MGTOW is not a monolithic viewpoint.

soelc3 · 2019-12-24T00:50:38+00:00

MGTOW is monolithic on the issue of avoiding marriage and cohabitation.

DonMelbourne · 2019-12-24T01:05:58+00:00

I think MGTOW is a single philosophy. We need to have a definition for MGTOW on this sub, in my view, so that these kinds of issues don't keep coming up. Or when they do, we have somewhere to point people.

My personal definition of MGTOW is this: There are two planks to MGTOW:

Men are treated as disposable by society, but we are not. We should strive for self-actualization.
Men should look after the 'three healths': good physical health, good mental health and good financial health. As part of that, a cost/benefit analysis shows that men should not marry nor cohabitate with women.

Anyone who follows the above is MGTOW in my opinion. What does 'self-actualization' mean? Depends on the individual. How do you define good health, good finances? Depends on the individual.

What if you don't think that society treats men as disposable? In my opinion, you are not MGTOW. You might even be right, but it is a philosophical line that (IMHO) divides MGTOW from non-MGTOW.

What if you believe that a cost/benefit analysis shows that marriage is preferable to being single? Then you are not MGTOW, IMO. Again, you might be right (at least for your own needs), and I wish nothing but the best for you, but you have crossed a dividing philosophical line. It doesn't make you are a bad person, and we'd probably agree on so many other things. But you are not MGTOW, IMO.

I am enjoying being alone as a 32 year old male, but would love to be in a relationship (not marry) with a woman I can enjoy life with.

That's fine, and consistent with what I believe fits into a MGTOW life. So does monk mode, FWBs, or no-relationship lifestyles. But marriage and cohabitation does not.

simplisticallysimple · 2019-12-24T02:32:56+00:00

MGTOW is about avoiding disadvantageous setups, legal, financial, or otherwise. This rules out stuff like marriage, cohabitation, and in many cases LTRs.

millionmilecummins · 2019-12-24T02:45:53+00:00

Agree with Don M., that MGTOW is monolithic with regards to no cohabitating with women nor marriage to women. I’ve been MGTOW for twenty years, before it was even a bonafide movement. You can’t straddle the fence, you’re either MGTOW or your blue and or purple pill. I don’t think it’s necessary to bad month men who marry or date women. Let them be, attempting to convince a blue/purple pill man to not marry is fruitless. Continue to make your own personal observations, and learn from them. Read as much as you can, many books will provide knowledge and understanding. Knowledge is power. To become MGTOW you actually have had to experience the reality of being in relationships. For some of us, a lot of them (relationships). It’s how we got here. For some guys, it takes years to cross over, others real quick, and yet for others they never do and they die blue/purple pill. Once you become comfortable and confident with having gone your own way, then the mini skirts, big knockers, large asses etc., can’t compete with having financial health, peace of mind, tranquility, good health, and the freedom to live out a full happy life on your own terms. There’s a cost associated with everything in ones life, nothing is free. Actions equal consequences. So, men who marry for example, get pissed at cupcake when she files for divorce, yelling that bitch took the House!, my 401k! my Vette! my boat! my Harley! my investments! if you play with fire then you get burned it’s really that simple. I’m hoping that over time, much more clarity and solidification is made as to the true definition of MGTOW, establishing its validity as a bonafide men’s movement. I’d like to see it move away from any negativity towards women. It should be well known from the outset that MGTOW is all about like minded men, who have decided to go their own way.

Mindraker · 2019-12-24T03:39:05+00:00

I agree that there are different degrees of it. The anger-fed, raging redpillers are driven by their emotions and I don't necessarily think that this is healthy for our society.

I think the cooler, monk-like MGTOW2-style is healthier, but I'm not sure this is the best answer, either. It may be good for you as a person, but I don't see this as fixing society's problems.

801735 · 2019-12-24T07:15:50+00:00

If you find someone, great, if you don't, great.

chalchium · 2019-12-24T02:53:27+00:00

I would agree with the title, before I saw this:

would love to be in a relationship (not marry) with a woman I can enjoy life with. Would love a woman who is into the same kind of music, movies and other activities like me

You need to re-examine your understanding of the red-pill. Women aquire resource, protection, good genetics and increaseingly, entertainment from men (aka the party clown). It is in their instincts and they are never trained to overcome them. Even the women in the so-called "redpillwomen" community still fall to the same archetype. Therefore, it is impossible for a woman to love you if you don't provide the aforementioned. That's why you see research concludes that "men and women cannot simply be friends". This is the inter-gender mechanism that is created by evolution.

Does it mean every women is like this? Hell no. You will definitely find corners around the globe where such pure friendship between a man and woman exists. But from what I see, most men who claimed this statement are preys of a chameleon and lie to themselves. They truly believe they have found the one until they are trapped. Many ex-MGTOWs are like this. Read up on the "predatory female". Women are biologically programmed to trap men, and you are biologically programmed to be vulnerable. Not to mention the #metoo culture around, you really don't want to mess with a woman who can't depart on good terms, which is most of them nowadays.

Brandwein · 2019-12-24T16:52:17+00:00

I would like a kind and sweet woman that visits me once a week to cuddle and doesn't cost anything, then leaves me alone. But such an arrangement is a lotto win for which i won't begin gambling. Bachelorhood for the win.

ZeusTheSeductivEagle · 2019-12-28T12:57:35+00:00

Sorry brother but you cant "be a member" I'f you dont actually want to be mgtow. Lol doesnt mean you cant be redpilled and share in the discussion here. But as soon as you cohabitate or marry you are legit doing the opposite of going your own way. No one is stopping you in trying to play the game and use this knowledge to your advantage. Hell I'm doing it. In technical called a purple pill at the moment but will move in with my gf at some point and will be just redpilled. "Mgtow is a monolithic view" the redpill is not.

atariStjudas · 2019-12-28T14:46:10+00:00

It wouldn't be a group if it wasn't monolithic.

Title	MGTOW is not a monolithic viewpoint.
Author	srkdummy3
Upvotes	1
Comments	26
Date	December 23, 2019 11:44 PM UTC (6 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MGTOW2
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MGTOW2/comments/eespbw/mgtow_is_not_a_monolithic_viewpoint/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MGTOW2/mgtow-is-not-a-monolithic-viewpoint.811190 https://theredarchive.com/post/811190

Comments