Now, there's a refreshingly sober kickass rationalisation of the "Magic of Love"

[Ned TrentParticipant 4894]

… brought to us by one of the new dudes on the youtube-channel-block, Edmont Dantes, who makes a few good content videos well worth watching, not all of them but a few. To one or the other of you, gentlemen maybe a fresh breeze of wind, what do you think…?

Anyway, without much further ado here it is:

 

 

Ned T.

I'd rather die a natual death with a clear MGTOW conscience somewhere off the grid than one within "modern" civilisation with a big stress mark on my forehead and a couple of dozen tubes plugged into my body. Back to the plantation..? Me..? Hey, literally: I won't ever fucking kid myself...YZERLMNTSIC

[SnakeSpectator 2080]

Not bad but the oversimplification of love to a mere chemical reaction is almost as dangerous as actually believing in love. The idea of love is socially reinforced from many angles. He equates love to a skydiving adrenaline rush. An adrenaline rush is non-interactive, cannot provide you kids, cannot externally validate you, etc. Love is engineered from the ground up to enslave you, from all points. What is the matrix? Control.

[Anonymous 1]

I agree with Snake. It is not a bad video, but it oversimplifies love or even relationships. I guess that’s how WOMEN always thought about love, and that’s why it is so easy for them to jump from one c~~~ to another. They focus on the initial rush of the relationship, and then, when that is gone, they rely on “esoteric” justifications (hamster wheel anyone?) in order to move to the next sucker. Men, as far as I can tell, are more pragmatic in this sense. Not saying that there are not men that try to use the same “esoteric” bulls~~~ to justify their obsession, but on a more instinctive level, I think man has a better understanding of these, and therefore, as long as the women on a relationship was there to fulfill her part of the bargain, men would be faithful. Women are the ones preaching for the “sexual liberation” and doing “slut walks”. They are the ones that uses sex with as many partners as possible as means of “discovering themselves”, or use it as a tool for getting what they want. The majority of men, at least the ones I could observe on this site, would be more than happy with one woman, as long as she fulfilled HER part of the bargain, and respected their partner with the same degree that they demand respect.

Unfortunately, that’s not the case now, is it?

[RoyDalParticipant]

In my opinion, romantic love is a compulsion programmed into our DNA for the purpose of propagating the species, making babies and rearing them until they are self sufficient.
Once that is accomplished, the male has fulfilled his biological purpose, and he can just crawl off and die.

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

[VictorParticipant 124]

Anonymous wrote:

The majority of men, at least the ones I could observe on this site, would be more than happy with one woman, as long as she fulfilled HER part of the bargain, and respected their partner with the same degree that they demand respect. Unfortunately, that’s not the case now, is it?

Just one woman would do me fine, thank you.  No interest in ‘sleeping around’.

[Mango IngawayParticipant 2264]

Anonymous wrote:

they rely on “esoteric” justifications

The “women are more spiritual” bulls~~~, you mean?
I get a good laugh each time I hear this one being pulled out.

Or the “they’re something missing in our relationship” one
Which roughly translates to “I’m gonna dump you and go ride some more c~~~s while I’m still half-decent looking.”
Their excuses truly are top kek

It is a common failing of childhood to think that if one makes a hero out of a demon the demon will be satisfied.

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

I take love as positive regard for someone, not feelings and so on.  It is what intentions you have.  It is something you can have for someone.  It is respecting their boundaries and ideals and who they are, and even delighting in them going that way.  It isn’t a case of what the person can do for you, just what they can become.  In this, you look after yourself.  And I believe any relationship with a woman has to be based on this, with compatibilities in the way both are trying to go, and not a needy clinging just to have someone.

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

[experiencedParticipant]

BadKan,”They are the ones that uses sex with as many partners as possible as means of “discovering themselves” :

 

VS:

 

"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."

[Ned TrentParticipant 4894]

Point taken, Snake & Badkan. That’s fair.

Being fully aware that the comparison might be a bit over the top, the message it carries should be clear enough and simple: Why get fooled by seriously falling in love…?

I'd rather die a natual death with a clear MGTOW conscience somewhere off the grid than one within "modern" civilisation with a big stress mark on my forehead and a couple of dozen tubes plugged into my body. Back to the plantation..? Me..? Hey, literally: I won't ever fucking kid myself...YZERLMNTSIC

[Author]

Posts