Female Suffrage removed

[CetaceanSpectator 34]

What will it take to bring us back to a male suffrage-only civilisation?

I’ve heard some MGTOW say that it would require a devastating war in which the male population drops greatly.
This would mean men killing men for women.

Is there another solution to removing female suffrage?
What do you think?

[RoyDalParticipant]

An immense disaster might do it. This is a genie that will not willingly go back in the bottle.

Society asks MGTOWs: Why are you not making more tax-slaves?

[Silverstone the SecondParticipant]

Nothing short of an apocalypse. Hell, I’d say there’s no going back from the welfare state that we live in here in the west. Any chance at taking away welfare will be met with immense resistance by all those people who would rather collect than work. This also includes women, mainly women.

Feminism is a movement where opinions are presented as facts and emotions are presented as evidence.

[RusskyParticipant 13503]

proud carrier of the 'why?' chromosome

[uchibenkeiParticipant 7965]

you would have to return to a monarchy or theocracy.

I bathe in the tears of single moms.

[AttonParticipant]

Draft women into the front line of a horrible war.

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

[FrankyParticipant 2338]

I think the smartest and most moral way going about it is(best idea so far)
having a male-only society

That way women have no influence over our lives and they can’t play the “you’re oppressing us” card anymore if they are just left on some hill far away from us.

[RennieParticipant]

Franky wrote:

I think the smartest and most moral way going about it is(best idea so far)
having a male-only society

That way women have no influence over our lives and they can’t play the “you’re oppressing us” card anymore if they are just left on some hill far away from us.

I agree. A male only society would be fantastic. Make women live somewhere else. They can have their little matriarchy and pretend civilization. Just not in or near ours.

[AvidAvariceParticipant 223]

Without creating male-only societies, I see no solution.

Patriarchy, and the male ingenuity that drives it, creates advanced societies that are relatively safe when it is coupled with the right culture. Once we’re relatively safe, Women feel that men are no longer needed, female suffrage begins and we end up with a Matriarchy. Matriarchy cannot sustain a relatively safe, advanced society, and so some form of collapse or “restructuring” inevitably occurs at some point, Women feel fearful again due to the resulting instability, and we end up with a Patriarchy again. And so the cycle repeats itself.

It seems Women feeling safe enough to view men as “unnecessary” or simply a “luxury” begins female suffrage and the decline, seeing as we don’t see feminism crop up in underdeveloped countries. And so we would need for Women to feel perpetually unsafe, and therefore we would need society itself to be unsafe or unstable. Men would be sacrificing their own safety and comfort in order to achieve this by holding back societal growth, wealth and stability, so I don’t see it as a preferable solution.

Even if we were to use “shock therapy” by leaving women to fend for their selves, or by having a “men’s strike” day(s) where men simply didn’t show up to work, Women will blame the resulting chaos on men. They expect men to do everything without any second thoughts and yet, at the same time, feel that men aren’t needed to do the very “everything” that they automatically expect men to do, and can’t be brought to see otherwise. It’s madness at it’s finest.

A Male-only society would be great, but its not really feasible. Look at what happened to the confederacy – if we were to attempt the creation of a male-only nation, the result would be endless bloodshed between awakened men and manginas.

Best to just Go Your Own Way and reap what benefits you can from current society. Just my 2 cents.

[FrankyParticipant 2338]

Cetacean wrote:

the result would be endless bloodshed between awakened men and manginas.

could you explain i’m sorry i don’t understand you
Why would manginas want to fight awakened men if women are on the other side of the hemisphere?
Wouldn’t the manginas just flock to the women?(we would have nothing that they want or can’t achieve easily without us)
I mean you don’t need to create a whole nation.And you just make it a city where men that want can go.
No violence no making anyone conform to our veiw, just people that want to.

There may be some conflict yes but(like the trolls that come to this site), i don’t see it being that big.Maybe i’m missing something.

[CetaceanSpectator 34]

I like the idea of a male only society, but I don’t think that it is a possibility.

Do you agree with the claim that if enough men go their own way, women will begin to make changes in society and culture themselves out of desperation?
Personally, I believe this is the only way. The only way is for a civilisation-changing number of MGTOW for society to understand that gynocentrism has gone too far.
Maybe women (who believe to be on the side of MGTOW) will advocate for a male-only democracy or even having to take a knowledge test in order to vote.

[CetaceanSpectator 34]

AvidAvarice wrote:

It seems Women feeling safe enough to view men as “unnecessary” or simply a “luxury” begins female suffrage and the decline, seeing as we don’t see feminism crop up in underdeveloped countries. And so we would need for Women to feel perpetually unsafe,

I could not agree more about women needing to perpetually feel unsafe.

[CetaceanSpectator 34]

Thanks for your response!

You asked a great question:

Franky wrote:

Why would manginas want to fight awakened men if women are on the other side of the hemisphere?
Wouldn’t the manginas just flock to the women?(we would have nothing that they want or can’t achieve easily without us)

Is there a reason for manginas to attack MGTOW? I would agree with you and say “no”, there is no reason. However, are there cases in which a mangina attacks a MGTOW? Yes, plenty. Look at all the White Knight feminists and Alpha traditionalists. They all want to take down MGTOW. Why, we might ask.
I would say that there could be a case in which this “MGtown” is attacked “because women would demand it.” Women would demand that MGTOW be assimilated with the rest of society. Already, there are people trying to take down MGTOW.com
Why? We are just enjoying our male-only space, aren’t we? The same reason why people are trying to take MGTOW.com down or distort the MGTOW discourse so as to conflate MGTOW philosophy to nought (the EGTOW “everybody’s going their own way” bulls~~~) is why MGtown would be attacked.

Is this reasoning fair, or am I being a fool?

Keep Swimming

[AvidAvariceParticipant 223]

Franky wrote:

Cetacean wrote:

the result would be endless bloodshed between awakened men and manginas.

could you explain i’m sorry i don’t understand you
Why would manginas want to fight awakened men if women are on the other side of the hemisphere?
Wouldn’t the manginas just flock to the women?(we would have nothing that they want or can’t achieve easily without us)
I mean you don’t need to create a whole nation.And you just make it a city where men that want can go.
No violence no making anyone conform to our veiw, just people that want to.

There may be some conflict yes but(like the trolls that come to this site), i don’t see it being that big.Maybe i’m missing something.

Well, this site is a virtual space. Virtual spaces are unlimited and are created and repaired with relative ease , physical spaces are not. If this were a physical space, the attacks launched at this site (as in actual attacks, not the trolls here and there) would equate to some form of military action, and the damage would not be so easily undone.

As for my thought process about bloodshed between manginas and awakened men, I started with this: if we were to create a “MGTown” within any existing country or nation, it would be short lived – once such a town grows prosperous, or maybe even before it gets much traction, women will whip their manginas into shape to write whatever laws they have to in order to allow women into MGTown, and then it would be just like any other place.

To avoid this, “MGTown” would need to be its own sovereign nation, which brings the issue of either seceding from a current country or nation, or building some sort of artificial island. Secession will not come easily, and will more than likely be met with violence if seriously attempted. See: the Confederate States (I’m not a supporter of the confederacy. It’s just a relevant example).

As for building an artificial island in the middle of the ocean (setting aside whether or not the creation of the island itself is feasible), there are two issues. The first would be trade – practically all nations will be mangina nations that can be very easily manipulated into refusing to trade with us, which poses a large issue seeing as MGTown is a modest artificial island that likely does not have the means to be entirely self-sustaining without trading with other nations.

The second issue is ownership of the seas. As things stand with the United Nations, all of the sea up to 200 miles (or was it kilometers? I can’t remember right now) off the coastline of a country is a province of that country, and the details are still being debated. So, let’s assume that MGTown is built far out enough that it remains outside of the 200m/km coastline area of every country. I’ll get back to this in a minute, but I need to make another point that will eventually cross paths with this detail.

Because MGTown has no Women, it has no means of reproduction. Because of this, MGTown’s population would only be sustained through men in mangina nations waking the f~~~ up and fleeing to MGTown. This, in turn, would grab the attention of the women in these mangina nations who of course want to stop men from defecting from their matriarchy (Just as they want to stop men from going their own way by regularly attacking this site), and this is where the whole “ownership of the seas” point comes into play.

The United Nations has already had anita sarkeesian and joe quinn give their spiels at their conference, so they’ve already given voice to women who are professional victims with no real argument to make other than their feeeeeels. I’d say it’s not too far-fetched to imagine that they’d amend the 200m/km coastline limit on sea ownership in order to have a mangina nation claim sovereignty over MGTown if they had practically half of the women in these nations loosing their s~~~ over men defecting to MGTown.

And then we’re left with the same issue we have with secession.

I didn’t mean for this to be this long, but those were my thoughts. I hope that made sense, and let me know if I took a wrong turn somewhere.

[CetaceanSpectator 34]

I agree with your description of how it might play out.

[VarunParticipant 2981]

Complete abandonment of women. Though I have a doubt this will ever happen.

As a science student, I can say that nature won’t allow it. Or else we would never have had two sexes in this world.

Even if we do live separately, I’m pretty sure our biological factors will be modified in such a way that we become hermaphrodites (organisms that reprodu\ce asexually)

Of course, I’m just speculating here.

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

[GrumpyParticipant]

I may be a tad out to lunch on this.
Enshrine both personal responsibility and personal accountability as an obligation of citizenship.
One does not accept those, one does not have the rights and privileges of citizenship period.

There was a time in my life when I gave a fuck. Now you have to pay ME for it

[economistParticipant 225]

It’s been obvious since women gained suffrage that the privilege has been used almost entirely to the detriment of the human race. With some exceptions, Women always vote for more immigration, more welfare, etc. etc. They vote for attention and to fit in with a social group, they don’t really care nor (in my opinion) do they very often even have the ability to reason necessary in the process of electing leadership to effectively run a country. Even women who seem to be outliers in this behavior, one notable example being Lauren Southern, are simply seeking attention and to fit in to a social group just like the others, however they have identified that they can secure the most attention by publicly going against the grain.

We take away someone’s drivers license if they demonstrate they are a danger to everyone else on the road. Why not take away women’s right to vote if they demonstrate they are a danger to the western values that allowed them to gain suffrage in the first place?

[RennieParticipant]

Exactly why I don’t share the vision of Mgtown. Make no mistake it would get ruined.

[FrankyParticipant 2338]

AvidAvarice wrote:

I didn’t mean for this to be this long, but those were my thoughts. I hope that made sense, and let me know if I took a wrong turn somewhere.

you made sense
thank you for explaining
oh well i guess there is no way after all..
I guess i’ll just go full caveman some day.
If i even get other “bright” ideas i’ll share them with you guys 🙁

[Author]

Posts