Was checking out this youtube video of Dan Harmon raging against Red Pillers, MGTOW, InCel and such (link) and noticed an interesting pinned comment that was getting some traction. Wanted to see what you guys thought of it and the back and forth it caused. Here's the comments worth reading (warning these guys wrote novels as comments also Serius is anti and K is pro):

seriussam101

As someone who personally experienced 4Chan's formation and evolution, I can say with great certainty that lot of Alt Right philosophy, including the "Red Pill" and "Men Go Their Own Way" movements, is just a crutch designed to help neckbeards avoid the painful prospect of entering economic and emotional adulthood. Everything wrong with their lives is the result of gold-digging women (even though they can't even get dates), the liberal media's war on "Free Speech" ("Why can't I say the 'N-word' when black people can say it? This is America!"), or some other conspiratorial boogeyman. It's a culture of denialism that appeals to white males with shitty lives and no hope. It allows them to wash their hands of taking responsibility for self-improvement by placing themselves in a perpetual war against insurmountable, non-existent foes or by instilling views that are and forever will be incompatible with life in America. At some level, they understand they can't prevail in this self-imposed conflict, so they view life as a cruel joke and try to inflict their misery upon others. "For the lulz. Feels good, man."

Once you understand this, all their irrational, self-destructive positions begin to make some semblance sense. (I am being generous and not including the overt racists or Neo-Nazi contingents of the Alt-Right in my generalization.)

K Destroyer of Worlds

There are subreddits and Youtube channels for these groups. How about reading up on what they actually believe rather than what you think they believe based on observing 4Chan trolls? I can't speak for Red Pill folks as I don't find much common ground with their ideas but MGTOW (Men GOING Their Own Way is the correct phrase btw) have nothing to do with having any foes or not taking responsibility or not growing up or whatever other wrong ideas you're attributing to them. They are just men who are removing themselves from the perpetual chase for women's love, approval, affection or what have you. They are all about self improvement but for different reasons than most men. They go the gym and grow their finances for their own benefit rather than to impress women. They avoid marriage as they view it as a bad contract that leaves many men in financial ruin due to a divorce system biased in favor of the wife.

And as much as I love Dan he's way off in his description on InCel guys. Many of them are born with deformities and diseases that make them completely unattractive to the opposite sex. They tend to be deeply depressed or suicidal and have formed their clique to socialize with people in that same boat for mental support. Those guys deserve some sympathy. No one should have to live life that way and for Dan to bag on them based on one idiot blogger is the definition of punching down. He's literally making fun of a group who's ranks are stocked with the physically and, in some cases mentally handicapped.

As for me I don't identify as a member of of these groups but I do support some of their ideas. I also make sure to know the actual positions and beliefs of folks before I go ranting about them online. And just to disabuse you of another inaccuracy in your post: I'm a black, hard left, east coast, college educated liberal.

seriussam101

I know exactly what they believe. They believe exactly what I described, and have for quite some time. I was around when those groups started, failed, and changed their names as a re-branding effort to dupe a different sub-set of the same losers into joining their cause. Sorry.

Edit: To be more constructive, I was deeply involved in the initial 4Chan cesspool that spawned the Red Pill shit. Then I started getting laid and got a real job, and it stopped making sense. None of it makes sense to educated, emotionally developed adults. As soon as I started interacting with the people I had attributed all my problems to, the entire philosophy imploded.

It doesn't matter if you are a "hard left" liberal, you don't know what you are talking about.

K Destroyer of Worlds

@seriussam101 Once again you cite 4Chan as your source of information. Read the subreddits, listen to some of the Youtubers. I don't care about your biased, outdated sources, stay current and informed. This ridiculous echo-chamber bullshit needs to stop, on both sides. Stop painting every group you disagree with as monsters and LISTEN to what they're saying across their entire spectrum of views.

Men's rights groups and sympathizers come from all walks of the political and socioeconomic divide, yes some are alt-right knuckle-dragging misogynists that yearn for the 1950's when men could treat women like property and those people should be called to task and harshly. However most don't think that way at all and there's proof of that all over if you actually care to research.

If a staunch feminist who thought the same things you do can make a movie about Men's Rights supporters ( http://theredpillmovie.com/ ) and come to identify with and even support many of their views then maybe there's hope that people like yourself who are too entrenched in their own ideologies can grow to see the humanity in the people they once thought were pigs (to use the term the Russian trollbot MarxLeninMao lobbed at me upthread).

Don't cherry pick 4chan as your only source, OF COURSE 4chan is gonna breed idiots, its what they do. Grow your information base. I mentioned I leaned hard left because you mention that anyone with men's-right-ish views is an alt-righter. That alone refutes a part of your argument and shows that you don't have all the facts.

seriussam101

Sorry, but I can’t let you off the hook now. It’s a slow day at the office, and I am in a spicy mood. As a preliminary matter, I find it odd that you cite to Reddit and YouTube as reliable sources for your position and protest my reference to 4Chan. I see a lot of duplicate names and messages in the MGTOW corners of 4Chan and Reddit. Regardless, I hate to break it to you, but neither Reddit nor YouTube are any more compelling sources than 4Chan. All three are equally credible, anonymous internet mediums on this topic. That being said, can you provide 10 threads or channels you think best represent MGTOW, in your mind? I will let those sources speak for themselves. Regardless of your sources, I am going to demonstrate for all to see that MGTOW is a garbage movement comprised largely of garbage people or, at the very least, people with irrational views on specific topics.

I’ll focus on Wikipedia since it appears that MGTOW proponents wrote the MGTOW entry, and thus, it likely represents the most generous spin on MGTOW that could be presented to the general public. Spoiler alert: It’s not very impressive. According to Wikipedia, MGTOW “is a mostly pseudonymous online community supported by websites and social media presences cautioning men against romantic relationships with women, especially marriage. The community is part of what is more broadly termed the manosphere.” The entry goes on to say, “According to the columnist Martin Daubney, members of the MGTOW community believe that legal and romantic entanglements with women fail a cost–benefit analysis and risk–benefit analysis.” First of all, reducing personal relationships to a “cost-benefit analysis” destroys any credibility MGTOW has in and of itself. Only an emotionally crippled person would view personal relationships in this manner. Anyone who has had a significant number of relationships with women, both plutonic and sexual, intuitively understands that you can’t quantify the positives or negatives of relationships with them or effectively “weigh” the positives and negatives against one another. You can try, and many of us do after a painful experience, but those decisions are largely emotional. These are not rational decisions lending themselves to a clinical cost-benefit analysis. That issue aside, I will show below that this “cost-benefit” analysis framework is a ham-fisted smokescreen that allows MGTOW proponents to take potshots at women under the guise of objectivity. It can serve no other purpose.

But, continuing with the Wikipedia entry, the “Beliefs” section states the following: “MGTOW use the word gynocentric to describe conditions that favor women to the detriment of men, and are opposed to such circumstances. MGTOW believe that there is a systemic gynocentric bias against men including double standards in gender roles, bias against men in family courts, lack of concern for men falsely accused of rape and lack of consequences for their accusers.” So, the defining pillar of the MGTOW movement is a conspiracy that geared towards perpetuating a victim complex based on a few scattered “double standards” where society purportedly treats men unfavorably. As you will recall, I originally criticized Alt Right groups for deriving movements from conspiracies that stoke their respective victim complexes. MGTOW suffers from the same cancer. Obviously. Notably, I agree (as an attorney) that much of Family Law is nonsensical. But, it’s a comparatively nominal problem in America in terms of the frequency and scope of its impact. That being said, the outrage over men being falsely accused of rape is a strange focus for any movement to any objectively reasonable person. There’s no evidence that men are falsely accused of or convicted of rape with any meaningful regularity.

The rare instances they are have been paraded about and endlessly discussed by MGTOW proponents in an effort to draw completely unsupportable conclusions about women in general or the magnitude of the problem. Conversely, there is a lot of evidence that rape, despite often going unreported, is a startlingly common occurrence. 15% to 20% of women are victims of rape. There is no evidence I could find that a significant proportion of the male population is raped. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_the_United_S­tates . The idea that a movement can have this particular issue as a “cornerstone” of sorts is laughable to someone who is actually engaged with reality. Bringing this back full-circle to the “cost-benefit” analysis by which MGTOW proponents govern relationships with women, this analysis is fundamentally flawed because it will always favor abstaining from relationships with women. 100% of the time. Simply put, there is no benefit to altogether abstaining from or categorically limiting romantic or sexual relationships with women at any time. None. The average person can experience all the benefits of an abstinent life while experiencing relationships with a woman. An abstinent person cannot, however, experience the benefits of a committed relationship while abstinent. You can retain a desired level of independence if you are married, as my father did (my father essentially lived in a separate apartment 4 days a week so he could work 20 hours a day and climb the corporate ladder).

You can experience financial and professional success while in a relationship—e.g., you do not have to agree to subsidize your partner (your parent can subsidize you, if you desire). And you can sign a pre-nup if you want to get married. If things don’t work out, you can get divorced. Don’t have children and proactively track your assets if you so desire. There are common sense solutions that effectively insulate you from all the negatives associated with marriage or committed relationships. You just have to choose the right partner, communicate with her, and be actively aware of what both parties want or need from the outset of the relationship onward. MGTOW proponents assume these things are not possible, and thus, abstention or categorical restriction is necessary because (i) they are emotionally crippled, (ii) lack experience or relationship savvy, and/or (iii) generally view women as manipulative leaches (generally because they are emotionally crippled and lack relationship experience). Because of this obvious truth, the MGTOW’s cost-benefit analysis will always be ??? over 0. Any risk or downfall that can be attributed to entering into a relationship with women, no matter how nominal, will call for the MGTOW advocate to forgo that relationship. In other words, the smallest fractional value of risk (e.g., 0.0001) is greater than then value of the benefit (0). Because there are always risks associated with any relationship, whether personal or professional, the MGTOW calculus will effectively forbid any relationship with a woman. Moreover, because many MGTOW proponents understand, at some level, there is no meaningful “benefit” to abstaining from relationships with women, they focus exclusively on the “risks” of entering into relationships with women—i.e., painting women in an unfavorable light. This is the only way to increase the “cost” of associating with women.

Please note that I am not saying that relationships with any woman are advisable. I am not saying that every man should engage in relationships with women or get married. I am simply saying that the foundational rationale of the MGTOW is laughably stupid and, to the point, supports my original generalizations about MGTOW and its proponents. Popular MGTOW YouTube channels further support my position. When I seared “MGTOW” channels on YouTube, the two channels with the largest numbers of subscribers were “MGTOW 101” and “Sandman.” Literally 100% of MGTOW 101’s videos about women paint them in a negative light or celebrate “exposing” random strawman feminists. The same is true of Sandman. None of their videos focus on any discernible benefit to the MGTOW lifestyle (because there is none). Rather, they focus on disparaging women and/or feminism. On a related point, you clearly take issue of with my characterization of the MGTOW movement as intellectual bankrupt and comprised (almost exclusively) of losers. Can you identify 10 professionally successfully, active MGTOW members? Note: Anonymous posters in Reddit and people whose carrier is their YouTube channel will not be considered. Can you identify any peer-reviewed or academic literature published by MGTOW proponents that support it? Even discredited movements like Young Earth Creationism can pass this low hurdle.

So yeah those are the juicy parts. Looks like Seriussam deleted that last mega comment, glad I saved it. I figured since they were bringing up this sub here would be a good place to post it.