My thoughts on the schism in MGTOW over the nature of women.

[IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)Participant 2572]

What I have observed over videos in the recent months, which Immortal in a video had mentioned, is a schism in MGTOW over the nature of women.  It appears there is a camp that argues women are by very nature evil (born that way) and there are those who disagree with this, or at least with the logical conclusion some talk followed, and the impact that such language has on Blue Pills not waking up and so on.  With this also, is that when the likes of TL;DR points out problems with the video of some of the women are evil videos, there then are individuals who rush to the defense of the YouTuber putting up such videos and going on namecalling assault against TL;DR, or whomever else.

Anyhow, this is my take on the controversy, and my getting into another way, about moving forward:

Does it matter if it is gynocentrism, or women evil, or nurture or nature, or whatever and to focus on this, and act like MRA, etc… or can MGTOW just move on, be aware, and put baggage behind to move ahead?  I did the video, and post it here, knowing I may draw fire, but my idea here is to ask for alternatives.  I don’t even get into the nature of women themselves in this video.

"I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

[Anonymous 3]

Do you think children are inherently evil? That will answer the question, as women are nothing other than children in adult bodies.

Society does not, or rather should not, allow itself to be run by children. There is no “equality” with children. Children don’t have quotas that they are given to run the world, and displace adults.

Society is stupid for thinking women are actually competent and capable or worth listening to. If society is functioning correctly, women are not elevated to leadership or authority roles, they are properly submissive and kept in the home. Evil doesn’t really apply.

[chirParticipant]

Good, Bad… doesn’t matter, in the final equation in their minds you as a man are a needed resource which:

1) serves as a provider / protector for the spawn.

2) Shovels the s~~~ and does the work to keep them comfortable and fed.

3) Offers companionship.

In return they give the man exclusive access to their pussy and insure that any spawn are the mans.  Or so we like to think.

This is the bottom line.  This was the original contract between man and woman.

Nature of women has not changed.

It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning; it is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.

[experiencedParticipant]

“schisms?………………….we don’t need no stinking schisms.”

   

 

"It seems like there's times a body gets struck down so low, there ain't a power on earth that can ever bring him up again. Seems like something inside dies so he don't even want to get up again. But he does."

[IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)Participant 2572]

Anonymous wrote:

Do you think children are inherently evil? That will answer the question, as women are nothing other than children in adult bodies. Society does not, or rather should not, allow itself to be run by children. There is no “equality” with children. Children don’t have quotas that they are given to run the world, and displace adults. Society is stupid for thinking women are actually competent and capable or worth listening to. If society is functioning correctly, women are not elevated to leadership or authority roles, they are properly submissive and kept in the home. Evil doesn’t really apply.

Why does a man going MGTOW care where a proper woman’s place is?  Will you stop being MGTOW if suddenly women were denied leadership positions, were properly submissive, and kept at home?  So are you MGTOW because society isn’t functioning as you see it should?

The tradcon and Neo-Masculinity argument (and heck MGTOW manifesto from 2001) argue for this.  It also means that men would need to be the head of the household and end up having women at home, breeding with the women who are submissive, and go that way.  It would mean, from a practical level, that a man could support a family on one income.  The moment women start leaving the home to work, to bring in money, the idea of the man as the breadwinner and he who has the gold, makes the rules.

How exactly would you put the genie in the bottle, and how would you going MGTOW make it happen?

"I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

[IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)Participant 2572]

experienced wrote:

“schisms?………………….we don’t need no stinking schisms.”

No, none aren’t needed but apparently it looks like it is happening over this issue.

"I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

[Anonymous 0]

IGMOW (I Go My Own Way) wrote:

Why does a man going MGTOW care where a proper woman’s place is? Will you stop being MGTOW if suddenly women were denied leadership positions, were properly submissive, and kept at home? So are you MGTOW because society isn’t functioning as you see it should?

The tradcon and Neo-Masculinity argument (and heck MGTOW manifesto from 2001) argue for this. It also means that men would need to be the head of the household and end up having women at home, breeding with the women who are submissive, and go that way. It would mean, from a practical level, that a man could support a family on one income. The moment women start leaving the home to work, to bring in money, the idea of the man as the breadwinner and he who has the gold, makes the rules.

How exactly would you put the genie in the bottle, and how would you going MGTOW make it happen?

I figure that women are entitled, privileged flakes and dingbats. It has always been that way and always will be that way. There’s nothing to be done about it, so there’s no reason to worry about whether it’s nature or nurture, and there’s no reason to try to come up for remedies for it.

Even if you go back 100 years, women were still entitled, privileged flakes and dingbats. If you married a woman and wanted to do something about it, you beat them and it kind of ruined them–a beaten dog is not a loving dog. A beaten wife just became a surly servant. Today if you want to do something about it, you divorce them and say goodbye to them. But in either case, there was never a time when they were submissive and loving.

So love and marriage is just a game to be played, if you’re up to it.

It’s like the working world. You jump in and maybe succeed. But over time it chews you up. By middle age, you’re fat from sedentary activities, have a bad heart, and all that. But it can be fun and a challenge while it lasts. With the working world, it’s just a question of getting lots of money and then hopefully getting out before you get too sick and old.

Same with marriage and love. It’s fun and a challenge. But it chews you up. Some men stay with it till they die, and it probably shortens their life. The smart ones get out early: They have some good memories of the chase and the challenges, and hopefully still have some health and money left at the end.

So here is how it goes: You have to do something with your life, so you “opt in” and accept challenges in the workplace and in love and get some small victories. But it wears you down and chews you up, and hopefully you get out before the challenges kill you. In your old age you “opt out” and put your feet up in retirement. Either the wife accepts the fact that you “opt out” and are doing your own thing, or you dump her. They say “gray divorces” (divorce in retirement) have been increasing greatly.

But that’s the bottom line. Work and women are the same. Nothing really changes, and there’s nothing to be done about it. You just have one choice: Opt in, or opt out. Opt in for a while and enjoy the challenge and the chase and the bragging rights. But then if you’re smart, you opt out before it chews you up or kills you outright.

[Anonymous 3]

IGMOW (I Go My Own Way) wrote:

phoenix wrote:

Do you think children are inherently evil? That will answer the question, as women are nothing other than children in adult bodies. Society does not, or rather should not, allow itself to be run by children. There is no “equality” with children. Children don’t have quotas that they are given to run the world, and displace adults. Society is stupid for thinking women are actually competent and capable or worth listening to. If society is functioning correctly, women are not elevated to leadership or authority roles, they are properly submissive and kept in the home. Evil doesn’t really apply.

Why does a man going MGTOW care where a proper woman’s place is? Will you stop being MGTOW if suddenly women were denied leadership positions, were properly submissive, and kept at home? So are you MGTOW because society isn’t functioning as you see it should? 

Why ask the question and state your opinion if you don’t want to read the answer?

Answer your own question, since it applies to you.

[sidecarParticipant 35837]

It doesn’t matter why All Women Are Like That.

What matters is ALL WOMEN ARE LIKE THAT.

Who cares if it’s nature or nurture or whatever? The end product men have to deal with is the same.

[FermatParticipant 3478]

@chir Extremely accurate, my friend.

I have discovered a truly remarkable list of reasons why women are not necessary for a happy life, but alas this margin is too small to contain it.

[IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)Participant 2572]

chir wrote:

Good, Bad… doesn’t matter, in the final equation in their minds you as a man are a needed resource which: 1) serves as a provider / protector for the spawn. 2) Shovels the s~~~ and does the work to keep them comfortable and fed. 3) Offers companionship. In return they give the man exclusive access to their pussy and insure that any spawn are the mans. Or so we like to think. This is the bottom line. This was the original contract between man and woman. Nature of women has not changed.

I would say that is the net sum, maybe with some other elements involved, connected with marriage, and what is involved.  The human species maybe needs to have enough men involved to maintain its survival.  BUT, my preference is that there be work on making it easier for men to go MGTOW and break away from that, if it doesn’t work with them. For some men, maybe they want and need to do that.  I just see for a MGTOW, that isn’t for them, whatever reason.  It doesn’t matter a man’s reason for this, it is just for them.  Why not focus more on moving ahead, than arguing of a lifestyle involving women, that isn’t for you?  I am not an outdoors person at all, and am not one for camping.  So why would I continue to fixate on whether or not nature is evil if I don’t want to go there?  It just isn’t for me.  It can be what it is, and I go on.

"I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

[Darth SinParticipant 576]

Women are neither good nor evil. They simply are.

Do you hate a rattlesnake for being a rattlesnake ? No, you simply avoid it.

[IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)Participant 2572]

Darth Sin wrote:

Women are neither good nor evil. They simply are. Do you hate a rattlesnake for being a rattlesnake ? No, you simply avoid it.

I think it is beneficial to consider a lot of life as just is, and move on from anything that doesn’t work.

"I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

[IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)Participant 2572]

But warning others about things that don’t work and why is valuable. Moving on from this discussion is a disservice to the community.

There are new MGTOW coming online with channels.  Does it benefit for every channel to discuss the same issues over and over and over, when there are plenty on discussing it, or will there be benefit from trying to look at what to do after being done with women?

This video came to mind.  I see burnout if it focuses on the same thing over and over:

"I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

[sidecarParticipant 35837]

IGMOW (I Go My Own Way) wrote:

There are new MGTOW coming online with channels. Does it benefit for every channel to discuss the same issues over and over and over, when there are plenty on discussing it, or will there be benefit from trying to look at what to do after being done with women?

Without all sorts of equipment, one star looks pretty much like every other. The night sky is just one tiny point of light after another, repeated over and over.

But then you get into the mountains where the sky is clear and the air is pure and you look up and you see ALL THOSE STARS, and suddenly the sheer number of them is what matters.

So I say the more the better.

[IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)Participant 2572]

sidecar wrote:

richardhutnik wrote:

There are new MGTOW coming online with channels. Does it benefit for every channel to discuss the same issues over and over and over, when there are plenty on discussing it, or will there be benefit from trying to look at what to do after being done with women?

Without all sorts of equipment, one star looks pretty much like every other. The night sky is just one tiny point of light after another, repeated over and over. But then you get into the mountains where the sky is clear and the air is pure and you look up and you see ALL THOSE STARS, and suddenly the sheer number of them is what matters. So I say the more the better.

I would say, if the channels offer a different perspective, more stars the better.  If there isn’t deviation, then you eventually hit a place of over saturation, and burnout happens.  Keeping things fluid, as suggested in another thread, will allow for diversity.  It is just for me, some of the stuff I see I don’t agree with, and have seen a number of men not identify as MGTOW because of the issues.

Anyhow, that is my take on it.  I did a followup video to this one here, looking at a different part of where I see possible schism happening, and focused on myself not doing other things.  I really need to be doing more of my own way and less talking about it.  Limited funds now is an issue with me.

Anyhow, here is the video:

 

"I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

[Author]

Posts