nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

MGTOW = “men going their own way”

iptba

I know there is already a thread on men's rights, but really MGTOW is something quite specific and elsewhere on the Internet, discussions and discussion forums are very often separate.

Also, women can be interested in men's rights, just as men can be interested in women's rights and feminism, but MGTOW is pretty much just for men.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Church on Tuesday

Tinytemper wrote: »

It can't be just me who finds the men who usually subscribe to the ideas behind the incel, mgtow or whatever groups, to be really sad individuals who are seeking for reasons to explain their lack of success with women. They usually resort to blaming women themselves. I think that's easier to stand behind than having to admit that they just aren't that attractive as a partner. Not looks wise but in many aspects of their life. Bitterness is not an attractive trait.

This. Looks are only a small part of it. If you're going around like a moody bollix and have a chip on your shoulder with destructive habits, you may as well start planning the log cabin now my friend.

The problem nearly always lies with these men rather than the women they are trying to pursue. That may seem harsh but it's just the simple reality. Another thing these men seem to not understand is that, in life, very few people will actually be attracted to you on the whole. In other words, surface attraction is fine, but to meet someone you really click with and your outlooks on life more or less match? that's as rare as hens teeth, when it happens it's great, probably the best most fulfilling experience in the world; but it's something that seldom happens.

The most important thing to do is focus on yourself and live your life, If your self esteem and self worth revolves around likes (or rather lack of) on Tinder and you measure yourself by that false metric, then you're ****ed. I have always found the more you move forward in life, the more good things and opportunities fall onto your lap.

Sn@kebite

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

The most important thing to do is focus on yourself and live your life, If your self esteem and self worth revolves around likes (or rather lack of) on Tinder and you measure yourself by that false metric, then you're ****ed. I have always found the more you move forward in life, the more good things and opportunities fall onto your lap.

This is similar to these middle-class feminist types. Hiding in sociology degree programmes and getting likes on instagram feeds and sucking up to only the uni (TCD-esque) types is a large part of their life. A lot of mgtow seem like a male version of this. It's everyone else's fault. They have their legitimate points as do a lot of feminists but a lot of it just isn't activism it's more inferiority. A type of self-pity and a deeply embedded negativity which leads to conspiracy theory attitudes.

Church on Tuesday

Sn@kebite wrote: »

This is similar to these middle-class feminist types. Hiding in sociology degree programmes and getting likes on instagram feeds and sucking up to only the uni (TCD-esque) types is a large part of their life. A lot of mgtow seem like a male version of this. It's everyone else's fault. They have their legitimate points as do a lot of feminists but a lot of it just isn't activism it's more inferiority. A type of self-pity and a deeply embedded negativity which leads to conspiracy theory attitudes.

Pretty much. It boils down to a certain lack of self improvement or the want to self improve. If you were to make even small improvements to your life you would be amazed at how better physically you feel and how your mental outlook on things improve.

You can't just sit on your arse and feel sorry for yourself, well you can, and I've been there trust me but you won't have much of a life and you will miss out. Rather than being bitter about negative past life experiences, it is always better to learn from them and frankly it makes you a better man for it.

Wibbs

Sn@kebite wrote: »

This is similar to these middle-class feminist types. Hiding in sociology degree programmes and getting likes on instagram feeds and sucking up to only the uni (TCD-esque) types is a large part of their life. A lot of mgtow seem like a male version of this. It's everyone else's fault. They have their legitimate points as do a lot of feminists but a lot of it just isn't activism it's more inferiority. A type of self-pity and a deeply embedded negativity which leads to conspiracy theory attitudes.

Yup, both cheeks of the same smelly gender politic arse. Feminism: Women are always agentless victims and it's always the fault of men/patriarchy. MGTOW/Incel: Men are always agentless victims and it's always the fault of women/matriarchy. Both have their silly jargon too. The only difference is the whinging feminist types get significantly more airtime and leeway.

One thing(though this is a while back so maybe it's changed.. Is it even a thing now?) about the PUA lot that I noticed stood out as different was that they actually took responsibility. :eek: Sure they couched it in moronic Yank sales pitches and endless jargon and some nasty misogyny as a cherry on top, but they were quite clear that the reason the guy wasn't getting laid/a girlfriend was down to him. He needed to improve, he needed to be the better catch, He needed to go to the gym, He needed to get a better haircut, clothes etc and actually ask women out(with a 19.99 vid and e book and "system"...). If it hadn't been mired in a kilometre deep level of bullsh1te it had a few points buried under the crap. Personal responsibility being the biggest. Not a popular angle these days with so many and so many movements and politics and philosophies.

john123470

Originally Posted by Tinytemper

"It can't be just me who finds the men who usually subscribe to the ideas behind the incel, mgtow or whatever groups, to be really sad individuals who are seeking for reasons to explain their lack of success with women. They usually resort to blaming women themselves. I think that's easier to stand behind than having to admit that they just aren't that attractive as a partner. Not looks wise but in many aspects of their life. Bitterness is not an attractive trait."

^^ can all MGTOW's be written off as "sad individuals" .. ?
What makes one "attractive to a partner" ? - Johnny Depp looks, money, a sense of humour ? MGOTW members are allowed to possess these traits

The above post seems to imply that "success" with women will invariably end with marriage and kids - otherwise one becomes a bitter old man who will sign up to the likes of MGTOW groups and "blame" women for their lot

I have read thru the MGOTW site .. find it irreverent, amusing.
They don't advocate for a celibate life - sex is there to be enjoyed. The underpinning philosophy seems to suggest that the great pussy hunt that ends (usually) with wife and sprogs is not all its cracked up to be.

I see nothing wrong with that view. Oddly enough, it is usually women who dismiss it as pitiful

Sn@kebite

Wibbs wrote: »

Yup, both cheeks of the same smelly gender politic arse. Feminism: Women are always agentless victims and it's always the fault of men/patriarchy. MGTOW/Incel: Men are always agentless victims and it's always the fault of women/matriarchy. Both have their silly jargon too. The only difference is the whinging feminist types get significantly more airtime and leeway.

I suppose this is the guilt ridden 'woke' culture a previously oppressed group must be endlessly pandered to as a type of reparation. And white middle-class women love it. (Why wouldn't they?)

The issue is they are not just given air time they focus obsessively on the West and ignore systemic oppression of women around the world and are utterly unchallenged. This is more where MRAs come in as possibly a primary movement where I see MGTOW as a sort of offshot. The fact that there are more and more advantages and help for you if you are female and the hypocrisy of MRAs just cannot be compared with feminism which is a more unabashed fine art.

The idea of governments pandering to the "gender pay gap" and men in engineering schools fall over themselves trying to get more women into the approximately 80% male-dominated physics/eng/compsci yet these middle-class white women sit in mental health sciences of 96% female-dominated and are uncontested in their hypocrisy as male tailored services just aren't there due to a female lens default. If MRAs talk about this within seconds feminists derail to hold the female dominated areas in place (health science, biological sciences, arts, humanities, social sciences [you see it's almost everything?) and not an eye-lid batted and women in these fields don;t show any concern at the imbalance. They act as if women are subjugated even though they dominate social narratives via soc-sci channels run by themselves and white females disallow men's groups forming on campuses while telling us all universities are run by men for men. It's a joke tbh. It's got to the stage governments are trying to get more men into teaching to create role models for boys.

This is where I think MRAs point out this hypocritical, self-serving feminist sh1te point directly at feminists as the problem whereas in contrast, MGTOW just blame all women in general and treat it as women are just not worth the hassle. But I think feminists =/= women at all although all women do benefit from a lot of this BS so MGTOW possibly are noticing that.

Errashareesh

Sn@kebite wrote: »

This is similar to these middle-class feminist types. Hiding in sociology degree programmes and getting likes on instagram feeds and sucking up to only the uni (TCD-esque) types is a large part of their life. A lot of mgtow seem like a male version of this. It's everyone else's fault. They have their legitimate points as do a lot of feminists but a lot of it just isn't activism it's more inferiority. A type of self-pity and a deeply embedded negativity which leads to conspiracy theory attitudes.

I saw a comment on YouTube from someone about the drudgery of the working day for a middle-aged working-class man (it was actually a clip of the dad in The Wonder Years

) and the commenter said "And we don't even have the luxury now of a woman to come home to, because women only go for the top 20 per cent of men."

Yes, that's right. 80 per cent of men are single.

Whereas the reality is that most people are in a relationship. For some men, there is no interest in them from women. And this sucks - don't get me wrong. I don't wish that on anyone. But instead of facing up to this (which isn't easy I know) they decide it's women who are the problem. Women are nasty, selfish, vain, gold digging, vapid bitches. Of course some are, but in the context I'm talking about it's women full stop, no matter who they are. It's easier to think this. It's also a sign of only being attracted to those bitchy types. Not a reasonable position no matter what.

Can't stand today's feminism either (I'm a white middleclass woman but more influenced by the likes of Gloria Steinem than the current crop. Old skool feminists are also being condemned by younger, woke feminists now due to the transgender debates).

[Deleted User]

You're not reading posts by 60-year-old married men. The people posting that sort of stuff are more likely to be younger and the numbers are skewed pretty heavily. 80% is actually fairly accurate around the age of 25-30, an age where people could be comparing their progress in life to their parents. I know mine had children and a house by then. Not really saying I agree with the sentiment but you have to be aware of how this stuff breaks down before you dismiss it.

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp4hf/cp4hf/ms/

Figure 1.2 Click the buttons.

"By age 33 women were more likely to be married than single, while for men this happened at age 35."

Wibbs

Deleted User wrote: »

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-cp4hf/cp4hf/ms/

Figure 1.2 Click the buttons.

"By age 33 women were more likely to be married than single, while for men this happened at age 35."

Eh... Who were the 33 year old women all married to then, other women, themselves? Nope, they were married to men. Likely those 35 year old men as men and women tend to pair up where the guy is a few years older.

The plain fact is most people end up in a relationship of a long term nature, bad, good or indifferent.* Most have a kid or more.

Now for those men who've never had a relationship by say 30 this is a problem and a hard enough nut to crack. Sad to say, but honestly it's down to the guy. Now often it's most certainly not his fault. I mean if he's by nature extremely reserved and introverted then that's a major hurdle to jump and a major disadvantage unless he gets lucky(and many do). If he's fallen out of the ugly tree and hit all the branches going down then that's not a positive, though of the guys I know who've had the most action only one is actually handsome. One guy I know who has never been without female company since his teens and his wife is obviously younger and better looking always struggled with his weight and very average in looks and wouldn't be a great raconteur by any means. How does he do it? He never stopped trying and often failing and lord he had some I can't watch car crash type public examples of being blown out of it. But he kept putting the effort in. It's how he operates in life. Try, fail, move on, try again. If in the morning his wife left him, if he was still single in six months I'd be shocked. And he's in his mid fifties.

*it has been my experience that the latter is most in play.

IAMAMORON

It also needs to be said that mgtows are foregoing that most pleasureable pursuit of the unrequited.... the chase.

Call me old fashioned but i do like life better when the seeds of love are potentially on the horizon. I am putting my hands up here, I am a hopeless romantic. I need to be crushing on someone, it gives me soul and fills me with aspiration. I am a midnight hour junckie, full confession.

Ubbquittious

For every lad who is into this MGTOW carry on there is some woman sitting at home under a duvet with a bottle of wine, a jar of nutella and netflix on. Do those have an organised movement yet? Most of them are also on tinder but couldn't be bothered with anyone

This is a big thing in South Korea anyway https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/til-death-do-i-stay-single-south-koreas-nomarriage-women

Modern life must be to blame for some part of it. You can sit at home soaking up an endless amount of (pixel-based) entertainment and food and drink without rising out of one's seat and soon you'll be able to do it all on your universal basic income. No need to bother with having a partner, sure after the honey moon period finishes you'd be only having rows anyway.

If all the modern conveniences disappeared in the morning the women with the netflix and nutella would all be crying out for a fat fella with a big beard who used to play computer games all day to help bring in the turf and slaughter the pigs.

[Deleted User]

Get the impression that things looked very bleak for young fellas a few years ago, but the balance is shifting, am noticing a bit of push back against the more ludicrous elements of feminism recently.
It won’t be picked up by the likes of the Irish Times for a long time yet, but it’s becoming ‘a thing’ on social media.

ancapailldorcha

Wibbs wrote: »

Now for those men who've never had a relationship by say 30 this is a problem and a hard enough nut to crack. Sad to say, but honestly it's down to the guy. Now often it's most certainly not his fault. I mean if he's by nature extremely reserved and introverted then that's a major hurdle to jump and a major disadvantage unless he gets lucky(and many do). If he's fallen out of the ugly tree and hit all the branches going down then that's not a positive, though of the guys I know who've had the most action only one is actually handsome. One guy I know who has never been without female company since his teens and his wife is obviously younger and better looking always struggled with his weight and very average in looks and wouldn't be a great raconteur by any means. How does he do it? He never stopped trying and often failing and lord he had some I can't watch car crash type public examples of being blown out of it. But he kept putting the effort in. It's how he operates in life. Try, fail, move on, try again. If in the morning his wife left him, if he was still single in six months I'd be shocked. And he's in his mid fifties.

Well, I have my health I suppose.

Ubbquittious wrote: »

For every lad who is into this MGTOW carry on there is some woman sitting at home under a duvet with a bottle of wine, a jar of nutella and netflix on. Do those have an organised movement yet? Most of them are also on tinder but couldn't be bothered with anyone

This is a big thing in South Korea anyway https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/til-death-do-i-stay-single-south-koreas-nomarriage-women

Modern life must be to blame for some part of it. You can sit at home soaking up an endless amount of (pixel-based) entertainment and food and drink without rising out of one's seat and soon you'll be able to do it all on your universal basic income. No need to bother with having a partner, sure after the honey moon period finishes you'd be only having rows anyway.

If all the modern conveniences disappeared in the morning the women with the netflix and nutella would all be crying out for a fat fella with a big beard who used to play computer games all day to help bring in the turf and slaughter the pigs.

I don't think it's that aspect of modern life.

To address your link, from what I know a lot of Asian countries are quite patriarchal so if feminism is making grounds there then this is a logical corollary.

Back to modern life, I think it's become quite a bit more difficult for people to go down the route that their parents did, setting aside whether or not they want to. Anyone who wants any sort of a career is strongly incentivised to move to a big city. More tenants means rents skyrocket and there's only political will to maintain the status quo, not fix it. My Father worked while my Mum maintained the farm, shopped, cleaned and took care of us. Here in London, I'd need a partner just so we could split the rent on a single bedroom flat. Of course we could move out of the city and commute but then there's the obscene commuting costs and time wasted to boot.

Not to say that it's impossible. If the government tripled the price of Coca-Cola tomorrow, people would still buy it, just in smaller amounts. Couples are still buying houses and starting families. I think for a lot of people, if they don't think they'll ever get on the property ladder, they adopt a stronger mindset of living in the moment and so spend on experiences like travelling. I don't drink, don't drive, own a phone, rarely go out (Introvert life, joy) and pay less than a score a month for said phone and if I ever buy here it'll be down to my folks giving me a dig out, not my savings.

I'll stick to my map-staring simulator even though modern conveniences are pretty much here to stay. I managed to impress someone at work by knowing where Brunei is so I have that.

H3llR4iser

Ubbquittious wrote: »

For every lad who is into this MGTOW carry on there is some woman sitting at home under a duvet with a bottle of wine, a jar of nutella and netflix on. Do those have an organised movement yet? Most of them are also on tinder but couldn't be bothered with anyone.

There are, lots of them as a matter of fact - but guess what? It is an universally accepted fact, by mainstream media, that their plight be the fault of men.

Woman can't find a guy? It's because there aren't any "real men" left. She has one or multiple off-putting characteristics that objectively restrict her pool? It's the fault of men for basically not lowering their standards and accept her as she is.

Heck, even the "beauty standards" imposed by fashion and the "lifestyle magazines" culture, mostly imposed by women on women for women, it's normally blamed on men, regardless of the fact that most dudes would quite frankly fcuk a hole in the wall if someone painted a pair of tiddies near it.

I get all of the criticism of the various "men's movements" - be it MGTOW, MRA and even "incel", a lot of it is just self pitying; Yet in an environment where each and every single issue affecting women is openly, publicly and incessantly blamed on men, is it really that surprising that some criticism starts flying the other way? As long as we have the single woman = men's fault and single man = his own fault attitude, all of this is going basically nowhere.

ancapailldorcha

H3llR4iser wrote: »

There are, lots of them as a matter of fact - but guess what? It is an universally accepted fact, by mainstream media, that their plight be the fault of men.

Woman can't find a guy? It's because there aren't any "real men" left. She has one or multiple off-putting characteristics that objectively restrict her pool? It's the fault of men for basically not lowering their standards and accept her as she is.

Heck, even the "beauty standards" imposed by fashion and the "lifestyle magazines" culture, mostly imposed by women on women for women, it's normally blamed on men, regardless of the fact that most dudes would quite frankly fcuk a hole in the wall is someone painted a pair of tiddies near it.

I get all of the criticism of the various "men's movements" - be it MGTOW, MRA and even "incel", a lot of it is just self pitying; Yet in an environment where each and every single issue affecting women is openly, publicly and incessantly blamed on men, is it really that surprising that some criticism starts flying the other way? As long as we have the single woman = men's fault and single man = his own fault attitude, all of this is going basically nowhere.

And not once will you ever hear an appraisal of what she brings to the table. Only her criteria.

milehip

Sunny Disposition wrote: »

Get the impression that things looked very bleak for young fellas a few years ago, but the balance is shifting, am noticing a bit of push back against the more ludicrous elements of feminism recently.
It won’t be picked up by the likes of the Irish Times for a long time yet, but it’s becoming ‘a thing’ on social media.

Any particular example(s) of this push back you'd care to illustrate?

[Deleted User]

Into my 30s now and still no interest from women. Will be changing career now and once I'm settled in that and still single I'll be moving to a couple of acres with a shed to dick about with woodwork and cars and bikes. Might as well get some benefit from being on my own. :pac:
Women aren't interested, never have been so yeah, that means I hate them. :pac:

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't see what the problem is. It seems no matter what men do, it's open to ridicule, especially by women like Laura Bates who write books titled Men Who Hate Women. She wrote the article linked above.

Nice guys are mocked.

Nice guys aren’t mocked. “Nice” guys are. There’s a difference. The “nice” guy is a guy who thinks that being (their idea) of nice entitles them to a relationship or sex with whoever they are aiming that “niceness” at. Most women have experienced this guy at some point in their lives. These guys are in reality not very nice at all and that reveals itself sooner or later.

Whereas a sound guy who is just sound will not be mocked. Because they are not expecting anything simply for being a decent human being.

[Deleted User]

Ah the old "expectations" thing. I don't **** anyone over, treat people well, am well-read and have various interests. How dare I "expect" that any woman in Ireland might possibly consider giving me the time of day?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Deleted User wrote: »

Ah the old "expectations" thing. I don't **** anyone over, treat people well, am well-read and have various interests. How dare I "expect" that any woman in Ireland might possibly consider giving me the time of day?

Did you miss the part where I said your average, genuinely nice guy doesn’t have those expectations? It’s weird that my post prompted your post. If you are just a sound guy, why would you even think I was talking about you?

There is a particular strain of “nice” guy - that’s who gets mocked. In reality they turn out to be quite sullen and bitter (and it’s thankfully pretty obvious, pretty quickly) because the nice thing didn’t work. Thankfully they are not that commonplace.

[Deleted User]

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Did you miss the part where I said your average, genuinely nice guy doesn’t have those expectations? It’s weird that my post prompted your post. If you are just a sound guy, why would you even think I was talking about you?

There is a particular strain of “nice” guy - that’s who gets mocked. In reality they turn out to be quite sullen and bitter (and it’s thankfully pretty obvious, pretty quickly) because the nice thing didn’t work. Thankfully they are not that commonplace.

Because I'm one of the losers who can't get a woman despite the fact that I would consider myself a decent person. If I say I'm nice then does that not get put in inverted commas?

Mongfinder General

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Men-Strike-Boycotting-Marriage-Fatherhood/dp/1594037620

Men on strike was a book written a few years ago. It basically sets out the reasons why men aren't arsed about getting married nowadays. There's too much to lose. They don't gain anything by getting married. So why do it?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Deleted User wrote: »

Because I'm one of the losers who can't get a woman despite the fact that I would consider myself a decent person. If I say I'm nice then does that not get put in inverted commas?

Do you act sullen and bitter when rejected? If not, then you are not who I’m talking about.

[Deleted User]

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Do you act sullen and bitter when rejected? If not, then you are not who I’m talking about.

No I immediately strut into town with Walking on Sunshine blaring from a car following me at walking pace like any normal person would.

[Deleted User]

It's like there are three types of nice guys. The arseholes who think their being nice entitles them to women and they're bitter, the lads in middle who are just nice and lack any sort of "game" and can't see a woman being interested, and the nice guys who do. The ones in the middle end up friendzoning themselves but don't expect that the woman should like them romantically just because they get on well.

Just my opinion.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Deleted User wrote: »

No I immediately strut into town with Walking on Sunshine blaring from a car following me at walking pace like any normal person would.

Okay then, maybe you are who I’m talking about after all. You seem determined to steer yourself into that category for some reason.

Deleted User wrote: »

It's like there are three types of nice guys. The arseholes who think their being nice entitles them to women and they're bitter, the lads in middle who are just nice and lack any sort of "game" and can't see a woman being interested, and the nice guys who do. The ones in the middle end up friendzoning themselves but don't expect that the woman should like them romantically just because they get on well.

Just my opinion.

And of course the first category aren’t actually nice at all.

[Deleted User]

I've been told I'm in the category. Generally I find stating facts that are not flattering to women gets one called names quite quickly.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Deleted User wrote: »

I've been told I'm in the category. Generally I find stating facts that are not flattering to women gets one called names quite quickly.

How do you mean? This is me being genuinely curious now, not confrontational!

[Deleted User]

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

How do you mean? This is me being genuinely curious now, not confrontational!

For example if I say "Women are just as shallow as men" that's an instant "Uh-oh, loser"/"You hate women".

In the spirit of not being confrontational the rush to label and for want of a better term, "blame" guys for having any slightly undesirable ideas helps push them toward the reddit/4chan losers. Women who have negative experiences with guys are told it's not their fault and guys are assholes. Guys who make any complaint about women (regardless of experience) are told they're wrong, get over themselves, why do you think you're "entitled" to anything anyway? Etc.

Sn@kebite

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

And not once will you ever hear an appraisal of what she brings to the table. Only her criteria.

It seems a general unspoken consensus that just be being female (especially if she's white, middle-class and a feminist) is an absolute treasure chest in itself that a man is a lucky fcker for her to condescend to settling for him (as I'm sure you were alluding to).

It seem a general embedded view of underneath everything women are good (sugar, spice and all things nice) while men underneath everything are bad. This is how feminism ironically set it's foundations especially academically that men bring a damage and destruction to the world and women bring a healing and nurturing virtue to the world. It's patriarchy (goldie-locks and the three bears/little red riding hood) and benevolent sexism but it's upheld by women and male feminist types (Obama/Biden and that idiot Jackson Katz).