Going Your Own Way For The Wrong Reasons (?)

[Eric LauderParticipant 12053]

IRuleMe wrote:

Eric Lauder wrote:

Spot on, sir, you’re right.
Indeed I think that the requirement for a “perfect” MGHOW should be having had sex with at least three women (not escorts, it have to be a free thing), including at least one LTR (without marriage contract and without cohabitation, but lasting at least few months) and at least one one-night-stand with an almost unknown woman who he catched and f~~~ed in a matter of few hours.

ummm. NO! So now you want impose “criteria” for what is, and what is not “MGTOW”? That’s like trying to define levels of MGTOW. That’s the very antithesis of MGTOW. It’s men going their OWN way. It’s not for us to impose our will, and expectations on someone else. That’s the very reason that drove us to MGTOW away from society in the first place. That we were refusing defined gender roles, refusing society expectations, and now you want to enforce expectations on MGTOW’s…? Do you see how asinine that is?

Secondly, every woman I ever dated wasn’t worth a LTR. Which is exactly why those relations~~~s were short to begin with. I want nothing to do with wimmin because they are a waste of my time. Not because “I claim to be MGTOW because I can’t get chicks”. I have my freedom and my sovereignty. That’s all that matters. I do what I want, when I want, however I want.

I didn’t mean it should be required, by saying “requirement for an IDEAL MGTOW” I described the best situation for GYOW, and I think that 3 women / 1 LTR / 1 one-night-stand is the barely minimum: power comes from experience, and twice than that would be even better (no need of even more, probably, it would be a waste of time).

There’s an HUGE difference between a professional football player who abandon football “due corruption of the whole sport system” and someone who never played football alleging that “I abandoned due the sport system is corrupted”.
In the case of MGTOW our version of the latter kind tend to be undecided and confused, ready to embrace tradcon myths, and he’s NEVER harsh enough when it comes to judging women: he’s all about women’s sexuality that according him would be “somewhat excessive”. That’s laughable and reality-fled: women’s sexuality doesn’t exist compared to a man, most women would remain virgins for their whole life if all men would suddenly GTOW.

SUPREME LEADER KIM JONG-UN'S FASHION STYLIST - if you want a new look or if you're a very beautiful trans you can call me, phone number +85079255312 / mobile 01921421211. The worth of a man isn't the usefulness that women get from him. Avoiding living with a woman, a man isn't rejecting a lot of sex: he's rejecting sexual starvation. MGTOW IS TACKLING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN COMPLIANCE WITH CONVENTION OF ISTANBUL: http://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/rms/090000168008482e --- Article 4, Section 4 "Special measures that are necessary to prevent and protect women from gender-based violence shall not be considered discrimination under the terms of this Convention". WHAT I LEARNT FROM A GENDER STUDIES CLASS IN LUND, SWEDEN: every time feminists accuses men of doing something, odds are likely either them or persons associated with them are doing the exact same thing but a lot worse. WHO I'M RIGHT NOW https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1okpAj7Fhw Basically my former life have been a conflict between this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yz_RQVkvke4 and this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFIMeyTK-sU That's, more or less, all about me.

[sjt1975Participant 2536]

Akanbi wrote:

“Going MGTOW” is not an excuse for one’s inability to get laid.

Whilst a man deciding to Go His Own Way may not excuse his in-ability to get laid per se, it is nevertheless a sensible/understandable reaction to his in-ability to get laid, because why should a man continue to pursue something that will never (or is highly un-likely to) happen for him? Since ‘women are the gatekeepers to sex’, if no woman decides to give a guy any sex, and that guy has no apparent major de-barring issues from him sensibly being able to get laid (i.e. never goes out, no major communication/mental/physical defects), then the fault must lie with the culture and/or the women, for that guy’s lack of success in getting laid, rather than with the man himself; of course, if a man does have such a major de-barring issue, then it is highly un-likely that he would get laid anyway. Therefore, rather than the man beat his head against a brick wall, it is more sensible for him to decide to stop pursuing that which he will never (seem likely to) achieve, given that he can control/divert his sexual urges. What I find disturbing is that the Original Poster’s phrase is like perpetuating ‘the game’, since it implies that men should not be rightfully allowed to go MGTOW because they cannot get laid; I greatly disagree with that view-point – why shouldn’t they? Technically, a man does not even have to have attempted to get laid at all, in order to decide to go MGTOW; he may just decide that ‘the juice is not worth the squeeze’, so why bother with ‘the game’ in the first place, and so he never even bothers entering/playing ‘the game’ at all? Also, a man can decide to go MGTOW for a whole variety of other reasons, not related to his sexual success/failure, but fundamentally because he want to do whatever he wants to do in his life, not to live his life appeasing others (all of the time).

Fundamentally, I am saying that same as LookAfter#1 says before:

LookAfter#1 wrote:

I slightly disagree with the original post. In my opinion MGTOW can be a realisation that you’re waisting your time, effort, and money […] Also MGTOW can be doing whatever makes you happy, rather than trying to make everyone else happy.

[AkanbiParticipant 2120]

sjt1975 wrote:

What I find disturbing is that the Original Poster’s phrase is like perpetuating ‘the game’, since it implies that men should not be rightfully allowed to go MGTOW because they cannot get laid

I think you’ve misunderstood the point I’m trying to make here. I am in no way perpetuating any ‘game’. I am also not attempting to declare the kind of man that should or should not be allowed to go MGTOW.

I am very aware that there are some MGTOW who have never been sexually involved with women in their lives. Some of them might have been incels along the line but after realising that the sex is not even worth the effort, and that it will be better to put that effort into things that add real value to their lives, they PURPOSELY DECIDED to not waste their energy and resources just because of sex. They started focusing on themselves & living life on THEIR OWN terms instead (in other words, they started Going Their Own Way).

There’s a difference between that and a man who goes along the lines of: “I can’t get laid. That means I’m MGTOW”.

If you open the first link I embedded in the original post, you will see that what the guy was basically saying is that if a man can’t get laid, that means he is MGTOW. That line of thinking is WRONG and that’s one of the things I’m pointing out with this topic.

My brother make you no follow sheeple o. Look them and Go Your Way.

[MonkParticipant 17070]

Eric Lauder wrote:

Indeed I think that the requirement for a “perfect” MGHOW should be having had sex with at least three women (not escorts, it have to be a free thing), including at least one LTR (without marriage contract and without cohabitation, but lasting at least few months) and at least one one-night-stand with an almost unknown woman who he catched and f~~~ed in a matter of few hours.

Falling into an obvious trap does not sound like a qualification for anything except the Darwin Awards.

[CoolbreezeParticipant 442]

Just live your life-

[sjt1975Participant 2536]

Akanbi wrote:

If you open the first link that I embedded in the original post, you will see that what the guy was basically saying is that, if a man can’t get laid, that means he is MGTOW. That line of thinking is WRONG and that’s one of the things I’m pointing out with this topic.

I agree that, just because a man can’t ‘get laid’, this does not in itself mean that he therefore is a MGTOW; it just means that he isn’t getting any sex from a woman. Going MGTOW is a decision a man must make for himself, and act as he sees fit, accordingly. However, what I am saying, is that a man can use the fact that he isn’t ‘getting laid’ to justify his decision to go MGTOW. And a guy can decide to go MGTOW for other reasons aswell. I think you will agree with that.

[IRuleMeParticipant]

Eric Lauder wrote:

El C~~~o Punto wrote:

Eric Lauder wrote:

Spot on, sir, you’re right.
Indeed I think that the requirement for a “perfect” MGHOW should be having had sex with at least three women (not escorts, it have to be a free thing), including at least one LTR (without marriage contract and without cohabitation, but lasting at least few months) and at least one one-night-stand with an almost unknown woman who he catched and f~~~ed in a matter of few hours.

ummm. NO! So now you want impose “criteria” for what is, and what is not “MGTOW”? That’s like trying to define levels of MGTOW. That’s the very antithesis of MGTOW. It’s men going their OWN way. It’s not for us to impose our will, and expectations on someone else. That’s the very reason that drove us to MGTOW away from society in the first place. That we were refusing defined gender roles, refusing society expectations, and now you want to enforce expectations on MGTOW’s…? Do you see how asinine that is?

Secondly, every woman I ever dated wasn’t worth a LTR. Which is exactly why those relations~~~s were short to begin with. I want nothing to do with wimmin because they are a waste of my time. Not because “I claim to be MGTOW because I can’t get chicks”. I have my freedom and my sovereignty. That’s all that matters. I do what I want, when I want, however I want.

I didn’t mean it should be required, by saying “requirement for an IDEAL MGTOW” I described the best situation for GYOW, and I think that 3 women / 1 LTR / 1 one-night-stand is the barely minimum: power comes from experience, and twice than that would be even better (no need of even more, probably, it would be a waste of time).

There’s an HUGE difference between a professional football player who abandon football “due corruption of the whole sport system” and someone who never played football alleging that “I abandoned due the sport system is corrupted”.
In the case of MGTOW our version of the latter kind tend to be undecided and confused, ready to embrace tradcon myths, and he’s NEVER harsh enough when it comes to judging women: he’s all about women’s sexuality that according him would be “somewhat excessive”. That’s laughable and reality-fled: women’s sexuality doesn’t exist compared to a man, most women would remain virgins for their whole life if all men would suddenly GTOW.

Abuse comes from experience. Because a man who makes a conscious effort to engage in such things to “gain experience” is putting himself through abuse. Power comes from recognizing situations and not submitting at all.

[sjt1975Participant 2536]

OldBill wrote:

Akanbi wrote:

“Going MGTOW” is not an excuse for one’s in-ability to get laid.

A very cogent point, Akanbi.

A man should go his own way because of what that adds to his life and not as a result of what he believes to be a personal failure.

Our detractors routinely dismiss the MGTOW life by claiming we’ve made the choice we have “because we can’t get laid”. Confused men like the one you quoted apparently chose to believe that, before investigating what MGTOW really is about.

Are you saying that choice to Go MGTOW is not really to do with the fact that a guy “can’t get laid”, but rather in the acknowledgement/understanding of the under-lying true nature of ‘the game’ and of women, which for that guy happens to mean that he “can’t get laid”? And so, because he understands how bad the under-lying fundamentals are of the reason why he “can’t get laid”, he decides to check-out of ‘the game’ and from women, and so he Goes His Own Way. If that is not what you mean, can you please explicitly clarify what you do mean? I may be getting confused here, but I would like to get the exact intended meaning clear.

[BrujahParticipant 579]

I like a pretty woman just as much as the next guy but the difference between us and the rest of the simps is that the need for female validation is no longer a driving factor.

It’s NICE to be acknowledged by someone attractive but that’s all that. Just a nice feeling. Nothing more.

[Author]

Posts