Arthur Schopenhauer MGTOW Philosophy

[Blue SkiesParticipant 15665]

Schopenhauer reached the same conclusions as modern MGTOW hundreds of years earlier.
—
Biological programming commands us to survive, marry, and procreate to our detriment
Life is full of suffering because of our biological programming
The world is not designed to maximize happiness
We think love will make us happy but it only leads to more suffering
The two sexes only exist to create children and are utterly incompatible beyond that
Some individuals are aware of the programming and choose to disobey it
Self awareness can lead to enlightenment and in turn, contentedness

MGTOW is not a movement, it is a way of life.

[raindogParticipant 313]

Schopenhauer was a beautiful crank.

"Free your mind and your ass will follow. The kingdom of heaven is within." -Funkadelic

[FrostByteParticipant 19005]

Blue Skies wrote:

Schopenhauer reached the same conclusions as modern MGTOW hundreds of years earlier.

100 years ago, today, a 100 years from now….the truth is the truth.

If you rescue a damsel in distress, all you will get is a distressed damsel.

[raindogParticipant 313]

“A man can be himself only so long as he is alone; and if he does not love solitude, he will not love freedom; for it is only when he is alone that he is really free.”

― Arthur Schopenhauer

"Free your mind and your ass will follow. The kingdom of heaven is within." -Funkadelic

[Anonymous 6]

Important and timeless knowledge.

[BlacqueJacqueShellacqueParticipant 6890]

Never read that before. Thank you BM.

[Blue SkiesParticipant 15665]

Anonymous wrote:

Important and timeless knowledge.

BlacqueJacqueShellacque wrote:

Never read that before. Thank you BM.

Cheers!

MGTOW is not a movement, it is a way of life.

[HitmanParticipant]

[HitmanParticipant]

the B.B.C. seems to have painted a rather skewed portrait of Schopenhauer..
no surprise,
however, my apology’s for posting a view of a MGTOW idol,
which was less than i had hoped for..
has merit nonetheless..

[Puffin StuffParticipant 24979]

As a doctor and researcher in genomics I have a very “nature” in the nature versus nurture argument.

What strikes me is that, as Shopenhauer states in the piece posted, to paraphrase, men and women really do have very little in common. And this jives with genetics.

Males and females are only 85% homologous genetically. That’s a big difference. The similarity between chimps and humans is 85%.

Or said another way, we are as different from women genetically as we are from chimps.

I told my feminist mom that I thought that the separation of sex’s was a good thing. Like in the Jewish faith and Muslim faith. And kind in the MGTOW ethos.

She couldn’t find an argument against it.

My younger sister won’t let her husband or son out of her sight so they don’t talk to me…male only spaces, I don’t think younger procreating females would ever allow it voluntarily.

For happiness sake, men need men only spaces like the old pub.

#icethemout; Remember Thomas Ball. He died for your children.

[Anonymous 18]

One way for sure misery is to go by feelings.

In my experience the wants and the needs (including that of desiring women) are prerequisite to feeling distressed and less than accomplished.

I derive twisted pleasure in not doing what I feel like doing.

Generally, for the most part it had led to a greater sense of harmony with my, mine and myself. Whatever that means.

[Anonymous 54]

Puffin Stuff wrote:

As a doctor and researcher in genomics I have a very “nature” in the nature versus nurture argument.

What strikes me is that, as Shopenhauer states in the piece posted, to paraphrase, men and women really do have very little in common. And this jives with genetics.

Males and females are only 85% homologous genetically. That’s a big difference. The similarity between chimps and humans is 85%.

Or said another way, we are as different from women genetically as we are from chimps.

I told my feminist mom that I thought that the separation of sex’s was a good thing. Like in the Jewish faith and Muslim faith. And kind in the MGTOW ethos.

She couldn’t find an argument against it.

My younger sister won’t let her husband or son out of her sight so they don’t talk to me…male only spaces, I don’t think younger procreating females would ever allow it voluntarily.

For happiness sake, men need men only spaces like the old pub.

A buddy of mine says we are not different genders,were different species.
And yes,I need some men only stuff.
Men who accept never having them arnt men in my eyes.

[AttonParticipant]

A man who is content is someone society cannot extract resources from.

A MGTOW is a man who is not a woman's bitch!

[DanceMyOwnWayParticipant 2097]

Anonymous wrote:

Puffin Stuff wrote:

As a doctor and researcher in genomics I have a very “nature” in the nature versus nurture argument.

What strikes me is that, as Shopenhauer states in the piece posted, to paraphrase, men and women really do have very little in common. And this jives with genetics.

Males and females are only 85% homologous genetically. That’s a big difference. The similarity between chimps and humans is 85%.

Or said another way, we are as different from women genetically as we are from chimps.

I told my feminist mom that I thought that the separation of sex’s was a good thing. Like in the Jewish faith and Muslim faith. And kind in the MGTOW ethos.

She couldn’t find an argument against it.

My younger sister won’t let her husband or son out of her sight so they don’t talk to me…male only spaces, I don’t think younger procreating females would ever allow it voluntarily.

For happiness sake, men need men only spaces like the old pub.

A buddy of mine says we are not different genders,were different species.
And yes,I need some men only stuff.
Men who accept never having them arnt men in my eyes.

I had this conversation yesterday with a girl I know about male spaces. Men get married, pay for the house, only to be allowed the small mancave space of the study, or the shed, or the attic for projects or much needed peace and quiet. The rest of the house is “hers” of course! Sod that – my space is my space – females by invitation only, my cave my rules, preferably bring food!

If you fall down 7 times, get up 8

[Anonymous 3]

Puffin Stuff wrote:

Males and females are only 85% homologous genetically. That’s a big difference. The similarity between chimps and humans is 85%.

Or said another way, we are as different from women genetically as we are from chimps.

This was quite an eye opening statement to me.
It changed the way I view women!

[Anonymous 3]

Puffin Stuff wrote:

As a doctor and researcher in genomics I have a very “nature” in the nature versus nurture argument.

What strikes me is that, as Shopenhauer states in the piece posted, to paraphrase, men and women really do have very little in common. And this jives with genetics.

Males and females are only 85% homologous genetically. That’s a big difference. The similarity between chimps and humans is 85%.

Or said another way, we are as different from women genetically as we are from chimps.

I told my feminist mom that I thought that the separation of sex’s was a good thing. Like in the Jewish faith and Muslim faith. And kind in the MGTOW ethos.

She couldn’t find an argument against it.

My younger sister won’t let her husband or son out of her sight so they don’t talk to me…male only spaces, I don’t think younger procreating females would ever allow it voluntarily.

For happiness sake, men need men only spaces like the old pub.

If you’re a doctor and researcher in genomics, how come you don’t know how to use the possessive apostrophe?

More to the point, what would you be doing posting on here?

As for your claim that males and females are only 85% homologous genetically, that is total bulls~~~. It’s clear you don’t understand what homology is. Anybody with a minimal high school education in biology knows that males and females are near-identical, both homologically and genetically (we can argue over what ‘near-identical’ might mean precisely). You will NOT be able to post up a reputable citation in support of your assertion.

[LightBringerParticipant 440]

Puffin Stuff wrote:

As a doctor and researcher in genomics I have a very “nature” in the nature versus nurture argument.

Males and females are only 85% homologous genetically. That’s a big difference. The similarity between chimps and humans is 85%.

Or said another way, we are as different from women genetically as we are from chimps.

This seemed suspect to me, so I did some research, and long story short this isnt accurate. http://theconversation.com/differences-between-men-and-women-are-more-than-the-sum-of-their-genes-39490
Basicly, your assertion isnt true. Some of our chromosomes are nearly identical but on the whole a vastly different genome.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/14/chimp_genome_y_chromosome_gumble
‘What this means, of course, is that women are in fact much closer genetically to being chimps than men are. Some have even interpreted the research to mean that men are “more evolved” than women, having left their heritage as apes further behind than the ladies.’

[Anonymous 3]

LightBringer wrote:

Puffin Stuff wrote:

As a doctor and researcher in genomics I have a very “nature” in the nature versus nurture argument.

Males and females are only 85% homologous genetically. That’s a big difference. The similarity between chimps and humans is 85%.

Or said another way, we are as different from women genetically as we are from chimps.

This seemed suspect to me, so I did some research, and long story short this isnt accurate. http://theconversation.com/differences-between-men-and-women-are-more-than-the-sum-of-their-genes-39490
Basicly, your assertion isnt true. Some of our chromosomes are nearly identical but on the whole a vastly different genome.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/14/chimp_genome_y_chromosome_gumble
‘What this means, of course, is that women are in fact much closer genetically to being chimps than men are. Some have even interpreted the research to mean that men are “more evolved” than women, having left their heritage as apes further behind than the ladies.’

If the pothead who posted that is a doctor and researcher in genomics, then I’m Daffy Duck and I’ll introduce you to Donald.

[Anonymous 42]

Not nice Jack, your hare pot-trigger is getting the best of you. HR. is a long standing and highly respected member of this community.

[Anonymous 3]

Anonymous wrote:

Not nice Jack, your hare pot-trigger is getting the best of you. HR. is a long standing and highly respected member of this community.

He is a liar – and like you, a c~~~.

[Author]

Posts