We're one in the same theatre of Gynocentric society. Two philosophies with very different frameworks which are designed for different outcomes within Gynocentric Society. TRP is a framework which involves the women as a core component of a man's framework. The men who seek this route want sexual release at a cheaper price, they also want the currencies of this acquisition and so TRP works to conform men into the stereotypical male of past generations, the one prior to the mass induction of social engineering beginning in the 1900s. TRP is more of a revival and a Rosetta stone for the hungry beta, the ones who pedestal sexual release and all it entails.

MGTOW is supposedly different but how? Women are not part of its core framework, rather women are excluded from the central framework. This frame is far more difficult to achieve and especially so for males who've already achieved a modest level of copulative success. For most men they place to much value in sexual release with women, like a dog out of Pavlov they're incapable of disassociating the reward mechanic from women and are unable to devalue them realistically. In some ways men can't be blamed for something that is incredibly difficult but then again they can be blamed for succumbing to their own suffrage.

A lot of men here I've noticed hover in what could be called limbo between the two philosophies. However from a realistic standpoint most are here because they do not have an easy means of access to women. What does this mean specifically and what constitutes easy access? Money, in this era men do no hold a higher station of status or economic income then women so the ones who want to use the Beta strategy to buy into the market are incapable of doing so. Most men are like this because realistically they do not have an existing framework of thought to counter the inherent thought processes of Gynocentrism or for those exposed to the red pilled may opt to MGTOW as some sort of default because of their inability to satiate their sexual desires with women. Its rare for men to ingest the red pill to such a level that they completely devaluate women, so much so they no longer exist at the core of a man's framework, thoughts, and or feelings. This is radically hard to achieve because testosterone as in that which gives us our physical and intellectual supremacy also enslaves us to the Gynocentric initiative without a strong and continuously counteractive framework.

Is there empirical proof for this? Yes, men still marry at close to the same rates as the end of the Second World War because the ones who do so are the ones who go to post secondary and have a higher station of status and income then women. This means if the supra majority of men had the economic means to pay to play, they would and MGTOW and TRP(all Red pill philosophies) advance in the sphere's of male thought would altogether crash.

Women, Men and the New Economics of Marriage

There is an education component to this change: The decline in marriage rates has been steepest for the least educated, especially men, and smallest for college graduates, especially women. College graduates, the highest earners, are more likely today to be married than are Americans with less education — 69% for adults with a college degree versus 56% for those who are not a college graduate.

That was not the case in 1970, when all education groups were about equally likely to wed. Among college-educated men, 88% were married in 1970, compared with 86% of men without a college education. Among women, the comparable 1970 figures were 82% and 83%.

Thus, Americans who already have the largest incomes and who have had the largest gains in earnings since 1970 — college graduates — have fortified their financial advantage over less educated Americans because of their greater tendency to be married.

Another thing I think a lot of us need to come to terms with is that for all intense and purposes Feminism has done a better job of keeping men from their own suffrage then anything else. This economic agenda of gender subsidization has economically forced betas out of the Gynocentric institutions of marriage because its clear as day these men would marry in a heart beat but lack the economic agency to do so even when the quality of the market is though the bottom of seven hells. One can even argue further Feminism has allowed a majority of men to glance a purple pilled version of female behaviour by overly incentivizing true female nature out into the open. Despite the recent era of female behaviour a lot of men still cling to the Blue and Purple pilled religions of finding none existent NAWALTS, because as men we all know the power of the thirst, the power of a framework which incorporates a women at the heart of a man's ego. The thirst compels a man to orbit around the economies of Gynocentrism and TRP is another philosophy anchored to this destructive mass.

Thoughts?