The real reason for feminism

[sidecarParticipant 35851]

AFT wrote:

MGTOW is a reaction to all this, was it foreseen? I’d guess that some kind of reaction was probably foreseen, what if analysis undertaken, and a MGTOW scenario possibly discussed.

I rather think not. I suspect they took a look at the men of the 40s and 50s and figured that biologically ingrained blue pill tendencies would continue to keep men producing their surpluses, fighting their wars, etc. I think they figured that men would become even more competitive for government subsidized, overpriced pussy. The shock and confusions we’re seeing in response to MGTOW around the world tends to make me believe that nobody ever considered the possibility that the most potentially productive, most intelligent men that redistributionist societies depend upon the most would be able to do a simple cost to benefit risk assessment and opt out.

MGTOW really f~~~s with anyone’s plans to control and manipulate.

It does more than just f~~~ with it. It drops the bottom right out from under it.

xdccr wrote:

I’m sure many people who’ve never heard or barely heard of the angle of CIA/government involvement

Nah. We’ve all seen it before.

We just don’t care.

It doesn’t make any difference. It doesn’t matter if some feminist harpy is motivated by the CIA, the KGB, or the MLB, I’m still not going to be buying her any free drinks or providing her with any resources.

[Not a MG╠OWParticipant 17]

AFT wrote:

“No offense”, I’d hate to see what you’d say if you tried to be offensive, but I get what you mean, anyway, blue / purple pill men can sound like women as they are unplugging, let’s hope he is a guy and he’s unplugging. Manginas and white knites are even WORSE than women. Point is XDCCR, what are you trying to achieve? It’s fine to present the facts and let men come to their own conclusions, but you’re going beyond that, looking for something that I really don’t think you’re going to find here.

It could be a man that’s high on the blue-pill, but I’m leaning towards OP being a woman. Hardcore blue-pill men can’t outwomen women. But they are the only thing stopping the male gender from achieving at least equality. Which is why I would agree that they are worse in a way.

[xdccrParticipant 19]

I do have to reply to this though.

“Nah. We’ve all seen it before.

 

We just don’t care.

 

It doesn’t make any difference. It doesn’t matter if some feminist harpy is motivated by the CIA, the KGB, or the MLB, I’m still not going to be buying her any free drinks or providing her with any resources.”

Direct and indirect supply of resources are different. You’re just not directly supplying women or feminists right now. You still pay taxes that fund programs that help them in endeavours you don’t support. Things can be changed, just not with the fatalistic attitude I’ve seen by some in this thread who recognize there’s more behind feminism than a bunch of angry women acting like kids taking as much as they can grab

[xdccrParticipant 19]

The 3 stages of truth kind of apply to this thread. It’s funny.

 

Anyway, actually out now. Don’t appreciate being called a woman. Thread has sunk to name calling.

[Anonymous 5]

Not a MG╠OW wrote:

No offense but you sound like a woman.

AFT wrote:

“No offense”, I’d hate to see what you’d say if you tried to be offensive

hahahahaha

xdccr wrote:

Thinking there ain’t more s~~~ coming down the pipe from different angles, everything’s great now that I don’t have a woman and kids to tie me down, shortsighted to put it gently

I now see your point and it’s clear that you’re trying to alert and warn us that feminism is only getting more radical.
Thanks, it’s appreciated, sincerely. However most here already know this. That’s why we’re not playing.
With one move, by not playing, it’s checkmate.
The moment you don’t play, you sit back with popcorn and watch. It’s hilarious.

[xdccrParticipant 19]

My point is feminism is just one of the tentacles of the octopus of destruction.

Edit: a good example of a conspiracy – feminism is a conspiracy against real men. one or more parties colluding against another

[sidecarParticipant 35851]

xdccr wrote:

Things can be changed, just not with the fatalistic attitude I’ve seen by some in this thread

Who’s fatalistic?  Feminism and redistributionism are utterly unsustainable.  Recognizing that isn’t fatalist, it’s just being correct.  Whoever happens to be behind it, if anyone, is irrelevant.

I think you’re not getting that MGTOW is essentially optimist in nature, just not within your assumed framework.  We know that feminism and redistributionism are going to fail.  We know that they are going to fail badly.  We know that nothing is ever going to stop that.  We know that they will probably take down society with them.  But that’s not fatalism, because we also know that THAT’S NOT OUR PROBLEM.

Feminism is going to crash and burn, and when it does, MGTOW will be there.  With marshmallows.  That is the optimism of MGTOW.

[BrainPilotParticipant 7640]

xdccr,
Feminism is a form of cultural marxism (as pointed out above) and also economic marxism. Guaranteeing equality of opportunity does not guarantee the equality of results. In order to do that, you must ‘redistribute’ the results… economic or otherwise. The economic redistribution is the easiest to identify and measure, because almost anyone can count money. As Margaret Thatcher explained it: “The problem with socialism is that eventually, you run out of other people’s money”. I can find some respect for that particular woman just for pointing out that simple fact. But she is from a different generation than the women I deal with now.

The reason socialism eventually runs out of other people’s money, is that the other people eventually decide to stop earning it for you. Speaking as one of the most reliable earners, I will point out that socialism has failed in every place in the world where it has ever been tried. But since at least half the population benefits from it (albeit the least producing half), you can always get support for it by going for the weakest producers within any society. If you can convince even 1% of the other (most producing half) to either go along with it, or allow it, then you get a majority to agree to “redistribute” other people’s money.

But it only works for as long as those other people continue to choose to keep earning it for you. Once those people have decided to stop earning it for you, they quickly become unconcerned with discussions about where the original idea to redistribute their earnings came from. They aren’t going to earn it for you no matter whose idea it was. The decision is the same regardless of the outcome of the discussion.

Can I make it any clearer for you than that?
will be saying “No” to those as well. We can say “No” for longer than they can survive without our earnings… regardless of what their demands rise to.

So to summarize for you: The answer to feminism from us is “No” regardless of who originated it, or how large or intensely demanded it is. We know exactly what will result from our answer. The answer is still “No”.

Can I make it any clearer for you than that?

You seem to be the only one here who needs to continue this discussion.

Why?

Which part of “No” do you not understand? 😛

<smiling here because I’m really not trying to pick a fight, but not understanding why it isn’t clear that we are all just cheerfully walking away from one>

Look, it's not my fault that tornado dropped a house on your sister. Now get back on your broom and get your ass out of here... and take your monkeys with you

[MrMeParticipant 651]

xdccr wrote:

What I haven’t found here is the history behind feminism (how major players in the 50s-70s were CIA agents pushing a movement to conquer the family unit and were just the first part of a plan for the destruction of it). From previous research I’ve done, I know this to be the truth.  

Source plz. Thx

[xdccrParticipant 19]

Brain Pilot: I get the point you’re making about socialism.

Also, I understand better after this thread that part of the idea of going MGTOW is to not contribute to the system in ways including but also other than with women. What I’d read and watched on MGTOW up until yesterday gave me more the impression that MGTOWs were walking away from romantic relationships with women, minimizing interactions with them, and working for number one. I hadn’t seen as much of other things like advice to start a business or dissociate from the system. Thinking back there are definitely undertones and suggestions from prominent MGTOWs. I guess it’s just not been in the forefront because it’s up to the individual man going his own way what he does past the common ground of realising romantic relationships with virtually all women in this society are toxic, and avoiding them. I see now that it’s not really an issue who’s behind feminsm today or how it came to be for MGTOWs. It’s still a topic of interest of mine, but this clearly isn’t the forum for it lol.

MrMe: check the infowars link earlier in the thread if you’re inclined

 

This leaves me not knowing what I am. I definitely don’t want a relationship with any of the women I’ve met or been with up until this point, and I’m told it’s not a MGTOW thing to be concerned with the history of feminism, only realising it’s toxic and saying f~~~ you to them and the system that brought them from this point forward.

I’m an undefined breed I guess. Some here might call me a purple pill man.

Thanks everyone with the thoughtful responses!

[нσтησσвParticipant 830]

I’m a lil late :S

But, just wanted to share this as an answer to the OP.

You’ll have to ignore the stupid part about the mgtow mice btw; they had no proof that they were dumber 😛

My Goal: To Leave Society.

[sidecarParticipant 35851]

xdccr wrote:

Brain Pilot: I get the point you’re making about socialism. Also, I understand better after this thread that part of the idea of going MGTOW is to not contribute to the system in ways including but also other than with women. What I’d read and watched on MGTOW up until yesterday gave me more the impression that MGTOWs were walking away from romantic relationships with women, minimizing interactions with them, and working for number one. I hadn’t seen as much of other things like advice to start a business or dissociate from the system.

I think you are over complicating things.  MGTOW is simply the knowledge that your own life is yours to control and no other’s, and you are not obligated to anyone else in what you choose to do with it.  Upon understanding that, minimizing encumbrances, whether from females or the state or whatever, becomes plain common sense.  In other words, MGTOW is simply the application of the principle of: “What’s in it for me?”

Woman: Buy me a free drink.
MGTOW: What’s in it for me?
Woman: You get the pleasure of buying me a free drink.
MGTOW: No, thank you.  I’ll pass.

Society: Work harder to create a surplus to support single mothers.
MGTOW: What’s in it for me?
Society: You get to allow single mothers have even more dependent children for you to feed.
MGTOW: No, thank you.  I’ll pass.

MGTOW A: Spend time studying and working to improve yourself and your financial position.
MGTOW B: What’s in it for me?
MGTOW A: Lots of money with which to buy yourself toys and free time to play with them.
MGTOW B: Sounds good.  Sign me up.

Thinking back there are definitely undertones and suggestions from prominent MGTOWs.

Prominent MGTOWS? There is no such thing. The only MGTOW that ultimately matters to a MGTOW is himself. That being said, some men are able to articulate truths better than others, and some men can speak sense that might not be so common, but the ultimate arbiter of what is right for you is you. Put too much faith into “prominent MGTOWS” and you might accidentally find yourself taking people like Sandman or that Paul Whatsisname jackass seriously.

realising romantic relationships with virtually all women in this society are toxic,

The law is the law. The law is toxic. The women themselves are irrelevant.

I’m told it’s not a MGTOW thing to be concerned with the history of feminism, only realising it’s toxic and saying f~~~ you to them and the system that brought them from this point forward.

MGTOW are Men Going Their Own Way. They are not Men Constantly Looking Back. It’s all about where we go from here, and avoiding the traps along the way, not how we got here.

[BrainPilotParticipant 7640]

xdccr,
Although there is no great interest here in exploring the origins of feminism, don’t assume that to be a reason you aren’t included here. It’s not that this information isn’t relevant. It’s just that for me, and likely for a few others here, our reaction to it is the same regardless of its origin. So we’d rather focus our energy on fine tuning our reaction to it rather than on exporting origin of it.

Perhaps think of yourself as a professional mgtow during the week with all of us, and the exploration of the origins of feminism as a hobby you can pursue on the weekends.

” I definitely don’t want a relationship with any of the women I’ve met or been with up until this point, ”

This would seem to make you a mgtow regardless of what hobbies you have on the weekends. The point is that you should not feel excluded or unwelcome from these forums just because there isn’t much interest in this particular thread topic. ‘Hope to see your posts and opinions in any other threads of interest to you here.

Look, it's not my fault that tornado dropped a house on your sister. Now get back on your broom and get your ass out of here... and take your monkeys with you

[Author]

Posts