it is not worth it and be close to what is the bottom to us right now. Something like the japanese survive today but worse.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Why would the bar lower? The birth ratios of men/women is on a world average 1.07:1.00. That's 7% more men being born than women being born. In most countries you'll usually have at least 4% more men being born that women. If something effects 4-7% it won't really do anything because those 4-7% are screwed anyway.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Men die off more frequently and younger than women do. The pool of eligible men also has to be willing to marry. Look at what happened after world war one and two, after millions of men were killed. Average men were playing the field while women were settling for men they'd normally not bother with.

Remove enough eligible men from the dating market and women have to settle or risk being single. Single moms in their 30s are experiencing it. Fewer men are getting tertiary educations than before and many just have jobs to maintain a low key (read: porn and video games) lifestyle. You don't need half the population to vanish from the SMP. Just enough for people to note there's a trend.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Men die off more frequently and younger than women do.

Yes, past 65. Before 65 you'll usually find more men than women, with a few notable exceptions in countries that have been war ridden or similar. This doesn't effect dating at all that happens during age ranges where starting a family is still viable in most peaceful modern country with decent healthcare. While it is true that women outnumber men you have to look at what age they start doing that because men don't just start dropping like crazy at 35.

Remove enough eligible men from the dating market and women have to settle or risk being single.

But so do the remaining men as those men you removed probably entered relationships which roughly removes an equal amount of women from the dating market.

As many men that aren't available to women in that age range there are equally many women not available to men in that age range. Unless those men actually die but that's not what's happening in the countries we're usually talking about.

Fewer men are getting tertiary educations than before and many just have jobs to maintain a low key (read: porn and video games) lifestyle.

Maybe, but arguably this makes it even worse because this means you won't have a stable income until 23. If you don't go into tertiary you'll have a stable income at about 19 in my country and even if you have a job with a low salary by the age your 25 you've already worked 4 years and have 50k in your savings account. That's enough to support a child for 6 years which is enough to bridge the time between when one of the involved parties has to stay at home because they go to kindergarten at 6 which means both can start working again so financially this is absolutely viable. It's not like low key jobs make it impossible to have a family. No. Absolutely not. Most people aren't rich. Most people are lower middle class and they usually often have families. You don't have to watch out for a guy making 6+k per month, you can get by fine with 4.5k. Especially if you wait a few years before you actually have children at which point you have two full incomes that you can save which is going to be more than enough to support many children later on even if you're on the minimum wage in my country. That's what minimum wage is for. It's the least amount that one can have a comfortable life.

Also of course a lot of single men are doing porn and video games because you gotta do something to fill your time. Maybe you go to a sports club 2-3 times a week and fri/sat you go out but the rest yeah... you're probably going to sit at home watching series/tv/movies or reading books or listening to music or video games and the occasional porn. What exactly is bad about that? Even married people do that. What are my parents and the parents of my friends doing? Even less. 1 time a week senior sports club, 1 time go out with friends the rest stay at home watching tv and going on a trip every other weekend. That's basically just a normal lifestyle.

What exactly am I missing here?

[–]-Radical_Edward0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

What you just wrote makes no sense.

[–]Glawen_Clattuc39 points40 points  (25 children) | Copy Link

The points you raise are:

  • emotionally disaffected women (and mainly disaffected as a result of "feminism and leftism");
  • technological substitutes for sex;
  • rising financial costs of marriage and relationships;
  • the alleged privileging of a small number of advantaged men over the rest.

Every one of these points could be used to predict a massive religious revival as much as MGTOW becoming the norm; maybe even more so.

There is little in your list there that a devout Christian pastor or Muslim imam would be likely to take issue with - although their explanations of the causes would differ, as would their solutions.

Mostly I think your view is way off base because it just seems far too narrow.

It describes the view of a subset of a subset of people who only appear to have grown in number as the internet has provided opportunities for them to "find" each other on a global scale.

But as a prediction of a future trend?

I'm just not seeing any real evidence for it.

[–]YetAnotherCommenterPurple Pill Man, Sexual Economics Theory6 points7 points  (18 children) | Copy Link

Every one of these points could be used to predict a massive religious revival as much as MGTOW becoming the norm; maybe even more so.

But religions are not costless, and arguably they're much more costly than a religion which imposes personal demands and duties.

"Become a fundamentalist Christian, give up any nonheterosexual nonmarital nonconventional sex, and wife up that woman and be her provider/protector as God orders you" is a lot more costly as a way to get sex than "porn and sexbots."

Not to mention that religion's credibility has taken a nosedive in the past 20 years.

[–]le_swegmeister7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Take the Christpill.

[–]Glawen_Clattuc2 points3 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

I understand what you are saying, but I fail to see how it makes for a counterpoint to my point which is the conditions outlined by OP (which I summarised in that bullet list) would be just as likely, if not more so, to predict a religious revival as an upturn in MGTOW (which in any case strikes me as very unlikely).

[It's] a lot more costly as a way to get sex

Only when looked at from a very particular perspective - the religious perspective on marriage in the three Abrahamic religions at least is that it is a form of sacrifice and men and women enter into that agreement willingly, sacrificing their own needs for the needs of each other, for the needs of any children they may have, and, ultimately, for God.

To see a marriage as merely a way of getting to empty your sacks or fill your womb is a failure of imagination because you are not looking at it the way the religious might

Not to mention that religion's credibility has taken a nosedive in the past 20 years.

Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world.

And the fact that Islam is so often in the news is galvanising others to declare themselves Christians.

I'm European (hence the time delay in responding) and I've seen a massive upsurge in people identifying as Christian now, even though they've never read the bible or been to Church except for weddings, christenings, and funerals.

[–]YetAnotherCommenterPurple Pill Man, Sexual Economics Theory2 points3 points  (13 children) | Copy Link

Only when looked at from a very particular perspective - the religious perspective on marriage in the three Abrahamic religions at least is that it is a form of sacrifice and men and women enter into that agreement willingly, sacrificing their own needs for the needs of each other, for the needs of any children they may have, and, ultimately, for God.

To see a marriage as merely a way of getting to empty your sacks or fill your womb is a failure of imagination because you are not looking at it the way the religious might

But you're putting the cart before the horse here. Whilst I fully accept someone who is sincerely religious would look at marriage this way, you're talking about the prospects of a religious revival. Which means people who are not yet religious choosing to become religious.

Whilst a religious person may not see marriage as highly costly overall, a person who isn't yet religious isn't going to hold the same opinion.

Let's take a dude who is dissatisfied with the sexual marketplace because he can't get laid or even find a girlfriend. Presumably he is not against premarital sex since that's ultimately what he's looking for. He may not want kids. He may be interested in less conventional forms of sexual pleasure. What incentive is there for him to adopt a religious worldview that is against premarital and non-procreative sex?

Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world.

I was speaking about the Western world. In the West, religion has in fact taken a nosedive in credibility.

And the fact that Islam is so often in the news is galvanising others to declare themselves Christians.

I'm European (hence the time delay in responding) and I've seen a massive upsurge in people identifying as Christian now, even though they've never read the bible or been to Church except for weddings, christenings, and funerals.

That is, at best, people becoming "culturally Christian" as part of a kind of tribal identity marker (like you said, it is coming about in reaction to all the Islamic terror attacks that are in the news. A dangerous out-group causes in-groups to rally around their tribal identity). If they merely identify as Christian without reading the bible or going to church or even having a specific set of theological views or anything along the lines, that sounds to me like a pretty obvious case of dead faith. If they're merely rallying around being "Christian" in response to the threat of Islamic terrorism, they're using "Christian" as a proxy identity for European/Western Civilization. Paleoconservative magazine The American Conservative touches on similar themes in this article here: https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-a-christian-revival-in-eastern-europe/

[–]Glawen_Clattuc2 points3 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

I am going to come back on your points, but do please remember that the main purpose of my initial post was the change the view of OP and to do that I was suggesting that the factors he had set out were at least as likely to predict a religious revival - hence, it's not so much that I am predicting a resurgence in religion, but that this would be equally or more likely based on his prediction of an upsurge in MGTOW by 2040.

Whilst a religious person may not see marriage as highly costly overall, a person who isn't yet religious isn't going to hold the same opinion

Well, no.

This is a good point, of course, and I understand what you mean, but I think it misses something important: the religious person and the faithless person both understand marriage as "costly", but the difference is that the religious person sees that cost as worth it - and that's a huge difference.

The religious person's view takes into account that there is a long-term pay-off in the here-and-now emotional, physical, and financial investment in committing to a marriage. By contrast, the secular atheist is looking for an immediate pay out on his investment.

By analogy, we could compare them to a man who spends a few days seeking out just the right ingredients to cook a perfect meal made by his own hand at home against another who is prepared to splash out bucks in a restaurant for the same thing to be brought to his table in under 10 minutes.

The effort put in by the former will probably lead to more satisfaction overall than the effort put in by the latter, even if both ate the "same" meal.

Let's take a dude who is dissatisfied with the sexual marketplace because he can't get laid or even find a girlfriend

Yes, let's.

What incentive is there for him to adopt a religious worldview that is against premarital and non-procreative sex?

It's quite simple - relief.

Relief from stress, from the rat race, from the seemingly continual pressure to score with women and constantly fail.

Of course, that's a fantasy. He would be assuming that women who go to church are somehow "easier" to get a relationship with than secular women which is just nonsense.

But still, it's what might draw him in there.

Think about the massive success that Jordan Peterson has had with 12 Rules of Life and so on.

Here is a religious man who has attracted huge numbers of dissatisfied men with his message.

I was speaking about the Western world.

So was I.

Mosques have sprung up in large numbers of cities right across European states, but most especially in the UK, Spain, France, and Germany.

That is, at best, people becoming "culturally Christian" as part of a kind of tribal identity marker

Oh, absolutely it is.

But if we are trying to predict what the effect of that tribal identity marker will be by 2040 then it is not completely unreasonable to see that what at first was what you call "culturally Christian" could easily become something much stronger.

After all, when people take more than a passing interest in something then they start to devout more time to that thing.

The strong Islam becomes in Europe the more likely I think it will be that we will see a resurgence of religion. (Not saying it will happen, just that I think it becomes more likely to happen).

[–]YetAnotherCommenterPurple Pill Man, Sexual Economics Theory2 points3 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

it's not so much that I am predicting a resurgence in religion, but that this would be equally or more likely based on his prediction of an upsurge in MGTOW by 2040.

I understand. But please clarify: by "MGTOW" are we referring simply to the actual act of men declining to assume their traditional role as protectors/providers for women and children, or are we specifically talking about conscious explicit adoption of the label "MGTOW"? Because I'm very much speaking about the former. MGTOW doesn't require a man to identify as MGTOW, merely to decide that marriage and kids aren't in his future. That's the standard I'm using.

This is a good point, of course, and I understand what you mean, but I think it misses something important: the religious person and the faithless person both understand marriage as "costly", but the difference is that the religious person sees that cost as worth it - and that's a huge difference.

I should clarify, I was speaking in terms of net costliness (i.e. costs subtract benefits). So the non-religious person still sees marriage as, on a net basis, higher cost than the religious person.

What incentive is there for him to adopt a religious worldview that is against premarital and non-procreative sex?

It's quite simple - relief.

Relief from stress, from the rat race, from the seemingly continual pressure to score with women and constantly fail.

Of course, that's a fantasy. He would be assuming that women who go to church are somehow "easier" to get a relationship with than secular women which is just nonsense.

But still, it's what might draw him in there.

Like I said, religions impose a cost. They restrict the individual's behaviors and choices. So there has to be some sort of benefit.

Yes, the religion provides a relief from the pressure to constantly score with women. But so do MGTOW and generally anti-traditionalist MHRA-style beliefs; these beliefs do not force you to give up your favorite "sins" either. What's the benefit religion provides?

Like you said, "easy women in Church" obviously wouldn't work. It may draw him in. But how would he be kept there? Why wouldn't he just say "this isn't worth it, I'm out of here"?

Think about the massive success that Jordan Peterson has had with 12 Rules of Life and so on.

Here is a religious man who has attracted huge numbers of dissatisfied men with his message.

Peterson? Religious? He's a Jungian psychologist who thinks religion contains a lot of truths about the human condition but I wouldn't call him religious. He's like Joseph Campbell.

That, plus compare the 12 rules against the huge number of rules found in the vast majority of religions.

Oh, absolutely it is.

But if we are trying to predict what the effect of that tribal identity marker will be by 2040 then it is not completely unreasonable to see that what at first was what you call "culturally Christian" could easily become something much stronger.

But why would it? What benefit does actual-Christianity have relative to Cultural Christianity? Cultural Christianity imposes basically no costs... even Richard Bloody Dawkins calls himself "culturally Christian." Actual Christianity imposes additional costs (morality regulation, mandatory self-denial, guilt) so where's the offsetting benefit? And I mean an offsetting benefit that would be recognized ex ante (i.e. by a non-religious person evaluating whether or not to become religious).

The strong Islam becomes in Europe the more likely I think it will be that we will see a resurgence of religion. (Not saying it will happen, just that I think it becomes more likely to happen).

Well in some ways that's a bit of a tautology, as the strengthening of Islam in Europe would by definition increase the number of religious people in Europe. But even so, I don't see why it will make people go back to Christianity. Rally around Christianity as a symbol of identity perhaps. But will it make more people reaffirm the Nicene Creed?

Additionally, why would Christianity be the religion that benefits? Why not Hellenic or Norse or Celtic paganisms?

[–]Glawen_Clattuc1 point2 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Yes, the religion provides a relief from the pressure to constantly score with women. But so do MGTOW ...

Then, surely, that just confirms the point I've been trying to make here, no?

That said, going back a bit:

MGTOW doesn't require a man to identify as MGTOW, merely to decide that marriage and kids aren't in his future. That's the standard I'm using.

I'm not sure that you can co-opt people who don't identify as MGTOW as MGTOW though.

As a single professional, one who was freelance for a long time and who now has a job with a great deal of flexibility to pursue the work in directions I think it would be interesting to take it, and one who currently at least has no interest in a relationship for the foreseeable future, I think I would come under the standard you are using.

But I do not see myself as a MGTOW at all - I feel the label is significant because you can't deny that it brings with it a whole raft of other political and philosophical ideas about the relations between individual and state, of men to women and so on, that I simply do not accept (of course, the folks calling themselves MGTOW cover a very wide range and amongst themselves there is much disagreement).

Peterson? Religious? He's a Jungian psychologist who thinks religion contains a lot of truths about the human condition but I wouldn't call him religious.

Yes:

"Canadian psychology professor and author Jordan B Peterson has revealed that he is religious, arguing that we need God to make sense of life."

You've evidently missed that part of his background.

I mean, I'm not calling him an evangelist, but he nevertheless has a strong religious background and it underpins much of his thinking.

Actual Christianity imposes additional costs (morality regulation, mandatory self-denial, guilt) so where's the offsetting benefit?

I'm not actually religious myself so it would be hard to say, but I think one of the values of religion is that it provides people with stability and that stability provides motivation because it suggests there is something beyond the here-and-now that makes effort - hard, gruelling effort - worth it in the present.

Almost all if not actually all science and all philosophy is an attempt to identify a certainty, an anchor point, from which all else can be mapped and from which all else can depend on.

A belief in God etc. may be unscientific, but it is not necessarily irrational. It provides a basis from which everything else can be mapped and seen in a perspective and that in itself can make a huge difference to the way a person behaves in the world and how they feel about their behaviours.

[–]YetAnotherCommenterPurple Pill Man, Sexual Economics Theory2 points3 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

I'm not sure that you can co-opt people who don't identify as MGTOW as MGTOW though... But I do not see myself as a MGTOW at all - I feel the label is significant because you can't deny that it brings with it a whole raft of other political and philosophical ideas about the relations between individual and state, of men to women and so on, that I simply do not accept (of course, the folks calling themselves MGTOW cover a very wide range and amongst themselves there is much disagreement).

But the significance of MGTOW is in men voluntarily boycotting the male gender role. It doesn't matter, to those who want men to "man up," if the guy is a MGTOW or just someone who preferred playing video games to getting a wife. I totally agree there are men whom are in fact boycotting the male gender role yet aren't radicalized MGTOWs or don't accept all or even most of the ideas that MGTOWs discuss. But from the perspective of a society that's concerned with declining marriage/commitment/family-formation rates, why does it matter?

You've evidently missed that part of his background.

I mean, I'm not calling him an evangelist, but he nevertheless has a strong religious background and it underpins much of his thinking.

I stand corrected. That said, I don't think it means his Twelve Rules For Life count as "religious."

I'm not actually religious myself so it would be hard to say, but I think one of the values of religion is that it provides people with stability and that stability provides motivation because it suggests there is something beyond the here-and-now that makes effort - hard, gruelling effort - worth it in the present.

Almost all if not actually all science and all philosophy is an attempt to identify a certainty, an anchor point, from which all else can be mapped and from which all else can depend on.

A belief in God etc. may be unscientific, but it is not necessarily irrational. It provides a basis from which everything else can be mapped and seen in a perspective and that in itself can make a huge difference to the way a person behaves in the world and how they feel about their behaviours.

I agree that religion can be utility-maximizing (i.e. 'rationally irrational') and has cognitive and psychosocial benefits like how you described. But I must ask, how would this create a resurgence in religion for someone currently non-religious? Not to mention, these benefits come from almost any religion including Islam. Finally, we live in an age where the "death of God" is much more complete than when Nietzsche coined the phrase; it is getting harder and harder to engage in the necessary "suspension of disbelief" required to become seriously devout.

Now, could people get more "religious" in some vaguely-defined, moralistic-therapeutic-deistic, identity-reinforcing sense, or perhaps more "culturally" Christian? Maybe. But if we're talking about serious Christian convictions... I don't see a resurgence in these happening.

Not to mention, what about the other religions? How do you think their trajectory will go?

[–]Glawen_Clattuc0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy Link

But the significance of MGTOW is in men voluntarily boycotting the male gender role.

But what is the male gender role? For that matter, and more importantly, what is a gender role?

I'm inclined to reject that kind of feminist perspective - whatever your own feelings about feminism, if you are talking about gender roles you are adopting a broadly feminist perspective.

But from the perspective of a society that's concerned with declining marriage/commitment/family-formation rates ...

There are different concerns related to this, yes:

  • falling birth rates
  • rising life expectancy (far beyond the current retirement age of 67)
  • changing demographics

But I don't think this is anything to do with MGTOW, but more to do with the increase in women's participation in the workforce and especially in more white collar and professional occupations because it usually requires at least a decade, usually more, to establish themselves in their career before they can start thinking about having a family.

If governments wanted more women to start having children later they would likely have to find some way of part-funding ways of allowing women to establish themselves in their careers in their 20s while still in the process of acquiring the experience they need to go up the ladder.

That could prove both costly and ineffective (as the government could not guarantee that the women it supported in this way in their 20s would want to continue in that same career after having children).

But I must ask, how would this create a resurgence in religion for someone currently non-religious?

Well, it might not. But I think that would be much more likely an outcome than OPs prediction that MGTOW will be the norm by 2040.

Not to mention, these benefits come from almost any religion including Islam.

Well, yes, but that's neither here nor there. I earlier mentioned the Abrahamic religions because those are the ones I'm most familiar with (+ Sikhism because I grew up in an area with a large Sikh population).

I never specified a Christian revival - in fact my much earlier comment ITT specifically refers to an imam.

Finally, we live in an age where the "death of God" is much more complete than when Nietzsche coined the phrase; it is getting harder and harder to engage in the necessary "suspension of disbelief" required to become seriously devout.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one - I see signs of a resurgence of religiosity almost every time I leave the house.

For every person who no longer goes to Church, there are another three that * avidly read horoscopes, * have become enthralled in Wicca, * do Reiki or aroma therapy, take a serious interest in "alternative" medicine, tantric yoga, * adopt weird and wonderful diets that involve eating kale while wearing purple underpants or whatever * show deep respect and even something like awe for their Muslim neighbours and colleagues professions of faith, * and there are even some who believe that we are locked in a Manichean struggle with a Satanic force of Darkness called "Cisheteropatriachal White Supremacist Capitalism" that so dominates our souls and minds that some people have internalised the fiendish message of this evil miasma ...

Nietzsche was a tad previous to make that declaration.

[–]YetAnotherCommenterPurple Pill Man, Sexual Economics Theory1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

But what is the male gender role? For that matter, and more importantly, what is a gender role?

A gender role is a set of moralized expectations assigned to people on the basis of their sex. "This is what a man/woman is supposed to be like," with any deviation from these prescriptions being viewed as some sort of immorality or wrongness.

I'm inclined to reject that kind of feminist perspective - whatever your own feelings about feminism, if you are talking about gender roles you are adopting a broadly feminist perspective.

I'm a Men's Human Rights Activist. As a result I oppose traditionalism.

If most people naturally end up choosing things, in the absence of social control and policing, that are consistent with traditional notions of what men/women should do, that's fine by me. My complaint is that social control and policing are HARDLY ABSENT.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one - I see signs of a resurgence of religiosity almost every time I leave the house.

For every person who no longer goes to Church, there are another three that * avidly read horoscopes, * have become enthralled in Wicca, * do Reiki or aroma therapy, take a serious interest in "alternative" medicine, tantric yoga, * adopt weird and wonderful diets that involve eating kale while wearing purple underpants or whatever * show deep respect and even something like awe for their Muslim neighbours and colleagues professions of faith, * and there are even some who believe that we are locked in a Manichean struggle with a Satanic force of Darkness called "Cisheteropatriachal White Supremacist Capitalism" that so dominates our souls and minds that some people have internalised the fiendish message of this evil miasma ...

But this makes your prediction almost trivial. You're conflating everything from "affirming the Nicene Creed" to "being a hipster" to "being a hippie." If "religiosity" is so broad as a behavior as to include eating kale while wearing purple underpants then what, pray tell, are the limits of religiosity?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Let's take a dude who is dissatisfied with the sexual marketplace because he can't get laid or even find a girlfriend. Presumably he is not against premarital sex since that's ultimately what he's looking for. He may not want kids.

That's most unattractive men today. They never got their chance to experience teen & young adult love and now they are faced with an ultimatum: "wife up a baby rabies / single mom woman or remain sexless"

Women can dress it up with as many layers of fake righteousness ( fix a heart he din't break, raise a child he didn't make ) as they want.

[–]gblyeti 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

Mgtow is practical solution to those ploblems that an indiividual man can implement.

A religious revival requires everyone to get together in joint delusion to believe in fairy tales to solve their problems together. Its not going to happen.

[–]Glawen_Clattuc0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

A religious revival requires everyone to get together in joint delusion to believe in fairy tales

That is a very tired, very 19th Century Socialist understanding of religion.

It's the kind of view of religion that committed Marxists put forward in contrast to their allegedly superior scientific, rationalist, and materialist concept of history.

It was - and still is - complete bullshit, natch.

Its not going to happen.

It's already happening if the rise of Islam in Europe is anything to go by

[–]equanimous_samsarasyrup of ipecac2 points3 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

So a thot jihad? Hmmm

[–]Glawen_Clattuc1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Do you mean a jihad against them or by them against MGTOW?

[–]equanimous_samsarasyrup of ipecac1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Well we are speculating on the future so I suppose it could swing either way. I imagined it would be a MGTOW Jihad against the Cult of Thot, but for what it's worth it was a tongue-in-cheek comment.

[–]Glawen_Clattuc0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Oh, yeah, I got it was tongue in cheek - I just wasn't sure whether the tongue was in the Thot cheek, or the MGTOW one.

[–]WhatIsTheMeaningHere2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

mmmm tongue in the thot cheek.

[–]Glawen_Clattuc0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

"Ewwwww, gross" as I believe the young women of California are supposed to say.

[–]DaphneDK42King of LBFMs32 points33 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

How can MGTOW be the future? They aren't having any babies. By definition they can't be the future.

[–]SoulracktheDevourer10 points11 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

There's too many people in the world anyway

[–]PM_ME_CASHI don't see color5 points6 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Yeah in China and India and no where else.

[–]SoulracktheDevourer6 points7 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Have you been to big American cities

[–]PM_ME_CASHI don't see color1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Ok that continent too.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Ideas propagate faster than DNA

Also, artificial wombs aren't THAT far off

[–][deleted] 47 points48 points  (35 children) | Copy Link

You are wrong for the one simple reason that humans are not rational actors and are ruled more by emotion than logic. The fact that in a few years we will all have a sea of free ultra-realistic VR porn does not matter to your average man because he seeks out emotional intimacy with a real human and no porn or robot is ever going to replace that ever.

Even if we fast forward to bots so realistic they look and feel exactly like real women, the guy still knows in the back of his head it's not real and he's only using the bot because he could not get a real woman to love him and this fact will continue to eat him up and make him depressed.

I mean look at the incel rants all over Reddit. They are not actually related to a lack of sex. They are by and large related to a lack of emotional intimacy. A robot is not going to fix this problem no matter how advanced.

The real future will be non-marital, more casual, monogamous relationships and cohabitation. This is already in progress.

[–]muddyrose20 points21 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

About the emotional intimacy, you're exactly right.

The vast majority of incels reject the suggestion "to just hire a prostitute". They cite many reasons, ranging from it not counting because you've paid for it, to they refuse to "donate" money to a roastie. A few even go that deep, they don't want a prostitute because they don't want just sex. They want someone to connect with.

Anyone who is honest with themselves or isn't dead inside can recognize the difference between bought sex, and sex with someone who actually wants to have sex with you.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Exactly right. And if even incels don't want this it seems absurd to me to claim that the general population will want it.

[–]Discoberry17 points8 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

They are by and large related to a lack of emotional intimacy.

You are the first person I have ever seen bring this solid point up.

[–]Xemnas810 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Other groups do, it's just this group is pretty anti-incel for fairly obvious reasons (highly social-dominance oriented)

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 7 points8 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

This is a good point. I guess most men need to at least get burned once to realize the oven-that-is-emotional-intimacy-with-women is not worth sticking your hand on. I've personally gotten to a point where I could give a fuck less; relationshits are a let down and meant to die out over time. Emotional intimacy is one of those things you outgrow, I think.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Emotional intimacy is one of those things you outgrow, I think.

Depends on your personality but given how most people do end up pairing off - even though marriage rates are going down men and women still largely enter relationships - I'd say people who can truly outgrow this desire are in the minority.

My favourite example of a "real life MGTOW" as opposed to the "internet warrior MGTOW" is a man named Felix Dennis who made £500m from various business ventures and never married or had kids but fucked loads of beautiful women and kept them around all the time.

He was said to be quite cold with his emotions, but nonetheless despite his lifestyle he did seek out something more than simply sex with many of those women. In the years before he died even he was in a relationship of sorts with one woman.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

He seems like a pretty cool guy. I'm not big into being a part of the whole MGTOW "movement" online which spends 99% of its time griping about women/society. It seems there are many other MGTOWs out in the world doing cool things but they don't necessarily brand themselves as such.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes exactly. I agree.

[–]The3liGator14 points15 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

MGTOWs realize that emotional intimacy is unlikely in a relationship with a woman, especially since today's culture discourages a woman's responsibility to be considerate of their male partners' emotions.

They're better off getting emotional intimacy from friends or pets.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

They need to find better women then. I have a lovely girlfriend who cares for my emotions even despite my many many flaws. She's nursing me through opiate withdrawal even. Dunno what I'd do without her. And she's only 21 so she's in the generation who are supposedly all AWALTs.

There's more women in the world than party girls who use Insta 24/7.

[–]Xemnas810 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Mind saying where you met her bro?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Fetlife, ironically.

[–]gblyeti 1 points [recovered]  (5 children) | Copy Link

Yep.

So many guys are learning that emotional inimacy in relationships with women is rather limited. The interesting thing about most mgtow's is that theyfre not incels looking for their first chance with a women. They're guys who have done relationships and found them disappointing.

If they want emotional intimacy they've learnt they're not going to get that from a woman. As they say, get a dog.

[–]doctor_awfulChad ThunderDoc1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Back in my day we'd just say they haven't found the right one. But ok, any reason to throw the towel is a good one nowadays lol

[–]gblyeti 1 points [recovered]  (3 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, and then you'd find "the one", and be in a sexless marriage with a wife that does not respect you for the rest of your life or divorced when you lose your job. Let me know how your third marriage goes. I'm sure she'll turn out to be the good one. Guys are learning to find something better to do with their life after the first marriage runs its course.

[–]doctor_awfulChad ThunderDoc1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

A cuck mentality will lead to cuck outcomes. Git gud instead of bitching about how life is unfair.

[–]gblyeti 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

Git gud

I can already get whatever I want out of a woman. Make her love me, at least a woman understands the word. Guys like you still haven't figured it out. Many mgtow's have no problem getting laid. They choose what you get good at instead of letting pussy choose it for them. Even guys at the top of the market like Keanu Reeves are making the same choice. Do you even know why you care about pussy so much? Of all the things you could do with your life you want to turn into a peacock for women's amusement so they'll care about you a little bit? Have you ever really decided what you ore going to be or did you just follow your dick until it led you to be what you are today? Get control of your duck and you could choose another life. Perhaps a better one.

[–]doctor_awfulChad ThunderDoc1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

...guy, I like my relationship and the girl I'm with, and I liked my previous ones until I didn't at which point I ended them. You seem to have a lot of stuff bottled up.

I don't know what this weird rant is trying to accomplish beyond you trying to justify your anger to the world.

Also, Keanu Reeves is apparently dating Jamie Clayton

[–]-clickhere- 1 points [recovered]  (4 children) | Copy Link

Not OP but wanted to make a counterargument, if you are open to it.

You are correct that humans are not rational actors and are ruled by emotion. In other words, we are all just the chemicals in our head.

The world we perceive is just an external stimulus that triggers those chemicals.

Virtual/augmented reality is just another external stimulus, that will trigger the chemicals.

It doesn't matter if you (rationally) know the trigger is 'fake', the chemicals still arrive.

Everyone will go into virtual (or augmented, or robots, etc) to get the chemicals.


Bonus: To provide a specific counterpoint to your idea that people will become "depressed" when their robot is not actually a women. Right now women (and some men) get pets to fill the hole in their lives from not having babies. They KNOW the pet is not a human baby, but it gives them joy, it releases all the same CHEMICALS as a human baby, and they love it, and post pics about it, and etc. Contrary to being depressed, they are overjoyed. Sure, a human baby would be better, but that pet is theirs, and they love it, and it gives them joy, and chemicals, etc.

So welcome to a brand new world where realistic robots looking like celebrities are in every man's closet, waiting to be pulled out for sex, emotional intimacy, and chemicals.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

If what you were saying was true, then watching the mountain of free porn we have right now would be sufficient instead of having actual sex. Plainly this is not the case. Most men, if given a choice between real sex and watching porn, will not choose the latter.

VR porn is really no different. It is more immersive but it is still at the end of the day just watching porn. I do not believe your average man will actively choose it over the real deal. I believe incels would likely use it as a coping mechanism but that's a small minority. Most men even if they do use this tech will not use it as a direct replacement for sex, much like how I will watch porn if I'm horny but my girlfriend isn't around.

It is a huge flaw here that you are trying to sell an inferior version of something to a group of people who get the superior version. OP's premise only really works if you run on the assumption most men are incels but that's not reality.

[–]-clickhere- 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy Link

Porn is visual (one sense), not immersive (all senses), which is the future (vr, or augmented, or sex robots, etc).

And even then (just one sense) it is actually "sufficient" for some people (as evident by your own statement that "most men" want the real thing but that means "some" men are sufficient with porn over the annoyance of having to deal with a real person). Imagine when they have ALL the senses (vr, augmented, etc).

Remember my example of the "pet as replacement for baby"? That refutes your point. That is fully immersive. And people LOVE it. They get the chemicals. Did you know, for example, that looking into your pets eyes triggers the same chemicals (oxytocin) as released after sex (also called the cuddle hormone, or love hormone).

People LOVE their pets. They get the chemicals. They know its not a 'real baby', but they don't care, because its immersive, they get the chemicals, they get the love! VR is same, augmented is same, and one day you will fall in love with a robot. You will know rationally its not 'real', but even look at the movie "Her". It was just a voice. But man what a VOICE, Scarlett Johansson, giving the main character total emotional intimacy, and it was just a voice! Now imagine that AI voice attached to an actual sex robot, or attached to a VR character, and you have a full haptic suit to 'experience' everything she has to offer. You will get the immersive experience.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Remember my example of the "pet as replacement for baby"? That refutes your point. That is fully immersive.

Not really because the majority of people do not have pets INSTEAD of babies.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

That doesn't really prove OP wrong though, all you're saying is that it wouldn't be completely fulfilling. 60% of Japanese Men alrady have described themselves have having no interest in Women That's really just an early version of what OP is talking about. That doesn't necessarily they're 100% okay with the alternative simulacra.

Human minds are easily tricked by super normal stimuli, the brain can do well with "good enough" for a lot of things which is why it can't tell the potato chips you're eating aren't actually completely filling but it still hits the right receptors.

Don't even get me started on far future technology that can hack our neurons and receptors directly. The back of the mind has a backdoor and we'll build an interface to it.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Right but the premise of OP relies in the majority of men choosing this unfulfilling life. Why would they do so? What is the incentive for a normal man, not an incel, to exclude women from his life? So he can switch to imitations of the real thing? For what purpose?

This idea only appeals to lower tier men who can't get women to begin with. The rest of the male population with real sexual access is not gonna be interested.

And as for the whole brain chip thing that already exists. Look up brain electrodes. They're used in medicine since the 90's. The CIA took a keen interest way back in the 60's and a CIA contracted doctor was able to use them to control human sexuality back then as part of MKULTRA experiments. What you're saying isn't new.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

But the bar for Men doesn't necessarily have to get lower. Personally, I think if there was a sudden depopulation of Men OP's future is much less likely to happen.

Also, Brain electrodes aren't exactly the same as neural interfaces. We simply don't have the biological knowledge, tools, and technology (yet) to interact with the brain on a level of granularity and fine tuning I'm talking about. Right now its like trying to perform eye surgery with a meat cleaver.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Using brain electrodes we can already directly control a man's sex drive. In one of the MKULTRA experiments a doctor was able to use them to get a man to constantly masturbate for hours despite it being extremely painful. He was also able to get a woman to desire to marry him using brain electrodes too. This was all done back in the 1960's.

The shit they can do now probably goes way above what public knowledge tells you. Whether they'll ever use this kind of thing for mass mind control - because that's what you're really talking about - is questionable due to modern scientific ethics which didn't exist back in the 60's.

[–]MrShakedown10 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

emotional intimacy with a real human

We keep pets at homes for a reason. Sure you can't talk or do naughty stuff to them, but they satisfy need of interaction with a living being, touching/petting etc.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

And anyone who only has pets for companionship in lieu of a human SO will also find themselves depressed.

[–]MrShakedown10 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I mean, it's not a perfect substitute, but at least to some extend it helps coping with loneliness.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It helps to an extent sure.

[–]ogrilla99-1 points0 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I agree with what you say, but you don't look at the cost side of the picture. Yes, the emotional intimacy you can get with a good, real-life woman can be amazing and there will likely never be a substitute for it (provided you find the right woman). But there are costs of being in such a relationship. First there are times when she will drive you up the wall (just like you might do the same to her once in a while :-). And there are times when she needs emotional support back from you. And so on, and so on.

You make a good point about incels, but the other part I've noticed when reading their posts is that none of them talk about what a woman requires from *them*. That is, if you're in a relationship with an amazing woman, what does *she* need, that you have to provide?

In contrast, a good VR girlfriend / sex robot gives you, say 75% of a real woman's intimacy, but with 0% of the cost (you never have to give your VR girlfriend a backrub or listen to her bitch about her bad day, unless you're into that :-). I could see a lot of guys taking that deal.

Consider that lots of guys who can pull 9s and 10s end up in relationships with 7s or 8s, and if you ask them why, they'll say the extra hotness isn't worth the massively increased cost (e.g. self-esteem issues, vanity, guys always hitting on your girl, etc.). Of course, not everyone makes this calculation (and not every girl has such costs), but a lot of guys do.

Fun mental exercise: could we come up with a VR equivalent of the hot/crazy scale? Say with emotional intimacy on one scale and costs on the other? Given that VR costs stay about the same, as they progress on the intimacy axis, at some point, they will cross the line of real women. That doesn't mean their intimacy is now 100% that of a real woman, but that their overall package is now more compelling than the average woman.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

The emotional costs in a good relationship should be give and take. As you said, sometimes she will drive you up the wall, sometimes you will do the same to her. But likewise, you should also be making each other happy as well. If it's a give and take, the costs of emotional intimacy don't look so bad.

I agree ofc that if a guy goes for women with self-esteem issues and whatnot he's gonna have a much harder time. That's why most guys are not exactly lining up to get into relationships with those women.

I also find the kind of guys who end up with crazy girls are crazy themselves. In that instance like really does attract like. And they're matched to each other and like the emotional rollercoaster they're entering.

I'd say your axis theory makes sense if you are looking at low value guy who's only options are low value women or VR. But I'd argue for most men they can lock down a perfectly fine partner even if she is not 10/10 in looks (as you said, often those women are not worth the hassle for an LTR, on this I agree).

[–]ogrilla990 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I agree that there will never be a substitute for a "real" human's interaction and intimacy (man or woman). And I think everyone will always desire that. If you choose the right person, the ups are far more than the downs, and overall you will (hopefully) be much happier with this person being in your life than without.

But IMHO your statement that VR will only ever be an option for "low value" guys is incomplete. As time goes on and VR gets better (and assuming the costs stay the same), it will successfully compete with the companionship value of a higher proportion of women. After all, not all women are perfect unicorns. There are "low value" women just as much as "low value" men. Which means the pool of men who choose VR over the quality of woman *available to them* will increase. Yes, the highest value men will still choose real life women because they can still get the best women. But the line between low-value and high-value men will keep getting drawn higher.

FWIW, I think this same dynamic will work with women choosing men. Women don't need men for financial support any more, and so can choose based on criteria that men have been using for millenia, things like looks, personality, emotional happiness and intimacy, etc. There's no reason why VR men can't supply those things as easily as VR women. Which means, IMHO, we face a future in which many (if not the majority) of people choose to develop intimate relationships with virtual partners rather than real-life partners.

Essentially, I disagree with your assertion that "most men can lock down a perfectly fine partner". I think that lots of us underestimate the serious epidemic of loneliness and lack of connection that is sweeping this country and many others (like Japan). Already, plenty of people (both men and women) have a higher emotional connection to their pets than to any actual human (some of them are even in relationships). Would these people like to have a connection to a human instead? Sure, but they've decided they either can't or that the price to pay for the type of relationship they want is too high, and so they prefer a pet. Call them low value if you wish, but they constitute a large part of our society.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

We're at a stalemate at this point then because really it's a difference of opinion in how many people we think will place that level of value on this technology (consider it a viable replacement for a real human).

Only time will tell, and really we won't have to wait too long. Personally I do think a lot of men in particular will use the tech, but only a small minority will see it as a replacement for a real human. As I said while it is more immersive it is still ultimately just porn.

Japan has very different culture from any Western nation with many social dynamics and problems related to them which the West does not have so I don't think it can be used as a reliable comparison.

For example in Japan it is expected a man work INSANE hours to support not only his own family, but also parents and grandparents. Most women are unwilling to marry a man who will not provide to this level. Most men are now unwilling to work so hard, so that's a big reason Japan is in the situation it is in wrt "herbivore men."

This is not a pressure which exists in the West. While a more traditional woman may expect a man to provide and hypergamy may push her to men who earn more than she does, it's still not anywhere near the pressures of Japanese culture, so I don't see any pretence for the same dramatic effect happening in the West.

As for women, they seem more happy with cats than porn if they stay alone.

[–]TheBestRapper22 points23 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

No, the most influential impact on men in the future will be the prevalent blue pill ideologies that are broadcast through every media channel, social and cable, known to man. That level of influence is more powerful than some niche subreddit.

[–]Glawen_Clattuc3 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Except its in schools and universities - and in the institutions and professions which require (or just attract) university graduates - where those "blue pill ideologies" are most prevalent.

But if boys keep doing poorly in school and this leads to male participation rates in higher ed continuing to fall then this might mean an increase in boys and men who ignore and/or miss out on those kinds of ways of thinking.

The more fragmented media channels become the more diluted those messages might be via media.

[–]Xemnas810 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

The result, however, of their disenfranchisement from education is that they increasingly become the social scapegoat which the 'enlightened'have full right to ostracise, shame and generally abuse. Which breeds more reactionaries in a vicious cycle...

[–]Glawen_Clattuc0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Which breeds more reactionaries in a vicious cycle...

It is an act of staggering incompetence and stupidity - on a General Custer level - to feel confident enough to abuse something like 40% of the population on a regular basis and not expect to get a reaction.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Blue pill idealogy is a paper tiger, it's getting louder and more hysterical precisely because it know it is doomed.

Look around you, the far right is gaining traction throughout the globe. You wouldn't have gotten Donald fucking Trump as president of the most powerful country in the world if BP idealogy mattered a damn.

The internet and social media are sowing hate, tribalism and chaos through society - and guess which idealogy profits the most in those circumstances? Certainly not leftism.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Social media is whatever you make it. An individual's Facebook feed could be full of RP or MGTOW or whatever else messages if that's all he follows.

[–]G5_Shadows5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It sounds like dark times ahead if MGTOW is to grow that large. Idk how so many people will be convinced to live like that, but I would try to be as close to top 20 as possible as a man. Instead of just moping and declaring war. It makes people bitter. It makes societies unhappy. It's borderline dystopian, not to say the world is perfect but to just anticipate a loveless world is saddening.

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot29 points30 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

i love how in this new world you picture men will be going their own way while women just...what? sit there with their tits in their hands waiting for the leftover man to have them? even though women are pretty content to just live their lives in celibacy reading erotic fiction and forming social groups with their girl friends. if men ever go their own way en masse, itll be after women have already done so. we just don't need you that much lol

[–]Nodoxxintoxin15 points16 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

“women don't have a strong biological impulse to seek out men for anything, be it sex or relationships - they can essentially live without men for extend periods of time, rather than be pursuers”

This is from the op. He pretty much has conceded women will wgtow, it’s just mgtow with less energy invested and less bitching.

[–]surething_fella3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

First, the wealth redistribution through taxes needs to go away. No more alimony. No more child support.

Then we can see, for real, how much women need men.

[–]whatyoucallaflip 1 points [recovered]  (3 children) | Copy Link

i love how in this new world you picture men will be going their own way while women just...what? sit there with their tits in their hands waiting for the leftover man to have them?

Why does this premise lead to the conclusion that

if men ever go their own way en masse, itll be after women have already done so.

What makes you believe that men necessarily wouldn't go first?

[–]kandyapplezincel larping as a thot26 points27 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

because women have been going there own way long before men have

[–]Nobodykers5 points6 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Men have a much stronger urge. A woman, no matter how low value, can also always find a bang and have kids.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women may well go WGTOW, certainly this generation and the one after. I'm not sure what the future will hold if women get desperate enough, so I'm not going to speculate.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

If western men go their own way, I'll do like the redpillers/pua's do and outsource my desires to foreigners. Just like how thai and vietnamese women are more appealing to the likes of Roosh V because of their extreme femininity, I'm outsourcing marriage prospects to men of Latino or Eastern European families. It's working pretty well for me, and Puerto Rican and Dominican men don't seem to be Going Their Own Way away from me anytime soon.

See, OP, I'm not mad at you for what you said, and I think part of it's right. But when you think in terms of masculinity and femininity, masculinity has to lead. If men want feminine women, they have to be masculine men. If yall just wanna go your own way... that's fine too I guess.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

There's some desperate Indian men that might be interested in you too.

You like those Mexican & eastern European men because they are desperate virgins; easy to manipulate.

You're right, they will always be an option for you because nobody else wants them

[–]matrixpush4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

What's interesting is that it's actually gotten worse for most men in the current right-wing administration, when RP thought it would get better, or be "the answer" to feminism/progressive/social justice/whatever you wanna call the left.

Divide & conquer has been effective.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

What's interesting is that it's actually gotten worse for most men in the current right-wing administration

In what respects? I hope you're not going to do a purely material analysis, btw, pride and dignity tend to matter much more to human beings than taking a bump in quality of life. Thats why we dont have people deserting their office cubicle jobs and forgoing bachelors degrees in order to make more money as bartenders, for instance.

[–]matrixpush3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Women are generally more angry, you see it in memes, comments, screenshots, tinder/bumble bio's. Puritanical laws like FOSTA shutting down American's rights to anonymously browse Craigslist for casual affairs without having to go through a sign up process. Because of that, in any major city, you have to navigate escorts now on dating apps far more than before.

At least the liberals are being trolled...

[–]no_delay13 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think you are spot on.

In fact, just look at Japan, they are already there.

[–]Million-SunsMarriage is obsolete8 points9 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

As a MGTOW I'd like to agree with you OP but I can't.

MGTOW men, even taking in account the technological and social evolutions you listed, will always be a tiny minority.

The power of the pussy is too strong and has ruled the world for thousand years. Only a few selected men have the willpower to emancipate themselves from that thirst that controls them.

Moreover, boys are constantly brainwashed by feminine messages, at school where the majority of teachers are females, and at home, where there is declining father presence.

Males are already second class citizens and I don't see that trend being reversed in my lifetime. There are too many whiteknights,simps, male feminists who also encourage and feed a redefinition of masculinity at the hands of women.

[–]CissyXS0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

The MGTOW movement doesn't need to attract the majority of people to have an positive impact on society. I actually think it's the healthiest reaction to mistreatment and it has a real potential to become a wakeup call for women, if that's what you want. Incels are begging for attention, TRPs are demanding it, but MGTOW if done correctly are really just going their own way. It's a good way of making a statement without attacking anybody all the while maintaining self-respect. It will hardly go unnoticed.

[–]Million-SunsMarriage is obsolete5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

First of all, MGTOW is not a movement. That's the whole point of going one's own way. There are no leaders, no dogma.

Secondly I can't agree with you because that's not how women work. Society is coddling them too much for them to have that kind of wake up call, and question themselves. It will always be "men's fault". Women blame men stuck playing video games or being intimidated by "strong independent women".

Moreover they do not need men any longer. The government tagged in.

So men making a statement that way will be like flogging a dead horse. Nobody cares that the people not invited to the dance to begin with are leaving. Ignorants already label MGTOWs as incels, that's to say dysfunctional sub-humans.

Maybe that will happen if very high social status males decide to go MGTOW, but even then, they will be shamed and deemed as broken toys.

[–]DXBrigade10 points11 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think marriage will decrease, just not because of MGTOW, rather involontary celibacy. And men aren't trapped with kids, men actually want to have kids.

[–]CainPrice11 points12 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

I disagree. You make one good point but it's not enough to pave the way for the future. MGTOW is a fringe internet movement that seems very loud and proud on the internet but is not actually growing in the real world in any significant way. Men are still going to date and marry, the same way they always have. Details below:

"What can I do to please men/the man in my life" is an idea increasingly foreign to women.

Absolutely true. This is the biggest problem in modern relationships. A complete lack of gratitude from women. And while I wholeheartedly agree that the shoe sometimes goes on the other foot and -some- men are selfish assholes who suck at treating women well, the number of good men trying to please their ungrateful princesses far outnumbers the number of good women trying to please asshole men. Being a good man who treats his woman well is seen as baseline, bare-bones stuff that doesn't get the man any points. A man needs to do all of that -and- be awesome on top of it, not just be a good man. Being a good man is nice, but barely worth any points.

The kind of porn, videogames, tv shows, websites, etc available today blows away anything seen 20 years ago.

Whether or not this is true, it doesn't matter. Nobody is actually satisfied by porn over actual sexual and romantic success no matter how good the porn is. It's just a distraction people do to keep their mind off of the fact that they're losers, but any one of them would give up their loser lifestyle in a heartbeat for a real relationship.

The recognition that marriage and LTRs with women tend to skew against men's interests is spreading.

False. This is 99.9% an internet phenomenon. Most normal men outside of the manosphere date and marry just like they always did, or are too unattractive to have the option to date and marry. The fringe never-marry cohort on the manosphere is very loud in their corner of the internet, but is not and has never been in any position to become mainstream. Marriage is happening later due to economics, not men becoming more anti-marriage.

Everything is just too fucking expensive.

True, but this actually leads to -more- relationships instead of less. If a woman lives with you or if you get married, you have two incomes and one rent. You can take more trips and buy more shit.

Culture -- Feminism and leftism is too entrenched

True, but women aren't trying to outdo themselves, only other women. If the best man around has a bachelor's degree and makes 40k a year, a woman with a NYU law degree who makes six figures will still marry him if he's hot, because all of her friends will have shittier husbands. Women marry their best option and don't compare it to how they, personally are doing in life. They compare him to how other women are doing. If all of her NYU law degree friends marry losers but she marries a guy with a college degree and an office job, she's the winner.

If you have to be really bad ass in order to get your money's worth out of the SMP, only a fraction of men are going to pursue that and only a fraction of them are going to succeed. Meanwhile, the bulk of men are going to choose being lazy.

False. Well, true for 18-25 year olds, then false. Most men eventually grow up and get a job and live an awesome or at least passable life for themselves. Men who remain children past 25 and work loser jobs and play video games all day are the rare exception - extreme losers - and not becoming any more common. Nobody wants to be those guys. Whether or not they're getting laid for it. Nobody wants to be those guys, period.

[–]xiaodre2 points3 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

you will have to explain to us why the marriage rate keeps dropping then. and, perhaps you might care to explain the herbivore men and what has been happening to japanese society for the last twenty years? that was something that people following mgtow in the west had no idea was happening until a few years ago, but that more or less mirrors mgtow philosophical precepts..

EDIT: spelling, sorry

[–]dudenotrightnowfrogs rights activist17 points18 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

in Japan, WOMEN are the ones who are choosing to not marry. the MEN can't get laid so they're starting to develop weird fetishes.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew9 points10 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

you will have to explain to us why the marriage rate keeps dropping then.

this MAY be happening, but you also may be seeing the rise in average age of marriage. you really cant know this for decades

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

you will have to explain to us why the marriage rate keeps dropping then.

Cohabitation is replacing marriage. It's not because of MGTOW.

Source.

"One of the main reasons for the decrease in the married population and the increase in the single population is the growth of cohabitation by unmarried couples,” it said.

[–]CainPrice4 points5 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

You're conflating men that women don't want to marry, date, or fuck and completely lack the option to get married with men who choose not to do so. There are very, very, very few of the latter.

When a man ends up jerking off to porn, playing video games, and never getting married, 90% of the time, this wasn't his choice. It was women's choice. And sure, maybe he could have worked out, eaten right, worked hard to get a better job, gotten into some interesting hobbies, met a woman, and gone on to get married, but that's a lot of work and there's no guarantee that after doing all of that, he would have ended up with a willing wife. Women still might not have chosen him. So a guy like that might not bother and might remain a loser. And honestly, if a woman showed up and told him she'd suck his dick and marry him if he threw his Playstation 4 out the window, he'd give up video games in 5 seconds because he's not really happy with that life.

This is a tiny, insignificant percentage of men. Most men end up married. The increase in men who aren't married is because in modern times, we have more financially independent women and we have made casual sex a lot more accepted socially. So women are only going to marry men if it's a good deal. This has resulted in a bigger portion of bottom-dwelling men not getting married, but it's not a growing segment of men indicating a trend for the future. It's a growing segment of women who would rather shrug guys like that off, go to work, pay their own mortgage, and maintain a few booty call guys because they're too busy to date.

Most quality men who have the opportunity to date, have sex, and get married do so. I'm not going to discount that -some- quality men go the MGTOW way, but that's a tiny minority. The huge majority of men who stop trying to measure up to women's or society's standards and end up alone didn't end up that way by their choice. It was women's choice. They're just a product of women's newfound financial independence and love of casual sex.

[–]-Radical_Edward2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think you are confusing relationship with marriage.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

And honestly, if a woman showed up and told him she'd suck his dick and marry him if he threw his Playstation 4 out the window, he'd give up video games in 5 seconds because he's not really happy with that life.

Sex and blowjobs yeah, marriage not so much.

I agree with the basis of what you're saying but I disagree with the emphasis on how much men supposedly desire marriage. They desire girlfriends and frequent sex absolutely. Marriage is dying just look at the figures. And I provided a link above showing that cohabitation is already replacing marriage. I don't see that trend stopping because marriage is just not an attractive prospect anymore. It's an outdated leftover from the olden days.

[–]CainPrice1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Don't underestimate how desperate losses are. Yes, hot, successful non-losers who have choices with women might have sex and eschew marriage.

But some dumpy loser with a failure of a life who subsists on porn and video games? That lonely guy wants nothing more than to love and be loved. He'd bet everything on marriage if a woman magically appeared in his bedroom and made the offer.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

In that scenario marriage is the price set by the woman and he must accept because he is low value.

I'm saying for most men, average ones, they are not seeking out marriage and are not as thirsty as your hypothetical low value man that they are required to marry just to get girls.

This is why we are seeing falling marriage rates.

[–]CainPrice1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Nah. Average guys are still getting married. They are not checking out of marriage, having lots of casual sex, then leaving women by the wayside. That's an internet revenge fantasy when the truth is that it's the women living out their fantasy. Women are checking out of marriage in their 20s, getting careers, having lots of casual sex, then getting married later in life after having lots of fun.

So average men are still getting married like always. They're just getting married later in life, though. Mostly because the women they're marrying are finishing college and grad school, getting jobs, getting their own places, and spending their 20s having casual sex. Average men getting married later hasn't been their choice or their aversion to marriage. It's been women's choice.

The declining marriage rate has also been primarily women's choice, not men checking out of marriage. Today, compared to 1960, women have careers, and casual sex is socially okay. So women really only need to get married if it suits them. There's no financial dependence, and it's totally acceptable and normal for a working woman to have a few booty call guys she hooks up with. So there's an uptick in bottom-tier men who don't end up with wives just for having jobs, but it's not a huge exodus of men from marriage. It's women having higher standards.

While sure, Chad the wonderful who's fucking ten different women sees no need to marry, some average guy dating a 31 year old career woman who's ready to settle down is going to marry her if things go that direction. He's just marrying her at 31 instead of 25 because -she- wasn't looking to marry at 25.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That is not my claim.

My claim is that cohabitation is replacing marriage. Those men are still entering monogamous relationships rather than fucking around but they're not getting married nearly as often as they used to. The marriage rate has been plummeting for decades and shows no sign of stopping.

My source is official stats from the UK government. I would be amazed if it was significantly different in the US.

One in six people are now cohabiting as the number of unmarried adults reaches record levels, figures have disclosed

...

"One of the main reasons for the decrease in the married population and the increase in the single population is the growth of cohabitation by unmarried couples,” it said.

"In the early 1960s in Britain fewer than one in a hundred adults under 50 are estimated to have been cohabiting at any one time, compared with one in six in 2010."

The number of couples getting married has been steadily declining since the 1970s.

There are of course some analysts who claim this is purely for economic reasons and people still want to marry, but the fact the economy isn't so great right this minute doesn't explain decades of marriage decline so I question that explanation.

I just think the majority of people see no purpose to marriage anymore. I don't think it's some big MGTOW revenge fantasy. I simply think younger gens are looking at marriage and not seeing what the point is.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Nobody is actually satisfied by porn over actual sexual and romantic success no matter how good the porn is. It's just a distraction people do to keep their mind off of the fact that they're losers, but any one of them would give up their loser lifestyle in a heartbeat for a real relationship.

You are correct about men who have no experience or knowledge of relationshits. They are pining for women deep down inside whether they know it or not.

Those men who have actually lived with women for a time, soon realize the situation is broken for men, and resolve not to cohabitate with women again - they are in a much more stable configuration.

If a woman lives with you or if you get married, you have two incomes and one rent. You can take more trips and buy more shit.

Wishful thinking, women are wealthier control most of the spending in the US despite consistently having less income. Do the math, a man with a woman attached tends to be worse off financially whatever their joint income may be.

[–]CainPrice0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

You're right that men who have been burned by divorce or had really bad relationships might be less inclined to do it all again. Those guys deserve a separate category from guys who are actual losers and have nothing to do with women due to the women's choice (so they pretend they're avoiding women to save face).

However, the guys who were -already- married, -already- have a kid or two, and so on already did the duty to society that guys like you think all men should have avoided from the start. A guy who knows what it's like to have been married, bought a house with his wife, had children with a wife, and lived as a happy family before it all went south - he already experienced all of that. So he's not thirsting for the experience. But he already did it. A guy who used to be married and had a few kids already did the thing you're saying that all men are going to avoid in the future.

Meanwhile, a guy who can't get laid to save his life that's pretending its his choice to avoid women would give up his crazy ideology in a heartbeat if a woman offered to marry him. So we have guys who can't get laid that would drop MGTOW in 2 seconds if a woman actually wanted him, and guys who already did the marriage thing. Neither one of those make a strong argument for "MGTOW is the future".

If you'd said that the future is going to be "The same amount of guys get married as today, just later in life and to older, sluttier women, and and we're going to see a lot of divorce, infidelity, or just open marriages", I'd be right behind you. But you're saying that men are all going to go MGTOW in the future, which is silly. You guys are a fringe minority in no danger of becoming mainstream.

Anyway, we'll have to agree to disagree on the financial thing. You'd have to be marrying or cohabiting with a really, really poor woman for her to spend everything she earns -and- some of your money every month. Two incomes, one rent is always more money in the bank, unless some way, some how, somebody is spending their entire income and some of yours on Amazon. I don't doubt a crazed shopaholic woman could do that, but most women are a little more normal than you give them credit for.

[–]Zippo-Cat8 points9 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Typical MGTOW sour grapes fallacy. You are not the ones avoiding women, women are the ones avoiding YOU, and you made up a pathetic ideology to pretend you're the one in control.

Nothing is spreading, the feminists are not going away, there will not be a beta uprising. There is a single word to perfectly sum up this entire post but it's banned from the sub. I think you can guess it though.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Is there an argument in there or just intense dislike? Lol. Just report me next time and write "SUPER DOWNVOTE" as the reason, it will give you the same emotional satisfaction. Pro tip of the day.

[–]hshsvdhsiabs6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I think you’re forgetting that sex is not the main reason to be in a relationship. Most importantly, people want to feel loved and like somebody understands us. Otherwise, FWB would work perfectly well for everyone. I don’t think that the deep want for emotional connection is just gonna magically go away in 20 years because extreme feminism exists and you can order a realistic sex doll online.

[–]yoyo013232 points3 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

It is bitter. But feminism is bitter and look at it now. I do think that repercussions will deal in a harsher results.

Dating. Good luck with that, cause I sure as hell am not dating men who are as bitter and hopeless as that bunch, I’m talking about the guys who are completely MGTOW. And don’t value women. I’m done with dating lol you either have to settle for; guys who enables stupidity, guys who are assholes, or be one of those women who says MGTOW is great. It’s better to not look for it anyway and focus on the best you can be, without being an asshole though.

In terms of lifestyle. I don’t know what it will look like. Maybe marriage laws will be changed ( which some kind of reformation is needed, that is fair for everyone). I see the upcoming generation being very scared of being what they’re being. So MGTOW is good for young boys to not feel bad about being a guy; but after that first heart break, being cheated on, divorce, or some leftist ideal fucking their job over. Bye bye stability.

Society needs balance. And the only way that ever happens is if the foundation is built strongly, with care and dedication. Valuing men and women are is the bases and foundation; and we don’t even have that down. This is part of the reason why society is fucked as far as the west goes. Scared to see what’s going to happen next.

[–]theDukesofSwagger2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Well you can’t exactly date a MGTOW so I guess you’re set in that regard.

[–]-Radical_Edward0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy Link

Women again, asking for good men, when all they want is to be used. Meme gender.

[–]yoyo013232 points3 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

I hate that lol. That’s another thing that’s getting old. There’s more to being with someone than being a good man Or a good woman. Shit. Of course I want a good man, what am I gonna date? An abusive asshole, no.

There are things I want in a man, and for every woman it differs. Same for men. There’s more to it.

I wasn’t asking for good men anyway lol what’s your problem. Unless you’re being sarcastic which I hope you are. I dont think anyone wants to be used, that’s just terrible

[–]-Radical_Edward1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

You are a woman, your feelings will always be stronger than your logical mind, no matter what you choose as a person, men have it too but we have ways to control it. You have not.

Take a look at /r/rapekink, read the origin stories. Those women have looked into the abyss and it has consumed them. They tried to fight it with reason, logic, therapy whatever they could but they all lost at the end. Do you know why ? Feelings don't tire, they are constantly there hurting you from the inside until you give up to it. It can take months or years but everyone loses at the end.

[–]yoyo013232 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

I really don’t know what’s the point in you saying this. Maybe women are more emotional or men more logical. But I’ve come across men that are way more emotional than women, come across women that are way more logical and intellectual.

So what you’re saying does not...matter. To me at least. A lot of men walk around claiming what you’re saying. But are the dumbest people I’ve ever met. And are very, very irrational. That’s not something anyone should believe. Plenty of women play that “emotional card” against men who are so so logical, and get manipulated. What you’re saying is just silly to me

[–]-Radical_Edward0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

There is no use debating you.

I admited, men have it too. Most men as a matter of fact. What is the point of restating what I have just said? We can grow out of it. You can NOT. When it happens to you your body will recognise it and it will slowly become what you want. You can try shaming me, I don't care.

2) I don't know if you realise but you comment makes absolutely no sense. You use logical fallacies "I heard dumb men say it" and you are off topic. It is like you didn't even read my post.

[–]yoyo013233 points4 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I agree with there no point in debating me, cause I don’t know what you’re saying. People grow all the time. You can reason better from more experiences, you can rationalize through emotions. Called growing up from a child to an adult. Maybe a woman is more emotional. But she can stay rational and speak her emotions clearly; meaning she’s a woman. Not a child. Or an animal. Your claim about women just being emotional, make it seem like we don’t have a mind of our own or are rational. Which just isn’t true.

2.) I did read your very confusing post. And added more to my statement. You speak of logical fallacies; but your claim is illogical. Right.

[–]-Radical_Edward0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

It is true that women are emotional but that wasn't my point. I don't know why you focused on it. It wasn't even up for debate. I agree with you on what you just said, third time I am telling you that I agree with you but it doesn't register in your brain.

This feels like debating a toddler. You don't understand my point and the fact that you reread and are still off topic means you never will.

Good luck.

[–]Eartherry2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

The more men start doing it the more people are going to talk about it. That's going to be the nail in the coffin. Their argument is going to be picked apart and exposed for what it is, the last ditch effort of a formerly dominant demographic to force the focus back onto themselves. Why? A combination of entitlement and laziness. That demographic has made too many enemies for potential supporters to want live under their control.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

This same argument always gets made about white people, men, rich people,the religious right... "look at all the success they have had, they must be entitled and lazy! And they will all die off soon and then WE take over!!"

Typical cultural marxist ranting with no substance.. ugh.

[–]InfamousComfortNo Group Think2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

While this could potentially happen, I doubt that the situation is going to be able to play out long enough. MGTOW reminds me of the Beautiful Ones in (i think) John Calhoun's experiment, and they were never a majority. The same conditions exist today in the West. Humans are more advanced than mice of course, but history gives us great examples of what happens when populism begins to take off. Peter Turchin models these sort of things, and he thinks that peak instability will occur in the next decade. Methinks that drug, porn, and food addictions have kept violence at bay until now, but shit is heating up. I expect protests, shootings, suicides, and addictions to skyrocket in the next decade. Not exactly MGTOW.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 2 points3 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

MGTOW reminds me of the Beautiful Ones in (i think) John Calhoun's experiment, and they were never a majority.

Few issues there.

First, Calhouns experiment was a closed system.. no new mice could immigrate in. Having more mice trickling in would allow the population to not completely die out, thereby enabling the culture of the mouse dystopia to metastasize further.

Second, the starting population was very small compared to what we humans have. Again, this means the "experiment" gets to go on for longer among we humans before wholesale societal collapse.

Third, the driving factor in fucking up the mouse society was population density, but the secondary effect of this - social breakdown and descent into anarchy - was what caused the actual devastation. Humans are more adept at preventing wholesale anarchy, we have laws and police and courts and militaries and shit. However we are piss poor at stopping cultural changes (including bad ones, like decadence) from playing out, only totalitarian states are capable of that.

All of this means that humans will not die off, but the problems in culture and gender relations will continue to worsen.

[–]InfamousComfortNo Group Think0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Without writing a wall of text, I will simply agree with you. The truth is nobody has a clue what is gonna happen. As you alluded, the Beautiful Ones experiment had variables that are not fixed in our human experiment such as immigration, propaganda, etc. You could argue that the difference between human and mouse society/biology is so different that no logical conclusion can be drawn from the experiment. I should have been more clear that I do not believe that outcome is likely for the West despite it being a possibility (nuclear weapons).

The OP stated that MGTOW is the future for men, and my comparison to the Beautiful Ones was that they never became the mainstream POV. They focused on self improvement. This was what I was trying to relay.

History has countless examples of civilizations going through cultural shifts. None of those are cookie cutter to our current situation, but these cycles play out through time. The only thing to do is wait and see what happens. I think the Ginkgo model by Peter Turchin is a good representation of how these events occur.

[–]wereqryanBlackpilled6 points7 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Expect a sharp increase in the number of men who are sexless (discounting directly paid sex), alone, and without any romantic relationships. Number of incels/MGTOWs will rise and we'll notice more and more men dropping out of school and society to live as NEETs playing videogames or glued to internet forums.

The number of single women without relationships will also rise as more and more men fail to satisfy their standards with the economy becoming harder to work in, but not as much as the rise in the number of men.

[–]GradualDecomp2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Any evidence to back that up?

[–]dj10showhell in a handbasket6 points7 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

I agree with everything except for this:

The number of single women without relationships will also rise

I think polygyny will be acceptable, and Chads will just have harems all to themselves. Nobody else will stand a chance.

[–]Dash_of_islamBidet 4 Life>Toilet paper unwashed proles0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

But if the economy is shit. Then BB could still be a viable option for guys appealing to poor women, no?

Like a financially secure ugly guy could still find some lower class girl who wants an easier life. Or would she rather remain poor?

Or maybe people will try communes again but still working jobs if possible so that they can distribute the costs and play up everyone's abilities??

Who knows, the automation and robotics revolution will change the world in unpredictable ways. Will have to wait to see how the chips fall

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

The ultimate end point of history is a single Chad ruling over all the worlds women, while the rest of the men die off in a Matrix like virtual world surrounded by their anime waifus.

At that point the big bang (an orgy to repopulate the globe) will happen, human history resets and the cycle repeats itself.

[–]EsauTheRed0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Continue this thread

Who will raise the children?

[–]Regal_NewtBlue Pill Woman6 points7 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Women are becoming increasingly annoying. I'm not saying all, but the majority.

Completely subjective statement that you have no evidence for. Women have been becoming more equal, and therefore more self sufficient. Tbh it just sounds like you're threatened by women being your equal.

This is due to feminism fucking up gender relations, causing even non feminist identifying women to become infected with this vague sense that men are selfish, lazy boors who are taking advantage of them - and that they therefore need to complain a lot in relationships.

Yeah. So. Feminism doesn't even remotely do anything you're suggesting. Your fictional MGTOW idea of feminism does that. And again- it's more your victim complex from women doing their own thing and not waiting on you than a reality.

"What can I do to please men/the man in my life" is an idea increasingly foreign to women.

In a relationship you should always be thinking of how to make your partner happy, and partners- women included- still are. That hasn't changed. Outside of a relationship, why should we focus on making other people happy more than ourselves. Again, you're just bitter that women aren't waiting on you anymore and are actually doing their own thing.

Increasing availability of REALLY high quality entertainment, at dirt cheap prices. The kind of porn, videogames, tv shows, websites, etc available today blows away anything seen 20 years ago. With all this VR porn, AIs making fake celeb porn for you, etc... the bargaining power of pussy is going to take a nosedive.

Firstly, a screen doesn't replace the real thing. Secondly, you REALLY overestimate how much women care about the "bargaining power of pussy." The vast majority of women don't want to be with someone who, consciously or unconsciously, view sex as a bargaining chip.

That's not even talking about sex bots. If THOSE ever truly take off, then gender relations will quickly become an unrecognizable wasteland populated by female incels.

Yeah none of us are worried about this. It's really only incels who are interested in the dolls and the overwhelming majority of men want sex with actual people over a doll, or are outright turned off by dolls. Likewise, as a generalization, women tend to be turned off by men who use sex dolls. Make of that what you will. Not saying it's necessarily fair.

The recognition that marriage and LTRs with women tend to skew against men's interests is spreading. The Redpill worldview is gaining more traction despite media's intense antagonism towards it (didn't stop Trump). More men are abstaining from rushing in to marry chicks just because she popped out a baby. Marriage rates are dropping. Male birth control will happen within a decade, meaning no more getting trapped by a kid. It took a while for men to catch up with the realities of the market and stop being simps, but it's happening.

Marriage happening less doesn't mean relationships are happening less. Just means that marriage is not the kind of relationship that people are doing as often. Also, male birth control is good for everyone, feminists and other women included. Lastly, not getting married just because you had a kid isn't a MGTOW exclusive idea. It's kinda just common sense. The relationship is about you. Not the kid. No kid will be happy with parents who dislike each other.

Everything is just too fucking expensive. The upper middle class lifestyle that is marketed intensely at women, that many of them crave, is becoming unreachable for the average western family. The middle class is disappearing across the globe thanks to globalism, automation, etc. When 90% of people are lower class, lower class values will become the norm... and that means more broken, single mom-led families being supported by the welfare state while men live out one giant extended adolesence. Not like there's much else to do when there are no meaningful jobs (other than drug dealer/gang member) in your community.

You do realize that getting married/ moving in together and having two incomes is actually promoted by this, right?

Culture -- whether it be in the sphere of dating, politics, sex, marriage, or whatever -- is not going to shift back in favor of men any time soon. Feminism and leftism is too entrenched, and women don't have a strong biological impulse to seek out men for anything, be it sex or relationships - they can essentially live without men for extend periods of time, rather than be pursuers. Women also struggle to lower their standards... the lack of eligible college educated men has created angst and disappointment among women, rather than a lowering of standards. That means women will still be demanding the same dreaded 6-6-6 (six pack, six feet tall, six figures) for decades to come at least.

So, by your own admittance, you're just bitter that women aren't fawning over you. Also, there is not, nor will there ever be a lack of women interested in men, and we're not nearly as stuck up and obsessed with looks as you seem to think.

TRP, while laudable in a sense, is by definition inaccessible to the majority of men. Not everyone can be alpha (or no one would be). Furthermore, the kind of lifestyle TRP espouses (building "value") doesn't appeal to everyone. If you have to be really bad ass in order to get your money's worth out of the SMP, only a fraction of men are going to pursue that and only a fraction of them are going to succeed. Meanwhile, the bulk of men are going to choose being lazy and doing whatever the fuck they want with their free time.

TRP just gives standard dating advice mixed in with some fable about non existent alphas and bettas and the non existent differences between them. MGTOW, much like you, don't go their own way and just sit there and sulk about women. Don't give either too much credit.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 6 points7 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

You argument seems to be: "You are bitter."

To which my counter-argument would be: "Nah."

I'm not angry at women, though I recognize many MGTOWs are, I just look at the cost-benefit ratio and see that it is massively skewed against men. Pumping and dumping or hook ups are the best it ever gets for men - free sex, no strings, no huge fucking list of expectations and demands, and freedom to move on when anything changes.

Cohabitating, living with women, is a mug's game. Demands/complaints go up, sex goes down. What is the incentive for men to participate? You're basically signing up to be a slave, a provider, a workhorse. Meanwhile there's an entire life of freedom, peace and lack of obligation out there that just keeps getting better and better, while male reason for being in a marriage (having a wife who cooks, cleans and fucks) is disappearing.

If anything, I'm glad I live in a time where there are better alternatives to being worked to death for the sake of my wife and kids.

[–]goldmedalflower0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

Are you describing the Steve Carrell character in the 40 year-old Virgin except with escorts?

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

It's one among many possibilities. You have limitless freedom when you cease caring about being acceptable to women. You could be a genius inventor, a lazy bum, a backpacker just traveling around the world, a serial killer (bad example but eh) .. whatever takes your fancy.

[–]Nobodykers3 points4 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

MGTOW 'genes' will die in a single generation. There is always men thirsty enough to fuck or lonely enough to take any deal. Those thirsty genes will be the only male genes remaining in a matter of generations if MGTOW ever became an epidemic.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 2 points3 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

If that was true MGTOWs wouldn't have been able to come into existence to begin with. Culture/society play a role in this, not just DNA.

[–]Nobodykers4 points5 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

If people dont die out, non-MGTOW men will be the only ones remaining. Its natural selection. Your revenge fantasy wont come true.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

Explain how incel men came into being. All their ancestors reproduced, correct?

You are equating dna with destiny, when that's not really the case. Idealogy and society have an evolutionary path of their own, that can mold the destinies of individual humans regardless of their dna.

[–]Nobodykers1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Incels arent mgtow.

[–]dj10showhell in a handbasket0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Because religious and social constructs caused some men of yesteryear to procreate that would be the incels of today.

[–]cxj75% Redpill Core Ideas3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Tbh I think we will see mass male suicides in the future

[–]CrestfallenWolf1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Accessible male birth control will not be a thing within a decade. IDK how much money I've made off taking that bet every year. Easy money.

[–]ManTerrupter 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

There are a ton of benefits in feminism for men. I fully support feminism for the following reasons:

WOMEN DO WORK

Women feeling empowered to work is good for men because it removes the highly toxic expectation that men become financially responsible for women in exchange for sex and 'love'. Women eschewing marriage is good for men as marriage was really only ever a means of men financially supporting women, like children, in exchange for sex. Still today, many women view men's worth by their ability and willingness to support and protect women. Many women avoid marriage to men that are lessors financially, which is a clear indication of their toxic notion of men as providers and protectors of women (women's financial slaves and human sacrifices).

WOMEN DO WAR

Women enlisting in combat roles, potentially resulting in fewer male combat deaths, is good for men, because traditionally men's lives were/are still sacrificed for women's and their state husbandry's safety and welfare (again human sacrifice). Traditionally, women and the state socially conditioned men into disposability on women's behalf. That's gynocentrism in its most pure and anti-male form. Women should fight and die for their own rights rather than disposing of men for the same.

WOMEN DISROBE

Women feeling 'empowered' to take nude selfies or engage in paid porn and posting the picture and videos online is good for men. Men are primarily visual when it comes to sex and can easily satisfy themselves sexually with naked pictures and videos of women, freeing themselves from potential false accusations, STDs, unwanted pregnancies and state mandated financial obligations (forced wealth transfer) that quite often result from intimate physical relationships with women.

WOMEN PAY TAXES

Obviously, women paying taxes is great for men as women share the tax burden which was traditionally shouldered entirely by men. Men were socially conditioned (shamed) into becoming women's providers & protectors, which is anti-male, pro-female cultural brainwashing at its worst.

WOMEN TEND THEMSELVES

Women providing for and protecting themselves is obviously good for men as it makes women more responsible and accountable for their actions and doesn't use men as human sacrifices, human shields and walking ATMs.

WOMEN GET EASY

Women feeling empowered to have free and easy sex outside of marriage is good for men, though men then face the same unwanted potential pregnancies, false accusations, etc that come with risking intimate relationships with women.

WOMEN FINANCE THEMSELVES

Women choosing artificial insemination, career and single motherhood couldn't be better for men as women's bodies and choices are then completely women's physical and financial responsibilities, not men's. Their body, their choice, their responsibility.

So you see, there are many benefits in feminism for men and if explained in the correct way will have many a man supporting feminism and escaping toxic gynocentrism, male disposability and the destructive expectations placed upon men by women and their all too often anti-male gyno-state.

[–]Xemnas811 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Feminism has never historically liberated men from their gender role. This is an old ass criticism, the one which Warren farrel made. We're already seeing a normie and tradcon pushback against women in the military, for example.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

MGTOW = Mice utopia experiment by John Calhoun

[–]purpleppparmchair evo psych1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

You're ignoring the effects of international competition. An anti-natalist philosophy is not going to thrive for obvious reasons -- people who hold the views generally don't reproduce, and civilizations with birth rates too low are not going to remain superpowers. Unless artificial reproduction will be big enough to offset it. Still I'm not convinced that single parent households will do well.

[–]Tornado_of_Niggers 1 points [recovered]  (4 children) | Copy Link

Possibly. The concept of "involuntary celibacy" has been floating around, but it terms of LMS, emphasize the M, and what we really have involuntary poorness or involuntary equality. Most sane people and MGTOWs will tell you that the idea of raising children in America or Western society sounds like an absolutely difficult nightmare. And the people that go through with raising children validate that claim.

We have a shrinking middle class, which really means a lot of intelligent people are entering poverty and aren't going to procreate, let alone raise children. It's actually an existential crisis in terms of one's personal legacy. Do you want your lineage to end with you? Do you care? And if you had children would you be able to raise them so that they too had children? If you couldn't raise children that were capable of raising their own children, what right do you have in having children at all? You should already be aware that the Silent Generation and Boomer Generation left a much more difficult world for Gens X, Y, & Z. And that it's shaping up that breeders among Gen X & Y are leaving behind an even more difficult world.

[–]Dash_of_islam 1 points [recovered]  (1 child) | Copy Link

Wouldn't you be kind of old if you wait until you become rich??

And we can't all become rich because of the way social oyrsmids work.

So if you do become rich at 45, yur not going to get many sane young girls (daddy issues and low IQ does not a good mother make) or you will be their BB.

[–]DesignerDebates3 small children in a trench coat[M] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

This is tagged as CMV. Top level responses must challenge OP’s view.

[–]theDukesofSwagger0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

You somewhat (maybe unintentionally) frame it as though men have to choose a lifestyle. I agree with what you say and believe it will play out as so. But only that it will happen naturally, without knowing to most people.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree with you, and I should've mentioned this in my OP. Most won't be identifying as an MGTOW or even know what that term means, but they'll be acting it out regardless

[–]wtffellification0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Considering the 80/20 rule...

The 80% of men either A) improve themselves B) believe and hope for the light at the end of the tunnel, or C) kill themselves

MGTOW is just as much a "choice" as voting for the least shitty president.. is it better not to vote? Some would say so. But most people vote anyway

Even if you don't identify as a MGTOW (because this limits your life's potential and, frankly, because most people who identify as a MGTOW are bitter, sad chumps...) if all your actions indicate you being a MGTOW than, well, what the hell, right?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Cant wait for the future.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

women don't have a strong biological impulse to seek out men for anything, be it sex or relationships

What makes you so sure of this?

[–]FrustratedLogician0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

You don't really go full-MGTOW. The problem I see is that you still pay taxes: money is used to subsidise poor women choices fucking attractive men, ending up with a spawn. So, you are still cucked by other men, who designed the tax system. You cannot run away from being exploited, one way or another. I hope to be wrong about this but my thought experiment led to this conclusion.

[–]Single-man-330 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

MGTOW is growing at a rapid pace these days, and getting much stronger Nationwide. Feminism is much worse than cancer now, and there is no Cure for it at all unfortunately. A lot of feminists that really hate us men altogether since they really are very mentally disturbed to begin with. And most women in the past were the very complete opposite of today, and Real Ladies as well. A man would have to be real crazy to get married to one of these very pathetic loser women now as well. GO MGTOW.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

We're living in a period of false conciousness, like Marx predicted.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

As someone who is probably MGTOW, I would say no. Women adjust and tolerate things that they used to shame because the alternative is no men.

We saw this happen with video games, it'll happen for other things

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

Do women tolerate video games? The majority i've encountered despise them almost as much as they do the men who play them. Sure there are gamer grrrls here and there, but they are the exception.

[–]EsauTheRed0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

They tolerate or even play them in the younger generations

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

A lot of them do tolerate it now, because otherwise they wouldn't have boyfriends or husbands.

[–]AutoModeratorMarried to Littleknownfacts[M] 0 points1 point  (82 children) | Copy Link

Attention!

  • You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.

  • For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.

  • If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.

  • OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]goatismycopilotJohnI'monlydancing17 points18 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Why mention Trump though, he has been married 1700 times and he has the hots for his daughter, I am not clear on how he fits into MGTOW.

[–]azngirl76893 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

But only his one daughter- the other daughter may as well be chopped liver

[–]dudenotrightnowfrogs rights activist2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

lmaoooooooooooo I literally spat out the water I was drinking on my keyboard. someone give this person gold.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

The united states is now going its own way and breaking up with its girlfriend NATO.

[–]diffdedbedGreen Eyed Devil8 points9 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

and women don't have a strong biological impulse to seek out men for anything, be it sex or relationships - they can essentially live without men for extend periods of time, rather than be pursuers

... and then in the real world...

[–]deadsandsushi2 1 points [recovered]  (5 children) | Copy Link

It's true though. I love men and love dating men, but I'm easily happy when not dating at all/being single.

[–]frogsgoribbit7373 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

So are most people. Including men.

[–]diffdedbedGreen Eyed Devil2 points3 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Based on your post history you are atypical for a woman. I'm atypical for a man in relationships so I'm not trying to call you out as "bad" but you are definitely "not like the other girls".

[–]deadsandsushi2 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy Link

That's certainly true, but not according to Red Pillers. According to them, all women are the same and like/want the same things.

[–]diffdedbedGreen Eyed Devil1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

AWALT was my first, "um no" moment for TRP. TRP gets it like 50% maybe 60-70, but then blows it by giving women no agency or personality of their own beyond that basic attraction phase.

[–][deleted] 18 points19 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

No one cares what the MGTOW dudes do.

Go your own way, just stop bitching about it when you get there.

[–]Willow-girlProud 2 B an American farmer9 points10 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

No one cares what the MGTOW dudes do as long as they're not shooting people.

FTFY

[–]Glawen_Clattuc6 points7 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I thought that was InCels with the guns?

I think MGTOW are either fat old dudes who can't afford mail order brides or thin young dudes who've applied libertarian economics to dating.

[–]WhatIsTheMeaningHere0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Nah, you see, MGTOW dudes have enough coping mechanisms to feel superior enough not to fuck up their own lives by shooting people. It's when they start to convert to inceldom when they realize that maybe they aren't all that great and women losing them isn't much of a loss that they have the potential to become dangerous. It's either that or they take the humble egoless route.

[–]Glawen_Clattuc2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

No one cares what the MGTOW dudes do.

Heh ; - )

[–]Whodunnit88Survivied Purge Week 20180 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Do you need to care about something to have a discussion over it on an internet forum?

[–]Dweller_of_the_Abyss-2 points-1 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Go your own way, just stop bitching about it when you get there.

Nah.

[–]KikiYuyuPurple Pill Woman16 points17 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Maybe if there weren't so many obnoxious misogynistic MGTOWs, sure. A very vocal bunch never seem to go their own way and instead preach about the evils of women and how amazing they are for seeing through the facade.

Just go your own way already, geez.

[–]WhatIsTheMeaningHere16 points17 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

They want to "save" other men, but also at the same time I think there's a little bit of ego attachment there and that if they are going to take the route of the voluntary celibate, they want everyone to do the same, otherwise someone else might get a better deal by not doing what they're doing. The worst thing that could happen to many MGTOWs is for nothing to happen to society from them "going their own way" despite their claims that they don't care.

[–]diffdedbedGreen Eyed Devil7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Misery loves company.

[–]goatismycopilotJohnI'monlydancing10 points11 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The MGTOWS who just want to be nice hermit people in the woods with their dogs and horses and do some kind of prepper shit probably think running around saying " I am a MGTOW and I am leaving" is super childish. There are some hermity people in my neighborhood because I am in a poor rural area it is like rural meth heads people who want a couple of cows and horses and me, they wave at me in their trucks they seem okay.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree actually, I don't really frequent any MGTOW places because of this trend. The main topic should be how to enjoy your freedom and massive amounts of free time.

I think the MGTOWs who are really enjoying life aren't posting about it

[–]mgtow_14 points5 points  (11 children) | Copy Link

What many people miss about mgtow is that it's different for every guy. There are no guidelines or rules. The premise is do what truly makes you happy and forget all the responsibilities and restrictions society wants you to freely take on.

For many men this means avoiding women completely. For others that might mean sex is fine, but just not marriage. The point is to do what makes you happy.

Many of the older mgtow men do warn about women and the current legal climate to make sure men are aware of long term ramifications should they marry, ltr, or impregnate a woman.

There is also a good deal of anger just like with all red pill related communities. In that way red pill and mgtow are much like feminism.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew4 points5 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

the "confirmed bachelor" has existed forever, why do peopel need a group to be confirmed bachelors? this is the part i dont get

[–]mgtow_11 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

It's more than being a "confirmed bachelor" it's ignoring all the pressures society puts on men to conform to a gender role. It's actually very similar to feminist movement for women. Women wanted to break free of their gender role and now men are doing the same.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

Why do you need a group to do it?

[–]mgtow_11 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

It isn't a group. There are no meetings, no rules, no leaders, etc. Just men doing what makes them happy. Which is different for each man.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, and the sheer simplicity and vagueness doesn't leave a lot to talk about. I guess the only people still talking are the ones pissed off at women who want to vent, it doesn't give MGTOW the best reputation. Not that it even matters.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

No, the forums where men get together to commune over being mgtows, those are "groups"

[–]mgtow_12 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

That is just a means for like-minded individuals to talk about their experiences. If that is your definition of a group then fine.

The biggest reason the online forums get so much attention is a lot of men are in the anger phase, many men are dealing with the legal system, and let's face it men think with their dicks and want a reminder of why they went mgtow in the first place.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

It is very loosely defined but it seems only those on the extreme side (women = evil, don't touch them ever or you'll get all ur money stole!) speak about it.

I've been told that the simple fact I don't wanna get married and have kids makes me MGTOW too but somehow I've not seen many people who are in relationships that are simply not marriages actually post on the sub. It's all anger as you said.

The one exception is /u/squidracer here on PPD. He's alright.

[–]mgtow_12 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The sub has a lot of anger just like red pill and just like feminism.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

My theory: After you go MGTOW you are either still pissed off, or not.

If you are pissed off you rant about women.

If you are not, you don't have much to talk about concerning women, or MGTOWism proper. There are really no further insights to be gained on the subject or questions to be answered, so you mostly focus your energy elsewhere.

TRP, incels, MRAs always have something new to discuss, because women still effect them.

I think this is a feature of MGTOW, not a bug.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree except I think it is a bug because the end result is the public face of MGTOW being polluted by incels.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew11 points12 points  (16 children) | Copy Link

The future lower class

[–]equanimous_samsarasyrup of ipecac2 points3 points  (14 children) | Copy Link

spoken like a true boomer

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew9 points10 points  (9 children) | Copy Link

Not a boomer sorry

Upper classes will always be married families. How do you believe MGTOWS either enter the upper classes or have their posterity enter and stay in them?

[–]equanimous_samsarasyrup of ipecac2 points3 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

Not upper class automatically means lower class? Are you predicting a complete erosion of the middle class in the future?

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Nope, but being a MGTOW means lower class.

Upper class men just don’t marry. They don’t sit on the internet 12 hrs/day complaining about women.

[–]equanimous_samsarasyrup of ipecac0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Cool. I'm more curious what Atlas has to say.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew4 points5 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

Theres no such thing as an unmarried middle clas

[–]equanimous_samsarasyrup of ipecac1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

Does this mean the middle class won't erode but it will consist of families because it always has?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

"The only thing that is constant is nothing will ever change" that's the quote yeah? Gotta be it.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

“Let’s get real. I mean, you know, if you had millions of pounds, and you could be in love with half a dozen beautiful women at the same time, and they were happy with that arrangement, would you? Or would you like to be married and have children? Choose!”

-Felix Dennis, net worth £500 million

He is not even middle class in your bubble?

I get hating on the internet warrior MGTOWs but that doesn't mean successful men who simply choose not to marry won't exist in larger numbers in the future. With cohabitation replacing marriage over the decades it's pretty much inevitable.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew1 point2 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

class is not determined by money. soemoen not born to a certain class doesnt become it by getting some money and adopting hteir values, but their children might. class really doesnt even apply much to individuals

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree class is not purely based on money, but you wouldn't exactly call someone worth £500m lower class would you?

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (3 children) | Copy Link

Millennial here, Atlas is absolutely right.

[–]equanimous_samsarasyrup of ipecac2 points3 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I never said boomers had a monopoly on being clueless, half of millenials are retarded too join the club.

[–]Atlas_B_Shruggin✡️🐈✡️ the purring jew3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Explain why im wrong

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Stick to the ipecac.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Civics class lied, there is more freedom at the bottom

[–]sublimemongrelBecky, Esq.7 points8 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

So you’re stereotyping “women” as unlikeable because...they’ve stereotyped “men” as equally unlikeable?

[–]azngirl76897 points8 points  (10 children) | Copy Link

As long as you actually go your own way this time. Like away from women. Please.

[–]Whodunnit88Survivied Purge Week 20181 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Then who will call out the women for being entitled deluded hypocrites?

[–]Plopolok0 points1 point  (8 children) | Copy Link

I find it funny that you can say at the same time "men need to vet more" and "if you're not satisfied with the market, shut up and disappear".

[–]azngirl76894 points5 points  (7 children) | Copy Link

I just want the whiny pussies to finally fuck off like they’ve been saying they will.

[–]Plopolok1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy Link

What do you mean by "fuck off"? Not talking on ppd anymore? Are you not a whiny pussy yourself?

[–]azngirl76894 points5 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Stop slagging off women all the time. I mean damn, we get it, you hate women.

[–]Whodunnit88Survivied Purge Week 20180 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Non-MGTOW slag off women too though.

[–]Plopolok0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

How am I slagging women? And no, I don't hate them. And I don't hate you neither.

[–]azngirl76894 points5 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I’m talking about the MGTOWs.

[–]Plopolok0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Ah, ok.

Well, this particular post isn't very aggressive against women. A bit more against modern feminism, but that's a frequent trope on PPD. Personally I enjoyed reading it, so I disapprove of your censoring attitude.

[–]Whodunnit88Survivied Purge Week 20180 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Why?

[–]yaseedog will hunt5 points6 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

What can I do to please men/the man in my life

whew

[–]mc0079Non-Red Pill3 points4 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

hahahahahahahahahahahaha

[–]passepar2t1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm de facto mgtow right now, but I don't understand MGTOW guys who write these grand manifestos and twirl their mustache operatically.

[–]WhatIsTheMeaningHere0 points1 point  (11 children) | Copy Link

I wonder if they brought out all these perspectives intentionally to lower the population and that whatever becomes popular is the result of whatever direction of population growth the elites want at the time.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Lmao, the ultra cynical view.

[–]equanimous_samsarasyrup of ipecac0 points1 point  (9 children) | Copy Link

I wonder if they brought out all these perspectives intentionally to lower the population

(((they)))

[–]yaseedog will hunt0 points1 point  (7 children) | Copy Link

what are the brackets for?

[–]equanimous_samsarasyrup of ipecac1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy Link

Not sure, it's something I've seen conspiracy theorists do.

edit: apparently anti-jewish conspiracists

[–]yaseedog will hunt0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

ah. not great

[–]equanimous_samsarasyrup of ipecac1 point2 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Agreed, I've always considered people who blame society's problems on an ethnic minority that's been persecuted throughout history to be a bit out there.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

I know a guy who got really obsessed with all that bullshit over the past year and he had to be kicked from our social circle because of it. He literally was incapable of talking about anything except for "da jooz secretly run the world" and would shoehorn it into literally anything. He's been NEET for like 5 years and has been glued to /pol/ and other crazy forums all that time. Sadly it's made him a fucking nutter and he won't snap out of it.

Kinda scary to see just how cultish simple internet forums can be and why I take a break from the internet at times to keep perspective.

[–]WhatIsTheMeaningHere0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

I got hooked on pol for a while so I have an awareness of what they're about. It's a really confusing place. Some people just have a twisted sense of humor, while others actually believe it. It's hard to tell who's who because they're always being ironic on so many levels. It was so fulfilling to see them take down the "He Will Not Divide Us" flag though. That was hilarious.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah I used to like /pol/ a few years ago for that same reason. The Poe's law aspect where it's funny because you dunno who's joking and who's serious. I found it amusing.

My mate got proper sucked into it and is extremely serious about it now. He is virtually a neo-Nazi at this point. I don't say that lightly, I mean he literally will defend the actual Nazis.

[–]yaseedog will hunt0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

"a bit out there" lol :) yes.

[–]WhatIsTheMeaningHere0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Perhaps... It'd just be nice to have a list of names of these people so we could know where exactly their loyalties lie.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Seems like it's already happening.

[–]goldmedalflower 1 points [recovered]  (2 children) | Copy Link

You gloss over the power of pussy and how men, young men especially, will always lust after women.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Lusting after women is inevitable, the question is whether that lust translates into a long term relationship.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

And young women after older men

[–]doctor_awfulChad ThunderDoc0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I like women. Nearly nothing of what you talked about is relevant to most of the women I know. Either leave the basement or get to know some better women.

[–]JezebeltheQueen5656Crushing males' ego since 19930 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Men Grabbing Their Own Willies: "hurr durr, we are going away for good, women will cry, woo!"

women: finally!

Men Grabbing Their Own Willies: w-wait, you are supposed to be desperate now!

Women: we arent as desperate as you. bye felipe!

[–]GayLubeOilTrue Red Pill-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The market readjustment will be the replacement of women who are vulnerable to feminism with Senioritas and نساء

[–]Dash_of_islamBidet 4 Life>Toilet paper unwashed proles-1 points0 points  (4 children) | Copy Link

Why wouldn't it remain a friend movement.

Like women obviously grabbed feminism because who doesn't want the same benefit as the other sex. Feminazis are rare, and the whole child free thing would probably get bred out of humans pretty fast if their Gene's are not getting passed on as much unlike before when everyone had kids.

Maybe there will be a masculinism movement that pushes back and we get true equality.

But I think crazy MGTOWs and Feminazis will remain a fringe group that probably won't get too much traction and remain a laughing stock for everyone who is normal

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children) | Copy Link

the whole child free thing would probably get bred out of humans pretty fast if their Gene's are not getting passed on as much

You... you do realise the choice of whether or not you want kids is not passed on genetically right? There's no "wanting children" gene to be bred out to begin with.

[–]Dash_of_islamBidet 4 Life>Toilet paper unwashed proles-1 points0 points  (1 child) | Copy Link

I mean the desire to be child free would be bred out provided it has some basic related to genes

It's weird but the idea of your line ending at you shouldn't matter, but it's like a deep feeling you want.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

Afaik there is no evidence that the desire to not have kids is rooted in genes. If there is some evidence for it I'm happy to be proven wrong. But I've found none in the past.

I personally could not care less if my "line ends at me." It conceptually means nothing to me. My genes are shit anyway. Let them die. If I had a choice I wouldn't have even been born.

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The term "MGTOW" and all the online concepts and communities that go with it will never become mainstream, but men will start acting out the underlying principles regardless. Like not every alpha is a redpiller, there are natural alphas out there, and natural MGTOWs (Tesla being the prime example). I'm saying there will be more men going their own way in the future but the "movement", if that's what it is, of men bitching online will remain fringe, as you say.

To give you an analogue: The majority of women don't identify as feminists today, but the behavior of most women is slanting towards careerism/materialism rather than traditional femininity, regardless.

[–]Iceklimber-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

The world is diverging

OP you are right in the sense that some men are going their own way, I sure am due to the perpetually escalating legal nightmare. Others will elect this lifestyle due to boons like realistic robo waifus

This in turn will create an artificial male scarcity. Women will step up their behaviour to compete for those men who remain. Glorious prospects.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (8 children) | Copy Link

IT jobs and jobs involving working extensively with software/computers are increasing in numbers.

Women absolutely HATE jobs where people have to work with software. That's another thing.

How long CAN a LTR be when the woman honestly hates your job & hates most of your hobbies (esp. if they revolve around computers) ?

[–]goddamnADHDMGTOW[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

Lmao so true. I love working with computers and software btw. Wouldn't give it up for the world.

[–]jonascf0 points1 point  (6 children) | Copy Link

Why do women hate jobs where people have to work with software?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (5 children) | Copy Link

Women hate nerdy men. Even If you're hot and nerdy it will still dock you points with many women.

Also, software is abstract. Nerds who work in more *material* fields will do a bit better with women.

Sure, some women will like nerds, but they're a minority.

[–]jonascf0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy Link

Ok, I understand your point of view.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy Link

You're welcome to CMV. My experience says otherwise though.

[–]jonascf0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy Link

I won't be able to change it. I have only my experience to go by and so far being nerdy and working in non-material job hasn't really stopped me from meeting women. This leads me to believe that the tendency you describe is more pronounced in some environments and less in others.

Of course I might have been even more succesful if I was less nerdy and had a more masculine job, but doing well is good enough for me.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy Link

You probably look good though.

My own experience (with my own pictures) was that a profile without a job got a lot more matches than a profile with "programmer" or "software engineer" written down as a job.

[–]jonascf0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm decent looking, neither good nor bad.

My own experience (with my own pictures) was that a profile without a job got a lot more matches than a profile with "programmer" or "software engineer" written down as a job.

That's very sad, caring about the status of a job just seems very shallow. I hope you find someone that doesn't care about petty things like that.

[–]gunbusterxlYou people are fucking disgusting-1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy Link

*facepalm*

MGTOW is a simple life decision: women are not worth the headache and it's better to focus on yourself. The logic is sound. The results are sound. Honestly, the ONLY thing I have against MGTOW is that its members just flat out refuse to move on with their lives. It's like some spoiled kid who runs away from home to "teach his parents a lesson." You've made your decision. Now go your own fucking way.

You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2024. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter