Sandman's video on Catholicism and MGTOW

[braininavatParticipant 95]

Did anyone read the extensive comments left on Sandman’s recent video about Catholicism and MGTOW?

There are (as of this writing) 303 comments to 3284 views, which is a high proportion of comments.

A lot of MGTOW videos have extensive comments, but mostly in the nature of men agreeing with the content or saying something to the effect that learning about MGTOW was a revelation to them.

Men who are ready to take the red pill can agree about the interpretation of female behavior, but this comment section reveals some deep divisions that would be worthwhile to consider. I think that these divisions are potentially damaging to MGTOW, or, more generally, getting men to swallow the red pill. Social change can come about simply by a large enough number of men calling a spade a spade when it comes to women. Men don’t have to identify with or as MGTOW in order to choke down this much of the red pill.

Can men discuss MGTOW without getting trapped into religious and political differences? Some of the comments were quite ready to do so, but some were quite angry, and seem to put ideological differences over male solidarity.

Full disclosure: I am an atheist from a Protestant background.

[KeymasterKeymaster]

This is essentially why we amended our “about the forums” section to include backing off from the subject of religion. Don’t misunderstand, have no problem whatsoever with it. It’s not like it’s delete-worthy or harmful even when there is a little friction created from bringing it up.

My father once told me (before I could understand the value) “Never discuss politics or religion with anyone”. He phrased it like it was the 11th commandment. Like it’s the anti-NIKE: “Just don’t do it”. To this day, I’ve learned that’s million-dolllar advice, and when the subject comes up, It’s time to get my coat. These subjects are just too vast, vague, interpretive, based in personal belief (and held close to the heart) instead of science and facts, and it’s one of those things where 1 + 1 just can’t equal 2 – no matter how long anyone discusses it or examines it.

After all, the bible teaches us “thou shalt not kill”. Right?
…. but more people have been killed “in the name of God” than for any other reason.

That’s all anyone really needs to say about that.

“MGTOW” might be about “going your own way”…. but it’s also about men coming together for once – perhaps for the first time – and helping each other out for a change. Looking out for one another, instead of crawling over each other for pussy, or success or whatever else. But since you’ve put it out there, I will disclose I am also raised protestant who quietly adopted atheism ever since I was 8, saw a painting of Adam and Eve and noticed they had belly buttons.

Stop right there!

How on God’s green Earth could every artist who ever painted Adam & Eve overlook that ENORMOUS flaw in their own work???!!!

That’s when I had a pretty good feeling religion was essentially bulls~~~, and THAT’s why my father’s advice was some of the best I ever heard. So it was quietly accepted atheism for me, since my teens until just recently, when I arrived at a profound realization that “God” is not some man with a silver mane in the sky. He never was! God is not what I was taught in Sunday school. God is “the way things ought to be”. The non-negotiable laws of nature. The basics of right and wrong – however you want to phrase it – and knowing those things in your heart, and keeping them there. An unspoken and universal “absolute truth”. This will vary from person to person and culture to culture, but it transcends “relative truth” and even our own judicial system.

And now it sounds like Im preaching, so I should probably just shut the f~~~ up.
Have a pleasant evening.

If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.

[braininavatParticipant 95]

(This is in response to a comment that has since disappeared.)

The 11th commandment is sound, and usually one by which I abide.

More than merely abide by “Thou shalt not discuss religion,” one can employ it as a principle.

One of the (potential) problems of MGTOW is that of being viewed as a “movement” or, worse, as a “cult.” Here there is something to learn from Sam Harris. In one of his lectures he urged that atheists go “underground” and simply challenge bad ideas wherever they are to be found. I agree with this. There is no need to identify with any movement.

If men can simply challenge misandry and female entitlement wherever it is to be found, progress is possible.

[VileNordParticipant 766]

The problem is systemic of the origin of one’s morals. Religions differ not only in their beliefs about who God is but also about how God commands us to act. These are deeply held ideologies by all parties involved and there is no magic bullet for the clashes that arise from them. Furthermore, these belief structures are more fundamental to a man’s identity than his sex is. It is therefore only rational to place an attack on one’s religious ideology above an attack on one’s gender. This is not news to anyone, I’m not being profound or revolutionary here. Unless…..I suggest that morality can be understood from a scientific angle. This is what Sam Harris has done in his book The Moral Landscape.

Claiming that an objective outline of morality can be established without instruction from an omniscient being is truly a radical departure from the world of today. So radical in fact, is this school of thought, that I fear mankind will never embrace it and we will be damned to perpetually relive this cycle of religious violence.

A man who is convinced he is living in service of a higher power is the hardest man to sway.

Lust for comfort suffocates the soul

[Crazy CanuckMember 4215]

I think that these divisions are potentially damaging to MGTOW, or, more generally, getting men to swallow the red pill. Social change can come about simply by a large enough number of men calling a spade a spade when it comes to women. Men don’t have to identify with or as MGTOW in order to choke down this much of the red pill.

There will probably different MGTOW. Atheists MGTOW and religious MGTOW. There will probably some people between the two. What some people to fail to realize is that religious requirements are there if a person wants to go to heaven and live a peaceful life (less suffering). Nobody that I know is forced to stay in religions. Of course some of our parents decided to make us go but what’s the point if your heart isn’t into it.

Just because a person goes to church and read the bible doesn’t mean they are a Christian. Only when they follow the teachings they will be considered Christians. I have family members go to church pretty much every Sunday. They read the bible and even pray daily but when it comes to the requirements forget it. They start a lot of problems for others due to jealousy and hate so what’s the point. These people just don’t realize this, they would better off being atheists than wasting their precious time.

It’s none of my business what someone else does in their private life. Unless they start talking about it or asking for advice it’s none of my business. If a person wants to sleep around it’s not my place to judge. But there are even risks sleeping around with multiple people.

Also MGTOW aren’t materialistic, in the most part. Men generally happy with simple things. Btw the main reason I left AFVM wasn’t that everyone agreed abortion is ok because men would suffer pay child support, I didn’t want to be associated with that and strong oppose abortion. I had to agree with that point which was the last straw for me. With MGTOW I haven’t seen anything like that yet. Everyone is doing their own thing, really we are not an organized group more like sharing insights and information among each other.

In the end the common goal with MGTOW at least I hope is to have a happy life. I personally can’t see being happy sleeping with one woman to the next. I have had a sexual relationship that I didn’t like it at all and it was the only one I had in my entire life. It was purely a sexual relationship and it stayed that way because she was embarrassed to seen with me in public because she was much older at the time.

"If pussy was a stock it would be plummeting right now because you've flooded the market with it. You're giving it away too easy." - Dave Chapelle

[ether_oreParticipant 29]

There is and likely will always be a division of sorts between MGTOW. There are basically two classes as I understand them so far. The PUA and those that abstain from intimate contact with women. In order to get along in terms of the basics of MGTOW, I guess the trick is not to attempt to pass judgment on one another. Disagreement is OK, but not disagreeableness.

I am not Catholic, but I am part of a denomination which holds that sex outside of marriage between a man and a woman is forbidden. Placed in simplistic terms, this is because God said so, but I believe there exists “reason” behind the commandment if one considers that the issue is about family stability. Children do not need to pay for my bad choices. I have chosen MGHOW because I have come to the conclusion that for me there exists no benefit to being married. However, in order for me not to violate what I perceive and accept as a reasonable commandment, I must also accept celibacy. It has been difficult, but as time passes and I become more involved with other things, I find that it is doable. There is no commandment I am aware of that says I “must” get married. It may mean that I miss out on some blessings as a consequence of not being part of a family and sometimes I struggle with that, but then I take my daily dose of red pill and come to my senses.

[braininavatParticipant 95]

It is at least arguable that the only form of MGTOW that proved to be sustainable in the past was cenobitic monasticism, so that those who remain single out of a religious motivation (or, perhaps it would be better to say, avoid sexual relationships because of their religious beliefs, and choose to not have relationships with women due to being MGTOW) have a long tradition on which they can draw. Moreover, remaining single and celibate for religious reasons is socially acceptable in most communities; once you’ve told people your reasons, usually they’ll let it lie and not bring it up again. Even if you’re not Catholic you can tell people you have a vocation and are committing your life to God, and mostly they will understand.

[VileNordParticipant 766]

Even if you’re not Catholic you can tell people you have a vocation and are committing your life to God, and mostly they will understand.

I wish I could just tell a white lie like this and escape the confrontation. I’ve yet to calm the beast in me that rages at a person’s stupidity. I don’t generally judge people for the way they live their life, and I’m entirely reasonable when it comes to simple ignorance, but outright stupidity in the face of logic awakens an insatiable demon. As the foul creature emerges I am left with but two options; slay the beast and recoil to a pitiful state of hyper-intelligence induced depression, or take residence upon it’s back and storm the barricade of stupidity.

One day I will find the metaphorical pill to slay the beast asunder. Until then……Mr. Hyde I presume?

Lust for comfort suffocates the soul

[wonkoParticipant 52]

wonko saw once pictures of the catacombs. There were lots of strange symbols on headstones for all the people laid out. Not only are there lots of dead people down there but there are lots of dead religions too. What’s a few more religions still kicking for now topside. Within a hundred years or so we’ll all be gone. Perhaps a few centuries and the religions wont be recognizable i.e. they’ll be gone too. For now MGTOW allows men whatever their persuasion a bit more freedom to enjoy their lives even if its just arguing. Whenever wonko is asked what he believes he simply says, “I believe that I’ll have another sandwich.”

[Crazy CanuckMember 4215]

I wish I could just tell a white lie like this and escape the confrontation. I’ve yet to calm the beast in me that rages at a person’s stupidity. I don’t generally judge people for the way they live their life, and I’m entirely reasonable when it comes to simple ignorance, but outright stupidity in the face of logic awakens an insatiable demon. As the foul creature emerges I am left with but two options; slay the beast and recoil to a pitiful state of hyper-intelligence induced depression, or take residence upon it’s back and storm the barricade of stupidity.

You don’t need to pretend to be religious just show the book “Men on Strike”. Any person with half a brain will understand why men don’t want to get married.

"If pussy was a stock it would be plummeting right now because you've flooded the market with it. You're giving it away too easy." - Dave Chapelle

[WarriorParticipant 14]

<cite>@wonko said:</cite>
wonko is asked what he believes he simply says, “I believe that I’ll have another sandwich.”

You sir, are a genius.

[Old BuckParticipant 3596]

I am bumping this thread as it is still very relavent.

Don't chase tail. Turn yours around, walk away, and live free!

[Anonymous 1]

Keymaster wrote:

“God” is not some man with a silver mane in the sky. He never was! God is not what I was taught in Sunday school. God is “the way things ought to be”. The non-negotiable laws of nature. The basics of right and wrong – however you want to phrase it – and knowing those things in your heart, and keeping them there. An unspoken and universal “absolute truth”. This will vary from person to person and culture to culture, but it transcends “relative truth” and even our own judicial system.

Glad to see, you and I have come to the same conclusion.

[Anonymous 12]

Religion is indeed a very hot topic on which we do not stand united.
Race and politics… we got that s~~~ nailed down, even differing points of view do not cause Divide.
Religion still does.
I once heard that Race, Religion and Politics not best be discussed in a bar.

(copypasted from a convo with tower, because i am a lazy f~~~)

[TwistParticipant]

Crazy Canuck wrote:

Just because a person goes to church and read the bible doesn’t mean they are a Christian.

Just like standing in your garage does not make you a car…

Keymaster wrote:

This will vary from person to person and culture to culture, but it transcends “relative truth” and

even

our own judicial system.

Particularly the justice (sic) system. We see this so much today in the topics we discuss on this board, the injustice of a gynocentric legal system. And we have seen it in history – it was “legal” for hundreds of years to own slaves. Was it “right”? It was legal to pack Jews onto freight trains and send them to camps. Was it “right”? Nuremberg relied on the concept of such a higher law (“god”) to find justice.

“The idea of a law of ultimate justice over and above the momentary law of the state—a higher law—was first introduced into post-Roman Europe by the Catholic canon law jurists.[3] “Higher law” can be interpreted in this context as the divine or natural law or basic legal values, established in the international law – the choice depending on the viewpoint. But this is definitely a Law above the law.[4]”

“The rule according to a higher law means that no law may be enforced by the government unless it conforms with certain universal principles (written or unwritten) of fairness, morality, and justice.[1] Thus, the rule according to a higher law may serve as a practical legal criterion to qualify the instances of political or economical decision-making, when a government, even though acting in conformity with clearly defined and properly enacted legal rules, still produces results which many observers find unfair or unjust.[2]”

Article

[nagolbudSpectator 674]

The problem is not religion, politics, or race. The problem is emotional men that don’t have the ability to question their own beliefs. The problem is emotional men that can’t have a basic conversation about the reality we live in and instead turn to using female nature to uphold their beliefs. I’ve had thousands of awesome conversations about politics, religion, Jesus Christ, all in the bar with real men. Have atheists in their skinny pants and trendy outfits caused drama? Of course, but 99% of the time most people enjoyed the conversation and we ended up shooting guns and hunting together. It’s always the atheists getting emotional creating drama and without the ability to hold a real conversation. I used to be an atheist too, and even then I could have plenty of debates with a believer without using manipulation and other emotional female games.

0100111*beep*0101010101101101~[A Glitch in the Matrix]~110010[transmissionterminated]000101101

[Anonymous 12]

the solution is simple:

HU mans do not know everything.
There are things still hotly debated.
One can not push ones belief or lack thereof on a person.
That person must shift her position on her own.

For practical purposes, i would propose to move threads with a strong spiritual element to the philosophy section.

[narwhalParticipant]

nagolbud wrote:

The problem is not religion, politics, or race. The problem is emotional men that don’t have the ability to question their own beliefs.

I disagree slightly. I don’t think there’s any problem with being emotional about this topics, or being unwilling to question your own beliefs. The issues come when you resort to insulting others who don’t share your point of view, or when you are quick those who disagree are insulting you. There is a difference between being passionate about what you believe, and being quick to offend and be offended.

Case in point, on reading KM’s comments above, my first inclination was to be offended as someone who believes in God. However, I logically know that KM had no intention to offend, and there would be nothing productive to gain from me taking offense. I have had very in depth conversations about religion with devote atheists, at a time when I was a much more devote Christian…with no issues. It’s not because we had no emotion about our believes, but because we treated each other with respect and refused to let minor offense get in the way.

I’m not saying that questioning what you believe is unimportant. It is. I’m saying I’d rather have a conversation with passionate atheist who respects difference, then a man who flip flop’s his opinion with the wind and can’t converse without resulting to insults.

nagolbud wrote:

The problem is emotional men that can’t have a basic conversation about the reality we live in and instead turn to using female nature to uphold their beliefs.

Not sure what that means.

nagolbud wrote:

I’ve had thousands of awesome conversations about politics, religion, Jesus Christ, all in the bar with real men. Have atheists in their skinny pants and trendy outfits caused drama? Of course, but 99% of the time most people enjoyed the conversation and we ended up shooting guns and hunting together. It’s always the atheists getting emotional creating drama and without the ability to hold a real conversation.

Not at all matching up with my experience. I’ve met plenty of Christian and Atheist who would rather hate and insult than hold a legit conversation. I’d probably say the atheist is more likely to be interested in a conversation, but reacts defensive at first as they are usually first insulted for their beliefs. It works both ways though.

nagolbud wrote:

I used to be an atheist too, and even then I could have plenty of debates with a believer without using manipulation and other emotional female games.

I find that it always works best when insults and manipulation are ignored. It doesn’t really matter what the topic or issue is.

Ok. Then do it.

[Author]

Posts