Search Results for 'echo chamber'

[KingOfTheSeaParticipant]

RoyDal wrote:

Are they making a living at this, or are they being subsidized?

I think they get revenue from their channel on Youtube and donations by fans, but I don’t think there’s anyone big behind their production. Just another wall for the echo chamber.

[Mango IngawayParticipant]

They don’t want anyone who disagrees with them.
What a wonderful echo chamber filled with deluded morons.

It is a common failing of childhood to think that if one makes a hero out of a demon the demon will be satisfied.

[Mango IngawayParticipant]

Anonymous wrote:

however if this is your little brother, he probably looks up to you alot (even just subconciously)

He’s my older brother actually, I like him a lot and he’s really smart, that’s why I was so shocked that he fell for the “I’m a victim I can’t be proven wrong or be told to think a bit”.

Anonymous wrote:

EDIT: PS dont debate women(even non feminists) waste of your f~~~ing time bro,  just dont

Man, after that, you can be sure I’ll let them in their little echo chamber. Then they can turn society even more to s~~~ than it already is.
So that we mgtow’s can have a huge-ass “point-and-laugh” session once western countries become like Japan.

It is a common failing of childhood to think that if one makes a hero out of a demon the demon will be satisfied.

[HimeoParticipant]

Russky wrote:

MGTOW are mostly nonconformist contrarians, so we’re prone to disagree even with our own flock and infight. But I am not sure if it’s good or bad. Maybe there’s so good in that

It is both tedious and vital to the integrity of MGTOW. Without debate and disagreement we become an echo-chamber. To remain relevant, MGTOW philosophy must be continuously challenged. Each argument sharpens the philosophy and the MGTOWs engaged in debate.

[RedHeadedStrangerParticipant]

Seems to me that you have addressed them all.  Perhaps though, you are looking for alternative responses, so I will tell you about my general method.

It is comprised of 2 main tactics: 1) take the moral high-ground, 2) use the socratic method.

It’s easy to p~~~ them off and win by intellectual humiliation if you engage from a position of moral superiority.  For example, say: “I disagree. And frankly, I am appalled that you would say such a horrible thing.”  This will take the wind out of their sails and put them on the defensive.  Due to the fact that they inhabit the echo-chamber of PC bulls~~~, they will usually ask to what you have taken offense.  This is when you begin questioning their knowledge and their beliefs.  Say something like, “This may be a simple case of miscommunication, what do you mean when you say X?  Because I do not believe X to be a proper response to the situation which you are describing.”  They will elaborate, usually without clarifying, not purposefully of course, and will then ask you to state your position.  This opens up the dialogue, but don’t take the bait.  Continue questioning them by asking them to be more specific, and make it personal.  Say, “I am open to dialogue, and am willing to change my mind if you can convince me of your position, so far though, you haven’t.  Will you please explain to me why I should embrace this situation as problematic, and why your response is appropriate?”  At this point you have taken control of the conversation, maintained the moral high-ground, and simultaneously granted yourself victimhood status.  Most of the time, they are a bit flustered at the challenge, unprepared to deal with it, and eager to get the hell out of Dodge.  They will re-state the same things they have already said, as if you didn’t hear them the first time.  They may even suggest you are an idiot — this is the Scotsman fallacy; don’t fall for it.  Simply continue with, “Perhaps I do not understand, likely do to the fact that I am indeed an idiot, as you suggested.  But I am open to considering your position. Are you open to considering mine?”  Relieved that they now get to play offense, they will usually answer in the affirmative.  Continue with, “If I can show you how and why you are in error, are you as open as am I to reversing your position on this issue?”  If they are recalcitrant and say no to your request, you are done.  Simply end by saying, “If that is the case, you are wasting my time, good day.”  You just won.  If, on the other hand, they are open to your point of view; from atop the moral high-ground, rain arrows of fact and truth down upon them and DESTROY THEM.

 

 

[Anonymous]

@headon.collision

What is happening here is not “shaming”, at least not from my part. Ii is called debate.

And I saw the video you posted, is from Sandman and it is a reminder why I stopped watching his videos.

On the video you posted, Sandman advises men to behave more like women, for men to act on consensus (like women) and to men behave more like con artists (just like women).

First of all, this treatment of men as they were defective women is absolute nonsense. This is one of the reasons there is a rift between the genders. That only shows that Sandman found its “unicorn” and is now more a mangina then a mgtow. Debate is what gives mgtow strength and prevent us from becoming a echo chamber. This urge from Sandman for men to conform no matter what is disgusting in my opinion.

He also says that men that “shame” (his word for disagreement) other men do so out of envy. He then justifies that in life, in order to achieve your goal, everything is valid, including finding and exploiting the rules. And that the men that try to enforce the rules are just doing so because the rules favors them and they do so because they don’t know how to exploit them. Really now? Well, if that is the case, then he have no business, whatsoever, in criticizing anything that women do. From exploiting men’s sex drive to use the legal system to financially rape men, women are just exploiting the system as Sandman is preaching. Again, deceit and shortcuts instead of honor and hard work. I may be wrong, but I believe it is BECAUSE of those last things that MEN were able to built CIVILIZATION and WOMEN WEREN’T.

Thanks for the video, it only reinforced what I already suspected, Sandman is a mangina. He has been preaching the return to the plantation for sometime now, and this only reinforce mys suspicious. He is a f~~~ing c~~~.

Rant over.

[narwhalParticipant]

So if she tells me she’s ‘tight’ and it turns out to be an echo chamber in there, can I sue her?

Ok. Then do it.

[KeymasterKeymaster]

IggyThunders wrote:

Wow. So Tradcons are persona non grata worthy of an eject button? Then you better flush me. Believe it or not we Tradcons do have nuanced views. I think we are getting into dangerous territory here which lends itself to ideological purity. I’ve seen this happen before many times. And the only thing that does is create an echo chamber. I sincerely hope that doesn’t happen to this forum.

Iggy brought something interesting up here.

This is the Manosphere, and the last thing you will get is everyone agreeing on s~~~. No danger of an “echo chamber” when MGTOW are healthy, aware, awake and perfectly willing to call each other out and point out bulls~~~ when it’s warranted. LOVE that about the red pill and MGTOW. As like minded as we are, we don’t just nod and agree for the sake of it. If anything, we are more likely to throw flaming arrows at each other – even when we shouldn’t.

That’s why a MGTOW agreeing with another MGTOW actually has value.
And butting heads also has value.

My definition of “TRAD CON” was not say trad-con views are wrong and declare tradcons should be ejected. It was only to illustrate what people *MEAN* when MGTOW use the term in a sentence. Like “alpha” or “beta”. We don’t actually subscribe to those (female) definitions, but we use them to talk about certain behaviors and mentalities.

For example, when I talk about “that beta”, I am not implying I am a definitive “alpha” who is speaking negatively about him – because even the most “alpha” of us has been guilty of beta behavior on occasion. Both labels are bulls~~~. But it’s a good way to encapsulate certain behaviors with a couple of words and everyone knows what we are talking about.

It’s obvious that most MGTOW can’t abide single mothers….

sidecar wrote:

If she really “got it”, SHE WOULDN’T BE A SINGLE MOTHER!

Bingo. That’s a perfect example right there. (thank you @sidecar)

Shunning single moms and believing 2 parents is a much better way to raise kids is actually a “tradcon” view. I hold that view myself – despite my definition of “TRADCON” above. Frowning upon single moms shows a “traditionally conservative” point of view. So you could argue many of us are “tradcons” in that way. Would I have married once upon a time? Very possibly and almost did. THREE times. But I didn’t, because I was awake.

MY personal idea of “tradcon” is much different than the current/universal idea of “tradcon”.
The difference is clear.

My brother and his wife are a perfect example of my definition above. He is an unthinking fool who is perfectly content being a slave and kneeling before his queen, while she is perfectly content with that arrangement too. It makes me sick to witness. We are both “tradcons” in a sense and hold similar values (especially when it comes to child rearing), but my idea is MUCH different than his.

Check this out. A couple of weekends ago, I took part in a hangout on Google+ with other MGTOW who wanted to speak to MGTOW.COM and ask us some questions. There were 4 of them online- plus me. It was only supposed to last an hour or two, but we chatted for 7.5 hours. Want to know something AMAZING? Here we were – 4 random guys on the planet – separated by oceans and very different lives. But guess what. For the first time EVER IN MY LIFE, I found myself in the company of 4 others who all had parents who were married until death separated them.

How often does that happen? F~~~ing never.

Growing up, most of our friends ALL had divorced parents or were raised by single moms. I have never been in the company of 4 people where EVERYONE’S parents were married. And neither did they! We were all blown away by this. Four-out-of-four in a totally chance meeting all came from married 2-parent households. You will never find yourself in a group of 4 total strangers where 100% of them came from a traditional 2-parent household.

So don’t for a second think we are anti-tradcon.
We are just aware of the difference between “tradcon”…. and “TRAD CON”.

If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.

[Big Viking Chef BVCParticipant]

I don’t want an echo chamber either Iggy.  None of us need to agree 100%.  There’s no freedom in that.  But anyone that tries to convert everyone else to their own views 100% deserves ejection.  Just my opinion.

When the open door policy is removed and I find myself being suppressed or programmed, I will eject myself…but that won’t happen here from what I have seen so far.  These guys are way too intelligent for that.

BVC

 

Swallow this RED PILL ===> Men will lay down their lives for their brothers, their women and their children. This makes Men useful as slaves. Women will lay down their lives for ONLY their children. To expect more from women is just a FANTASY created by society and reinforced by the unconditional love that we experienced from our Mothers. The key to freedom is the understanding that the woman you meet is not going to fantastically love you like your Mother did. If you buy into the fantasy, then she is your new master. If you do not buy into the fantasy, then she is nothing, and you retain your freedom.

[IggyThundersParticipant]

Wow. So Tradcons are persona non grata worthy of an eject button? Then you better flush me. Believe it or not we Tradcons do have nuanced views. I think we are getting into dangerous territory here which lends itself to ideological purity. I’ve seen this happen before many times. And the only thing that does is create an echo chamber. I sincerely hope that doesn’t happen to this forum.

[Anonymous]

Exsliventxs wrote:

I’m sure he’s a big boy and he can defend himself

Dude, I was not even calling out @scubasteve. I posted as somewhat sarcasm. I did spent 15 minutes (well, maybe not that much, but still) writing a response, and it was actually pretty good. So when it got lost I was frustrated and I posted the “Daamit!” post as a joke/venting. I will be really surprised (and disappointed) if @scubasteve actually got offended by it!

I re-wrote the response I did as polite and as “caring” as I could, as to not hurt anyone’s feelings. Because apparently some people cannot handle criticism. But hey, if it is too much, they are welcome to ignore my posts.

If this becomes a freaking echo-chamber though, I am leaving.

Not threatening anything, I am just stating what my standards are.

Respect doesn’t mean conformity.

Besides, Dolla_D got butt hurt from a criticism I made from one of his videos. I was actually looking forward for is rebuttal, but in the end it was just crying.

Anyway, trying to minimize the drama.

Cheers

[Anonymous]

@experienced

Yeah, I agree.

That made me think, I believe that this path we are trailing away from gynocentrism would come to be even without the feminism movement. As technology advances, men would start realizing the obvious: there is NO need for women to abstain themselves from the work force. I think all feminism did was to accelerate a process that would, otherwise, happen smoothly.

It is also interesting that BECAUSE men always had (and have) to deal with loneliness without any pandering, it developed our resistance to this kind of thing. And the catch is, to keep developing these “resistances” to adversities with some compassion for men. I think that’s why not only MGTOW is important to men, but it is also important for MGTOW to be different from Feminism. We have to avoid echo chambers, but without a lack of compassion. You look at the article, she had a pretty good life (it seems at least) and even a boyfriend. I think that, because she had everything she wanted all the time, when she was confronted with things out of her control, she snapped. It is sad really.

We should strength our conviction, and although we should reinforce the bond between men, we cannot forget that in the end, our lives are OUR responsibilities, no one elses. This is a point that I think it is crucial to every MEN (hell, to every PERSON) understand. Never give up and always aim for success but don’t fear failure. Rejoice on the effort, because in the end, YOUR EFFORT is the ONLY THING you can control. The results are not up to you.

The more I live, the more I realize that all the “bad luck” I though I had were actually strikes of extreme good luck seen from the wrong angle, taking in consideration the big picture.

Sorry for the rant, this topic brought back memories.

Take care guys.

[Anonymous]

First: No, I didn’t read his books, hence why I wrote “If you have anything to say regarding the POINTS I made, trying to defend this idea that CHAUVINISM is the f~~~ing way to go, by all means, GO FOR IT”.

Second:

Anonymous wrote:

“I will not have this turn into a circle jerk”, who are you to make such policing claims, discussing how you think all MGTOWs should be, act, and abide.

I stand on my position. Having a circle jerk or an echo Chamber is the worst thing that could happen to Mgtow and/or this website. Besides, SOME form of STANDARDS should (and as far as I know ARE) adopted by most of the members here. This is policing. The fact that is not EXPLICIT doesn’t mean it is not there, and it is not decided by ME, it’s decided BY the GROUP. Just look at superMGTOW, do you think “he” should have stayed then? For better or worse, “he” was also going his own way, looking at women as “property” and “inferior” and all that crap. And yet, it was not ME responsible for his BAN, it was the group. So implying that I am “tone policing” for exposing what I think are toxic ideas or to think that “everything goes” here just because we are all “going our own way” it is, as far as I can tell, not very clever.

Besides, you are misinterpreting what I said. If it is on purpose or not I cannot say. I am not dictating how “MGTOWs should be, act, and abide”.
What you do with your freaking life is your problem. I am questioning your interpretation of the MGTOW PHILOSOPHY. Is the Mgtow philosophy about OPPRESSING WOMEN, or FREEING MAN?  Is me who this dictating how other Mgtows should be? Or is this the agreement between those that claim themselves MGTOW? Some guidelines ARE NECESSARY. You CANNOT be a Feminist and a Anti-Feminist, for example, because one requires being opposed to the other. The same way, MGTOW DOES require certain actions regarding women, and some standards SHOULD be put in place. If not, than Mgtow becomes just an excuse for doing whatever you want, a cop out. Don’t you think this is detrimental to the community?

Third:

Anonymous wrote:

Next do I think manhood academy is MGTOW? I get the feeling that you see MGTOW as an entity in and of itself without taking in consideration what it means. In regard to the way in which a man decides to deal with his past experiences with woman, that is the MGHOW, man going his own way, and dealing with it in his own way, and this will be different for the diversity of men, with an eclectic blend of horrible experiences with woman, and may further deviate from some entity which you choose to attempt to put boundaries upon, based on where these men are in their lives.

You still didn’t answer my question. So every man is MGTOW then? Because every man decides the best way to deal with their personal problems (including the ones one have with women) in his own way. Again, MGTOW have certain guidelines and as such it does not encompass ALL TYPES of behavior. If so, like I said, maginas, male feminists, white knights, pussy beggars, they are all MGTOWs, right? I mean, they are all dealing with their problems regarding the female sex in their own way.

Fourth:

Anonymous wrote:

Relatedly, you have your view and I have mine, which seemingly you have based solely on a video clip that was meant to remember, and for people to comment, although perhaps not extensively beyond their means..Dick, (his aka) is actually a very intelligent guy, with some good material and book..I do not agree with your philosophy of MGTOW, I never once said it was a cop out, you did. In fact you said many things in your rebuttal that I did not state once. More, you seem to write specific areas in bold and capitals to make them more noticeable to readers, to get specific points across, whether they have accuracy behind them or not, this is also disconcerting, nonetheless is out of the scope of our discussion.

Are you kidding me? Relatedly, you have your view and I have mine, which seemingly you have based solely on a video clip that was meant to remember, and for people to comment, although perhaps not extensively beyond their means.

Which is exactly why I said, in my comment, this:

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry dude, this guy is good for laughs, but if you take any of this s~~~ seriously, then I think one of us is on the wrong place. I will wait for other posts before elaborating further (maybe I might be taking this too seriously).

Yes, if it is for comedy purposes, than the video actually provides a good laugh. In fact, I even admitted:  maybe I might be taking this too seriously

However, looking at your responses, it is becoming clear that you ACTUALLY think that way, which in the long run is disservice for men. This line of though is what took us to the rampant gynocentrism that we live today.

I do not agree with your philosophy of MGTOW, I never once said it was a cop out, you did. In fact you said many things in your rebuttal that I did not state once.

You didn’t say it, but considering YOUR line of though, that’s what MGTOW would lead to following your logic. In fact, many things I said on my rebuttal were from things said ON THE VIDEO YOU POSTED and/or conclusions I got from the line of logic THE VIDEO YOU POSTED proposed.  Its something called LOGIC and REASONING. And again, YOU DIDN’T even TRIED to correct me, if I was so wrong. Beside, it is not MY philosophy alone. This is something I gather from various sources, and as such I am open for criticism of ANYONE. In fact, if MGTOW becomes this thing you are proposing, then you can be sure I will stop supporting the label. The LAST thing I want is MGTOW to become this “parody” of the male nature that feminists love to portrait and, apparently you like to indulge.

More, you seem to write specific areas in bold and capitals to make them more noticeable to readers, to get specific points across, whether they have accuracy behind them or not, this is also disconcerting, nonetheless is out of the scope of our discussion.

This is MY STYLE of writing. Problem?!?

Final:

Anonymous wrote:

Consequently, again, we will agree to disagree, you know my perspective, and you’re god damn right–as I did 5 years ago– I will always thank the comedy, satire, and eye opening reading Dick has set forth, and for bringing to the public eye many many issues, way beyond sexism and a traditional value set, which is what you are reducing it to, and at the same time are incorrect about one of the great pioneers, one that brought some serious, and blatant, issues, regardless if he did so in an intrusive, abrasive way, to the forefront. You have your opinion, I have mine, I do not accept yours whatsoever (but respect that it is yours), again however, you have no right whatsoever to define a Man Going His Own Way for anyone other than yourself.

I am NOT criticizing any of these things: comedy, satire, and eye opening reading Dick has set forth.

What I AM CRITICIZING is this stupid idea that women are inferior and there is nothing they can do about it. Because, guess what, if that is true, then there is nothing they can do but to pass stupid laws like “yes mean yes”, or DEMAND MEN to help them, and be excluded form ANY GUILT or ACCOUNTABILITY from their s~~~ty decisions. And I REFUSE to agree with MEN taking responsibility for ANY of WOMEN’S DECISIONS. Which is, according to the video you posted, what Dick here is saying.

Again, like I said on my first comment, I will repeat, if this is to be taken as SATIRE, then fine, it is good for laughs. But if this is to be taken SERIOUSLY, then you are as much “mgtow” as supeMGTOW was.

Conclusion: As far as I can tell, you are a Manhood Academy disciple. The guy here is attacking women, sure, but in the end the message is the same: Women are s~~~ty and there is nothing they can do about it, so its up to MEN to train them. Which I call bulls~~~. If I am wrong, and anyone has any input on where and why I am wrong, then I would love to read about it. However, if this deflection is all you got, then I am through too.

Cheers

[TruthySpectator]

Krab_Ass wrote:

@thetruth – to each their own I suppose…

That reaction shows that you have been shamed, and mentally tortured throughout your life, which causes you to not only be really defensive, but to also assume the worst is being accused of you and quickly attempt to protect yourself. Such is the power of lies. Men are NATURALLY attracted to young women. Really, men are attracted to all women, but young women of legal age have a much sunnier, carefree (and fatfree too lol) disposition thus making them of higher desireability due to high signs of fitness.

Ask yourself, how many of your reactions, feelings, thoughts and behaviors are YOUR OWN? This is what I meant when I said MGTOW is becoming like an echo chamber. Instead of the rational, logical thinking we pride ourselves of, oftentimes discussions descend into generalizing entire genders (‘alpha male’ ‘beta male’, ‘all women are sluts’) without considering the *individual* motivations of the person. And one man’s irrational fear spreads like wildfire. Just like how they make you think America is less safe due to gun violence, when in fact stats show its never been safer since the 60s!

Hysteria and fear are always the tools of control. Know this, any decision you make based on fear is bound to control you. It is only cold, rational cost-benefit analysis that can save you from marriage traps AND FEAR CONTROL. You have to question things, you cannot just join a movement because it seems right. Because you’re afraid of relationships (not speaking about any here, just say a principle). You should only become a mgtow because it makes sense, as I believe every mgtow does.

HOWEVER, that doesn’t mean that everything you read here is correct. That doesn’t mean you should stop questioning everything. *That doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t be willing to throw down MGTOW in a HOT SECOND if you can PROVE that it is detrimental to your happiness.* Not that that is ever likely, but this is the mindset you have to have if you want the truth. Play time is over gentlemen. You can sleep walk into the furnace or stop the plan (because the plan requires our acquiescence even at this phase of implementation). Where do you think your ‘tax’ dollars go to? Where do you think all those black project funds go to? Hmmm? Wakey wakey gentlemen…

 

[TruthySpectator]

Soul Man wrote:

Why is is so important for someone to wander in here from time to time in an attempt to polarize MGTOW and give it a cause or direction? I dont see this place as an echo chamber. Rather I see a bunch of men who share a common paradigm and still have enough common respect for one another to accept the differences from one individual to another. However I don’t personally see a bunch of p~~~ing matches here among the guys trying to convince anyone they are wrong about a particular topic. We are all just doing our own thing and this happens to be a place we gather to compare notes. It just happens that a great deal of our notes have a lot in common. Big deal…we are having a lot of the same experiences at large in the world. Does that make this an echo chamber? Hardly…. Ultimately we dont need nor do we desire anyone to come in here and tell us we are wrong. F~~~ I’ve been married twice. If I wanted to listen to that speech again I’d find another wife!

I have never lurked nor even been to this website before today. I’ve mostly lurked at mgtowhq, Nacho’s forum before that and Sandman over at youtube. I think my argument is being misunderstood. That’s probably because its 10 f~~~ing pages, but I’m new to this stream of consciousness s~~~. The reason I’m here is because I’m a man and I’m trying to figure out the truth.

If MGTOW is a method to play me to get me to behave a certain way then I WANT TO KNOW ABOUT. I’m f~~~ing tired of being manipulated into s~~~. Manipulated into relationships, manipulated into school and work and everyother f~~~ing lie in life. If I’m going to burn in hell let it be my choice, don’t destroy my family bonds (which are very beneficial for your health btw), and try to make me blame women and men as f~~~ ups when we’ve all been played against each other from the beginning.

I’m not a woman. I POSTED A CLIP OF ME SPEAKING PROVING I’M A MALE ABOVE. I’m not saying go and get married. The solution is NOT to go back to the plantation. My argument is simple: We’ve been misled on the proper way to behave. This causes problems. MGTOW is like learning you have metabolic disorder and saying F~~~ IT I’M GOING TO EAT ALL THE CAKE I WANT NOW! Which is not to say I’m against MGTOW. I’m saying that AFTER MGTOW destroys the system, we have to be careful we aren’t destroyed along with it. I will say this, without the red pill to guide me I’d be dead or loaded with kids like my friends from school. Instead I’m late twenties single and loving it.

Not ‘we’ as a society, or even as a group. Individually. I’m talking like fema camps.

[CPT ObviousParticipant]

Truthy wrote:

.I honestly think its becoming an echo-chamber and a swirling pot of self-perpetuating misery. However, I could be wrong.

Echo-chamber?  Possibly.  As CP says:

Anonymous wrote:

We are a refuge for men some of whom have been seriously abused.

Many of us here tried to play by society’s and women’s new rules and have been chewed up and spit out.  Some of us multiple times.  So we come here and find like-minded people who share similar experiences and have decided to avoid the grind.

You view it as self-perpetuating misery.  For me, it is just the opposite.  I am enjoying playing the fiddle while Rome burns instead of running around trying to put out the fires whilst being consumed in the process.

"You don't know a woman till you have met her in divorce court."

[Soul ManParticipant]

Why is is so important for someone to wander in here from time to time in an attempt to polarize MGTOW and give it a cause or direction?  I don`t see this place as an echo chamber.  Rather I see a bunch of men who share a common paradigm and still have enough common respect for one another to accept the differences from one individual to another.  However I don’t personally see a bunch of p~~~ing matches here among the guys trying to convince anyone they are wrong about a particular topic.  We are all just doing our own thing and this happens to be a place we gather to compare notes.  It just happens that a great deal of our notes have a lot in common.  Big deal…we are having a lot of the same experiences at large in the world. Does that make this an echo chamber?  Hardly….

Ultimately we don`t need nor do we desire anyone to come in here and tell us we are wrong.  F~~~ I’ve been married twice.  If I wanted to listen to that speech again I’d find another wife!

HISTORY...learn from it, memorize it, DON'T repeat it...

[TruthySpectator]

Smitty the Great One wrote:

Dude, seriously…. stop… no one gives a f~~~ for you opinion

Ok thanks, I’ve pretty much gotten it out there anyway. Just wanted to add this to the manosphere melting pot. I honestly think its becoming an echo-chamber and a swirling pot of self-perpetuating misery. However, I could be wrong.

[TruthySpectator]

… wrote:

Yeah, definitely a girl. Key tip off is she’s saying “its more complicated than that.” nope. “aren’t we both on the same side?” nope. girl for sure. oooooohhhh the complexities, ohhhhhh the dramas, the endless discussion. John Doe, you may have just met your future ex wife today.

 

I am NOT a female and have no problem proving it to you if necessary. Not every male is the same and speaks the same. I don’t believe your skepticism is warranted. Clearly the logical construction of my post would preclude me from being female? Even if its an ‘inane conspiracy’ theory,

take a look around you chief and tell me what kinda monster conspiracy would be necessary to change the natural order of things this badly? What you think that after thousands of years of f~~~ing around behind your back, “Oops.” and the cat’s out of the bag? I’m saying we’re on the same side, not out of some feminist/anti-feminist save me trope, but because men and women are human it stands to reason that men look out for women and women vice versa in their own way.

I mean let’s talk about what MGTOW never, ever talks about. The other man. The guy(s) who the wife is f~~~ing. MGTOW seems completely focused on the UNhappiness of the husband, to the complete EXCLUSION of the happiness of those other guys. Don’t get me wrong, the husband situation is wrong and if you get married you should never cheat, and honesty/integrity is the ONLY way to true long-lasting love. Because we men find devotion sexy, I get that.  But what about the other guys who are having a blast (literally lol)? As much pain as she is causing she is MULTIPLYING IN PLEASURE.

See, MGTOW is primarily focused around the concept that women suck and screw us over. Which is as we can see in this society generally true. But my contention is this is a mirage. By focusing on the dysfunctional marriage (which again shouldn’t happen), but neglecting the pleasure she and her lovers are having, MGTOW becomes a negative, half-full lifestyle. Because it only looks at the negative side of dealing with women.

I’m pretty sure this line of thought has already convinced you I’m a woman. But that’s probably because its so very different from the standard MGTOW echo-chamber. And yes, MGTOW is an echo chamber. Has been for as long as I’ve been reading. Chef (very well liked, senior mgtow) left mgtowhq because of the same paranoid and myopia that I’m trying to point out here. But let me try to prove the last paragraph for you.

Most MGTOW would warn you to avoid dealing with women because of the divorce, and the false-rape etc. etc. This would be good advice that any man should take. However, this advice only applies in the situation we’re in, which is f~~~ed up. My whole purpose of posting this is to say, “CONTINUE BEING MGTOW! Destroy this system! BUT REMEMBER! You need women. Eventually. Do not fall for the male ego trap of thinking that women are useless and don’t contribute anything!”

Women seem like they don’t contribute for three reasons:

1) Women generally contribute less that men do due to less (what I call) ‘activation energy’. The energy that let’s us just get up and go do stuff. Women see to lack this. Indeed, I’ve heard similar comments to “They’re always just ready to go….” referring to males.

2) Society is geared to make women seem less capable than they are. They can’t work so they have to ‘stay at home’. They’re weak so its ok to see her laying down all day watching soaps, and its ok to accept her lazy excuses. By coddling them, they really do become weak.

Most importantly:

3)Women’s contribution to our lives is hard to see/understand when you’re stuck in the materialistic world. Everything can seem like a man’s game when the most obvious signs of change are predominantly male. Men have trouble seeing women’s point of view because men are DO’ERs women are not. But the things women do that activate us spiritually, mentally and physically CANNOT BE REPLICATED BY ANYTHING ELSE. It is for this reason that men have always sought women, especially nice ones. To find a beauty to his beast. A nice soft creature, not one like who is mean and brutish (this is how he feels about himself. This lack of softness, like a woman’s lack of security causes man to seek woman.) Without these proper incentives in place, you cannot have harmony.

[KeymasterKeymaster]

I appreciate that we can have this debate without somebody shutting it down as soon as it becomes a little heated.

Gentlemen by all means have the debate! Last thing we want is a goddam echo chamber where thumb each other up all the time. If we cared about “likes”. I can go to Facebook for that and tell women any bulls~~~ they want to hear. No problem. Just be civil and thanks.

While here, thanks to those of you who took the time to welcome new member introductions with a quick hello.
When you arrive at the airport, it’s nice when someone is there to meet you and give you a ride.

Appreciated back. Cheers.

If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.