Showing posts with label mgtow. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mgtow. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 10, 2021
AOC's real target is MGTOW
Now she is associating white supremacy with the mythological patriarchy. I knew this is her angle. In fact I discuss it here.
Tuesday, August 11, 2020
Tomi Lahren rags on men
Tomi, it sounds like you and girlfriends just found out what MGTOW is. Judging from your rant I get the feeling you are less than thrilled with it. In the video, Tomi says she is not a feminist and that she loves men. If that is love you can keep that shit. One of her commenters (some simp. You should see her Facebook page. The only ones who post there are other angry pissed off bitches and desperate simps hungry for table scraps. Yes it is that pathetic.) mentioned Cassie Jaye and The Red Pill movie so we can all look forward to our lives to get really interesting really quickly.
In fact, Dr. Todd L. Grande discusses Tomi Lahren's rant in one of his videos.
Who is Dr. Todd L. Grande?
Here Dr. Todd L. Grande introduces himself:
Dr. Todd L. Grande covers topics related to Counselor Education and Supervision including but not limited to mental health, human behavior, psychopathology, personality theory, research, statistics, SPSS, Excel, APA style, appraisal, and group counseling.
Here Dr. Todd L. Grande responds to Tomi Lahren's rant:
If Tomi and her girlfriends stopped act bitchy and narcissistic they may actually get somewhere with men.
Friday, June 26, 2020
AOC's real agenda
White Supremacists or white nationalists are not that numerous but they do have the right to free speech just as any other group does and they should be prosecuted if they cross the line just like any other group. Rights and responsibilities across the board.
What led me to this conclusion? Her message to the supposed white nationalists white supremacists whatever. She called out to the males but not the females. Like she was surprised there could be females among their ranks. A quick search among the images on the internet will let you know there are a lot of females among their ranks. You can find this out by using the search engine of your choice. It would probably take you a couple of seconds. That is not a long time nor is it difficult to do. So why didn't AOC know it? Because it's a cover.
Okay Masc. As a fellow MRA/MGTOW what group or groups are in AOC's crosshairs?
Us. AOC was talking to anti-feminists,MRA's and MGTOW's. Especially MRA's and MGTOW's.
Men. Please come back. There are women who will love you if you come back.
Is what she was really saying. Singing the siren's song.
By using "white supremacy/nationalism/whatever" robs non-caucasian men of their rights to the Men's Rights Movement and MGTOW. Also, it puts off non-racist white men. Also, it kept her from mentioning us thus robbing us of any coverage whatsoever and it prevent the MRA meme and the MGTOW meme from spreading and attracting new members. It served a three-fold purpose and it was very effective. If somebody other than AOC came up with the "white supremacy/nationalist/whatever" angle that is one thing but if AOC herself came up with it then underestimating her is something we dare not do.
AOC is a feminist. She had never hidden that nor has she denied it. She hangs around other like-minded women on the net so I can imagine that the MRM and MGTOW have been brought up numerous times. They are most likely not big fans of the MRM and MGTOW so I don't expect them to become our cheerleaders anytime soon. AOC is a position to hunt us down and punish us for rejecting her and her sisters. She can call for investigations into our activities even though we are not doing anything illegal. Will she open up an investigation into us? I don't know but it is a possibility.
Sunday, June 14, 2020
A strong argument for MGTOW
Namee Arrow responds to a feminist shit talker:
Feminism is just a bunch of little angry girls. But honestly, all of you are missing the whole point of the question of MGTOW. Which is that men owe women nothing. There is no manning up. There is no good man. There is no gender-based social contract. Men have nothing to live up to for women. Men don't belong to you. Our lives, our resources are ours. Men need to explore their feelings and find what makes them happy. And women may have a hard time accepting that what makes a man happy is not women. And a lot of men are coming to this realization. Many don't even care about the only real threat women have and that is sex. Once a man can walk from sex he can walk from women. It's that easy. I have walked from sex and have tried to be friends with women. They all want to fuck me. They all want more. When they realize I want to treat them like an intellectual equal and just be buddies they only stick around until they have another man they want to work on. Then they ghost. Women cannot be friends with men who they aren't using as simps or who aren’t giving them attention. When a man won't simp or provide sex women are the ones who can't be bothered. A woman cannot be friends with a man. She can only use men. No woman is my equal. I have an identity without a woman. A woman will never have an identity outside the context of a man. Thus I am free. Thank you feminism for freeing me from any obligation to the welfare of women. Now all I have to do is leave this wretched America for a better life where I am not raped of my labor for the welfare of women. Your best bet men….work as little as you possibly can. Own nothing and avoid taxes. Let America collapse. Let the women slave. Just sit back, eat your popcorn and watch the show. Marriage and wage slavery is for suckers.
The way this dude put it is just perfect.
Feminism is just a bunch of little angry girls. But honestly, all of you are missing the whole point of the question of MGTOW. Which is that men owe women nothing. There is no manning up. There is no good man. There is no gender-based social contract. Men have nothing to live up to for women. Men don't belong to you. Our lives, our resources are ours. Men need to explore their feelings and find what makes them happy. And women may have a hard time accepting that what makes a man happy is not women. And a lot of men are coming to this realization. Many don't even care about the only real threat women have and that is sex. Once a man can walk from sex he can walk from women. It's that easy. I have walked from sex and have tried to be friends with women. They all want to fuck me. They all want more. When they realize I want to treat them like an intellectual equal and just be buddies they only stick around until they have another man they want to work on. Then they ghost. Women cannot be friends with men who they aren't using as simps or who aren’t giving them attention. When a man won't simp or provide sex women are the ones who can't be bothered. A woman cannot be friends with a man. She can only use men. No woman is my equal. I have an identity without a woman. A woman will never have an identity outside the context of a man. Thus I am free. Thank you feminism for freeing me from any obligation to the welfare of women. Now all I have to do is leave this wretched America for a better life where I am not raped of my labor for the welfare of women. Your best bet men….work as little as you possibly can. Own nothing and avoid taxes. Let America collapse. Let the women slave. Just sit back, eat your popcorn and watch the show. Marriage and wage slavery is for suckers.
The way this dude put it is just perfect.
Wednesday, April 22, 2020
Slaves To Humanity-Battleground
This is a kick-ass metal song with MGTOW memes. Believe it or not, these guys are still in high school but they are not The Archies nor are they The Jonas Brothers. These guys can rock with the adult bands any day of the week.
UPDATE: Slaves To Humanity have weighed in. They tell me that the song is about struggle but it has nothing to do with MGTOW. But wouldn't the battle between MGTOW's and feminists qualify as a "struggle"?
Wednesday, July 24, 2019
Dave Futrelle lies about MGTOW
I was at Dave Futrelle's website where he was ragging on the great MGTOW movement that is waking men up to the realities of feminism. Futrelle's lies are well known throughout the manosphere and we find his ineptness quite comical. Then again Dave has always been an unintentional comedian. Anyway, I left the following comment on his website. Let's see if he has the manhood to publish it:
As usual, Dave has no idea what he is talking about. MGTOW, along with the Men's Rights Movement, are very justified in their positions. It is feminism that is illegitimate and dangerous. It is brave men who stood up to these feminist monsters and for that these men are heroes.
Very sincerely,
Masculist Man-Masculist/Men's Rights Activist and Man Going His Own Way
BTW, the pet store is having a sale on cats but only if you buy in bulk which I'm sure you will. So while you are renewing your restraining orders against Dave you can go buy 50 cats at a time.
As usual, Dave has no idea what he is talking about. MGTOW, along with the Men's Rights Movement, are very justified in their positions. It is feminism that is illegitimate and dangerous. It is brave men who stood up to these feminist monsters and for that these men are heroes.
Very sincerely,
Masculist Man-Masculist/Men's Rights Activist and Man Going His Own Way
BTW, the pet store is having a sale on cats but only if you buy in bulk which I'm sure you will. So while you are renewing your restraining orders against Dave you can go buy 50 cats at a time.
Saturday, August 11, 2018
Thursday, October 6, 2016
George Will does not get it or MGTOW in action
Why Are Millions of Men Choosing Not to Work By George Will
American men who choose not to work are choosing lives of quiet self-emasculation.
The “quiet catastrophe” is particularly dismaying because it is so quiet, without social turmoil or even debate. It is this: After 88 consecutive months of the economic expansion that began in June 2009, a smaller percentage of American males in the prime working years (ages 25 to 54) are working than were working near the end of the Great Depression in 1940, when the unemployment rate was above 14 percent. If the labor-force-participation rate were as high today as it was as recently as 2000, nearly 10 million more Americans would have jobs. The work rate for adult men has plunged 13 percentage points in a half-century. This “work deficit” of “Great Depression–scale underutilization” of male potential workers is the subject of Nicholas Eberstadt’s new monograph Men Without Work: America’s Invisible Crisis, which explores the economic and moral causes and consequences of this: Since 1948, the proportion of men 20 and older without paid work has more than doubled, to almost 32 percent. This “eerie and radical transformation” — men creating an “alternative lifestyle to the age-old male quest for a paying job” — is largely voluntary. Men who have chosen to not seek work are two and a half times more numerous than men that government statistics count as unemployed because they are seeking jobs. What Eberstadt calls a “normative sea change” has made it a “viable option” for “sturdy men,” who are neither working nor looking for work, to choose “to sit on the economic sidelines, living off the toil or bounty of others.” Only about 15 percent of men 25 to 54 who worked not at all in 2014 said they were unemployed because they could not find work. For 50 years, the number of men in that age cohort who are neither working nor looking for work has grown nearly four times faster than the number who are working or seeking work. And the pace of this has been “almost totally uninfluenced by the business cycle.”
The “economically inactive” have eclipsed the unemployed, as government statistics measure them, as “the main category of men without jobs.” Those statistics were created before government policy and social attitudes made it possible to be economically inactive.
Eberstadt does not say that government assistance causes this, but obviously it finances it. To some extent, however, this is a distinction without a difference. In a 2012 monograph, Eberstadt noted that in 1960 there were 134 workers for every one officially certified as disabled; by 2010 there were just over 16. Between January 2010 and December 2011, while the economy produced 1.73 million nonfarm jobs, almost half as many workers became disability recipients. This, even though work is less stressful and the workplace is safer than ever. America ranks 22nd, ahead of only Italy, in 25 to 54 male labor-force participation. Largely because of government benefits and support by other family members, nonworking men 25 to 54 have household expenditures a third higher than the average of those in the bottom income quintile. Hence, Eberstadt says, they “appear to be better off than tens of millions of other Americans today, including the millions of single mothers who are either working or seeking work.”
America’s economy is not less robust, and its welfare provisions not more generous, than those of the 22 other affluent nations of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Yet America ranks 22nd, ahead of only Italy, in 25 to 54 male labor-force participation. Eberstadt calls this “unwelcome ‘American Exceptionalism.’”
In 1965, even high-school dropouts were more likely to be in the workforce than is the 25 to 54 male today. And, Eberstadt notes, “the collapse of work for modern America’s men happened despite considerable upgrades in educational attainment.” The collapse has coincided with a retreat from marriage (“the proportion of never-married men was over three times higher in 2015 than 1965″), which suggests a broader infantilization. As does the use to which the voluntarily idle put their time — for example, watching TV and movies 5.5 hours daily, two hours more than men who are counted as unemployed because they are seeking work. Eberstadt, noting that the 1996 welfare reform “brought millions of single mothers off welfare and into the workforce,” suggests that policy innovations that alter incentives can reverse the “social emasculation” of millions of idle men. Perhaps. Reversing social regression is more difficult than causing it. One manifestation of regression, Donald Trump, is perhaps perverse evidence that some of his army of angry men are at least healthily unhappy about the loss of meaning, self-esteem, and masculinity that is a consequence of chosen and protracted idleness.
Source
It is George Will and other blue pill conservatives like him that do not see what is obvious to those of us in the manosphere. In fact we called it right. Feminism begets gynocentricity,gynocentricity begets misandry and the results of misandry are the situation we have today. Men are checking out and I don't blame them. Men are figuring why give a fuck about a society that doesn't give a fuck about them. Politicians cater to women at the expense of men. California is scraping its statue of limitations for sex crimes. Why? I guess to crucify Bill Cosby when he is tried there. The democrats changed the law to lynch a black man. I guess they are the Dixie party after all.
American men who choose not to work are choosing lives of quiet self-emasculation.
The “quiet catastrophe” is particularly dismaying because it is so quiet, without social turmoil or even debate. It is this: After 88 consecutive months of the economic expansion that began in June 2009, a smaller percentage of American males in the prime working years (ages 25 to 54) are working than were working near the end of the Great Depression in 1940, when the unemployment rate was above 14 percent. If the labor-force-participation rate were as high today as it was as recently as 2000, nearly 10 million more Americans would have jobs. The work rate for adult men has plunged 13 percentage points in a half-century. This “work deficit” of “Great Depression–scale underutilization” of male potential workers is the subject of Nicholas Eberstadt’s new monograph Men Without Work: America’s Invisible Crisis, which explores the economic and moral causes and consequences of this: Since 1948, the proportion of men 20 and older without paid work has more than doubled, to almost 32 percent. This “eerie and radical transformation” — men creating an “alternative lifestyle to the age-old male quest for a paying job” — is largely voluntary. Men who have chosen to not seek work are two and a half times more numerous than men that government statistics count as unemployed because they are seeking jobs. What Eberstadt calls a “normative sea change” has made it a “viable option” for “sturdy men,” who are neither working nor looking for work, to choose “to sit on the economic sidelines, living off the toil or bounty of others.” Only about 15 percent of men 25 to 54 who worked not at all in 2014 said they were unemployed because they could not find work. For 50 years, the number of men in that age cohort who are neither working nor looking for work has grown nearly four times faster than the number who are working or seeking work. And the pace of this has been “almost totally uninfluenced by the business cycle.”
The “economically inactive” have eclipsed the unemployed, as government statistics measure them, as “the main category of men without jobs.” Those statistics were created before government policy and social attitudes made it possible to be economically inactive.
Eberstadt does not say that government assistance causes this, but obviously it finances it. To some extent, however, this is a distinction without a difference. In a 2012 monograph, Eberstadt noted that in 1960 there were 134 workers for every one officially certified as disabled; by 2010 there were just over 16. Between January 2010 and December 2011, while the economy produced 1.73 million nonfarm jobs, almost half as many workers became disability recipients. This, even though work is less stressful and the workplace is safer than ever. America ranks 22nd, ahead of only Italy, in 25 to 54 male labor-force participation. Largely because of government benefits and support by other family members, nonworking men 25 to 54 have household expenditures a third higher than the average of those in the bottom income quintile. Hence, Eberstadt says, they “appear to be better off than tens of millions of other Americans today, including the millions of single mothers who are either working or seeking work.”
America’s economy is not less robust, and its welfare provisions not more generous, than those of the 22 other affluent nations of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Yet America ranks 22nd, ahead of only Italy, in 25 to 54 male labor-force participation. Eberstadt calls this “unwelcome ‘American Exceptionalism.’”
In 1965, even high-school dropouts were more likely to be in the workforce than is the 25 to 54 male today. And, Eberstadt notes, “the collapse of work for modern America’s men happened despite considerable upgrades in educational attainment.” The collapse has coincided with a retreat from marriage (“the proportion of never-married men was over three times higher in 2015 than 1965″), which suggests a broader infantilization. As does the use to which the voluntarily idle put their time — for example, watching TV and movies 5.5 hours daily, two hours more than men who are counted as unemployed because they are seeking work. Eberstadt, noting that the 1996 welfare reform “brought millions of single mothers off welfare and into the workforce,” suggests that policy innovations that alter incentives can reverse the “social emasculation” of millions of idle men. Perhaps. Reversing social regression is more difficult than causing it. One manifestation of regression, Donald Trump, is perhaps perverse evidence that some of his army of angry men are at least healthily unhappy about the loss of meaning, self-esteem, and masculinity that is a consequence of chosen and protracted idleness.
Source
It is George Will and other blue pill conservatives like him that do not see what is obvious to those of us in the manosphere. In fact we called it right. Feminism begets gynocentricity,gynocentricity begets misandry and the results of misandry are the situation we have today. Men are checking out and I don't blame them. Men are figuring why give a fuck about a society that doesn't give a fuck about them. Politicians cater to women at the expense of men. California is scraping its statue of limitations for sex crimes. Why? I guess to crucify Bill Cosby when he is tried there. The democrats changed the law to lynch a black man. I guess they are the Dixie party after all.
Sunday, May 8, 2016
W.C. Fields is no friend of men
A Voice For Men posted an article about W.C.Fields as a MGTOW. However at the end they have this:
This is not to say he was not capable of offering advice to budding MGTOWs. When an interviewer asked him how a young man could build wealth, he replied “When the little beggar is only ten years old, have him castrated and his taste buds destroyed. He’ll grow up never needing a woman, a steak, or a cigarette. Think of the money saved.”
Source scroll down to the bottom.
I know that AVFM has cut on MGTOW's in the past so I'm wondering if this salute is being offered with the left hand. As far as I'm concerned if anyone says a something like that they are no friend to men.
This is not to say he was not capable of offering advice to budding MGTOWs. When an interviewer asked him how a young man could build wealth, he replied “When the little beggar is only ten years old, have him castrated and his taste buds destroyed. He’ll grow up never needing a woman, a steak, or a cigarette. Think of the money saved.”
Source scroll down to the bottom.
I know that AVFM has cut on MGTOW's in the past so I'm wondering if this salute is being offered with the left hand. As far as I'm concerned if anyone says a something like that they are no friend to men.
Sunday, December 21, 2014
Sunday, July 20, 2014
Definitions
There have been a lot of definitions to MRA's,PUA's,MGTOWers,Masculinists and Masculists and they have been mutually exclusive. But what if they are not. What if they are not mutually exclusive but in fact stages. I believe that true MRA's (those that avoid feminism and leave the admin duties and editorial policy to the MEN there) and Masculinists/Masculists can get along. There are the pro-feminist stooges but they are not part of this discussion. Certainly both groups can combat misandry in the cultural and legal arenas of their respective societies. Certainly a lot of PUA's have adopted MRA/Masculinist tactics in standing up to women and chellenging them. A lot of guys before the PUA thing just played it nice. While it may be true that PUA's are avoiding the political arena it is also true that a lot of MRA's/Masculinists/Masculists have used PUA tactics to get women. MGTOWers may have or have not,depends. I believe they would be the last group to use PUA tactics but if they wanted to they would employ them. I'm not saying PUA's are the supreme way to go far from it but those tactics are used. If a PUA gets tired of the shallow bar scene and a lot of them do they may either become MGTOWers or MRA's/Masculinists/Masculists. If they want to make a difference on all levels: cultural,legal,social and societial in general then they'll embrace the latter definition. These are the various stages of the manosphere.
Thursday, May 10, 2012
Beware of women using tactics to throw us off
When I think of women like this I think of Emma and how she played everyone except me. I pointing to Emma in the link not FS or ACLAF because that feud is over so leave it alone. But we can see what the MRA/MGTOW guy in the video was saying is that women are changing their tactics. Women will try to manipulate you but you can't let that happen. They are trying to derail the MRM,we can't let them do that. Onward we fight.
Friday, March 23, 2012
Pro-MRA music video
Check this video out. It fucking rocks. Finally a pro-MRA video that tells it like it is. Thank you Jade Michael for this video. May it be played throughout the MRM community.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)