MGTOW are for many of them men who've been abused by the system, victims of abusive divorces, slaves to an alimony system that should have been abolished long ago, victims of female-perpetrated domestic violence, etc. I respect their choice to avoid marriage in the future and I took the same vow - and favor the abolition of state-regulated marriage altogether, a system of female financial abuse of men that should not exist in the 21th century.
The problem is that MGTOW display a "strong man" posturing behavior like most of other right-wing anti-feminists, they see themselves as individualists, as "tough guys" and they refuse the "pro-male" label even though they know society discriminates against men and boys. They think they can secede and that if enough men do so society will collapse. This is often intermingled with right-wing beliefs about a 3rd world immigration invasion. All of it is nonsensical, the West won't collapse during your lifetime and certainly not because of immigration or because a few dozens of thousands of men are refusing to marry and chose to spend much of their time rambling about women in MGTOW spaces instead.
You can't secede from society, you can avoid marriage and that's all, you're still paying taxes to a gynocentric and gynocratic state that uses your money against you whether you want it or not. There is in America a $150,000 lifetime transfer from the average man to the average woman through taxes only. Secession isn't an option.
The moronic "strong male" posturing of the MGTOW who apparently think advocating for men is gay or something is the exact kind of behavior common in men that hinders the progress of male advocacy and that lets a feminist-driven society invent new ways of institutionally abusing men as time goes on.
[+]adlerchen1 points [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link
I personally expect roman style bachelor taxes to be talked about in the future as marriage and birth rates decline. The policy makers only want to use sticks on men, not carrots. And with women, who are the principle but not sole cause of the marriage crisis, due to consciously delaying marriage and children en mass to very advanced ages for birthing and for divorce raping men en mass with no-fault divorce that it puts off men from marriage at all, no stick is ever considered or would be sanctioned. Women's unilateral choices en mass are being blamed on men. Unmarried men are derided in OpEds in the media as "peter pans" for not marrying women who en mass have rejected marriage until they are no longer desirable or have outright rejected marriage altogether. They are never derided as immature for abdicating their adult lives as mothers. It is only men who derided as immature for not marrying women who en mass do not really want marriage.
I'm personally sympathetic to statements in favor of letting marriage die its slow death, because I get the fear, frustration, and sense of injustice from fellow men. However, I think to be happy, most men and women really need marriage and children. The problem is that stable long lasting and relatively risk free marriage between mature partners who are both conditioned to sacrifice for the other and respect the other, is basically no longer possible outside of small religious communities who live in bubbles apart from mainstream society. Most modern women no longer inhabit the head space to make a long term give-and-take relationship work, especially one as intimate as vital as marriage. They want to be married, but they don't want to be wives, as goes the saying in the manosphere. So many liberal women take umbrage with expectations placed on them by their partner(s) or wider society. Complaints about "emotional labor exist in the progressive press, as though it's such a great injustice for a loving spouse to give an ear to the feelings and worries of the other. These are not life partners. They are emotionally damaged and closed off. They make poor companions.
[–]C0dey 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[+]adlerchen1 points [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link
Children are the purpose of marriage. It's hard for me to imagine why one would marry with no intention of having children. The only reason I can think of would be community approval for what could otherwise be just an implicitly exclusive long term relationship with optional cohabitation, but if your standing is not dependent on familial or religious community approval then it's not a problem. Most people live in the permissive secularized atomized culture where you don't risk losing out socially for engaging in such behavior.
[–]C0dey 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]thereslcjg2000left-wing male advocate 3 points4 points5 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]her_958_resistors 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]her_958_resistors 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]rannerbeer1 points [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link
Nothing wrong with MGTOW. o hell with women quite frankly, they hate men and have nothing to offer.
Let women pay taxes to the governments that serve them. Let women get conscripted, work the shitty dangerous jobs that kill and work themselves into an early grave.
Men should simply sit back and watch the collapse.
[+]adlerchen1 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
Most women don't hate men. While leftist discourse of gender and history is fueling antimale attitudes, those kinds of women are still very much in the minority. It's very hard to hate the opposite sex, because we feel a natural attraction to the other. The kinds of individuals who do are generally speaking mentally unwell.
That sounds good until you're living in the collapse. What's happening is in no one's long term interests. I understand male nihilism. I genuinely do. But it won't help any of us, and it's not good for your soul. It's a poor coping mechanism.
I can also understand the schadenfrued of watching as women get equality, that so many of them demand but misunderstand because they tell themselves that our lives as men are so great. However, men and women are connected at the hip. You simply cannot do something to one sex without it inevitably effecting the other. This attitude you articulate here isn't a heathy one to have. Seperatism means lonliness. Seperatism means women's problems and fuckups will inevitably become our problems. We're meant to compliment and cooperate with the other sex. Not compete or fight with them. This attitude will poison your soul and your ability to feel love and empathy, and compromise your ability to find meaning in life. You can't hate or reject the opposite sex without hating or rejecting yourself, because your body will betray you. You will still long for them, and find that a very integral part of you wants what you hate, causing you to hate yourself.
[–]WeEatBabies 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]phoneticau 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]neitz2626 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Colombian-mra 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link