Ton on Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)

I have been reading a goodly amount of MGTOW hate, and frankly I don’t get it. Well maybe a little, but I’ll get around to that. Eventually.

Way I see it is, any man who has decided to ignore conventional wisdom  and live as he sees best is going his own way. This could be a young man ignoring the push for college (debt) and instead opts for a trade and recession proof blue collar money is going his own way. Any man who elects to live bellow his means, pays in cash therefore side stepping the self destruction and insanity of debt and modern finance schemes, like financing cars, having credit cards and what not is going his own way.   The man who ignores the misinformation (out right lies) put out by the media and elects to carry a gun, placing the burden for his own physical secure squarely  on his own shoulders is going his own way. A man who looks at the world, sees the crime and dysfunction of urban diversity but refuse to blame the dysfunction on the evilness of White folk is going his own way.  The Pick Up Artist who’s sole focus of interacting with women ( and by and large the world) is to get laid has gone his own way. The man who ignores the feminine imperative, Games his wife, considers himself the head of house hold etc and has 10 kids is going his own way. The man who refuses to marry and instead focuses on himself and spins a few plates in a semi long term rotation is going his own way.  The man who elects to forgo women entirely and to work low stress jobs to free up his time to play video games is going his own way.

 

Its that last group that gets the most heat, and it is that group I will be referring to. Mostly the hate comes from feminist, traditionalist and pick up artist.

Feminist (progressives, the government etc) need men to work at full capacity. They need the tax money to spread around, mostly to women and non Whites and they need the dumb as fuck consumer based economy to keep spinning.  Ideally said man will wife some chick up, once she has sampled enough alpha cock, hit the wall and preferably wife up a post wall alpha widow single mom; taking her and her thug spawn off the government dole. Getting married also means he’ll spend good money after bad trying to make her happy, keeping the whole circle jerk of predominantly useless production and consumption and tax receipts to spread more money around to people who generally hate White men.   Politicians need to buy votes, wealthy folks need to get wealthier and its a lot easier getting wealthy on disposable products, useless services and usury then developing something that truly uplifts man kind like Henry Ford did with the Model T. Buddy of mine bought one. Damn near 100 years old, and still going, beautiful condition for 16k. Cash. This was, for the time a mass produced, cut rate product. Nor are they hard to find in that price range. Lets see if what comes out of Detroit now will last that long. Any rate, feminist need MGTOW to stop GTOW’ing and get back into the draft horse harness. Also, they need the validation of marriage. Resources and validation. Typical women can never have enough of either.

Pick Up Artist…. well I just don’t get them cats. I mean they have a ton of words posted on the interwebz,, most of which doesn’t make sense to me, all regrading a topic I haven’t spent much time considering, yet by their measure of worth ( a man’s N count) I pretty much have them beat. While being short, not being a dancer, not dressing well etc etc. Weird crowd. No doubt all men should be aware of the basics of Game, and for that I salute them. They gave me terms to use to explain my own success and failures to other men, However most of the out and out Pick Up Artist I have read come across as womanish to me. I often wonder if their dislike of MGTOW is all about how men who ignore women also do not give a damn about a dudes N count and therefore do not confer the all mighty conquering hero status to the PUA crowd. This is also probably the smallest group of MGTWO haters. One thing queers, PUA and MGTOW have in common: an awful lot of press devoted to such a small portion of the population

Now the Traditionalist…. well they hate MGTOW for the same reason the feminist do. They too are invested in keeping the river of shit of useless production, useless consumption and taxes flowing. Usually they church that up with some vague reference to saving Western Civilization or some such. The fear of whats next drives them. If Western Civilization was such a great thing in the here and now, those MGTOW would find the natural incentives to get a hair cut, find a real job and wife up some gash. What the West once was has not been what the West s now. Hell what the West was 50 years ago wasn’t what it was a 100 years ago, Traditionalist also try to play it up as some kind of sin against God, but these are men who aren’t (or most likely cannot) fornicating so really no sin there. These men I believe, are driven by the same fear of what’s next when the shit river runs dry as the feminist. They have the same view of men as feminist, draft horses and tools.  The its a sin thing is always amusing to me. When ever someone says its a sin and they won’t see the Kingdom of God because of xyz, I think two things. #1, Salvation is based on someone believing Christ is the Son of God, God made flesh; that His death on the cross atones for our sins, and it is only by His death we may enter Heaven. Everything else is icing on the cake, and I love icing better then cake but isn’t a requirement for Salvation. #2 they are most likely railing against a sin they disapprove/ rare;y engage in while they themselves are engaged in all manner of other sins, making themselves no less worth of Grace and Salvation as what ever sinner they have in their cross-hairs. Usury is the easy go to sin to point out. The Good Book says something about removing the beam from your eye before removing it from your brother’s eye.

Now some of what the Traditionalist have to say on the topic are legit points of concern. Leastwise to me, as I got back into the baby production bidness after the death of my little brother. I have a son and a daughter, but I wanted another avenue for passing down the family name, being overly proud of my people and our accomplishments. Really I’d like at least one more son.   The whole MGTOW are genetic dead ends is spot on, but only sort of. A man refusing to have kids may have brothers and sisters to carry on the family Name and DNA. Having a wife does not ensure children, and having a wife does not ensure the children she squeezes out is yours, or that they will live to pass on the name. Most of what they have to say on the topic of marrying is very discounted from the reality of marriage and that is only one example.

 

Well that’s enough words for now. Y’all take care now

Advertisements

45 thoughts on “Ton on Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW)

  1. theshadowedknight

    A large part of the problem is the aggressive types of MGTOW. So few, but so loud. Always ranting about women and how much they suck and how men are fools, and making a nuisance of themselves. Just shut the fuck up and go do whatever it is you were doing. No one cares, you are not special, women do suck, and men are fools. In other news, water is wet and the sky is blue.

    Another problem is the type of rhetoric coming off the traditional types. Talking about how anyone not doing their program is worthless and has no place in their order. Talk like gets a man a little nervous, because it does not stop at talk.

    How many of them are talking about how none of their precious daughters are going to marry scum like me? Well, have a nice go fuck yourself, if I was interested in what you had to offer, fuck yourself. I do not recall seeing them at Scott’s place, or looking for men on behalf of their girls, anyway. Do not make empty threats, it makes you look like an asshole.

    A note here: the comments section starts exploding when you start poking MGTOW. What makes you think that you outnumber or are capable of overpowering us? We leave you alone, but how many show up when you make a stir, comparatively?

    No one is writing screeds about the threat of radically traditional families threatening feminism. It is all about the young men slacking off threatening feminism. Congratulations, me sitting on my ass is doing a better job than you have the past few decades. Imagine what I could do if I took a nap–yes, imagine, and know fear.

    So be careful about alienating a bunch of men who are apathetic to mildly averse to women from any sort of traditional social formation. No, we are not doing anything now. You start threatening us, and that changes. If you have something to offer, make your pitch. Remember, though, that I do not owe you a damned thing, thank you very much.

    Pick a fight with us, and you might up with a shotgun marriage on your hands. As in, you picked a fight with a shitload of angry, lonely young men and they shot you and took your women. We have damned little to lose, and we do not appreciate being bothered.

    The Shadowed Knight

    Reply
      1. SFC Ton Post author

        One of th points I plan on addressing is interwebz mgtow vs what I see and know of mgtow in the real world. Which I think is more important then the ones who preach the gospel of MGTOW on the interwebz.

        Event with the internet MGTOW, there are good apples and ones who I simply want to punch in the face

      2. theshadowedknight

        I know. Traditionally, a shotgun wedding is when the father tells a young man that he is either getting married or getting shot. This is a variation where the young man tells the father that he is getting married, or the father is getting shot. If the traditionalists want to push men into marriage, then they need to have a stake in the success or failure. Telling men they have to get married, but not to their daughters is unacceptable.

        The Shadowed Knight

      3. SFC Ton Post author

        LOL yea that was a weird claim for sure but I never get any takers when I ask the traditionalist if they will put their money where their mouth is and cover down on my alimony so I can remarry. Odd how they want me to take on additional risk but not share the fallout

        Compare that to the military. Every plane I jumped out of, every bird I unassed into a hot LZ, every breach every dangerous situation, I or my platoon leader where the 1st ones to step into the shit. I was the last one to eat and the last one to sleep and the pro marriage tradcons won’t cough up a few hundred each per month as an incentive.

  2. ballista74

    I have been reading a goodly amount of MGTOW hate, and frankly I don’t get it.

    It’s because it’s men that aren’t following the feminist and traditionalist script. Marriage is the tool of the control of men and neither party can tolerate men who are not under the thumb of a parasitic woman. Anyone who opposes MGTOW reveals themselves as feminists – all it really amounts to is the complete and total self-determination of men, where men stop seeking the validation and approval of women. That it is even opposed tells you the place that men are seen to have in society.

    Why is it opposed? You don’t have this quite right in your assessment:

    The man who ignores the feminine imperative, Games his wife, considers himself the head of house hold etc and has 10 kids is going his own way.

    Any real MGTOW who is taken seriously (i.e. does NOT follow the MGTOW Manifesto crap) does not recognize marriage, or feminist supporters in general as anyone who can be MGTOW simply because marriage (and children) causes a state where he loses his self-determination. In other words, a man is not going his own way if he is married – he is going a woman’s way, he is going society’s way. He completely loses all self-determination and is ruled by the State or a woman.

    MGTOW is opposed simply because they (rightly) recognize that marriage is a dangerous enterprise to a man’s self-determination, and consequently opposes it. Marriage is the tool of female domination of men and must be preserved at all costs in order for their enslavement of men to continue.

    I often wonder if their dislike of MGTOW is all about how men who ignore women also do not give a damn about a dudes N count and therefore do not confer the all mighty conquering hero status to the PUA crowd.

    Truth be told, all three groups are steeped in feminism and oppose MGTOW for the exact same reason, it teaches men to cease seeking the approval of women. PUAs are just the same as the traditionalist and feminist crowd as the men all prize the validation and approval of women. They can not tolerate men who are not pussy beggars and like you write, so they are in opposition. The only difference between a PUA and a traditionalist is the number of women they seek out the validation and approval of.

    Reply
  3. theshadowedknight

    I do agree with Ballista on MGTOW and marriage. Once a man is married and has a family, he cannot go his own way, because he is responsible for them. He has to take care of them, and he is no longer in a position to go off on his own anymore. For that reason alone, he is not going his own way.

    However, men being allowed to do whatever they will is dangerous. Total self determination would be acceptable if we were all the sort of people who can handle it, by plenty of men are not. They need to be controlled to some extent. True, this has gone too far, but that does not mean that we should go too far in the other direction. Unleashing men would be just as harmful–if not worse–as it has been for women.

    The Shadowed Knight

    Reply
  4. SFC Ton Post author

    LOL ok you both jumped ahead to some things I will cover in the next post

    Married MGTOW; I see the whole thing sort of like the tiered concept in SOCOM. SOCOM breaks its units down into tiers. Roughly speaking tier 1 is CAG and SEAL Team 6; tier 2 is SF, SEALS, MARSOC, RECON and by far the largest, each one of those groups being larger then CAG, SEAL Team 6 and the Rangers; tier 3 would be Rangers, and the Air Force guys(sort of). Ruling out tier 1, it really comes down to mission scope, budget and what not vs level of training but all are SOCOM and all are valued and not a group of dudes you want to do without. Married men who are ignoring the FI are still going their won way, even if it is at the lowest level tier. Guys who are not following the script but are still engaged with women are tier 2 and then there are the guys who have walked from it all. Low end jobs, minimalist lifestyle, no unnecessary contact with women etc are the tier 1 guys.

    Any rate that’s not the best analogy but the one that comes to mind

    I plan on getting to the various bombastic statements of the traditionalist latter. Its the so called red pill socon/ tradcons I plan on writing about. We already understand how feminist and even the supposedly non feminist women tend to view men, but its the purple pill guys TSK speaks to that I am aiming for. As I have said before and will say again, to my reckoning, they are red pill betas trying to redefine what is alpha to elevate themselves up the smp/ mmp hierarchy, Which I am ripping from something Rollo once said, though not in this regard.

    Excellent observation about validation B74. This is what I assume to be the lift that is talked about by…. damn I cannot remember his screen name but he has his own blog with God is Laughing and comments at Dalrock’s place.

    Can you explain what I don’t have quite right?

    Reply
    1. ballista74

      Can you explain what I don’t have quite right?

      Mainly, on marriage, that men have any say-so in the conditions of which marriage entails (i.e. “ignoring the FI”). A man who does that will ultimately find that he will heed his female overlords no matter what, and find that their conditions are the ones that hold power and not his. MGTOW categorically opposes marriage, period, because they recognize that marriage by default brings the condition of slavery upon men.

      As for “lift”, I know the blogger you speak of, but don’t remember or find the reference. As I recall, though, it was more in reference to women than men. As far as I know, I’m the only blogger that routinely speaks of the general programmed nature of men who seek the validation and approval of women, and the tendency of society to force men to submit to women in their marriages and in broader society.

      Reply
      1. SFC Ton Post author

        As always you make a rational argument but we’ll have to agree to disagree. I know a couple of men, and suspect a couple others who run their household, with wives who swoon over them and their leadership. Sure they have shit tests to deal with and what not, I am firmly in the all women are like that camp, even my two, but often it’s a matter of degrees.

        I think the danger lies in how women can bring the full weight of the law down on husband’s when ever she chooses and the tradcons/ socons are conning themselves into thinking if they game their wife correctly things will work out

        I also there being a variety of red pills a man need to swallow and truths to deal with. The man o sphere seems to want to side step a lot of other unpleasant realities which give a man other options in how to go his own way

        A semi related note, I am going to take a swing at men seeking validation in a day or two, basically running with what you mentioned

        And way side note, you are one of the commentators that made reading Dalrocks comment section worth the investment in time

      2. Anonymous Reader

        One thing to bear in mind is how many men under 30 grew up in a female dominated household. I work with college men sometimes, and I listen to them as much as I talk at them. The divorce rate has been around 40% nation wide for a while. So when I’m working with some 22 year old men, 4 out of 10 of them come from a “home” where most likely Mommy Dearest kicked Daddy out of the house about the time the youngest child was 4 or 5 years old.

        Those men in a lot of cases were raised by Boomer feminists. Talking “marry! marry” to them is pretty stupid, because what they know of “marriage” is that a man gets to live with a woman for a few years, make one or maybe two babies, then a few years later he gets to pack up his stuff and go live in a crummy apartment – maybe escorted out of the house by cops with guns – because Mommy Said So. They’ve seen the nightmare of marriage 2.0 up close and personal.

        And who are the men they are supposed to emulate? Their own mothers likely kept their fathers away from them, any preacher was likely a woman-pleasing mangina, in school their female teachers, female principals and female counselors worked hard to beat the boyhood out of them.

        Some of the young men I see are just whipped, they’ve been in the female frame most of their lives, and now finally free of their mothers, their teachers, their preachers, they see no reason to rush into another female’s control. They’re supposed to just magically turn into some sort of manly man, because of age or something? Nobody ever taught them how to lead themselves, let alone a woman, and likely a headstrong and rebellious one, but they’re supposed to “just get it”?

        Men who have gotten some sort of frame with women owe it to the younger men to help them out, but not by scorning them, or pulling out some schoolmarmish shaming; heck, the 20-something man is as likely to ignore shaming as not, it’s what he’s heard all his life from male and female feminists alike.

        Challenge them? Yeah, maybe, if you walk the walk yourself. I always get a kick out of visiting a church where the older men go on about how they rule the roost, then when the little woman whistles them up they go out the door trotting at her heels. “Watch what they do, not what they say” applies to tradcons as well as feminists.

      3. SFC Ton Post author

        I believe there is an age aspect to the mgtow hate with men say my age and older being the haters. Sure they know the math on marriage and divorce but they don’t “know” it way down deeeeep

        It’s like reading a book about combat and having been through it. Most things you can only know from experience

      4. BigAl

        @Anon

        The more I read the manosphere, the more thankful I am for an old fashioned upbringing and great parents. Cant thank them enough for how I turned out.

  5. Tim

    My impression of MGTOW:

    MGTOW isn’t so much a movement as a mindset. MGTOW is men awakening to the fact that marriage is a deeply gynocentric movement that destroys men. Consider the goal of the women’s movement: (1) Destroy the patriarchy (destroy men and transfer their wealth and power to women), (2) Liberate women sexually and (3) destroy marriage and the traditional family. The women’s movement worked. Over the past 40+ years, in the US alone, tens upon tens of millions of men have been destroyed through marriage. Of those men, hundreds upon hundreds of thousands committed suicide.

    If a woman values you highly as a man – it likely has a lot to do with the size of your wallet. MGTOW therefore also eschew female validation. As a woman’s validation of you is likely tied strongly to what you can provide to her financially (think financial rape), only fools validate themselves through women.

    MGTOW will be hated by anyone that gains by duping men into the horrors of marriage. Men not getting married means that women and the state can’t redistribute men’s wealth and power to themselves – which is the primary reason people hate MGTOW.

    You’ll have people say that MGTOW is a small movement that makes no difference. The marriage rate is at a record low because men have been slowly opting out of marriage for decades. Only recently was that phenomenon given the name MGTOW. It used to be called confirmed bachelorhood – which is also hated by women and the state.

    Some women will claim that it’s women opting out of marriage – not men. MGTOW don’t care which gender opts out so long as fewer men sign a contract that will destroy them legally, psychologically, spiritually and financially. If it’s women opting out – to MGTOW – that’s good too.

    Many will claim to be happily married for 20+ years. Of those, a good portion will become divorced one day. Grey divorce has been the fastest growing sector of divorce for a long time.

    A common strategy employed to silence MGTOW is called “shaming tactics”. Google ‘MGTOW shaming tactics’ for a complete list. A common shaming tactic might be, “MGTOW are losers that can’t get a woman.” These tactics are used not only to silence MGTOW but also to shutdown debate and dissuade other men from taking up the MGTOW mantle.

    The books “The Myth of Male Power”, “The Manipulated Man”, “Men on Strike” and “Stand by Your Manhood” explain everything in much more detail.

    Reply
    1. SFC Ton Post author

      Welcome Tim and great post. Shaming is something I plan on tackling on the next part of this.

      I appreciate your reply, that was some quality reminders for most of my readers but good info if there are new men reading along and greatness really depends on the basics done at an elite level.

      It is in part my goal to help men go their own way, to which ever degree they see fit and to achieve some level of greatness, even if it is “only” in being happy and at peace with themselves and the world

      Thanks again

      Reply
    2. ballista74

      Good book list, minus Men On Strike, which is written by a traditional feminist woman with that perspective in mind. The particular danger of her book is discussed in that post. Important to the freedom of men is to weed out the “come back, we’ll make it a kinder and gentler plantation” types from the ones who really have the true interests of men at heart.

      I’m well aware of “The Manipulated Man”, and plan on blogging topics from it and two or three other books. Eventually. I’m not aware of the content of the other two, though I will be sure to check them out.

      General to the thread, this post will make good reading, as it describes the so-called “Blue Pill” world of marriage.

      Reply
      1. Anonymous Reader

        As it becomes a tiny bit more difficult for carousel riders to satisfy their provider need as they approach the wall, we can expect more “Come back! We’ll play nice, now!” books and articles on the one hand, and more “Man UP, DAMMIT! WOMEN NEED HUBBIES!” shaming on the other hand. It will be the same old nutcracker action, though, with the feminists squeezing on one side and the tradcons squeezing on the other side, with both having the same objective: to get men back into harness where they can be profitably worked.

        The key point in any of these articles to look for will be obvious: what obligations will the writers lay on women? Of course the answer will be “none”, but they’ll dress it up differently.

      2. Anonymous Reader

        Deti – perfect. Just a perfect example. We’ll be seeing a lot more of that, I am certain.

  6. Vic

    Tim has it right, MGTOW is an existential reaction to a threatening environment.

    No one would say (as some hinted above) “well that’s fine if you want to avoid getting shot but we need to be careful about what you do after saving yourself from the execution.” To that, let me just say “and the horse you rode in on.”

    That’s ludicrous. The entire point IS individual sovereignty. Is it a precarious situation for society? Oh Yes, yes it is.

    I believe men have an obligation to invest their God given liberty and not squander it to women or the state, especially considering neither will respect you if you do.

    It is financially irresponsible to enter into a marriage contract that can be dissolved unilaterally by your partner to take your kids, your assets, and require 50% of your income. This is BASIC business law. Your lawyer would be sued for advocating that kind of unilaterally enforced contract.

    Reply
    1. ballista74

      Nice post.

      I believe men have an obligation to invest their God given liberty and not squander it to women or the state, especially considering neither will respect you if you do.

      Interestingly enough, the answer is so simple to all of this: Make marriage something that is beneficial for a man to enter into – something where he profits and is truly better off by his own standards and not by the traditionalist cognitive dissonance. Yet this is intolerable by all 3 parties mentioned simply because in the view of all 3, women must always win and men must always lose. Or another way to say it, women can never be made to bear responsibility.

      Reply
      1. SFC Ton Post author

        LOL yea tradcons are all about economic incentives but cannot find a way to provide marriage incentives.

        And let’s face it, I am not the brightest penny in piggy bank and yet none have offered a counter augment to forging marriage, unless calling me a gamma and say I am scared of hard work and tough times as counts an argument

      2. Sumo

        calling me a gamma and say I am scared of hard work and tough times

        I always had you figured as a cowardly slacker. /sarcasm.

  7. Anonymous Reader

    Ton’s making sense here, especially with the notion of tiers. Most of us men are just regular legs, or even REMF’s, but we can still be part of the program. Every man who raises a daughter to stay off of the cock carousel and marry earlier than 30, or who raises a son to have a serious, manly frame and avoid entangling himself up with a slut, a flake, a fake or a feminist (i.e. all three in 1 ) is pushing back against the current.

    Let’s look at tiers historically instead of in terms of military forces for a minute.

    Look at the American West, start with the fur trapper / mountain men era of the 1820’s or so. Men who took a pretty slim kit into the mountains to trap beaver for sale back East and even to Europe – for hats. Men who made a meat kill with one shot from a flintlocked rifle, because two shots would give away their position to the Utes or the Kiowa or Blackfeet, Crow, etc. and that could cost him his hair. Men who saw others pretty much only at rendesvous. Those men seriously went their own way, and didn’t give two spits who cared. They also didn’t much bother telling anyone else what they were doing, so it isn’t like they were advocating for anything other than to be left alone, to get a fair price for their furs, and oh, yeah, to be left alone.

    These aren’t the MGTOW anyone’s looking for. They may well off the grid in modern terms.

    Then look at the ’49 gold rush, men stampeded to California any way they could, went to the hills, most busted flat and then what? Some homesteaded, some ranched, some went to cities, some died, some went back home, all of them had gotten an outfit and gone for the hills and probably where changed by it. Went their own way for a while, some made it, some didn’t. Mark Twain was one of these, and some good books came out of his San Francisco newspapering. They may or may not settle down, but when someone pushes them to “man UP” and marry a slut they will push back.

    Then look at other gold rushes later on, where men staked a claim, then sent back for their bride. Raised a family off a gold claim. They went their own way differently. Same deal for those who proved out 40 acres or rode herd on their own cattle all the way up a trail to market, etc. Some would say, well, those men weren’t going their own way because women and kids – no, that’s what their own way looked like. What they tended not to do was make some kind of tin goddess or porcelin teacup out of women. So they went their own way, it just wasn’t the same as the mountain men or the 49’rs or others. They found their woman. Might even have married what was called a “soiled dove”, a former hooker – but on their terms, because they were making her into an “honest woman”. Key words: On Their Own Terms.

    I don’t buy the whole “purity test” notion for independent men, it’s too much like some woman’s 496 point bullet list for the perfect man. Start with a first principle: who does a man answer to? If he’s religious, then that should be “to God”, if he’s not then “to himself”. Everyone answers to someone, and if that someone is anything like “Mommy” or “She Who Must Be Obeyed” or some other female, then he’s set himself up for a lot of trouble because he isn’t following his masculine nature.

    Who do you answer to? Whose opinion do you care about? IWhat’s your objective, your focus, your goal, and who made it your priority? Those principles matter, in my opinion, not what someone else said in a blog post or on social media. I believe this is what scares the feminists and their allies, the tradcons – because men like that are letting the air out of the standard, modern, female narrative, as recently articulated by Sharyl Sandburg: “Party and bed all the wild boys you want in your 20’s, then fall into the arms of a nice Beta when you are nearly 30”. It’s AF-BB all over, and funny thing is very few tradcons have any real problem with that.

    The really funnny thing is, the number of real deal MGTOW is tiny. Tiny! And the vast majority of cock-carousel riders are still finding a sucker to marry as they close in on the Wall. So for feminists and tradcons to be so hysterical, throwing their dresses over their heads in horror, at such a tiny, marginal effect is hilarious.

    Just wait. The majority of men under 30 aren’t married. Because the women that age are too busy riding the carousel, for a start. Those Millennial men, they aren’t as stupid as older men, especially the white-Knighting Boomer and Gen-x men, more and more of them can see what game is being played. If they truly are going their own way, then to marry one of them will cost big. Career gal wants bay-bees? Then better get ready to support a stay at home man with that career, gal, because he knows how many cocks you rode before him, and he won’t be your nanny cheaply. That’s just one scenario.

    (I refuse to get into the whole PUA’s vs. MGTOW dispute because it makes no sense. PUA’s should be tickled by MGTOW, because it means more women are available to them. MGTOW frankly shouldn’t care what PUA’s think about them, seems to me. And as Ton said, both groups are so tiny what difference does it make?)

    Sorry this was so long. No time to make it shorter.

    Reply
    1. SFC Ton Post author

      Killers post AR

      The mountain men of old where particularly bad ass, and frankly I reckon most mgtow are gtow for a season or two vs a lifetime. Some of those may marry etc, some may not and others may never re-enter main stream living, but that is for each man to decide for himself. I want them to make those decisions based upon the reality of the battlefield and an honest estimation of what he can achieve on it.

      Something else I’ll address later. I want to take on the tradcons/ socons…. augment(?) Against mgtow 1st. Then mossy on over to mgtow in the real world vs interwebz.

      It’s the physical world that counts.

      Also I am not a fan of trying to pegeion hole every dude out there into alpha/ beta mgtow or following the script. That would lead to ideologically rigidity which is a losing bet in the early stages of anything thing.

      Where would I fit in to any tiny slot? Am I going my own way? Some would say no because I have kids, two women in my bed and a new born son. Some would say I am a pua because of my N count and home life. I have never made getting ass a mission statement and have read little about Game. Etc etc. It would just become a big ol mess and lose the message of Sovereign Masculinty; unapologetic, unrepentant and unreconstructed masculinty.

      Reply
      1. Anonymous Reader

        Ton:
        Some of those may marry etc, some may not and others may never re-enter main stream living, but that is for each man to decide for himself. I want them to make those decisions based upon the reality of the battlefield and an honest estimation of what he can achieve on it.

        +1 on that. Says it all better than me and in fewer words.

  8. Anonymous Reader

    The other thing that’s funny about this latest little tornado in a teacup, some people are all worked up because basically “Men are writing things we don’t like! Oh, noes!”. That’s it. So some men have sworn off marriage, either out of frustration in their 20’s or really bad experience with divorce, or maybe they were raised by a divorced, feminist Boomer Mommy Dearest?

    So what? So “who cares” what? Are they pissing in your whole-grain breakfast cereal, or is it all just some words on a blog that you normally wouldn’t read? Are they sending a VAWA-mandated SWAT team to your house to make you do something, or are they just making bitter comments on some blog that you do normally read?

    I understand and expect feminists to get all emotionally in a tizzy when a mere man dares to disagree, that’s pretty much to be expected. What I don’t get is these married-with-children tradcons droning on and on about the evil MGTOW – what difference does it make to you, Barney?

    Some blogs I just don’t read the comments any more. Or if I do, I use the scroll function pretty freely. Because the comments are often empty of content. Does it mean I need to set up my own blog to rant and rave about how some commenters are just wrong, wrong, wrong and need to do/think/believe My Way because, well, I’m right? Nope.

    Part of being manly is frame. If a few comments on a blog somehow yanks your chain so hard that you regard the man making them as some sort of threat to the civic order, you need some perspective. Been there, done that, and now I often go for a walk of 30 min or more rather than read comments. Better for my cardiac health anyway.

    But look: the kind of men who are GTOW aren’t the kind of men that either feminists or tradcons want to marry their precious, special snowflake princesses anyway, so why do they care? Eh? What is it they really, really care about?

    We all know. And it isn’t what they say it is.

    Reply
  9. FuzzieWuzzie

    Great post and thread. I do have to wonder about how effective a few MGTOWs are. That some larger than life people are resorting to using shaming language on men who would be their natural allies tells me how powerful the FI is.
    That the FI is that afraid is telling. We must be getting somewhere.

    Reply
    1. SFC Ton Post author

      Getting somewhere? Agreed but I think right now it’s the more timid and future orientated that are doing the squawking. It will be a few years before anyone takes addressing these things serious, if they ever do

      Reply
  10. Liz

    It’s my opinion that just about every man was a MGHOW until really recently. They just didn’t have a name for it.

    It was pretty standard to paint society as the man trying not to get roped into marriage and the woman running around trying to get all the unwed bachelors hitched. It was never the orbiting male paradigm, but the opposite and the shows reflected that. Family shows like I Love Lucy weren’t coy about it. I remember a rerun episode where Lucy was trying to set up a bachelor friend and Ricky said something along the lines of (if memory serves) “Can’t you let the guy enjoy his freedom?”
    Look at the Little Rascals ‘He Man Woman Hater’s Club’. Abbot and Costello. The Three Stooges.

    Reply
  11. Liz

    I love this scene from It’s A Wonderful Life. It’s very illustrative of the time.
    Girl bats eyes and says, into his deaf ear, “George Bailey, I’m going to love you til the day I die”
    He stands and says, “I’m going to travel the world! I’ll have a couple of harems! And maybe three or four wives. Wait and see…”

    Reply
  12. BuenaVista

    The last two sentences of The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn:

    “Tom’s most well now, and got his bullet around his neck on a watch-guard for a watch, and is always seeing what time it is, and so there ain’t nothing more to write about, and I am rotten glad of it, because if I’d a knowed what a trouble it was to make a book I wouldn’t a tackled it, and ain’t a-going to no more. But I reckon I got to light out for the Territory ahead of the rest, because Aunt Sally she’s going to adopt me and sivilize me, and I can’t stand it. I been there before.”

    I share the disinterest most have here on litigating labels and what they mean. However, Huck, above, announces his antipathy for the ‘sivilizing’ dictates of Aunt Sally, i.e., dictates imposed by bourgeois, socially-approved females and their imperatives.

    What’s somewhat dangerous about our society now is that there are few if any physical spaces to explore, and thus if we have doubts about how society has structured itself and made of marriage or even cohabitation a legal, financial and emotional dead-end for a thinking man. Hence the explosion of our manosphere debating society, and the social workarounds provided by internet porn, gaming, fantasy, and the like. Turning inward, when a guy can’t just saddle up and head across the Mississippi for uncharted plains and mountains, as could Huck, might take a man to a dark place. (Suicide rate for divorced men: 11x that of the general population.)

    Reply
    1. BuenaVista

      I meant to note that, therefore, that Huck is broadly MGTOW, as for example is Natty Bumppo/Hawkeye in The Last of the Mohicans — who departs for “Kan-tucky” after he’s done killing Hurons in the Lake George wilderness. Their personal sovereignty is central to their mythic appeal, and fortunately for them there were new mountains and rivers to cross.

      Reply
    2. SFC Ton Post author

      Civilization is bad for the masculine soul, another area where I see tradcons/ socons as somewhat effeminate especially of the UMC variety

      I agree that the lack of frontiers and borders and dangerous work is an issue

      Reply
  13. BuenaVista

    One of the ironies I see in the SMP is that women vastly prefer the Sovereign Man concept: they want the man who demonstrates his independence, quality, self-control, capacity to reason, capacity to optimize for priorities. Obviously a truly Sovereign Man has solved his (and potentially others’) provisioning and protection issues. And he’s done so without becoming a cubicle farming drone, a simpering pro-feminist enabler, or a lying, deceptive caricature of a man.

    Then these same women, if they find themselves tugging on a Sovereign Man’s sleeve, force The Conversation: “Where is this going?” This is femme-speak for “That which makes you Sovereign makes you irresistible to me. I want you in my home for evermore. You are going to buy me a home, aren’t you?”

    (If a man resists this siren-call, he’ll likely be issued a new label: He’ll know longer be Sovereign, but a disgusting “Player.”)

    They will say this even to a gender war veteran, likely retired on his gender war disability pay. As noted above, this is accompanied by the “But I’m not like that so come back I will play nice, honest. Also, I have a pussy.”

    If you can find a woman who will acknowledge, truly, the risks and disincentives to marry, to a man exclusively, you have found a unicorn and let me know where the unicorns roam, wouldja?

    But women aren’t like that. They marvel in horror at gender war casualties, because they are so inclusive and evolved in their feelings, then quickly announce that they are different and will always play nice, and deny any complicity in constructing the current rules. While supposedly only 20% of women now self-identify as feminists, I’ve yet to meet one who denies her support for the feminist state and its systems. (Well, I did call in to a radio show once and spoke to Camille Paglia for two minutes about poetry.)

    I’m sorta in a zero fucks given frame of mind at the moment, so on a first date with a fine woman in the Big City Monday I escalated, almost in rote fashion, from great conversation at the W, to the usual groping and stroking in her car 90 minutes later in the darkness of Nicollet Island. Trust me, that was a mutual activity. Later, we laughed and made plans for lunch yesterday. Truly a delightful evening. But yesterday morning I got the text saying she was “frightened” by how “aggressive” I was, and that she never did that sort of thing and was just loopy from the two modest glasses of prosecco, and she thought I was more of a family man and blah blah blah the fuck blah — no lunch.

    Basically, I assume the “where is this going?” (what does it take to lock you down and farm you out) confrontation always emerges in 2-3 months. 10 hours is my new record. This is just the embedded contradiction (I’m strong, independent, and make my own way in the world; also, I plan to take out liens on your future) in current female expectations.

    Reply
    1. SFC Ton Post author

      Yep they want the Sovergien Man, wild and free even if he is urbane and smooth, then they want to break him to their saddle, and if they do this(normally by playing on bis better personality aspects) they despise him for being weak.

      Many of the younger girls understand what is at stake since they have enjoyed front row seats in the family drama shit show but 10 hours is pretty fast

      Wonder if that implies she has done a lot of clock sampling

      Reply
      1. BuenaVista

        Who knows (on the clock sampling). It would be great, though, to be pleasantly surprised some day.

      2. SFC Ton Post author

        Just seems like the kind of response one would get from someone who has played the game and lost a few rounds but as you say, who knows?

        DTBBTM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s