ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Sunday, May 17, 2015

Anti-GamerGate is afraid


CisWhiteMale ‏@Userlich
hey @voxday how do you feel about being lumped with Elliot Rodger

King of Bros ‏@Doomskander
I think it's more hilarious that he's further on the scary scale than Rodger

Vox Day ‏@voxday
I feel I'd like to correct them. I am considerably scarier than an inept loser like Elliot Rodger.

Labels:

147 Comments:

Anonymous fish May 17, 2015 12:04 PM  

Who the hell is Elliot Roger?

Blogger Mark Citadel May 17, 2015 12:04 PM  

Now THIS is comedy gold.The slightest threat to the Modern dogma, and they shatter like Waterford crystal! I wonder how scary Scalzi thinks you are. Probably warp factor 10.

Anonymous fish May 17, 2015 12:05 PM  

Who the hell is Elliot Roger?

Oh that guy?

Blogger VD May 17, 2015 12:07 PM  

I wonder how scary Scalzi thinks you are.

You don't understand how SJWs think. Or rather, don't think. They simply react with mindless opposition. So, if I deny being scary, they insist I am. If I appear to enjoy being thought scary, they insist that I am so cuddly and adorable.

And their reaction one day does not necessarily have anything to do with what it will be the next day.

Anonymous David-093 May 17, 2015 12:09 PM  

They take pride in being pitiful.

"See?! We're not scary at all! Nobodys intimidated by us!"

And they wonder why they were bullied as kids.

Blogger LP 999/Eliza May 17, 2015 12:16 PM  

Again, wow, some people have no idea our host is superintel and an awca.

This is surreal!

Vox and other men ALREADY went their way in their pursuits and what God has called them to - wow, just wow. the chart is unreal.

Is this a joke?

Anonymous Earl May 17, 2015 12:22 PM  

MGTOW is funny to them. Until MGTOWs are stepping on their backs climbing into the lifeboats first. Or looting and burning the people who are married with children and own some property.

I don't like or trust MGTOW. As much as I preach controlling Western women, men need to be kept in check as well. Men require different incentives, they respond differently to force and shaming tactics. Hordes of men with nothing in this world but their own hedonism is a real scary problem.

Anonymous Jack Amok May 17, 2015 12:23 PM  

I like how a bunch of blue-haired, Jabba the Hutt impersonators that need a 5-axis chart to plot their sexuality labeled two groups of their opponents "weirdos"

Blogger Danby May 17, 2015 12:26 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Danby May 17, 2015 12:27 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Danby May 17, 2015 12:29 PM  



I had no idea who Elliot Rodger was either. Turns out he's the ultra-gamma/omega that shot up UCSB last year. Shot the betas cause he couldn't get laid.

Do they even realize HE'S ONE OF THEM? You know the drill, neuroatypical, mental and emotional disorders, couldn't fuck a girl though his life depended on it. He blamed the men who could get laid for the fact that he couldn't. He just refused to go full Gamma, dye his hair in rainbow stripes, change his name to Alexandrina Erann, and start sucking cock.

Blogger Nate May 17, 2015 12:33 PM  

MTGOW should be way more toward the sad end than the hilarious end.

Blogger Tommy Hass May 17, 2015 12:44 PM  

Why would theredpill be scary but Return of Kings not?

Why on earth would Paul Elam be scary?

Blogger Tommy Hass May 17, 2015 12:44 PM  

MGTOW hating is kind of stupid.

Anonymous BigGaySteve May 17, 2015 12:51 PM  

,men need to be kept in check as well. Hordes of men with nothing in this world but their own hedonism is a real scary problem.

Yes you have to keep them on a tight lease.

Anonymous meh May 17, 2015 12:52 PM  

Why would Elliot Roger be scary? He's dead.

Anonymous zen0 May 17, 2015 12:57 PM  

> And their reaction one day does not necessarily have anything to do with what it will be the next day.

They know neither themselves or their enemy, so will be in peril every time.

Blogger Chiva May 17, 2015 12:59 PM  

It is interesting. In the beginning of all this the SJWs thought VD was a hilarious hick, then over time they thought he was a 'sad' misguided individual. Now they are afraid. Could it be that over time the veneer of their beliefs are wearing thin in regard to their arch-nemesis?

Be afraid, be very afraid - Elmer Fudd.

Blogger VD May 17, 2015 1:01 PM  

Why would Elliot Roger be scary? He's dead.

Dude, zombie apocalypse.

Blogger Antonio From Spain May 17, 2015 1:22 PM  

This must be some heretic SWJ. Their official party line had always been that MGTOW are sad pathetic losers, but here they are classified as non-sad hilarious.

Then, of course, hilarious is "arousing great merriment; extremely funny", how can that intersect with sad?

Etc...

Anonymous Mike May 17, 2015 1:23 PM  

I just think it's funny that ROK was put in the sad circle along with the hilarious one. They do a lot of good, as it happens.

Anonymous NorthernHamlet May 17, 2015 1:33 PM  

A group of SJWs and Vox Day walk into a bar...

The bar gets burned to the ground.

Anonymous Roundtine May 17, 2015 1:42 PM  

Famous anti-gamergaters: Tipper Gore and Hitler.

Blogger HickoryHammer #0211 May 17, 2015 1:46 PM  

So which one of these spastic nipple lickers had the moxie to draw up a ven diagram of butthurt? Congrats on being in the just plain scary category by the way, that's how they show that they're truly afraid that you might be an effective leader.

Blogger Nate May 17, 2015 1:47 PM  

"Dude, zombie apocalypse."

we've been over this. that's not scary. That's fun.

Blogger Nate May 17, 2015 1:47 PM  

"So which one of these spastic nipple lickers had the moxie to draw up a ven diagram of butthurt?"

HEY!

WHAT'S WRONG WITH LICKING NIPPLES????

Anonymous Jack Amok May 17, 2015 1:50 PM  

This must be some heretic SWJ. Their official party line had always been that MGTOW are sad pathetic losers, but here they are classified as non-sad hilarious.

Then, of course, hilarious is "arousing great merriment; extremely funny", how can that intersect with sad?


The reality is the entire Venn diagram is a lie for them. SJWs don't actually understand any distinctions between sad, funny and scary. They just have one big circle labelled "Enemies", then they make up reasons to dislike the people in it.

Anonymous Jack Amok May 17, 2015 1:52 PM  

we've been over this. that's not scary. That's fun.

For us, sure, but for SJWs? Remember, they're afraid of guns.

Blogger JohnR219 May 17, 2015 2:07 PM  

Chiva: Your comment reminds me about the what Gandhi said about movements....First they ignore you....etc...

Anonymous Wyrd May 17, 2015 2:12 PM  

...they insist that I am so cuddly and adorable.

Still waiting for the official Vox Day troll doll to put on my nightstand.

Blogger Giuseppe May 17, 2015 2:28 PM  

Dude, zombie apocalypse.
ok I actually laughed at that one.

Blogger Rek. May 17, 2015 2:32 PM  

I like how MGOTWs are seen as hilarious. It has always been my sentiment that a man backing down from a challenge because of some false pretense doesn't only make no sense but is quite simply laughable cowardice.

Anonymous 10900209 May 17, 2015 2:33 PM  

This is really interesting. Notice how the "sad" and the "hilarious" circles basically denote the same basic premise: "you're a sexually-irrelevant loser to be ostracized." The "scary" circle indicates the sorts of people they'd like to have arrested.

More evidence for the theory that leftists only have two modes of dealing with their opposition: snide and sarcastic jeering and social ostracization, or the Red Terror, Khmer Rouge kill-everyone-with-glasses-because-they're-part-of-the-oppressive-power-structure. When they're politically weak, they sneer at you and make charts about how sad and hilarious you are; when they're strong, they round you up with your whole family and have you sent to a 'reeducation' camp.

Social justice warriors killed 100 million people last century.


Blogger VFM 188* May 17, 2015 2:47 PM  

More than 100 million.

Blogger Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus May 17, 2015 2:58 PM  

Just goes to show that people making Venn diagrams definitely don't have Game.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 17, 2015 3:04 PM  

Oh, wow, another graphical version of Disqualify, how original.

To summarize severl comments:
SJW's almost always act like the mean girl clique in middle school.
This is not a coincidence.

Anonymous Aeoli Pera May 17, 2015 3:31 PM  

Hang on, they think Vox is scary now? After he gamed a half-ass award in some little corner of nowhere? Imagine after he literally scalps an SJW or two. Ask me about my colon cleansing diet!

Now I think of it, that would make for some great reaction videos on YouTube.

Blogger SWW May 17, 2015 3:38 PM  

Vox is scary because??? Ideas are scary?

Blogger Cee May 17, 2015 4:12 PM  

Ideas are the leading cause of feelbad among SJWs, so they're terrifying.

Blogger 1sexistpig2another May 17, 2015 4:21 PM  

I realize my ignorance will be showing when I ask, but I'm afraid I must. What is a vlogger?

Blogger HickoryHammer #0211 May 17, 2015 4:23 PM  

@1sex video blogger I think

Blogger Cataline Sergius May 17, 2015 4:31 PM  

So is, that one actor you used to like, Adam Baldwin or Mercedes Carrera?

Blogger Cataline Sergius May 17, 2015 4:32 PM  

So is, that one actor you used to like, Adam Baldwin or Mercedes Carrera?

Blogger 1sexistpig2another May 17, 2015 4:34 PM  

Can someone please give me an accurate definition for MGTOW? I see a lot of criticism of the movement (or what ever it is) here and I would like to know what exactly is being criticized.

Anonymous WinstonWebb May 17, 2015 4:38 PM  

Can someone please give me an accurate definition for MGTOW? I see a lot of criticism of the movement (or what ever it is) here and I would like to know what exactly is being criticized.

I dunno, either. But I would guess, based on the name alone, that it was a bunch of gammas that have given up on landing the object of their [creepy] affections and have decided to go gay instead.

Just a guess, mind you.

Blogger HickoryHammer #0211 May 17, 2015 4:40 PM  

WHAT'S WRONG WITH LICKING NIPPLES????

Hairy Scalzi nipples that were just worked out of a summer dress, slippery with salty nerd sweat.

Blogger HickoryHammer #0211 May 17, 2015 4:44 PM  

@1sex - Men Going There Own Way. Think brave hermit, bravely fapping in a cave somewhere so that no women might profit off the sweat of his brow, however tangentially.

Blogger 1sexistpig2another May 17, 2015 5:00 PM  

But I would guess, based on the name alone, that it was a bunch of gammas that have given up on landing the object of their [creepy] affections

I'm not well versed in the greek categorization of male stereo types, but I gather from what I've read that a gamma is something like an effeminate nerd. When I think of a man going his own way, I picture Jeremiah Johnson or Wild Bill Hickock, but I'm pretty sure that is not what is meant by most who use the term these days.

Blogger HickoryHammer #0211 May 17, 2015 5:04 PM  

When I think of a man going his own way, I picture Jeremiah Johnson or Wild Bill Hickock, but I'm pretty sure that is not what is meant by most who use the term these days.

I'm sure they do too. There MO is to swear off all women, because they don't want to be falsely accused of rape or have their.. manly essence... stolen to make babies against their will.

Blogger Corvinus May 17, 2015 5:11 PM  

If I was an SJW making the chart, I'd have Elliot Rodger as plain sad, Return of Kings as sad-scary, and MGTOW as sad-hilarious.

I guess it shows that SJWs have scrambled eggs for brains.

Anonymous Jack Amok May 17, 2015 5:13 PM  

Can someone please give me an accurate definition for MGTOW?

Gammas making a sour-grapes virtue out of not being able to get a date.

Blogger Corvinus May 17, 2015 5:14 PM  

And Gavin McInnes as hilarious-scary.

Blogger 1sexistpig2another May 17, 2015 5:29 PM  

...because they don't want to be falsely accused of rape or have their.. manly essence... stolen to make babies against their will.

Does anybody want this? I know I wouldn't. Back when I was a fornicating heathen I took extra careful steps not to impregnate any of my girlfriends as even in my ignorance I knew they would have been terrible mothers (and I not so good a father). I'll say this though, had a baby been conceived I would have moved heaven and earth (if possible) to protect him or her.

As for swearing off all women, there are a variety of religious orders where men do just that. I suppose that is more like going God's way though (MGGW?).

Although I'm pretty sure flapping is not an effective solution, in this day and age I don't fault any man for avoiding western women. As a group they are indeed toxic IMO and most are not marriage material. I wonder if my opinion of the adult western female puts me in the MGTOW fraternity or at least a western branch (MGTOW in the west?). I don't care either way, I'm still trying to figure it out.

Blogger 1sexistpig2another May 17, 2015 5:35 PM  

I'd like to reset everything back to the 1700s except for technology. I know it's impossible, but if it were, where would that put me on the Anti-GamerGate chart above?

Anonymous BGS May 17, 2015 5:51 PM  

"I'd like to reset everything back to the 1700s except for technology. I know it's impossible, but if it were, "

If a Carrington event level CME hits you might get your wish. The tech would still exist but a 80% die off would happen before it worked again. If we are lucky it would happen over winter.

Blogger Tommy Hass May 17, 2015 6:08 PM  

The derision towards MGTOW shows that Vox was right. With friends like these, who needs enemies?

MGTOW are men who recognize that men are being used as beasts of burden, often against their will, and will take steps to prevent this from happening. That's it really.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 17, 2015 6:27 PM  

HickoryHammer
@1sex - Men Going There Own Way. Think brave hermit, bravely fapping in a cave somewhere so that no women might profit off the sweat of his brow, however tangentially.


A popular cartoon, that one, and funny thing is it's the same picture feminists like to draw of the Ilk. So the irony here is funny.

A more likely picture: middle aged man who's been frivorced, living in a 1 bedroom apartment and paying his bills and his ex's as well, who is now bitter towards women in general for some reason or other and has no intention to remarry.

The divorce rate in the US is 40%, and between 60% and 70% of divorces are filed by women. So mathematically, it looks like MGTOW as bitter, frivorced man is more likely to be true than the other one.

I'm open to dialectic on this. Rhetoric? Not so much.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 17, 2015 6:31 PM  

WHAT'S WRONG WITH LICKING NIPPLES????

Whose? Seems likely the Scalzied manboobies can lick their own. Do they? I don't know, and don't want to know.

Anonymous Jack Amok May 17, 2015 6:41 PM  

MGTOW are men who recognize that men are being used as beasts of burden, often against their will, and will take steps to prevent this from happening. That's it really.

Men are supposed to be beasts of burden. Success is about controlling where you're carrying the burden and how much you get out of the deal. Sloughing everything onto the ground and sulking off into the darkness is surrender, not victory.

Anonymous Jack Amok May 17, 2015 6:50 PM  

The divorce rate in the US is 40%, and between 60% and 70% of divorces are filed by women. So mathematically, it looks like MGTOW as bitter, frivorced man is more likely to be true than the other one.

60 to 70% of divorces are filed by women, and probably half the rest are filed by men on behalf of the women, so at least 80% of divorces are the woman's idea.

I've got a lot of sympathy for guys who were screwed over in a divorce. Likely they were the victims of bad information as much as anything else. Society tells a lot of lies about women.

What I don't have any sympathy or tolerance for is guys claiming marriage is all shit because their own try didn't work out. It's one thing to say "here are the mistakes I made kid, so you can learn from them." It's another to say even trying is a bad idea. A man's lot in life is to get knocked down and get back up. A lot. Preferably learning something each time. It's not unmanly to fail. It is unmanly to quit. It's worse than unmanly to encourage other men to give up. If we are in a culture war, you might even call that sedition.

Anonymous MendoScot May 17, 2015 6:54 PM  

MGTOW are men who recognize that men are being used as beasts of burden

Correct.

often against their will

Correct.

and will take steps to prevent this from happening.

Hopefully.

That's it really.

No. They need to hear the skirl of the pipes, and the beat of the drums.

We are not fighting on their behalf, but that they may not be.

Derision is not sufficient because they will put the knife in our back, given an adequate offer from the other side.

The lines are drawn.

Blogger Remo - Vile Faceless Minion #99 May 17, 2015 6:54 PM  

So a man who looks at the terrain, sees no woman anywhere worth marrying, reads his bible and sees the quote from St. Paul about it being better for a man never to touch a woman, has two to ten friends that have been destroyed / enslaved to due alimony / childsupport, etc. is a stupid, hilarious, surrendering man child? Then he looks around and sees no incentives to work hard due to government taxation, business destroying activities, and an active mindset to punish success at every turn (unless you're a banker or politician).

It is into this environment that you wish to call out Men for not marrying that slut and working themselves to death to benefit others and you're going to use shaming tactics same as the rabid feminists?

Precisely what level of negative incentive needs to exist before a man can judge the situation as not being worth it? Right now it makes sense to sign up for every government hand out you can in order to bankrupt the beast. I'm not living in America but if I was I would see no incentive to work hard for others benefit or sign up for slavery.

Blogger Josh May 17, 2015 7:13 PM  

Oh god...not another MGTOW thread...

Anonymous MendoScot May 17, 2015 7:17 PM  

Remo, it's war.

You can fight it at your personal level, in your family, your church, your political element...

But you will fight it or give in. How far do you think you can run? I live near Patagonia, and I can assure you that the same is occurring here.

When I fight, I think about my wife and daughter. So, in winning you lose. And I would not give that up for anything.

Blogger Salt May 17, 2015 7:20 PM  

Still waiting for the official Vox Day troll doll to put on my nightstand

A bobble-head for the car.

Blogger Tommy Hass May 17, 2015 7:25 PM  

"Men are supposed to be beasts of burden."

Nope. Beasts of burden have no say where their labor go to.

I cannot blame a man who refuses to expose himself to risks that are frankly insulting.

It's like refusing to join the army after they've pozzed themselves out and fight wars for Israel and global bankers. Nothing shameful about that.

I mean, it depends where you are. In some places, marriage isn't a preposterous risk and leaving no posterity behind with no family is harsh. But in some places, the downsides are so significant and numerous, that going Galt is the right thing to do.

Who the hell gets married in CANADA, for instance?

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 17, 2015 7:35 PM  

What I don't have any sympathy or tolerance for is guys claiming marriage is all shit because their own try didn't work out. It's one thing to say "here are the mistakes I made kid, so you can learn from them." It's another to say even trying is a bad idea.

How many men say this, vs. just quietly step away from the rigged casino? Can you provide numbers, i.e. some dialectic, or is this going to just be another thread full of feminine-style "Man up and marry a slut because Women are Wonderful" rhetoric?

Come on, what's a bigger threat to the average man, a bitter divorced man or the feminist who runs Human Resources? What's a bigger threat to a married man, VAWA or MGTOW? Which can order men with guns into his home to arrest him on the basis of one phone call, feminism or MGTOW?

But if "man up and marry that baby momma!" is your idea of manliness, by all means teach your sons that lesson. Don't whine to me if it works out poorly.

Blogger 1sexistpig2another May 17, 2015 7:35 PM  

So far to me it seems like those that are anti-MGTOW have a different definition of MGTOW than those that are pro-MGTOW.

Sorry Josh for stirring up yet another MGTOW argument. I'm just trying to make sense of it all.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 17, 2015 7:41 PM  


Who the hell gets married in CANADA, for instance?


Or California. Some years ago that state quit reporting its divorce numbers, just quit. The divorce rate was over 50% in the first 10 years at the time. Unless the law has changed, 10 years is a magic number, after that lifetime alimony is quite common. Not just child support, alimony.

That's nuts, it's a holdover from the 1950's, and it's cash&prizes for women any time they want to pull the trigger. If the marriage rate in California is down, that's got to be one reason.

More dialectic, please.

Blogger Tommy Hass May 17, 2015 7:44 PM  

I was actually thinking of California.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 17, 2015 7:44 PM  

MendoScot

But you will fight it or give in. How far do you think you can run? I live near Patagonia, and I can assure you that the same is occurring here.


Near Nogales, or south of the Equator?

When I fight, I think about my wife and daughter. So, in winning you lose. And I would not give that up for anything.

When you "fight", how? How are you fighting, what are you fighting, and whom are you fighting?

I see the group of men who are called MGTOW as a collection of walking wounded. Some might be patched up and could go back to fight, some are so badly wounded all that can be done for them is a kind word and some basic care, and there's everything in between. But they are clearly men who have been damaged by the dominent, feminist culture. Why some regard them as enemies isn't clear to them.

Look if shooting the walking wounded on your own side is your idea of how to win a war, I'd say you have an issue with your targetting indicator.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 17, 2015 8:05 PM  

My token effort for the day was in Sunday school, in a room mainly full of married couples over 40. The issue of marriage in the context of Ephesians came up, and there was a pretty chapter-verse discussion. None of that "mutual submission" stuff. Then the class leader noted that lots of people still want to get married, but not in the context of God's word. He started talking about homosexuals, then got diverted.

Before we left that verse I raised my hand and pointed out that the latter part of chapter 5 is all about being married, not getting married. I then went on to state that lots and lots of people nowadays want to get married, but they don't necessarily want to be married.

Dead silence ensued. Nobody in any church thinks that way, even though the evidence is all around us. Listen to the college men and women, really shut up your big, Real Man yaps and listen to them. Find out how many grew up in a broken home, a home where their mother frivorced their father. You'll find, if you can actually listen, that about 40% of college students come from divorced homes.

So 40% of college men have never seen what a successful marriage looks like close up. They do know what it looks like when one blows up, and who pays the price. Meanwhile, a lot of women are taught from childhood that they must spend their 20's "finding their voice" and having adventures, so that when they settle down at 29 they will be interesting mommies. Riding the cock carousel isn't good preparation for marriage, can we all at least agree on that?

There's a reason that the majority of men under 30 in the US are not married, and it isn't due to MGTOW's, in fact some number (like, 40%) of those men likely are MGTOW because they saw their own mother frivorce their father.

The real reason most men under 30 aren't married is simple: most women under 30 don't want to get married yet. And with that heresy, I'll take a break for a while.

Shaming language won't work on them. Because it sounds just like their feminist mothers, perhaps.

Blogger Cail Corishev May 17, 2015 8:14 PM  

I've got a lot of sympathy for guys who were screwed over in a divorce.

What I don't have any sympathy or tolerance for is guys claiming marriage is all shit because their own try didn't work out.


Jack, we continue to be of like minds today. I don't blame the man who's decided the marriage game isn't for him. He might be making the wisest choice for himself. I just get tired of him showing up on forums where other men -- while knowing the risks -- are talking about how to make marriage work, and accusing every man less stridently anti-marriage than himself to be a fool or a feminist. Usually he looks like he's trying to convince himself of something.

Not every MGTOW does that, of course, but enough of them do that they set the tone for their "movement."

Blogger Josh May 17, 2015 8:14 PM  

Sorry Josh for stirring up yet another MGTOW argument. I'm just trying to make sense of it all.

Not your fault. You're not the one writing five paragraph comments about how Not All MGTOW Are Like That.

Blogger Eric May 17, 2015 8:16 PM  

I like how MGOTWs are seen as hilarious. It has always been my sentiment that a man backing down from a challenge because of some false pretense doesn't only make no sense but is quite simply laughable cowardice.

It's always been my sentiment that people with your sentiment are idiots. Walking away from a rigged game isn't cowardice, it's just wisdom. You're the kind of guy who keeps playing three card monty because unlike everyone else, you're gonna win eventually.

Blogger 1sexistpig2another May 17, 2015 8:25 PM  

What I don't have any sympathy or tolerance for is guys claiming marriage is all shit because their own try didn't work out. It's one thing to say "here are the mistakes I made kid, so you can learn from them." It's another to say even trying is a bad idea.

The problem with this is that marriage in a western country is NOT marriage, at least not in the biblical sense. For many men, it often IS a very bad idea. What is fraudulently passed off as marriage today is a three way business contract between: the state and two other parties:

a woman and a man, or
a woman and a woman, or
a man and a man, or
a woman and her dog, or
a woman and a bridge, or
a woman and herself, ect, ect...

1st, the state does NOT recognize God. 2nd, the state doesn't even understand what constitutes a marriage. 3rd, the state is the dominant party in the contract agreement. 4th, the state highly favors women over men and laws are written accordingly.

As a matter of fact the state works very hard to make the role of the husband impotent and irrelevant. I for one certainly would not hold it against someone for opting out of such a one sided deal.

Is there something else that makes MGTOW bad (aside from the cave fapping)? I ask because I don't see avoiding "marriage" to a western woman in a western country as such a bad idea.

Blogger Cail Corishev May 17, 2015 8:29 PM  

The real reason most men under 30 aren't married is simple: most women under 30 don't want to get married yet.

I've been pretty hard on your MGTOW rants (you really need to stop accusing us of pushing marriage to single moms and sluts, when no one here has done that), but you're absolutely right about this. Yes, a few younger men are starting to intentionally take a pass on marriage, but they're vastly outnumbered by the young women, for whom the norm is to put off marriage until the script calls for it at about age 29-ish. And most of those young men would get in the marrying mood if the girls were and didn't give away the milk for free.

Girls, with the encouragement of their parents and everyone else around them, have been delaying marriage later and later in favor of school and career and "personal exploration" for a couple decades now, and men are adapting to the new program.

Blogger kh123 May 17, 2015 8:31 PM  

Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn.

Blogger kh123 May 17, 2015 8:36 PM  

...Coupled with "A pledge, and then ruin."

Though the caveat the Sicilian adds on this point is worth noting.

Blogger Cee May 17, 2015 8:53 PM  

Girls, with the encouragement of their parents and everyone else around them, have been delaying marriage later and later in favor of school and career and "personal exploration" for a couple decades now, and men are adapting to the new program.
Not all of us are riding the cock carousel, thankfully, but even those of us raised in an intact home with an idea of marriage and family as the best possible goods can get shoved pretty far off course (by education, mental illness, or whatever else) and fail to marry when we ought to. Which doesn't mean it wasn't my fault for getting my priorities screwed up, but it's frighteningly easy to buy into the idea that there's limitless time for "all that other stuff" once you've got your degree and your career.

I blame men not at all for not wanting to try in that situation. Hooray for catch-22's.

Anonymous Jack Amok May 17, 2015 10:34 PM  

Precisely what level of negative incentive needs to exist before a man can judge the situation as not being worth it?

Can't really do a risk/reward tradeoff without considering the reward. And once you consider the reward, my question becomes, what risk is too great to take for the sake of your family?

Nope. Beasts of burden have no say where their labor go to.

Quibble if you want, but the point is that being a man means bearing a burden, and it means bearing it for someone else. There's a reason we're bigger, stronger and smarter than we need to be to just take care of ourselves.


But if "man up and marry that baby momma!" is your idea of manliness,

It always comes back to that with gammas, doesn't it? They just can't imagine any sort of marriage other than marrying a used up alpha widow fresh off the carousel. Well, if that was the best you could ever do, yeah, go your own way, sure. But maybe, just maybe, you might have a chance to do better than that. Or if you don't, some other guy might, so stop trying to undermine him.

The problem with this is that marriage in a western country is NOT marriage, at least not in the biblical sense.

Who said anything about government marriage? Seriously, you need to stop defining things in the worst possible light and using that as an excuse to give up. It seems you think biblical marriage is a good thing? Well, go build a biblical marriage for yourself then. I'm pretty sure God hasn't stopped recognizing them. The point is that you can't wait around for someone else to solve your problems for you - that's what women do.

Shaming language...

First, using that phrase is a gamma tell. Second, a man absolutely should be and will be ashamed of unmanly behavior. Third, my goal isn't to shame men but to encourage them to overcome their fears and realize their potential. The fears are real, they are legitimate, but you still need to go forth and conquer.

Anonymous MendoScot May 17, 2015 10:35 PM  

When you "fight", how? How are you fighting, what are you fighting, and whom are you fighting?

Well, that's the question, isn't it?

Anonymous Jack Amok May 17, 2015 10:44 PM  

So far to me it seems like those that are anti-MGTOW have a different definition of MGTOW than those that are pro-MGTOW.

Yeah, partly that's right. Maybe we can say there's the strong MGTOW position and the weak MGTOW position. The strong position are those people, as Cail said, "accusing every man less stridently anti-marriage than himself to be a fool or a feminist." They're like some coward running through camp before a battle screaming "we're all gonna die! The enemy is invincible!"

Just shoot them as a traitor before they cause any more damage.

Then there's the weak position, the guys who have just given up on marriage or civilization. If they've given up after making a fair try at it, if they've been knocked down and gotten back up, but they just finally got knocked down one too many times and they're just going to quietly sit the rest out, I've got no problem with them.

if they haven't even tried though...

Blogger Tommy Hass May 17, 2015 10:49 PM  

"And once you consider the reward, my question becomes, what risk is too great to take for the sake of your family? "

You're a fool. What family? You take risks for your existent family not for one that doesn't exist.

Blogger Cee May 17, 2015 10:51 PM  

You're a fool. What family? You take risks for your existent family not for one that doesn't exist.
Can you just accidentally a family without risking anything to get it?

Blogger Cail Corishev May 17, 2015 11:05 PM  

You take risks for your existent family not for one that doesn't exist.

Come on, no one's time orientation is that short. Do you also demand that your employer pay you up front, because you're not going to work for a paycheck that doesn't exist yet? Good grief.

I think the MGTOW position has enough logical consistency that it should be possible to defend it without hiding behind dishonest jibes. Maybe I'm wrong.

Blogger Josh May 17, 2015 11:28 PM  

I think the MGTOW position has enough logical consistency that it should be possible to defend it without hiding behind dishonest jibes. Maybe I'm wrong.

As we've seen in this thread, if their position has a logical consistency, they should use that. Instead it's the typical assortment of straw man arguments, complaints about shaming language, and putting words in the mouths of their opponents.

Blogger automatthew 0062 May 17, 2015 11:29 PM  

"I think the MGTOW position has enough logical consistency that it should be possible to defend it without hiding behind dishonest jibes. Maybe I'm wrong."

All weak positions get infiltrated. Actually, all positions get infiltrated. If they can do it to Schopenhauer, they can do it to you.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 17, 2015 11:49 PM  

Josh

Not your fault. You're not the one writing five paragraph comments about how Not All MGTOW Are Like That.


Ok, Josh, since there is no definition of MGTOW here aside from "Target For Two Minute Hate", suppose you define MGTOW. Or shall we wait for your buddy Thordaddy to show up with one of his riffs, instead?

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 17, 2015 11:57 PM  

Cail Corishev
I don't blame the man who's decided the marriage game isn't for him. He might be making the wisest choice for himself.

No, he's a parasite and the enemy of civilization. I read it here in the previous thread, on the Internet, so it must be true. You're contradicting other members of the Ilk with this statement, and it could be that such an attempt at reasonableness might be taken badly.

I just get tired of him showing up on forums where other men -- while knowing the risks -- are talking about how to make marriage work, and accusing every man less stridently anti-marriage than himself to be a fool or a feminist.

I asked you before for examples, and you pointed to exactly one posting on Alpha Game and handwaved about "swarms of MGTOW's" at Dalrock's that don't seem to be there in numbers more than previously. Could you put a number of some sort on "swarm", or is math just not your thing?

Because I don't see what you are going on about, not here, not at Alpha Game aside from that one circus, not at Dalrock's. Maybe it's that way at some reddits, but do you seriously expect any thought there?

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 18, 2015 12:07 AM  

The real reason most men under 30 aren't married is simple: most women under 30 don't want to get married yet.

Cail Corishev
I've been pretty hard on your MGTOW rants

Not even. You haven't offered any facts beyone one Alpha Game comment stream and some hyperventilating hysteria about "swarms" of MGTOW's at Dalrock's. Everything else you've trotted out is warmed-over rhetoric not all that different from the junk thought feminists serve up.

(you really need to stop accusing us of pushing marriage to single moms and sluts, when no one here has done that),

What I've seen in this thread and the previous one is no different than the junk that nancy-boy preachers in churches serve up on a regular basis. Men must marry, no exceptions, and any man who isn't married and raising children is a parasite, that's one clear message from the last thread. If that isn't "man up and marry that single mother", it's close enough.

but you're absolutely right about this. Yes, a few younger men are starting to intentionally take a pass on marriage, but they're vastly outnumbered by the young women, for whom the norm is to put off marriage until the script calls for it at about age 29-ish. And most of those young men would get in the marrying mood if the girls were and didn't give away the milk for free.

Are you sure you want to actually criticize women like this? Because that looks like something a bitter, porn addict loser in the basement of his mother's house who faps his small penis all day would write.

Girls, with the encouragement of their parents and everyone else around them, have been delaying marriage later and later in favor of school and career and "personal exploration" for a couple decades now, and men are adapting to the new program.

Amazingly accurate. But you forgot to place the blame on men for women's actions, so I don't think you are meeting expectations for this or the previous thread.

If you keep this up, you'll have to go to a self-criticism session, confess that you have MGTOW tendencies, and request Real Man re-education. Just warning you, that's all.

Anonymous Jack Amok May 18, 2015 12:11 AM  

Come on, no one's time orientation is that short. Do you also demand that your employer pay you up front, because you're not going to work for a paycheck that doesn't exist yet? Good grief.

You've got to make an ante if you want the dealer to deal you some cards.

Blogger Cuca Culpa May 18, 2015 12:19 AM  

SJW's almost always act like the mean girl clique in middle school.
This is not a coincidence.


Except in high school they looked like Malibu Barbie, not Nancy Spungen.

Blogger MrNiceguy May 18, 2015 12:22 AM  

I didn't think it was possible, but I think you've just put me off nipples forever.

OK, maybe an hour out so. Fifteen minutes, at least...

Blogger Markku May 18, 2015 12:23 AM  

that's one clear message from the last thread. If that isn't "man up and marry that single mother", it's close enough.

You are delusional and solipsistic. You just took what Nate said, put your own interpretation on it, and then imagined it's what "everybody" is saying. Because for a solipsist, there is only "me" and "the others", and "the others" are interchangeable. What one says, is what the other says.

There is no one, not a ONE here, that would call marrying a single mother or an ex alpha carousel slut the better option than being alone. Not even Nate, who had the strongest words for you. Even Nate was only saying that the loser option is to swear off marriage altogether.

I could paraphrase Nate's suggested alternative, but it's presumptuous to speak for someone when they are there to speak for themselves. But what I can say is that it doesn't involve single mothers or alpha widows.

Anonymous Jack Amok May 18, 2015 12:34 AM  

You're a fool. What family? You take risks for your existent family not for one that doesn't exist.

So, you're waiting for a family to exist before you'll take the risks needed to actually gain one? I'm perfectly willing to give mulligans during a debate. Perhaps you want to take one here.

Blogger Markku May 18, 2015 12:36 AM  

We have our secret circles. Of about a hundred Ilk. Nate and Josh are in them.

Now, I'm single, childless, and no immediate prospects for marriage. Guess how much shit I get for it? None. (Except rarely from Vox.) Because I'm not flying my loser flag. THAT is what causes all the contempt in fathers with intact families who have invested their lives in raising the next generation as pro-civilization. Taking actual pride in doing nothing.

Blogger Markku May 18, 2015 12:39 AM  

*starts to count seconds to getting shit in Secret Circles*

Because I know how the Ilk operates...

Blogger Cuca Culpa May 18, 2015 12:41 AM  

The divorce rate in the US is 40%, and between 60% and 70% of divorces are filed by women. So mathematically, it looks like MGTOW as bitter, frivorced man is more likely to be true than the other one.

In some places you don't even have to be married, just cohabiting. That's why the secular institution (corporate merger with unconscionable terms) is doomed.

Frivorce... that's a good way of putting it.

Blogger Cuca Culpa May 18, 2015 12:46 AM  

I live near Patagonia, and I can assure you that the same is occurring here.

Always heard there's lots of imported Canadian beaver down there... still the case?

Blogger JDC May 18, 2015 12:48 AM  

Now, I'm single, childless, and no immediate prospects for marriage

You got to get on that.

And thank whoever it was who put the image of a scantily sheathed scalzi suckling himself. I may need ophthalmic retraining to remove the image from my brain.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 18, 2015 12:54 AM  

Cee
Not all of us are riding the cock carousel, thankfully, but even those of us raised in an intact home with an idea of marriage and family as the best possible goods can get shoved pretty far off course (by education, mental illness, or whatever else) and fail to marry when we ought to.

Some of the Real Men ought to spend some time listening to young women in high school honors or AP classes. All of them are constantly bombarded with careerism, they are urged to join the National Honor Society not because it's a good thing by itself but because it will look good on their application to an Ivy college. Bright young women in high school are told flat out by some guidance counselors that marriage can wait until they have graduated from college and established their career.

Young women are being taught to avoid marriage. And they are doing so until they close in on 30. Real Men can blame that on MGTOW all they want, but that rhetoric fails to match the facts.

I thought dialectic was valued here. Looks like on some topics it is not.

Blogger Cuca Culpa May 18, 2015 12:54 AM  

Who the hell gets married in CANADA, for instance?

My parents received a letter from the Governor-General for their 50th anniversary. I often tell them they should have received a medal. Out of my 30-odd cousins who married after 1985, only about five couples are still together. 10 of us never married, the rest on number two or cohabiting. Not very good odds. I'm no MGTOW but I see their point.

Blogger Remo - Vile Faceless Minion #99 May 18, 2015 12:55 AM  

Entering a game with a better than 40% chance of lifetime destitution without considering the consequences is foolish. Puffing out your chest and pretending that you so alpha it can't be happening to me! (Jack Amok) is completely moronic. You can get married but pushing people to do this in high risk countries because ALPHA ALPHA ALPHA is not a useful proposition to most. Essentially what is being communicated is if you don't take this horrible chance at getting destroyed you're not alpha and if you do get destroyed (as 40% do) then you're also not alpha and oh if you point out the odds and consider them well by gum then you're REALLY not alpha and you should be ashamed of yourself.

The only answer to that is basically a middle finger and a chuckle when they personally discover the divorce machine first hand. I will personally enjoy hearing the laments from folks like Jack from my new distant home country (where marriage is a much less risky option). Still go ahead roll those rigged dice and pretend you're immune to reality because ALPHA!!!

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 18, 2015 1:02 AM  

But if "man up and marry that baby momma!" is your idea of manliness,

It always comes back to that with gammas, doesn't it? They just can't imagine any sort of marriage other than marrying a used up alpha widow fresh off the carousel.

Dude, that's what the nancy-boy preachers push every day in churches across the country. You can see it for yourself if you wanted to, pick a big evangelical church, maybe a Vineyard, where any single man is introduced to some babymomma by the ladies of the church, who are carrying their husbands balls in their purse and a copy of some book by Rachel Held Evans or Sheila Gregoire, etc. in the other.

It's reality, whether you want to open your eyes or not.

Well, if that was the best you could ever do, yeah, go your own way, sure.

Wait, you would allow men to make their own decisions about their future? That contradicts the implied theonomy of the rest of your Real Man rant, dude. I'll wait while you look up the hard word I just used.

But maybe, just maybe, you might have a chance to do better than that. Or if you don't, some other guy might, so stop trying to undermine him.

Dude, I'm just reporting what I see in churches. So sorry that reality does not match up with your pedestalizing idolatry of women, but that's the way it is.

Blogger MrNiceguy May 18, 2015 1:03 AM  

I didn't think it was possible, but I think you've just put me off nipples forever.

OK, maybe an hour out so. Fifteen minutes, at least...

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 18, 2015 1:07 AM  

Jack Amok
Shaming language…

First, using that phrase is a gamma tell.

Yeah, maybe, or maybe pedestalizing, woman-worshpping idolators like you just don't like it when your standard finger-pointing, "man up and marry that slut NOW, buster" jive doesn't work.

Second, a man absolutely should be and will be ashamed of unmanly behavior.

Who defines "unmanly behavior", dude? Did your wife take your balls out of her purse for a minute and let you wear them just for this posting? Or did she just let you hold the purse for a while, and pretend to wear them?

Third, my goal isn't to shame men but to encourage them to overcome their fears and realize their potential.

Yeah, that's why you write like a feminist. Because you want to encourage men. Sure, that's believeable.

Anonymous Jack Amok May 18, 2015 1:08 AM  

Fine Remo. Go your own way.

Just don't expect my grandkids to fix your roof when it's leaking and your 90 year old bones can't climb the ladder any more.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 18, 2015 1:10 AM  

When you "fight", how? How are you fighting, what are you fighting, and whom are you fighting?

MendoScot
Well, that's the question, isn't it?

I never liked Robin Williams and I did not watch that movie.

Can you answer the direct question, or do the rules of the blog not apply in some comment threads?

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 18, 2015 1:15 AM  

Cail Corishev

I think the MGTOW position has enough logical consistency that it should be possible to defend it without hiding behind dishonest jibes. Maybe I'm wrong.


I think the "man up and marry a babymomma" position ought to have enough logical consistency that it should be possible to defend it without hiding behind dishonest jibes, passive-aggressive snark or other feminized "debate" styles, but I might be wrong.

Meanwhile in April I was in a megachurch where babymommas were treated with the same respect as married women. Seems to me the Ilk should understand why that's wrong, but now after this and the precious thread I'm not sure or anyone else here is capable of understanding why honoring babymommas with their little bastards is wrong, both in terms of dialectic and Scripture.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 18, 2015 1:19 AM  

Josh
As we've seen in this thread, if their position has a logical consistency, they should use that. Instead it's the typical assortment of straw man arguments, complaints about shaming language, and putting words in the mouths of their opponents.

Boy, you are funny. The only strawmen have come from those who want to punish frivorced men for the crime of failing to submit to women enough.

Now why don't you run along and play with your buddy Thordaddy?

Anonymous Jack Amok May 18, 2015 1:26 AM  

Puffing out your chest and pretending that you so alpha it can't be happening to me! (Jack Amok)

Sure it could happen. I'm not infallible. My wife's not infallible. My kids could turn out to be ungrateful cretins. One of my brothers is divorced (twice). One of my nephews is a meth-head. I even have a niece who wants to be a lawyer and work in D.C. Life has no shortage of disappointments. But that's no reason to go hide in a cave.

Dude, that's what the nancy-boy preachers push every day in churches across the country.

Then why do you listen to them?


Did your wife take your balls out of her purse for a minute and let you wear them just for this posting? Or did she just let you hold the purse for a while, and pretend to wear them?

I dunno. I was too busy enjoying the blowjob she was giving me to notice where her purse was. As to who defines what "manly" is... I do. There are several folks around here I'd be willing to listen to if they objected to my definition. You're not one of them.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 18, 2015 1:35 AM  

that's one clear message from the last thread. If that isn't "man up and marry that single mother", it's close enough.

You are delusional and solipsistic.

Dude, you are in Finland and I'm on the ground in the US. If you are insisting that I deny what I see with my own eyes, hear with my own ears, who's delusional and who's solipsistic?

Come to the US and spend time in evangelical mega's, in progressive Catholic parishes, in the lady-pastor Lutheran chuches, in Rachel Held Evans Episcopal church, in the PC-USA, etc. You can see it with your own eyes, then.

You just took what Nate said, put your own interpretation on it, and then imagined it's what "everybody" is saying.

Dude, again, I'm seeing US churches, you're in Finland, do you see any possible problem with your perception?

Because for a solipsist, there is only "me" and "the others", and "the others" are interchangeable. What one says, is what the other says.

Hey, that pretty much describes Jack Amok with his hissy fit over men who refuse to marry sluts. Pretty funny.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 18, 2015 1:38 AM  

We have our secret circles. Of about a hundred Ilk. Nate and Josh are in them.

Any jerks there? Just asking.

Now, I'm single, childless, and no immediate prospects for marriage.

Then according to some here, you are a parasite and a threat to civilization. Better man up and marry something female ASAP, lest you cause the decline and fall of Finland by next Tuesday. Ask Jack Amok for advice on how to go about that.

Blogger Markku May 18, 2015 1:39 AM  

Dude, you are in Finland and I'm on the ground in the US. If you are insisting that I deny what I see with my own eyes, hear with my own ears, who's delusional and who's solipsistic?

No, I would probably entirely agree on your assessment of the statistical probability of success. It is slightly better here, as child support is rare, and alimony almost non-existent. But the psychology of the women is similar-ish. The chances are in the same ballpark, hence I'm single.

No, rather you are delusional about what the people here are suggesting. It is not marrying single mothers or alpha widows. You have constructed a false reality that is hilariously divorced from the actual reality.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 18, 2015 1:57 AM  

Dude, that's what the nancy-boy preachers push every day in churches across the country.

Jack Amok
Then why do you listen to them?

When did I claim that I did, dude? Could you try just a little dialectic once in a while, or is it too difficult for you?

As for the nancy-boy preachers, plenty of men who don't know better wind up paying attention to them because women-worshipping idolators like you insist that the nancy-boy preachers are right; "man up and marry a slut". The first thing to do with men like that is pry them away from feminised churches and get them to read the Bible straight. I doubt you'd have any interest in that, too many big, hard words.

Did your wife take your balls out of her purse for a minute and let you wear them just for this posting? Or did she just let you hold the purse for a while, and pretend to wear them?

I dunno. I was too busy enjoying the blowjob she was giving me to notice where her purse was.

Yeah, yeah, sure, sure. I've seen big talkers like you from coast to coast in churches, and when the little woman dog-whistles, you'll heel. Look, Jack, you don't seem to be very smart, but maybe you can get this: women are not to be worshipped. They are fallen, and if you read Genesis 3 you might learn something. If you can actually humble yourself to read the Bible, of course, which might be a big assumption.

As to who defines what "manly" is... I do.

Really. So you're claiming to be God? That's novel, this early. Usually Real Men like you don't get around to that claim for a while.

There are several folks around here I'd be willing to listen to if they objected to my definition. You're not one of them.

I'm sure that you and Josh and others in your circle jerk can assure each other of your manly manliness. So far all you've provided is examples of "stupid", " arrogant", "ignorant" and a bit of feminised passive aggressive.

One thing you've done is rhetoric. One thing you are apparently not capable of is dialectic. This thread is starting to disappoint.

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 18, 2015 2:11 AM  

Markku

No, I would probably entirely agree on your assessment of the statistical probability of success. It is slightly better here, as child support is rare, and alimony almost non-existent. But the psychology of the women is similar-ish. The chances are in the same ballpark, hence I'm single.


Duh, then you are a Man, right? And you are Going Your Own Way, right? So you fit the description of MGTOW.

Therefor according to Stingray and Jack Amok and others, you are a parasite, a threat to civilization and maybe Jack wants you shot. You don't see any problem with this?

No, rather you are delusional about what the people here are suggesting. It is not marrying single mothers or alpha widows. You have constructed a false reality that is hilariously divorced from the actual reality.

Ok, once again I ask you to prove this. It's been a real disappointment to get nothing but rhetoric, and pretty poor, feminised rhetoric at that. Can you do that? Can you argue a point with facts?

Dude, in this thread and the last thread it's been all Man UP all the time. I figure some old men here must have daughters that are pushing 30 and the idea of men not Manning Up is frightening to them because their daughters are hitting the Wall, but maybe I'm wrong.

What I don't see is dialectic. Nobody brings facts to convince me that marrying babymommas is a good idea, nobody brings Scriptural arguments on that either.

It's just limp rhetoric. And these are the defenders of civilization? What a laughable notion.

Blogger Markku May 18, 2015 2:18 AM  

Duh, then you are a Man, right? And you are Going Your Own Way, right? So you fit the description of MGTOW.

I do fit the definition. But I would absolutely not call myself that unless pressed, because I don't want anyone to think I'm like the ones associating with that label.

Therefor according to Stingray and Jack Amok and others, you are a parasite, a threat to civilization and maybe Jack wants you shot.

This is, again, your delusion that has spiraled to epic proportions.

Ok, once again I ask you to prove this.

Fine.

Jack Amok, Josh, Nate, Stingray, anyone involved in this, what might be politely called debate: Based on my description of myself, am I a threat to civilization, a parasite, and possibly needing to be shot? In order to not unnecessarily inflate the thread, no need to answer in the negative, but only if the answer is yes.

(I, of course, know the answer but since he demands proof.)

Anonymous A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents May 18, 2015 2:31 AM  

In the next couple of months I'll be helping with logistics in a couple of weddings. College students mostly, although there's one couple that met on Christian Mingle. No sluts involved, either, sorry to disappoint Jack, Nate and the other Real Men. These young men have exercised discernment rather than blind obedience to jackasses.

If I can, I'll witness those Christian ceremonies, and in my mind I'll contrast it with the women-worshipping idolatry I've seen here, with the exception of Markku. Also, when I meet with my frivorced friend next, I'll be sure to listen more than talk, because that's probably what he needs right now, a friend who will patiently listen, not a Real Man to order him around like a toddler. Because those are things I'm called to do, by a power far greater than anyone here - even Jack "I'm God" Amok.

This is probably a wasted comment, because frankly I"m not sure anyone here is capable of understanding it, aside from maybe Markku.
And it's way past my time for sleep.

Blogger Markku May 18, 2015 2:31 AM  

On the off chance that there are any wannabe pistoleros, then it is fine to express that opinion. But if anyone,

A N Y O N E,

suggests Russian women, then I will proceed to go berserk.

Blogger Cee May 18, 2015 2:32 AM  

Well that escalated quickly.

Blogger Markku May 18, 2015 2:49 AM  

Let's put it like this: As a soldier, do you run into a battle you know you will lose, just because it is a battle? No. That would be the single mom / alpha widow option.

But, do you then lie in your bunk in the base, bragging about how you're not in any danger? No, you don't do that either. That will not go over well with the men who are actually in battles.

Rather, you wait for the battle you can win, and do preparations for it as best you can. If it never happens, fine. But you DO NOT BRAG about doing nothing.

Blogger Cail Corishev May 18, 2015 3:16 AM  

Entering a game with a better than 40% chance of lifetime destitution without considering the consequences is foolish.

Fortunately, no one here has suggested that men should marry without considering the consequences.

Blogger Cail Corishev May 18, 2015 3:28 AM  

I think the "man up and marry a babymomma" position

Why should anyone engage with you when you continue to lie like this? As Markku pointed out, no one, not one person here, has said anything like "man up and marry a babymomma." Not once. You read something that made you feel that way, and ran with it beyond reason.

Now that that fact has been pointed out to you, you could say, "Okay, I jumped to conclusions because it's a hot topic for me," and from then on argued the actual points without the lies. But no, you dig in your heels and keep repeating the lie and piling on with snark and name-calling. Of whom does that behavior remind you?

I don't like criticizing MGTOWs, because we should be allies in the greater battle, even if we have some differences. But you can accept only so much BS from an ally.

Anonymous Jack Amok May 18, 2015 3:50 AM  

Based on my description of myself, am I a threat to civilization, a parasite, and possibly needing to be shot?

Once Vox assured us you weren't responsible for Captcha, I saw no need for you to be shot.

Now, as for others...

No sluts involved, either, sorry to disappoint Jack, Nate and the other Real Men. These young men have exercised discernment rather than blind obedience to jackasses.

If I can, I'll witness those Christian ceremonies, and in my mind I'll contrast it with the women-worshipping idolatry I've seen here,


That you write this indicates you have paid absolutely zero attention to anything I or most of the others here have said. All you have heard is that someone disagreed with you, and after that you just fabricated a bunch of arguments you pretended we were making so you could rail righteously against us.

You are the walking, breathing illustration of an aggressively delusional Gamma. You ignore the real world and what the real people in it are saying or doing so that you can live in your fantasy world where you have all the answer and win all the prizes.

Over at AG, there are guys who are trying like hell to heal themselves from that sort of dysfunctional mindset. It seems to be working, at least in some cases. Powerful stuff. You might want to consider it.

Blogger 1sexistpig2another May 18, 2015 5:10 AM  

Who said anything about government marriage? Seriously, you need to stop defining things in the worst possible light and using that as an excuse to give up.

I agree that government has no place in a real marriage, but I fail to see how describing the current situation as it relates to most of the populace is "defining things in the worst possible light".

Also, I am not trying to excuse anything, but rather get to the bottom of what I find to be an odd disagreement between one group of men opposed to feminism and another.

It seems you think biblical marriage is a good thing? Well, go build a biblical marriage for yourself then. I'm pretty sure God hasn't stopped recognizing them.

For years I was unable to find a Christian woman in the US that was marriage material. The few who were wife material by biblical standards were already married. I finally reached a point where I realized that being single for the rest of my life would be okay. It certainly was a better option than marrying a woman who did not understand or believe in marriage as God designed it.

Oddly that was when I encountered the woman who would eventually become my wife. She is not an American girl and was not raised with feminist values as most of the women in the US have been (unfortunately this includes women in church).

The point is that you can't wait around for someone else to solve your problems for you - that's what women do.

Is this what MGTOW are doing?

Blogger James Dixon May 18, 2015 7:34 AM  

> *starts to count seconds to getting shit in Secret Circles*

Since Meredith and I haven't had any children, I'm hardly in a position to throw stones. :)

> Puffing out your chest and pretending that you so alpha it can't be happening to me! (Jack Amok) is completely moronic.

As I've noted before, I'm not an alpha, and it hasn't happened to me. We've been married for 25 years now, with no indication that that's likely to change anytime soon.

There are good women out there. It is possible to find them.
Are the odds in your favor? No. Is the game rigged? Yes. So what? You're better than they are.

Blogger Remo - Vile Faceless Minion #99 May 18, 2015 8:23 AM  

Fine Remo. Go your own way.

Just don't expect my grandkids to fix your roof when it's leaking and your 90 year old bones can't climb the ladder any more.


Are you kidding Jack? Your grandkids are already my bitch! They'll need to work 24x7 to pay off my disability, social security, medicare, medicaid, and pension. AND they will have to work extra hard to afford alimony and child support for the baby mama kids (not genetically theirs but what's that matter right its for the children!)

Jack is a pussy who is probably typing this nonsense while his wife hovers over him with a divorce decree already filled out. You can see it in his writing. I've left for greener pastures (and better women) already so personally I don't care what this dumbass does but actively encouraging others to get their kids and grandkids enslaved by the beastly U.S. is pure evil. Yes Jack by all means make them try their best and wife up sluts in the good ol' US of A.

Blogger Cail Corishev May 18, 2015 8:37 AM  

is a pussy who is probably typing this nonsense while his wife hovers over him with a divorce decree already filled out

Why, oh why, do people keep characterizing MGTOWs as bombastic, hysterical, butthurt losers? It's so unfair.

Blogger Josh May 18, 2015 8:50 AM  

Why, oh why, do people keep characterizing MGTOWs as bombastic, hysterical, butthurt losers? It's so unfair.

SHAMING LANGUAGE!!!

Blogger Reaper May 18, 2015 9:03 AM  

no one, not one person here, has said anything like "man up and marry a babymomma."

Then what are you saying?
Some percentage of women are carousel riding sluts, men and women make up roughly 50% of the population each, if we are not to marry sluts, it is mathematically impossible for all men to be married.
So why does not being married and being aware of the risks of marriage make one a parasite?

Additionally, what's with the "watching quietly from the sidelines" crap?
I'm a MGTOW and I've been fighting feminism, Cultural Marxism and SJWs for almost 10 years.
I'm not fighting for my own children, I'm fighting for yours.
You'd really think people would appreciate that more.

Blogger Remo - Vile Faceless Minion #99 May 18, 2015 9:15 AM  

Exactly how are we defining MGTOW anyhow? I probably should have asked that question. I'm not married but I wouldn't be opposed to it.... where I'm living now. I wouldn't do this in the U.S. as I find the risks too great and I don't think you can raise children there in a biblical way. This makes me gama/delta/iota you're favorite Greek letter that isn't alpha though so woe is me. Personally I think picking up stakes and moving abroad for life, to a country or countries where you don't know the language, have no family so no free room, have to learn to behave in a new culture, etc. takes some work and moxie. That's my MGTOW definition - what's yours?

As for working in a cubicle farm suffering a 92% effective tax rate when the divorce rape is finished with you - that ain't alpha either folks. Get out there and explore the world - THAT is going your own way!

Blogger 1sexistpig2another May 18, 2015 10:00 AM  

Some percentage of women are carousel riding sluts, men and women make up roughly 50% of the population each, if we are not to marry sluts, it is mathematically impossible for all men to be married.

Studies show that around 97% of the population under the age of 45 have had sex before marriage. Studies also show that for every partner a woman has before marriage, the more likely she is to be in an unstable marriage and/or divorce.

Blogger Lovekraft May 18, 2015 10:21 AM  

funny, but I was re-reading Russell's "The Conquest of Happiness" on the weekend and found a quote in which he states ignoring, rather than engaging, leftist/progs is a better option.

Blogger Cail Corishev May 18, 2015 10:24 AM  

Exactly how are we defining MGTOW anyhow?

It's not easy to pin down. When I first heard the term, it meant a guy who had decided not to marry. That's all. Pretty simple. Some (most?) had been married before, and some had not, but the common factor was that they had decided against marriage.

On Christian blogs, that meant they had ruled out any sexual or romantic involvement with women -- a sort of secular monasticism. We heard much about how this allowed them to focus their energy on higher pursuits like startups and mountain climbing. Perhaps it did.

On non-Christian blogs, there was more variation. Some men were taking the monastic approach, not wanting to waste even temporary energy on women. Others were enjoying the free milk, gladly having sex with any number of women but refusing long-term commitment.

In the middle, I suspect there were many, maybe a majority, who were willing to marry if the right girl came along, but they didn't see much hope of that happening (or even understand how it happens), so they'd stopped putting any effort into trying to find her. They didn't have any plans to marry, but hadn't ruled it out entirely; so in the meantime, "I'm going my own way" sounds better than "I can't get a date."

That was then. Now I see married guys claiming to be MGTOW, so who knows. Maybe now it just means "guy who objects to the current marriage paradigm," which would include all of us, so yay inclusivity, I guess.

Blogger Bodichi (0031) May 18, 2015 10:29 AM  

@ A Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents

I think that you and Jack are talking past one another. Correct me if I am wrong but is this you point?

APIMTTC: Men who do not want to marry fornicating women with bastard children should are doing what is right and should not be shamed.

JA: Men who do not attempt to look for a non-fornication tarnished woman with bastards in tow are lazy and should be shamed.

If this has captured your respective points then you can see how you are not arguing against each other but against straw men. You are both in agreement but with opposite sides of the same coin.

If I have failed to capture your respective arguments please change them to accurately reflect them.

Anonymous Jack Amok May 18, 2015 12:49 PM  

probably should have asked that question. I'm not married but I wouldn't be opposed to it.... where I'm living now. I wouldn't do this in the U.S. as I find the risks too great and I don't think you can raise children there in a biblical way. This makes me gama/delta/iota you're favorite Greek letter that isn't alpha though so woe is me.

You find yourself, based on your own evaluation, in a situation you do not believe is conducive to marriage and raising a family. Here are the various reactions of the Hierarchy. Decide for yourself where you fit:

ALPHA: Formulates a plan to change the situation, preferably through remaking the local environment. Engages in personal improvement as needed. Meets with varying degrees of success.

SIGMA: Formulates a plan to change the situation, likely by finding a place more conducive (e.g. Vox). Also engages in personal improvement as needed. His plan likewise meets with varying degrees of success.

BETA/DELTA: Looks for a leader with a plan to change the local environment and signs on to help. Engages in personal improvement as directed by the leadership. Confused and unsure how to proceed in the absence of leadership.

GAMMA: Complains about the situation and assumes that by complaining he has contributed to solving the problem. Denies any personal improvement is needed. Sullen towards anyone actually trying to do something about the problem.

Blogger Cee May 18, 2015 2:34 PM  

Studies show that around 97% of the population under the age of 45 have had sex before marriage. Studies also show that for every partner a woman has before marriage, the more likely she is to be in an unstable marriage and/or divorce.

What studies, where, on what population, with how large a sample, defining sex how.

Not that I'd be genuinely surprised, but sex researchers (Kinsey, whoever brought us the ONE IN FIVE COLLEGE WOMENZ) are notoriously bad about statistical slights of hand to present the conclusions they want.

Blogger 1sexistpig2another May 18, 2015 2:47 PM  

I guess that makes me Alpha, and Sigma. I would have been Beta and Delta as well, except I can't remember ever being confused on how to proceed without leadership. I like the sound of Gamma (as in gamma rays and the Hulk), but I just don't fit the description above. Not that I don't complain mind you, but I know better than to think complaining is helping anything. Also, IMO only a fool would think that he doesn't need improvement.

Blogger 1sexistpig2another May 18, 2015 2:55 PM  

@cee

http://waitingtillmarriage.org/4-cool-statistics-about-abstinence-in-the-usa/

http://socialpathology.blogspot.com/2010/09/sexual-partner-divorce-risk.html

You can google it for more.

Blogger Tommy Hass May 18, 2015 2:57 PM  

"Come on, no one's time orientation is that short. Do you also demand that your employer pay you up front, because you're not going to work for a paycheck that doesn't exist yet? Good grief."

You don't get it.

Not only am I willing to take risks for my family, I am also unwilling to not take risks for my family. This is exactly why you need to be selective about this sort of thing.

It's why people who make it a point to keep promises don't give promises or at least, not many of them. It's why pro lifers are extremely cautious about recreational sex.

I said that because he used a common trope (men are to take risks for their families) and employed it in a context where it doesn't belong.

You are to take risks for you family, because they exist and you have a bond with them. That doesn't mean you have to take risks in creating people you will be forced to take risks for.

Blogger Cee May 18, 2015 5:01 PM  

http://waitingtillmarriage.org/4-cool-statistics-about-abstinence-in-the-usa/
Okay, so going through that I'm finding these findings are based on the NSFG, which samples ... 12~k or so people for each of its cycles.

Don't have time to go through everything in detail now, but this: Almost all Americans have sex before marrying. These findings argue for education and interventions that provide the skills and information people need to protect themselves from unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases once they become sexually active, regardless of marital status. reads as a potential red flag to me that where extrapolation from the study had to happen, they'll always extrapolate toward MORE PEOPLE HAD SEX rather than LESS PEOPLE HAD SEX.

Follow-up question: If only 11% of people were waiting until marriage in the 1950s, and the very low numbers supposedly extend back beyond that, why did the divorce catastrophe currently going on now not manifest before? Probably something to do with no-fault divorce I'm sure, but I'm not familiar with the timeline on that so I'll need to do yet more research to put this stuff together in a coherent timeline.

Also, if only 3% of people wait until marriage, where'd Teachman (second link) find all these virgin brides to do his study on?

Blogger Cee May 18, 2015 5:03 PM  

Note: Not arguing with the premise (yet), just have a lot of questions about what's actually being presented here and what assertions can be made from the data gathered. Also the usual hovering "cui bono?" about why people would want to present the premarital fornication rate as being 97% across the population overall.

Blogger 1sexistpig2another May 18, 2015 5:27 PM  

Cee that isn't the only study out there on the subject of premarital sex. Google is your friend (sometimes). All of the studies I have seen indicate high numbers for premarital sex in western countries, which is especially debilitating for females in marriage (not that it's all that great for men either).

Blogger James Dixon May 18, 2015 8:07 PM  

> Also, if only 3% of people wait until marriage, where'd Teachman (second link) find all these virgin brides to do his study on?

3% of 150 million is 4.5 million.

Anonymous MGTOW'd OUT May 18, 2015 8:31 PM  

“The real reason most men under 30 aren't married is simple: most women under 30 don't want to get married yet.”


Is not the personal freedom of men and women to remain single? Regardless, men under 30 lack the financial means to marry, enjoy living the bachelor lifestyle, or have yet to find a lady whom they want to settle down with. So it’s more complex than you stated.


“Riding the cock carousel isn't good preparation for marriage, can we all at least agree on that?”

Neither is the promotion of pumping and dumping by the Roissy’s and Roosh’s of the world, can we all at least agree on that?


“Walking away from a rigged game isn't cowardice, it's just wisdom.”

Except marriage is inherently not a “rigged game”.


“And most of those young men would get in the marrying mood if the girls were and didn't give away the milk for free.”

Those same young men who bitterly complain that women ought not be “easy”…are also working feverishly to get into their pants. Hypocritical, wouldn’t you say?


“It always comes back to that with gammas, doesn't it?”

No, it doesn’t go back to “gammas”, just men.


“Now, I'm single, childless, and no immediate prospects for marriage.”
“Then according to some here, you are a parasite and a threat to civilization.”

Funny how one of the venerable members of the Ilk gets a free pass…


“I don't like criticizing MGTOWs, because we should be allies in the greater battle, even if we have some differences.”

Patently false. MGTOW’s are NOT an ally, and neither are the Roissy’s and the Roosh’s of the world, for those on the “right” side of the cultural war. Both groups equally constitute a legitimate threat to western civilization. They refuse to marry and produce (white} offspring. One group steers clear from women; another group uses game to fuck women and leave them in their wake. Christian men and women, take heed who you claim is your “friend” in this “cultural war”. You should be criticizing and shunning them.


“Decide for yourself where you fit.”

Completely arbitrary criteria.

Blogger Cee May 18, 2015 11:33 PM  

> Also, if only 3% of people wait until marriage, where'd Teachman (second link) find all these virgin brides to do his study on?

3% of 150 million is 4.5 million.

Rhetoric snark. Depends on his sample size, too.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts