Two ant farms.

Recently over at Alpha Game, there's been a small tiff that Vox terms Nihilists versus Civilisationists. He notes the following:

"This is why the accusations of lotus-eating on the one hand and white-knighting on the other are both misplaced and ill-considered. Both nihilists and civilizationists are necessary to the process of first destroying, and then replacing, FI society. One need not agree with the other to respect and understand his - or her - role in the necessary, desirable, and, I would argue, inevitable, process."

If you'll excuse my humble opinion on the subject, this is practically the most sensible position to take. Unfortunately, both sides over at the comments have gone at each other anyway, leading to one poster noting that it was almost as if Vox had raised two colonies of ants and pitted them against each other for his amusement.

I think the problem with the civilisationists making their argument over there is that a) they assume we will continue our hedonistic ways after the fall of the Cathedral and b) we're doing nothing to improve ourselves in the meantime.

That's untrue. I'm a living example.

Male disposability - a strength?

Male disposability, that big bugbear.

Ah, I still remember the old days when I was reading Angry Harry, of land whales squealing in excitement at the thought the Y chromosome might be decaying, "self-love" jokes when it was found it was capable of self-repair, and sullen silence when it was suggested its mutability may be responsible for much of human evolution.

Men are expendable. It's in our genes. Women are inherently valuable because they have wombs and thus are the reproductive bottleneck. You can spend forever trying to fight it, or you can accept the fact that men and women are not equal on any footing whatsoever and turn that to your advantage.

If it still can be, that is. Somehow, I doubt that.

Oh well, t'was fun while it lasted.

VAWA has been reauthorised.

The Republican-controlled House on Thursday approved an updated version of the Violence Against Women Act that includes new protections for gay men and lesbians, part of an effort by GOP leaders to improve their image among women after last year’s poor election results.

The Senate approved the measure in January and President Obama said he will quickly sign it into law.

I wonder how the US government is going to get all that money in a pinch...oh wait, printing press.

T'was fun while it lasted, folks. Waiting for it to all come crumbling down now.

The sluts of Singapore.

Have a snapshot of our local women, brought to you by The Real Singapore. Let's hear some forty year-old broad tell us like it is, so much that I can't tell if this is a Poe or the real deal:

Me and gay friends decided to do a picnic at Hong Lim Park where some people had organised the 6.9 million protest. It was too crowded, felt like Michael Jackson concert so we had to find a less crowded spot pretty far away from where the whole commotion was, laid our picnic mat like the Pinoys and ate our homemade ham and cheese baguette. While silly Singaporeans had shown support for the 6.9 million protest, I was more interested to check out any good looking people lurking somewhere. You know, this was the time to be seen and I leaped at any opportunity available to market myself. Ehem! Sad to say, there were no cute guys. Most Singaporeans are ugly (thank God I’m not!). And most of the time I wasn’t really listening to what the speakers had said. Actually it was TJ’s (very handsome gay friend) idea of going to Hong Lim Park because he said he wanted to show support. I've never like crowd so it was boring for me. Besides, I don’t care about Singapore politics! I only care about getting married and finding someone to fuck! Arrrggghhh!

The first protest in Singapore in about three or four decades about an issue (demographics) that is vital to our nation, and all this slut can think about is finding someone to bang. Oh, how shallow and empty-minded one can get. Also, massively overestimated sense of self-worth. Sorry, slut, I wager you're nowhere near hot.

An interesting analysis on recent happenings in the MRM.

An analysis of the schism growing within the MRM by Eagleeye. He points out quite succinctly some of the root causes of the unease that a a number of us who identify ourselves (to any extent) as MRAs feel about the direction a portion of the movement is taking.

The thing is that this isn't just about traditionalists now - it's about anyone who disagrees with the narrative AVFM has set out. Now, I won't deny that Dr. Elam has done a lot of good; even Aurini, who is highly critical of the movement as a whole, admits that. Part of the reason I came back to the red-pill world was because of AVFM's activism sparking interest in me. But the reason why I'm here to begin with is due to two places: Angry Harry and Stand Your Ground from back in 2004-2005. As far as I can piece things together, AH has been attacked for pointing out the questionable veracity of repressed memories, and Factory has been attacked, too. Reports are also that the banner linking back to AH's site has been taken off AVFM. Remember that AH and Factory have not even mentioned (as far as I know) their positions on so-called "traditionalism", so that's not the reason why they were attacked.

Also remember the three weapons of the Rabbit People, as laid out by Vox Day:

1. Demanding sensitvity.
2. Name-calling and labelling.
3. Exclusion.

It's interesting how certain elements like WBB are behaving - like Eagleeye points out - in exactly the same rabbity manner that the fools over at A+, and indeed, the Left in general, do as their modus operandi. It's also interesting how the alt-right predicted that this sort of thing would happen years ago before the fact - No-Ma'am foresaw the identifiable flagships of the MRM being infiltrated by cultural marxists and either being broken up from within or turned to the state's purposes.

I don't like the taste in my mouth, good sir, no I do not one bit.

Still, I'm not too worried about what happens next, for the following two reasons:

1. The simple fact that the red-pill consciousness of which the MRM is a part of is a swarm. If you cut a swarm in two, you don't get a dead swarm, you get two swarms which continue to grow in their own right. The strength of a swarm comes not so much from its size (although that is a factor) but from the asymmetrical nature of its attacks.
2. The collapse will come anyway. The efforts of the red-pill world will help speed it along, but even if we did not exist, it would still be inherently unstable and collapse under its own weight anyway.

So ultimately, what this means for me is that I simply make a revaluation on where I stand on things in light of this new development, and to let others know just what's going on so they can make their own decisions.

What do you want to be in the future?

During my day, when the above question was asked of a Singaporean child, the only "acceptable" answers were the following: doctor, lawyer and engineer. Of course, the times, they have a-changed, but I doubt that even with the bread and circuses phenomemon spreading throughout the Singaporean populace today, "rock star" is going to be amongst the answers given.

Maybe "astronaut", despite the fact that Singapore does not, and will never be able to accommodate a space program. A small indulgence to be given, perhaps, before the kid in question gets some sense knocked into their brain and picks (or eventually, drifts) into a profession that is more on the realistic side of things. To be completely honest, my impression was that most kids don't really care that much about their futures, let alone have a plan for theirs, and are only spouting off the approved lines to get their teacher off their backs.

Anyways.

Europe trying to hide alpha fucks, beta bucks.

 Reblogged from Alpha Game:

"Apparently the French and German governments have concluded that their female citizens are too helplessly slutty to face the mere possibility that they may be having children with men who are not their husbands:

If those samples were found in the post by officials on their way to foreign laboratories, the French men who sent them could theoretically face a year in prison and a 15,000 Euro fine. This year the ban was challenged but the French Government decided to uphold and maintain the anti-paternity testing law.

The reasons for which the Government said the ban should remain were related to the preservation of peace within French families. According to some online articles, Germany, has also banned (or plans to ban) paternity testing for similar reasons.

The argument against allowing paternity testing in France is directly opposed to the argument for allowing it almost everywhere else. While French Authorities believe that paternity testing can cause friction within families, some fathers find that getting rid of any doubt relating to their relationship with their child can help strengthen the bond they have with them, instead. As one woman mentioned on Twitter, the French argument completely misses the point.  If the child doesn't belong to the father, there is no family in the first place!  Notice the pattern: evil is always opposed to the truth and inevitably seeks to hide its actions from everyone."

That's right, folks. "It's for the children."

Alpha fucks, beta bucks. Nothing new to see here.

I just finished reading Fight Club.

It's a short book, finished it in one night.

And then began to wonder: "where the hell has this book been all my life?"

Because every once in a while, somebody brings me my lunch tray and my meds and he has a black eye or his forehead is swollen with stitches, and he says:

"We miss you Mr. Durden."

Or somebody with a broken nose pushes a mop past me and whispers:

"Everything's going according to the plan."

Whispers:

"We're going to break up civilisation so we can make something better out of the world."

Whispers:

"We look forward to getting you back."

Everything in the book's sad, hilarious, disgusting, bitter, and yet very, very true.

I'm out looking for more of Palahniuk's titles.

Concerned.

The Conservative Sociologist (TCS) is a young woman who runs her own conservative blog up over here. I watch her on a semi-regular basis (as I do with almost everyone on Cappy Cap's blogroll), and have of late made a few comments regarding MGTOW on one of her posts, and found a comment on another of her posts that was thought-provoking, and made a post on it.

I believe I need to gather my thoughts on this recent back-and-forth, and this post will suffice for that purpose. I think this will be the last consolidation of this particular train of thought that began with DriverSuz on that earlier post of mine, unless something crops up.

It's been a while since I saw this comment on one of AVFM's articles (so I don't quite remember which one it was), but it mentioned that a lot of freshly indocrinated young women who leave women's studies courses often have this sense of rage against men in general. I can't confirm the veracity of this statement in its original context, of course, but my point in bringing this up is that I'm starting to see this being mirrored more and more by men in general. You have sex separatists like Barbarossa and Stardusk getting thousands of subscribers, who in turn spread the ideas and get their own subscribers, and so on and so forth...

Is it right to tar young girls who don't even know what they're doing with that broad brush? Even the ones young enough such that the argument that they were complicit in benefiting from feminist-inspired laws doesn't hold water? Is it fair to consider them guilty by association? Of course not, because heritable culpability is a stupid thing.

Well.

I don't really have much to add to this comment here from TCS. Draw your own conclusions:

I'm not sure what they sense, but here is what they should fear:

I'm an honorable man and I want justice.

There are no non-Feminist women any more than there are no men who aren't "potential rapists."

Regarding "fair", I tried being a good man, an honest man without regard to the social cost, and there was a heavy social cost. I am the best friend unworthy of intimacy, the helpful tool easily disposed, the ready protector called creepy.

I have smiled and nodded, understanding that many men are not like me and women have some legitimate reason for caution.

Women aren't being cautious, though. They aren't even paranoid, a real psychological condition that can be treated. They are instead reveling in faux drama to experience excitement in their lives.

I have drunk from the cup of injustice of unfounded suspicion for 40 years, understanding, apologizing, proving myself with physical evidence and independently observable achievement.

So, this will be "fair":

My body, my choice - I want some of that too, mm'kay?

 
"My body, my choice." It's a mantra that's been shouted ad infinitum, and I think it's a great mantra which highlights the importance of personal sovereignty to the exclusion of everything else, even a life. We must have control over our bodies, after all.

I really am in favour of this idea. In fact, I so fully agree with this idea, I'd like to suggest changing a few things in society to more fully put this concept in practice.

For starters, I spent two years in the navy as a conscript. My unit was a peacetime active unit, which meant we actually had to do our duties for real when there wasn't a war going on (mostly coastal patrol), and while this small part of the world is fairly safe, I was still expected to put my life on the line if need be.

Aside from that, the government took control of my body, telling me where I could be, what I could eat, what I could put into it, when and where I was allowed to smoke, how fit I have to be, and so forth. As an operationally ready reservist, I am obligated to pass a fitness test every year. Failure to do so results in me either having to go for a 20-session training course, a fine, or jail time.

Since it's my body, I demand my choice to not have my fleshy body co-opted to the point of potential death by the government to take bullets and bombs for people I hardly know. I demand that the government relinquish telling me what I can and can't do, and using the long arm of the law to force me to comply if I don't agree.

My body, my choice.

Water finds its own level.

The basic principles behind hydraulics can be put in layman's terms as such: a fluid must have equal pressure along the same level.

Pressure may be defined as the force exerted over an area.

Hence, if you push down with a weak force in a narrow tube, you can exert a huge force over a wide tube. To obey conversation of energy, you'll need to push the fluid in the narrow tube down a long way to produce a slight rise in the wide tube.

Now let's look at society today, shall we?

Masculinity has been criminalised throughout much of the world. The result? Alpha men and PUAs pump and dump carousel riders, while clueless betas taught to pedestalise women get sloppy seconds, to be raped in divorce court in a handful of years. Boys growing up in single-mother households end up as thugs and brutes, which are so much better at attracting the next generation of carousel riders - men are being born and bred by their own mothers to see women as little more than fuck holes to be used and discarded.

Age of consent keeps on creeping higher and higher, while thanks to the comforts of modern society, physical age becomes increasingly more disconnected from mental age and the ability to give consent. My grandaunt was married at fourteen, a mother by sixteen, and that was common back in the day; people were forced to grow up fast. What do we have now? Child paegeants. Honey Boo Boo. Children's bikinis and other pieces of clothing sexualising little girls as young as bloody six.

Male leadership has been derided as bad, evil, and an instrument of the Patriarchy(TM); women are to be shepherded into leadership positions via quotas, even if they have less interest in them. What do we get? The rise of Fundamentalist Islam, which states that women are only worth half of what a man is, that if you're an alpha male you get four wives, and if you're not...you're a cur, and get to bugger little boys while waiting to die like a good disposable male so you can get your seventy-two virgins in heaven.

Intimate partner violence laws have gone absolutely insane, to the point where "emotional abuse" and "financial abuse" are the watchword of the day, when reprimanding a pet in a woman's presence is considered abuse under Australia's "The Plan". What have we ended up with? BDSM. People willingly entering into master-slave relationships.

I could go on, but I think you see the idea. For all the social engineering in the world, "undesirables" always start creeping back - and often in a far more destructive form than their original manifestations were. Water is going to find its own level, after all.

But hey, to paraphrase Cappy, enjoy the worldwide decline, folks!

Who taught you to hate yourself?

Who taught you to hate yourself?

An excellent piece by Andy Man over at AVFM.

Regardless of the stripe you wear in the androsphere, be it MRA, MGTOW, PUA or Reactionary, this harkens to one of the fundamental truths of the red pill where it comes to relations between the sexes.

We men are not criminals for bearing a penis.

We men are not "women who have been poisoned by testosterone". Nor are we mutants, cavemen, dying out, or any other euphemism used to dehumanise us.

We men refuse to be duped any longer and buy into a revisionist history.

We men refuse to be shamed because of our biological sexual attractors.

We men shall not be demonised by a system that depends on us for its survival, and yet beats us into submission with the same breath.

We men shall not hate ourselves from some mythical "oppression" we perpetrate by the mere crime of just existing.

I dislike talking to people.

Some of you folks out there might remember that I'd resolved a little while ago to start trying to speak to strangers a little more to build up my confidence at doing so. A little progress has been made - I've gotten a little friendlier and more open with the local security guards and fellows who staff the food court - but the emphasis is on the phrase "a little".

The problem is twofold. The first bump on the road is that most people in Singapore don't like strangers. People keep their heads down and mouths shut in public; I'd say about slightly more than half of the people I greeted with a nod, raised hand (palm forward) and optional "good morning" actually looked away from me when I did so. There was even a small minority of people, men and women alike, who openly flinched and walked away from me the moment I did so.

The second is that the tiny percentage of people who actually are not only not repulsed by my greeting, but actually want to make small talk (less than 1 percent, I'd wager), are by and large, devoid of much interesting conversation.

Let me explain this. There's a Chinese saying that's attributed to Confucious:

Great men speak of ideas.

Middling men speak of events.

Little men speak of others.

Now, I don't claim to be a great man - far from it. After all, I'm hardly anywhere near the level of being able to come up with any worthy ideas, only filter the ideas others have put forth and seeing which are acceptable to me and why. But at least, I can speak of current events and discuss them. A local scandal involving a town council and potential cronyism/corruption in the purchase of computer systems, for example. The US fiscal cliff. Demographics problems - both in Singapore and beyond, and in terms of more than the usual regurgitated talking points. A recent illegal strike (remember, all strikes are illegal in Singapore) by bus drivers over their pay and working conditions.

You know, events.

People on the street and on campus - they don't seem to know, let alone care. All they want to talk about is what's on TV, what's going to happen to the characters on (insert show here), where to go to get a good eating, how many Facebook likes they have...

Or perhaps I shouldn't talk about current events, but about hobbies. Okay, hobbies. I try to open with my weights training, since it's the most obvious thing about my from my physique, and then faced with the ensuing silence, talk a little about how it's improved me as a person. All right, now it's their turn to talk, and at least some people have interesting hobbies to chat about that aren't either video games or attention whoring on Facebook. Yet, all too often it isn't worth enduring the banal masses to find someone who actually has a hobby and is passionate enough to hold a sustained conversation about it.

And I sit there with an easy smile on my face for about a minute or so, wondering: why does this person feel the need to use a near-complete stranger as an emotional tampon in a face-to-face conversation? (As opposed to an anonymous blog post, where anyone can skip over my more whiny posts) Once it's clear the situation's unsalvageable, I make my excuses and leave. 

Part of this is my own problem, of course. I try to hint at men's issues and other red-pill ideas to more receptive folks, but they can't be said out in the open, of course, or else I'd be as much of a social pariah as if I were to suddenly turn a glowing radioactive green. Another part of it is that I really don't care enough about being liked by other people that I'm willing to rot my brain watching tee vee to see which local and international celebrities are fucking who, what's the latest puerile and passing trend, and one hundred and one other soulless and transient shiny distractions from life. If people want to live their lives that way, fine by me, but I'm not going to suffer through a sea of banality for the sake of playing nice.

My father used to complain to me that I didn't speak enough to people, to which I would usually reply that I would rather have a few deep friendships than a hundred passing acquaintances. Fine. Now that I'm trying to talk to people, I'm finding out how so many people don't really have anything interesting about them to talk about.

Well, at least it's some practice trying to tease out a satisfactory conversation, but you can't pull out what's not there sometimes.

I'm not saying that there aren't any interesting conversationalists out there - they crop up in the wierdest of places. But so many people aren't, that's the problem. And there's a by-election coming up in one of the country's constituencies - if this is a snapshot of us Singaporeans, how are we supposed to feel comfortable with any of us voting?

Team Civilisation.

Vox Day has made a great post over at Alpha Game about Team Civilisation. A notable quote:

"It is important for even the angriest, most justifiably bitter men of the androsphere to remember that the survival of civilization requires the joint efforts of both the sexes.  By all means, denigrate, shame, and mock those women who are actively, if unknowingly, attempting to bring civilization down.  But it is vital to be able to distinguish between civilizational friend and anti-civilizational foe."

Mm. With all the talk over at SunShineMary's about sexbots replacing women (or at least, what far too many of them have become today, both in and out of the Anglosphere), at least for the middling and lower-ranked guys, I really find it hard to feel sympathy for any of them who embraced, or still embrace the whole "men are useless, for they are but muscles, ATMs and sperm banks" mantra.

I remember back in 2000, when the whole "the Y chromosome is dying" nonsense (odd how the trumpeting stopped and was replaced with derision when it was discovered it was capable of self-repair, and fell quiet completely when its mutability suggested it might have been responsible for up to 30% of human evolution. Nature does take more chances with men than it does with women, after all.) was at its peak, and seeing an issue of Time magazine with "men dying out?" splashed all across the cover. I remember reading one of Angry Harry's pieces back in 2004, when he quotes one glorious biologist as saying "men are parasites". And of course, in recent times, we have Greg Laden from A-doubleplusgood declaring that men are just women whose brains have been poisoned by testosterone.

So yes, with so many years of "men are useless" under my belt even as a young man reducing me to my penis and muscles, (I mean, who cares about all the stats which point out that children do far better in intact households?) I can't say I care much for what these women think of being reduced to a pussy and womb by sexbots. Perhaps then they'll have to bring more than a warm hole and a baby bag (sometimes) to a relationship.

And Vox Day has pointed out how to do that. Hop on the boat with the men and women on Team Civilisation, because instead of giving all of you ladies the benefit of the doubt and sifting out the bad apples like in ye olden days, the strategy of the red-pill man these days is to sift and screen and search for the single good apple that looks identical to all the others in the barrel. Others have chosen to abstain from the barrel altogether and will need to be persuaded back.

Their standards will be high, so you'd better be prepared. Those worthy of being on the boat will be on board when the flood comes, and those who aren't - sluts and simpering manginas alike - will simply be swept away by the tide to come, whether it's from collapse or from a brave new world.

Coasta Concordia or The Dark Knight shooting? As Aurini says, you choose the action, you choose the consequences.

Because we're all in this together.

We need to be paladins (not crusaders). All of us. We need, amongst other things, to live our lives according to precepts of civilisation and be shining beacons of what we stand for.

For Team Civilisation.

Inside the box.

 It's common knowledge that the red pill is a bitter pill. The truth will sear your mind, it will weigh heavy on your guts and leave a horrible taste in your mouth.

But at least for those who can handle all that, they will be free. Handling that, though, can be a tricky thing for so many people, and everyone has their own coping mechanism. Some of us manospherians (is that even a word?) have families who're red-pill as well, others have causes they can throw their energies and frustrations into. I suppose even the action of blogging in and of itself is a form of coping with knowing the truth - shouting out to the world and trying to find someone in this sea of madness who will listen.

As M3 points out: "The sphere is poison. So is chemo. And when when you're fighting cancer...all bets are off."

To that end, he unplugged for a couple of weeks and took a break, but now he's back. People suffer from burnout all the time and have to drop out for their own reasons, but as I mentioned in my MGTOW post, the glory of the manosphere is that whenever one falls back, there's always a fresh face filling the empty spot in the ranks. Yet it's all too hard not to stare into the abyss, especially when it hasn't just stared back at you - it's already taken up residence on your couch, monopolised the contents of your fridge and is hogging the remote.

It's imperative you get into this box, our existences depend on it...and I wouldn't lie to me, would I?

To that end, I have the box.

Of course, it should be obvious that the box isn't a physical box I've lugged home and put over my head whenever I feel that the abyss is getting a little too close for my comfort, although I'll say that my room feels that way sometimes. I lived in a converted storeroom from the ages of 6-16, so it's not a big surprise.

Enough about that, though. I was a fantasy novelist - still am writing, although not at the pace that I used to back when I had more free time. And when I go back and look at the stuff I've written over the years and think back on it, it's really true that writing does make you bare your soul to whomever ends up reading your manuscript. Your principles, your beliefs, your desires - even though you might write a character who, say, had a different point of view on a particular issue than you and you had the temerity to not make them stupid or evil like so many authors do, your writing will still be influenced at some level by your views on that opposing viewpoint. It's hard to escape that, unless you're a machine, an AI.

On the other hand, I've found it to be a release of sorts, building a world in my head. Sort of like a thought experiment on "how would you order the world if you were a deity?" only writ large. If you could reshape the world according to your will, how would you go about it? The end product would be a summation of both your conscious and unconscious desires, a world suited to your reality - although not the realities of others. There are two sides to every equation, a zero to every one, as they say. You can't grow as a person unless you accept that your reality doesn't apply to others, and it most likely doesn't match up with objective reality as we red-pillers know it.

But it's nice to retreat into a dream world for a little while and write about worlds where people treat each other with respect and decency, where rulers try to do the right thing, where karma actually exists and things happen for a reason, where human beings and elves and octopus people are actually rational beings who try to work things out and everyone goes home at the end of the day, if not happily ever after.

Well, the alternative is stewing in a cloud of rage and wishing Sodom-and-Gomorrah-esque destruction on all of existence.

***

"You don't seem angry about it."

"Anger would be futile, wouldn't it?"

"Well, yes, but aren't you accustomed to futile anger?"

I felt something like a dry chuckle attempt to escape my throat. I suppressed it and said, "I'm working on that." 

- Phoenix, Steven Brust 

*** 

That's my box. That's where I go when the precipice draws near. And I stay in there, wrap the chains about the wood and click the padlock shut until I'm ready to face the world again, which usually isn't too long. I open the word processor and write, just like when I did after reading this post by dear Glorious Bastard.

Remember to keep a coping mechanism at hand, folks. It's all so easy to spend hours being plugged into the sphere, watching the assembly line of emotions both low and high tick by. Get up from that seat. Spend time with the people you love. Throw yourself into that hobby or sport you have. Do something to prevent yourself from going mad at the world.

The sphere is poison, but there's a Chinese saying: "clear (alternatively, fight) poison with poison". The sphere has to be poisonous in order to have any chance of clearing the rot in our system, or at least die an easier death. No one said the truth was easy.

It's all too easy to let that nilhilistic feeling creep up on you, but as Aurini points out - the flip side of there being no innate meaning means that you can create it for yourself.

So go out and make some meaning, because the alternative's not pretty.

Runaway brides in Singapore.

 From The Real Singapore:

"To everyone else outside of their relationship, Janice, 23, and Ken, 25, appeared to be the perfect fairytale couple. Secondary school sweethearts, their relationship outlasted the trials and tribulations of National Service and getting their degrees. They were an item for a whopping nine years before Ken proposed in early 2012 after they found out that their BTO flat would be ready soon,  and Janice accepted.

So it came as a huge shock to all their friends and family when five days before their wedding at a five-star local hotel in September 2012, Janice called it all off and took a flight to Thailand to “escape” her fiancé and disappointed guests."

 The reason?

 “You could  put it like this – the third party was HDB. I feel like I was forced to decide to get married early because if I waited until I was, say, 30 and ready to settle down, to wait another three to four years to get a BTO flat would leave me no time to start a family. Everyone told me that Ken and I had to hurry up and apply for a flat together and then quickly get married once the flat application was successful,” said Janice, who just started work as an accountant last year.

“It wasn’t important to them that I still don’t know what I want with life, and I don’t know yet whether I want to spend the rest of it with Ken. It seems selfish, but it’s my life, and it’s more selfish to get married to Ken and later change my mind – divorce would be ten times more painful.”

 Solipism at its finest. I, I, I, me, me, me, mine, mine, mine.

 The rationalisation hamster is strong in this one.

"Janice may have called off her wedding, but the real price she had to pay was in the months after – getting the cold shoulder from Ken, having to pay off large debts, and an overwhelming shame at having “let my family down” caused her to have a nervous breakdown. Read about her struggle and Ken’s side of the story in Runaway Brides Part 2: The Aftermath."

Struggle. Struggle.

Kristoph Gavin, you may be a sick motherfucker, but you also have a sick crazy laugh.

PFAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHE OH GOD OH GOD OH GOD THIS SLAPS ME ON THE KNEE

Ahem. Excuse me. And yet...for all the independence, for all the equality, for all the desire to be strong and discover oneself...

She still insists on painting herself as a victim. Society still insists on painting her as a helpless little leaf, blown about by the horrible winds of life, an object to be acted upon, a thing without agency or desire or accountability.

In a time of supposed egalitarianism, why do we let women get away with behaving like children? Can you even imagine a MAN doing that to his bride and still expect to be pitied for being "pressured" into marriage?

To quote Mrs. Judgybitch:

"This is the idea that makes me reject feminism and so many other liberal theories:  that negative social consequences are prima facie evidence that a choice has been constrained by some nefarious plot designed to undermine a victimized group of helpless beings who lack agency or will or spirit and who can thus never be held responsible for their own decisions.  It’s patronizing, infantilizing and deeply, profoundly insulting.

It’s really an amazing feat, when you consider it from afar.  Feminism, which purports to promote the interests of women has managed to claim the moral high ground by postulating a theory that reduces women to helpless victims with no capacity to make decisions or face consequences.  We are basically children, at the mercy of forces we do not ourselves possess, cannot resist and are helpless to overcome." 

This isn't a woman, it's an overgrown infant in an adult's body. Who has rights but no responsibilities? A child. If people act like children, then yes - I will treat them like children, their physical maturity notwithstanding.

As Aurini said, actions have consequences - guys, you know the game in this day and age, and if you want to play it you're more than welcome to do so and get burned. Lady, if you're not sure you want to marry this guy, fucking tell him like an adult instead of feeding your damned hamster. But hey, society has declared that any woman can break any contract or agreement with a man at her desire; I'm mildly surprised that she's not demanding cash and prizes to boot.

And Singaporean women - you wonder why a growing number of local guys are looking for PRC or Indons or Thais, even without any knowledge of the manosphere?

Little wonder I'm an MGTOW. I can't even bring myself to feel anger or hatred for this woman, even if I wanted to. Pity with a dash of contempt, sure.

It's your life, sure. You can do what you want with your life. No one has the right to force you to live a certain way. Just don't expect to be sympathised with when the consequences come bearing down upon you and start making demands.

Any Singaporean cat food companies I can invest in?

Happy new year, and self-improvement.

 
Happy new year, folks.

I was listening to Aurini (a reactionary, or alt-right if you will) the other day, on his various views on the MRM and MGTOW, and while I won't comment on the former I do think that his view on the latter is a tad lopsided. I won't deny that there are bound to be some MGTOWs who do nothing but whine about the system and sit in basements all day to play World of Warcraft because it's the easy way out for them, and yet even a guest on Lunatic Fringe Radio (episode 10) admitted that it's the only rational course of action left to men these days.

(Edit: I just watched through another of his videos. Seems like he makes the distinction between MGTOWs who eat cheetos and the "herd of bulls" as he puts it.)

Most people are strange political animals (at least, I'd like to believe that) and political labels are a generalisation at best. Personally, I buy into ideas from all four subsections of the red-pill world based on how much truth there is in there and the relevance and utility of the information to me. As evidenced from my post about my uncle, I'm receptive to some of the ideas the alt-right is putting out (and their warnings about the coming global SHTF), and yet am MGTOW by necessity. Both MGTOW and PUA point out realities about how people work, realities that've been smothered under the blanket of political correctness. The MRM is the most vocal in the frontlines of fighting the matrix.

I know a lot of what I've been saying of late could be construed as whining, and probably is. Still, I suppose getting things off my chest is one step on the path of moving forward, and there is the need to point matters out to others, which is why I came up with my MGTOW piece.

But being a MGTOW doesn't necessarily mean letting yourself go and turning into Jabba the Hutt, surrounded by cheese stains and porn magazines. It just means that any self-improvement you do, you do it on your own terms, at your own wishes, and not for anyone else; as Hobbes once said to Calvin: "It counts as fun if you do it of your own free will." Making the decision to go MGTOW didn't mean I stopped my gym routine; I still remember my fat bastard days and love having all the extra energy and stamina to do whatever I want. To be honest, not being a fat bastard is a secondary benefit to all the extra energy.

Well, what can I do with all this energy? Off the top of my head, in my life, I've learnt the skills required to:

*Design a separation column to split up crude oil into its fractions.
*Make a general approximation as to how to best extract a product from a biotransformation. (Distilling ethanol, for a very simple example.)
*Build a computer from parts.
*Fix and replace, if not build, a bicycle chain, brakes and tyre. (Bicycles will be much more important in this part of the world when SHTF. Both because the gas pumps might run dry, and because bicycles are much better suited to the local jungle tracks than automobiles are. Just ask the Japanese - they made it down both coasts of Malaya in record time.)
*Load, fire and maintain a tripod-mounted machine gun. (From my conscript days.)
*Cook a passable meal via boiling or stir-frying. (Soup's next. And not from a can.)
*Scale and gut a fish, and all about identifying fresh fish. (You live on an island, you don't eat seafood, something's wrong with you.)
*Roughly sew back on buttons and patch up clothes. (This, admittedly, is still in progress.)
*Understand some basic tenets of agriculture. (Thanks to my grandmother's tales and a childhood fascination with green beans.)
*Write a novel.

Now, if everything collapses there might not be enough to go around for people to build an actual distillation tower to make crude into gas and diesel and tar, but I'm sure there'll be plenty of people around with their bicycles and going "what do?" when the tyres get bent out of shape, since one can't take it to the shop and get it fixed. Either that, or maybe I can cook up a still out of some glassware lying around and see what I can do - what I get out of distilling spirits might not be as good as proper medicinal alcohol, but it'll sure beat the hell out of boiling wine. The point is that all of these are marketable skills; I feel fairly comfortable not being a "useless eater" if it all starts going to pot, and will have a skill I can hand in for barter - be it fixing up a community's only remaining computer or mending a bike with scavenged parts.

Make a list. If it all came crashing down tomorrow, what skills would you be able to offer your loved ones, your community? What can you bring to the table?

Being an MGTOW doesn't mean you have to be a degenerate or reject completely some tenets of traditional masculinity. Unlike the Old Deal, what I believe the difference is that you need is to be discerning as to who gets to benefit from it. As I rediscover in baby steps the masculinity that was beaten out of me, what I learned as a MGTOW helps me decide who, man or woman, is effectively deserving of the benefits of my masculinity, and to what extent. Once, this was freely given to all women as a matter of course; now it's a huge, fine-pored filter to sift out all the undeserving. I will do it on my terms and at my will, not because I "should" or "society expects me to" or "it's polite".

Look back at the sinking of the Concordia and the outrage that the men weren't willing to automatically value their lives as beneath that of a woman's. Who were the women whom the men did help? Wives, mothers, sisters, daughters, so on and so forth - women who meant something to the men who shielded them in their time of need. The rest went and choked on the bitter taste of the "ekualitee" they so claimed to desire.

Whom would I share the benefits of my masculinity with? My mother, my father. My friends. I am not so sure about my siblings. But the point here is that as an MGTOW, I get to call the shots. I will not be shamed into laying myself down for anyone whom I do not feel obligated to. After all, it was not me who broke the Old Deal, and the New Deal may not be so palatable to some.

To which I say, fuck off.

The white picket fence dream.

For those who're unfamiliar with the term (despite me using it quite a lot), the white picket fence dream refers to a dream that I daresay many men even in this day and age still share: a stable job, a happy and loving family with a wife and kids, a small but comfortable home, and of course, the white picket fence that goes around the lot.

I think you can imagine what I'm trying to describe here; it's not just part of the American Dream, but part of the dream of a good portion of men everywhere. Can't speak for women, but I imagine a number of them want it too, judging not just by red-pill women, but various articles I've found highlighting that more women are desiring to stay at home these days. Seems like Average Jane is finding out that "having a career" and making someone else richer for nine to twelve hours a day isn't as rich and fulfilling as it's supposed to be, but Average Joe's known that for quite some time now. My recently married sister quit her job, citing "burnout". Yeah, let's hear Average Joe tell Average Jane he's suffering from "burnout" and needs an indefinite amount of time off work to relax and catch his breath. Let's see how well that goes over.

Anyways.

I remember in my blue-pill days that I wanted this dream pretty badly. There's not enough space for a picket fence here in Singapore unless you're filthy rich, considering that most of the population is stacked up upon one another like so many lego bricks, but a large, snuggly four to five-room apartment is the equivalent over here of your little house in the suburbs with a lawn and garage.

I also remember visiting one of my paternal uncles. We do this every Chinese New Year anyways, to see my paternal grandmother, but there was one particular instance which stood out to me.  I was about seventeen at the time, and we were going to sit down for a proper dinner instead of the drinks and snacks that we usually have during our usual short-ish visit (owing to various reasons). It was me, my parents, my uncle and his family, and extra seats had been placed around the table for us. My aunt was then pregnant with my cousin (their fourth) and had roped in my other three cousins in setting the table while she and my uncle made small talk with my parents. Being nowhere here nor there, what with not quite being an adult and yet not quite a child, I settled for laying back and observing my surroundings - and my eyes wandered over to my uncle.

I recall he looked particularly gaunt and overworked (not that he ever had or has much meat on his bones, when I asked my dad about it), not too far off from Paul Elam's description of his Uncle Walter, unlike Dr. Elam's uncle, my uncle looked truly happy.

Despite him looking like he was literally working himself to death -

Despite his eyes being quite thoroughly bloodshot from lacking enough sleep -

Despite the veins that crisscrossed his arms and the calluses on his hands -

He looked truly happy. He had energy as he directed the proceedings with my aunt and grandmother, drawn from some immense wellspring hidden within his thin frame. He smiled, smiled a lot, and truly meant it - you know the saying about smiling with your lips and eyes? That was him, as he herded my three cousins to their seats.

I know that it goes against general red pill thinking, that most PUAs would immediately denounce him as hopelessly beta, and MGTOWs call him stupid for not just allowing himself to be a workhorse, but taking pleasure in that status to boot. True, he has some things going in his favour - I've never seen him take any nonsense from my grandmother, aunt, cousins, or anyone for that matter. I guess he's still reasonably fit, tall and good-looking despite his frame (he still has a full head of hair while my dad and other uncles are balding pretty badly now). I suppose he has what some would call natural alpha tendencies.

His happiness was infectious, too, so I guess he has natural charisma with a tendency to bring others into his own frame. Despite all the stereotypes about pregnant women and hormones, my aunt looked pretty happy - and had been that way every time I'd seen her together with my uncle. My cousins looked happy, too. And even my paternal grandmother, who generally is a sourpuss (and has had numerous arguments with my mother), looked happy.

And I remember sitting down at the table, taking it all in, and feeling truly envious of my uncle. This magical, elusive thing that he had going on for himself which possessed his entirety and drove him onward - I wanted it, too. In that moment, I would have jumped through hoops, run over broken glass and swum through seas of fire if it meant that some day, one day, I could be sitting at a table with my extended family like my uncle was doing and feel as happy as he did.

Then I learned that in all probability, my uncle is a massive outlier and even if I swam through fire it wouldn't make the tiniest iota of difference; all it'd mean was that I'd be burnt beyond recognition at the end of it all with nothing left to show for it save maybe the Sword of Damocles having dropped from its hair and through my heart.

I learned that even if I managed to beat all the unbelievable odds stacked against me and achieved what my uncle had, it could be all taken from me with no warning, for no reason. And if I had achieved that and lost it, there would be no doubt as to where I'd end up - swinging from the rafters. Oneitis for women, I can harden my heart and give up, even if it will be difficult. Oneitis for my children, I would rather die than lose them.

Go on, mock me.

And what unbelievable odds might I face, you ask? I've mentioned one or two reasons before, yes. Suffice to say it's not too different from Cappy Cap's list in his cartel post, with a handful more points added for my personal taste. But here's Cappy Cap's list, for starters:

1.  Be in shape.
2.  Be nice.
3.  Be kind.
4.  Be reasonably intelligent.
5.  Be responsible/adult/mature.

Pretty simple, eh? Most unlike the long lists that stretch from the profiles of so many dating sites. A couple more points from my side for personal preference:

6. Be maternally-minded. I would never feel morally comfortable with asking someone else to completely give up their desires in life to fit mine, so any hypothetical wife material would have to want this to begin with. Yes, beta beta beta and all that, but there are some lines I won't cross.
7. Be financially responsible. (My own mom's a prime example of this; she chews me out for buying 60-cent broccoli instead of 50-cent broccoli) It shocks me, when I listen in on idle chatter in the lab, how many ladies in my degree don't even bother taking stock of their money. These are women who can do advanced calculus, so not knowing maths is not the problem.
8. Be pro-life, at least on a personal level.
9. Be possessed of the moral fortitude and self-awareness to, if during dating, refuse me if I attempt to game her into explicit sexual activity despite evident desire on her part.

Yeah, there's no doubt my uncle lucked out. I honestly don't think this is too stringent a list. Mrs. Judgybitch has another list with more points and of course we'd love to have plenty, but we guys are taught from a young age we don't get to have everything in life and have to make the best of what we realistically can get.

And yet somehow, this list seems like it's impossible to fill.

Now, I could apply myself. I'm finishing up my degree in chemical engineering now; I could have a decent starting salary once I come out into the petrochemical, biochemical or pharmaceutical industries. Enough to dress better than I currently do and have something in the way of future prospects, at the very least. I'm learning game, slowly but surely, practising basic concepts such as negs, agree and escalate, and putting on a mask of amused mastery/aloofness (or at least, what hopefully passes for one) on some of the lab ladies (mostly the nerdy/chubby hb2s to 4s. Baby steps, baby steps). Let's just say the response has been immediate and encouraging, not that I intend to take anything anywhere save my self-confidence.

Despite all this, though, even if I did find someone who filled this list, it won't change the lopsided local laws, and that damned Sword of Damocles threatens again with risks I can't accept. So, should I be complaining about the situation when I'm not going to be able to change anything about it and not take the risks, either?

As I touched upon in my post about my grandma's hypergamy, I would have worked like a dog for my family, but it's clear by now to anyone in the manosphere that beta bucks is hardly a reliable mating strategy these days. I can learn game, but no matter how alpha you become, there'll always be someone more alpha - as the old Chinese saying goes, "there is always one mountain taller than the other", and no single man can beat Pimp Daddy G.

And if there're any ladies reading this: despite the tediously maintained deceptions about all of us men as rapists, murderers, liars, cheaters and the like, most of us actually like you, or at least, used to like you. Sure, there are and always have been shitty men, but there are and always have been shitty women; we're all humans.

It's why we gave you Prohibition before you had the vote, it's why we gave you the vote when not all men had it either, then repealed Prohibition on your say-so. It's why we kept you safe when the world was a shitty place to live in, then let you out when the world was safer thanks to technological progress and let you do as you pleased. It's why my great-grandfather was shot during the early phase of the invasion of China by Japan back in the late 1920s, giving my great-grandmother and the rest of the family time to escape (it's sort of ironic how my grandmother emigrated to Malaya to get away from the Japanese, and they caught up with her anyways). It's why I see guys jumping through hoops and begging for some sort, any sort of female approval and validation.

Barbarossa scornfully calls this "male mother need".

If patriarchy had really existed in the fashion the feminists claimed it had, we'd all have backhanded you in the face when you started demanding things and sent you back to the sammich mines. Do as you will, just don't complain about the consequences and demand we "man up" and save you from them later. You can have a bite of the equality you claim to so desire and live with some of the consequences of your actions like men do, since Pimp Daddy G and his welfare checks can't give you intimacy.

But back to the point. I've grown to accept that what my uncle has is extremely rare and is completely dependent on the goodwill of my aunt, who thankfully by all appearances has plenty of moral fortitude to not wring him for all he's worth and kick him out the door. I've grown to accept I may never have what he has, no matter how dilligently I work towards those ends.

Who knows? Virtual sex is already coming out; maybe we'll get virtual families before the collapse comes. Oh god, I'm getting pessimistic again.

The white picket fence is dead, or at least, so rare that looking for it might as well account to looking for Lemuria or Atlantis.

Although I hear Atlantis isn't a bad place to live if you can find your way there.

The four levels of MGTOW - betas shrug.

A quick definition of MGTOW - an introductory piece.

Back to basics

Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW, individually Man Going His Own Way, or MGHOW)

Unlike Men's Rights Activists (MRAs), there is no necessity that MGTOWs engage in political activity or activism. MGTOWs may be active MRAs, they may cheer them on from the sidelines and send in donations or support, or they may not be politically active at all. There is a common point of awareness between various groups in the manosphere such as MRAs, MGTOWs, pick-up artists (PUAs) and reactionaries, yet how they react to the red pill differs considerably.

What MGTOW are not

Conservatives

Typical conservatives (neocons, socons, tradcons) are seen not just by MGTOWs, but the entire manosphere as nowhere near on our side. MRAs and MGTOWs identify conservatives as not so different from the feminists when it comes to misandry (to be examined later), but let's just say that the Bradley Amendment was passed by the conservatives in the name of "defending the family". PUAs take little notice of conservatives except for "Sunday morning nightclub", where they go to pick up "reformed sluts" looking for future beta provisioning, and reactionaries call the state of today's Christianity "Churchianity" and identify how feminism has seeped into tradcon thought to the point where they just call conservatives "pro-life feminists".

So no, the typical accusation levelled at the inhabitants of the manosphere that we're all just white male rednecks scared of losing our privilege and power holds no water, considering that we're not all even from the US of A in the first place, we're not all male (although admittedly overwhelmingly so), and most of us don't want any truck to do with the cons in their current state.

If anything, by their nature, MGTOWs are pretty far from what the tradcons want with their "family values" nonsense, otherwise they wouldn't be urging us to man up, shut up, and put up with our lot. Conservatives are no more automatically less misandric than anyone with a penis is.

But surely anyone speaking out or boycotting the status quo is a either a mustache-twirling, top-hatted misogynist sitting in his patriarchal volcano base while cackling madly, or a mindless brainwashed woman who can't see the light and needs to be re-educated properly.

Right?

Bitter

The other accusation levelled at MGTOWs is that we're bitter and suffering from sour grapes, that we're not good relationship material anyway, but oddly enough, a number of us come out of relationships. Then that opens the NAWALT/you've been burned argument, which then lets us point at those MGTOWs who never played in the first place. What gives?

Or perhaps it's just that MGTOWs are crunching the numbers and settling for freedom instead of their hopes and dreams, which will remain just that. Perhaps MGTOWs are taking the path of least resistance by dropping out of the game together (it is a point of contention with PUAs), but looking at the forces arrayed against them, who can really blame them for not wanting the play the game considering those risks?

Why MGTOW cannot be stopped

MGTOW is not a movement in the way that modern -isms are in the sense that there are no institutions, that there is no established organisation or hierachy of individuals dictating from up on high. It's true that there are a number of individuals spreading the message, but by and large the growth of MGTOW is fuelled by men looking at the figures, observing other men who've been put through the machine, and making the decision on their own to abscond from the plantation. This is proven by the sheer number of men coming to MRA and MGTOW sites and stating that they had come to the conclusions independently, and had discovered the manosphere after the fact, when they were looking for like-minded individuals on the internet.

For this reason, MGTOW is impossible to stop so long as the reasons for men to GTOW exist. There is no head for lawsuits to be aimed at, there is no activist leader to be jailed, there is no organisation to shatter. MGTOW benefits from the virtues of a disorganised resistance, and hence is quite eminently impervious to the usual take-down methods employed by those who would silence uncomfortable social movements. The only way for a state to attempt to deal with MGTOW is a host of increasingly punitive measures against men in general for refusing to participate, at which even the most blue-pill man is dangerously aware of knowing that the jig is up - this will be examined in further detail in a subsequent section.

A comment on CH:

"Things will radicalize organically. That’s one thing the manosphere is getting right. It is fighting an asymmetric war. Who is the leader of the manosphere? Roissey? Rollo? Roosh? Elam? Price? Dalrock? WHo do they have to shoot to get it to end? Every time a Bskillet dies a 3M is there to take his place. Mentu and Ashur went quiet but now we have Danny from 504. We have diversity. Roosh tells you how to bang, Dalrock how to marry, Pvt Man how to date. I guarantee you, you don’t need to tell the manosphere when to radicalize. The manosphere is not a club, an organization, a party. It is a living cell. It duplicates on its own. It expands on its own. It is open source. One guy has an idea and three more expand upon it, taking it to new places the originator could not have dreamed of. How may posts on other sites did 3M’s Incel manifesto spawn? How many men had how many discussions where further new ideas were born?

I gotta tell you, if this was a shooting war, I’d hate to be the general sent in to crush the manosphere. Asymmetrical forces are a hard nut to crack. The femifascists will have some successes but monolithic forces have a very hard time with these sorts of battles."



The four levels of MGTOW

In my observations (and practice) of MGTOW, I have taken note of a number of levels in which broad categories of MGTOWs may reside in. While Christians may vary widely in scope and status, they all revolve around a single idea: the birth and ressurrection of Christ. Similarly, feminists may claim to be wide in scope, but their ideas are all informed by one common rotten root: patriarchy theory. In the same vein, while MGTOWs may put into practice their ideas and concepts to differing extents, there lies one unifying idea that defines a MGTOW:

The recognition of the way modern society really works when it comes to the sexes, and a refusal to buy into and feed the system.

Note that this is hardly as neatly defined an idea as, say, the birth and resurrection of Christ, but it is what it is. It would be laborious for me to rehash why things are the way they are today (hypergamy, 80/20 rule, white knighting, Briffault's Law, et al) when other manosphere authors have gone over these topics over and over again, so I won't.

My reason for putting MGTOW into "levels" is not to suggest that there is an inevitable progression from one level to the next; there are many men who look at the situation and decide what hazards they're comfortable with dealing with, and then stay at that level, or move up or down as the situation befits. Nevertheless, my separation into levels is representative of the escalation of a MGTOW's increasing withdrawal from society at large and increasing starvation of the beast. It is difficult, but not impossible for a MGTOW to progress from one level to another without at least taking in part ideas and concepts from the previous level: while, for example, Cappy Cap still enjoys short-term relationships with women, he also particpates in economic disengagement.

Without further ado, the four levels of MGTOW:


Level 0: Situational awareness

This level includes men who are aware of the realities that face them in society, and yet deem the risks acceptable to have a go at playing the game. I will only touch briefly on this group, as there are not many of these around, and for good reason - the odds stacked against men having the white picket fence deal are still too bloody high. For the first time in a long while, men are having to filter women based on their ability to shrug off constant bombardment by society to give in to their hypergamous natures (and the same bombardment repeatedly chastises and criminalises mens' polygamous natures) and adjustment still has to take place, which may not happen before society at large collapses (yes, I'm that pessimistic).

Yet there are still some who seem to be content, if not happy. Men in this group may take precautions to keep what they have, such as learning game or through other methods (for example, Keoni Galt has made it clear in no uncertain terms that if his wife does try to pull him through the divorce meat grinder, he will pull out all stops and enact mutually assured destruction just short of actual violence) to minimise the risks as far as possible while still having a hand in play.

Which is why I do not consider this a level per se. Even though men in this group are aware of what they face, they do not reject any aspects of society because of their knowledge, which is necessary; pick-up artists, reactionaries and men's rights activists are also possessed of this knowledge, but their reactions to it are different. This is miles better than being a bumbling blue-pill average frustrated chump wallowing in propoganda and programming, of course, but does not truly fit the MGTOW label as has been put forth.


Level 1: Rejection of long-term relationships

Short brief: the MGTOW rejects all form of long-term personal relationships with women, including but not limited to marriage, cohabitation of any sort which might be classified as common-law marriage, picking up for a single mother's children, or any action which might be used in court to turn him into her legal indentured servant.

Common reasons for this:
a) Massive risk incurred by men in pursuing this course of action in the form of chilamony and frivorce theft, draconian domestic violence laws that follow the Duluth Model, being robbed of their children and having them alienated, all for no perceptible reason other than societal pressure and conditioning.

Resources withdrawn from society:
a) Intimacy and commitment that women desire, temporary or otherwise.
b) State-supported wealth transfers from men to women via the divorce, child support and domestic violence industries.

You may have heard of the marriage strike, in which large numbers of men are boycotting this rotten institution - either consciously or unconsciously, it does not matter. They're still out. A simple look through the manosphere wll turn up huge numbers of stories about men and children thrown through the family court meat grinder.

The effects of the marriage strike are interesting, and not just in the "where have all the good men gone?" "you're a sexist bastard if you don't have the hots for used-up sluts" and "man up and marry those single mothers like a good Christian man" articles. Men in general are leaving the plantation in droves - Dalrock has some interesting stats on remarriage and never-marrieds, and the stats do appear to be in line with many men adopting the stance.

As GirlWritesWhat points out in one of her videos: "We have soured the deal for men."

And she's right. As things stand today, there is no reason for men to get married whatsoever. Women have no legal or social obligations to men, and yet men are expected to carry all the traditional obligations while labouring at the same time under progressive ones.

So, they ask themselves. Why bother?

Why?

There is no reason for a man to get married today, ever. Why have children when they can be ripped from you at a moment's notice, and you'll never see them again? Besides, with surrogacy a man need not even get married to have one on his own terms - one example would be the Rotunda Clinic in India, which will for the price of US$20,000 do all the dirty work of hiring a surrogate for a man and give him a child with his own genes. Love, intimacy and companionship? One doesn't need to get married for that, even if one actually finds a suitable partner. Sex? Rollo Tomassi estimates that while game won't get an omega a hb7 or 8, he might be able to pull in a 4 to 6, which is just as well thanks to today's culture.

The only reason blue-pill men continue buying into the claptrap and feeding themselves to the meat grinder is that that's how it's always been done, that they're still feeding into the white picket fence dream.

The dream which doesn't exist any more.

When young men look up and see their predecessors hanging from the rafters, bullet holes in their skulls and as piles of ashes in before the steps of family courts, is there any wonder they are walking away?


Level 2: Rejection of short-term relationships

Short brief: the MGTOW rejects all form of personal relationships with women, including dating, one-night stands, friendships, etc. Any contact with unfamiliar women is kept strictly professional and at a minimum.

Common reasons for this:
a) Inane laws that govern the treatment of sexually-charged crimes such as rape or sexual assault compared with, say, murder or theft. Rights stemming from due process such as the right to face one's accuser (rape shield laws), the right to be considered innocent before found guilty (dear colleague letter, hanging in the court of the public, repeated calls for less evidence to be required for guilt, activist groups pushing for guilty verdicts irrespective of actual evidence).
b) The broadening of the definitions of these crimes to encompass a widening set of behaviour, to the point that post-coital buyer's regret can be considered rape.
c) The heaping of culpability upon men and the concurrent removal of culpability from women for their actions (such as sex when both parties are drunk).

Resources withdrawn from society:
a) Beta orbiter benefits to women. (Chivalry, etc.)
b) Greater loss of intimacy and romantic prospects for women.
c) A general growing indifference by MGTOWs to women (and an observable trend from men in general, too). Hate is not the antithesis of love, because it still implies the one doing the hating still cares to some extent about the hated. The indifferent merely ignores all of this.

To begin with, let's start from a comment found on Sunshine Mary's blog:

"Our entire social structure is designed to support women’s living any way they want.

Employers are required to follow a host of laws addressed to women in the workplace: anti discrimination in hiring, work assignments, work practices, workplace accommodations, and facilities. Anti sex harassment laws with insanely punitive consequences for men and insane definitions of “sexual harassment” (being defined as sexual conduct by unattractive men and any conduct by anyone that any woman doesn’t like). FMLA for childbirth and maternity leave. 

Women are allowed to do and say anything they want anywhere. Men are restricted in their speech and conduct. VAWA, which has a “must arrest” policy in a domestic violence call. Women can assault and beat men in public with impunity and the tacit support of feminists. 

There are new social customs to constrain most men. A man is forbidden to notice an attractive woman at work. He is not to comment on it, talk about it or even look a second or two too long. Nuclear rejections, public shaming are the norm if a man she deems unattractive deigns to talk to her in public. Men are never, ever to even notice good looking women. Older men are shamed from dating or having sex with younger women, and are shamed into dating women “more their age” for the specific purpose of providing men for lonely middle aged unattractive battle axe divorcees. Men are never, ever to comment on or appreciate a woman’s physical appearance, or compare an attractive woman to an unattractive woman.

Attractive men are exempt from all of these legal and social conventions."

Attractive men, of course, meaning alphas. For betas and omegas, the reality of life is stark. Interaction with women is potentially toxic and dangerous to men, thanks to the way laws regarding relations between men and women have been set up that almost unilaterally follow the Duluth Model, which assumes male perpetration and female victimhood.

When women are allowed to get away with light sentences for genitally mutiliating their husbands,  when they lie about rape just to win $10,000 in a radio talk show, to avoid trouble for coming home late, so on and so forth, when up to 41% of rape accusations may be false - why bother? When a man can get in trouble and have his life ruined and forever tainted on a single woman's word and society will howl for his blood, it's not hard to see why some men might very well decide the risk isn't worth the reward and disconnect from women altogether unless absolutely necessary.

Indeed, it would appear that many young men (and sometimes women) are getting sick and fed up with the way things are, and the men are absconding altogether. AVFM radio has had boys of 13 and girls of 14 calling into the show to share their lives and observations on misandry. When people are waking up from the matrix programming from a younger and younger age and saying "fuck you" to it, what can the only end result be?


Level 3: Economic disengagement

Short brief: the MGTOW refuses to produce more than is strictly necessary for his individual survival. He will do as much work off the books as possible to avoid taxation, and will endeavour to remain in the lowest tax bracket possible without jeopardising his way of life and acceptable standard of living.

Common reasons for this:
a) Lack of desire to produce due to being denied a meaningful and socially accepted path to respect within the grasp of the everyday beta man.
b) Refusal to pay into confiscatory wealth transfers from productive beta men to other groups via the state. The amount paid into taxation vs the amount of benefits received from the state is one example of this.

Resources withdrawn from society:
a) Economic production falls drastically as beta men refuse to be more than self-sufficient.
b) Taxation revenue falls drastically as beta men stop producing, resulting in greater debt and borrowing required to maintain government spending.

In Esther Vilar's work The Manipulated Man, she posits the following theory as to why traditionalism, interestingly, does not solely restrict the sexual natures of women as feminists claim, but also the sexual natures of men. Her theory, from what I remember from reading the book, goes like this:

*Men have three states: they are capable of great destruction, great creation, or great hedonism.
*For obvious reasons, we do not want destruction, but men will snap under pressure or participate in it for a cause.
*Most men, however, will default to hedonism, since it requires the least effort. This results in what detractors call "Peter Pan syndrome".
*In order to get men to produce, there are three methods that have been tried throughout history: forced production (I.E. slavery), restricting access to resources, and giving them a family.
*Slavery requires enforcement by other men, which in turn shifts the problem: how do the elite alphas convince the enforcers to comply? One way of doing this was to entice the enforcers with women who were attractive but not so enough for the alphas, but that does not solve the problem of slavery meaning that men will take every opportunity to underperform.
*Restriction of access to resources does not work very well because most men do not require large amounts of resources to be content. Food, shelter, and a source of entertainment is usually enough to satiate most men, leading to the stereotypical bachelor pad. Consumption in the modern world today is driven overwhelmingly by women (80-91%, depending on which economist you ask), so men producing enough to support themselves is insufficient to meet the needs of civilisation.
*Hence, there is a need to give a man a family to incentivise him to create. Enter traditional monogamous marriage, in which a man must give up his instinctive polygamous desires to settle for more reliably-provided sex with his wife.
*However, men do not have the certainty of paternity that women do of maternity. In lean times (most of human history), both men and women will tend to look after their own first, but as stated, men do not have that certainty.
*Hence, womens' hypergamous natures must be curtailed in order to allow men the assurance of paternity of their children. The sexual natures of women are curtailed only as a secondary measure to the primary motive of curtailing male sexual nature.
*With a family that he knows is undoubtedly his to work for, men produce to their maximum capacity and build civilisation.

Knowing this, remove a man's family from him, and he no longer has any incentive to produce. This is why chilamony is so important to the state - enforced by the long arm of the law, he is required to continue producing even though the joys of his family are no longer open to him. And today, Pimp Daddy Government has replaced the husband as the ultimate alpha that no single man can compete with, confiscating resources from men and using them to buy votes from women - a simple breakdown of which demographic puts in/receives more from welfare programs, taxes and government handouts, other things being equal, will quickly show this. Even the mainstream media has finally begun to pick up on this: "men dropping out of the workforce -  going hunting, fishing."

Men will jump through all sorts of hoops to get sex, but even they have their limits as to the crap they will put up with - and for many, the shit is overflowing. Without the hope of getting a family due to the dangerous climate of the sexual marketplace, the fact that being good providers is no longer a viable mating strategy, and that the alphas build soft harems of their own, the majority of beta men return to hedonism and stop production. This is an observable effect in Japan's "grass-eating youths", which 60% of young men between the ages of 20-35 self-identify themselves as. They stop wanting to climb the corporate ladder, they stop working hard, and instead produce just enough to get by and pursue their own hobbies and interests on their spare time.

This is what Paul Elam meant when he said: "Ladies, be afraid when men stop thinking with their dicks."

The Japanese government is terrified of this demographic in their already sinking economy. (See in one of my previous posts: the handsome tax) This step is when MGTOW moves out of the sphere of the personal and begins to catch the eye of the political, with reactions that will be discussed shortly later. Sometimes, the decision to disengage economically will be a conscious decision to do so, other times not so much. In the end, though, it all boils down to the fact that they aren't cranking out the tax dollars like they used to, much to the worry of many governments.

The idea is neatly summed up in Typhonblue's parable of the princess and the plough horse, in which she makes clear the essence of MGTOW, traditionalism, and the shift between the two. A small, yet powerful snippet from the parable:

"‘Stupid horse, I let you wear this bridle, but it was always mine. I just used it to control you! And look what you did! You were supposed to live for my needs, but you saved the best in this world for yourself!’ She pulled the bridle from the horse’s head. It turned back into crackled leather and rusted iron in her hands.

She stared at it, dumbstruck, and so did the horse.

Once the horse saw the bridle for what it was, old, worn—and above all, a bridle—his demeanor changed instantly. He reared up, pawing the air with his great hooves. In her haste to get out of the stall and away from him, the princess dropped the bridle.

The stallion turned his head to the stable door. The door was open. In her greed for the bridle, the princess had forgotten to secure it. The stallion’s nostrils flared, catching the scent of long night runs, open water and wild grasses.

He bolted through the open stable door, trampling the bridle to pieces in his escape.

The horse gone, the princess looked at the cracked leather bridle now laying broken on the ground. Off the horse’s head the magic was gone—there was nothing left in the bridle to want—and she felt a dawning horror as she finally understood her mother’s warning. The bridle’s only real worth was its ability to control the plow horse, and she had lost its magic forever."


Level 4: Societal rejection

Short brief: the MGTOW drops out of society altogether. He minimises contact with the blue-pill world and seeks to further his own ends on his own terms. For all intents and purposes, he does not exist. A urbanite might keep to his own apartment, while someone further out may simply head into the wilderness and go off-grid.

Common reasons for this:
a) Disillusionment and disdain for modern society.
b) An understanding of how modern society works, and a desire to protect oneself.

Resources withdrawn from society:
a) Anything that remains after levels 1, 2, and 3 have been enacted, due to the MGTOW practically vanishing.

Known as "going ghost" within the MGTOW community, the most extreme form of MGTOW is to reject a misandric society and drop out altogether. This level of MGTOW, at least in my observation, is the only one which strictly requires a conscious effort and decision on the part of the MGTOW - many men simply drift into stages 1 and 2, but a complete cloistering of oneself from society at large requires some level of understanding as to how the world really works.

In this level, the MGTOW interacts with society only as much as is required for him to survive. Unfamiliar people - men and women - are avoided, and contact, such as that which is required for him due to employment, is kept clean, public and strictly professional. This does not mean seclusion - MGTOWs in this level may have groups of friends whom they may share interests and activities with, but by and large they do not exist.

The minimalist lifestyle of level 3 is still in effect; the MGTOW may still work off the books for cash or barter, and will do his best to avoid paying taxes as much as possible. Less scrupulous MGTOWs may decide to bleed the system and hasten the collapse by sucking the system for all the benefits they can obtain. For all societal intents and purposes, the MGTOW is considered dead or non-existent - hence the term "going ghost".

Alternatively, the MGTOW may opt to leave society altogether and seek greener pastures. This is happening not just in the US of A, but in extremely high numbers in highly misandric countries such as Sweden. Whether it is self-imposed spiritual or physical exile, the end result is the same: one less worker drone paying into the system, one less card in the base of the house.


Reactions to MGTOW

History repeats itself

Interestingly, this is not the first time the MGTOW phenomenon has manifested itself. Similar conditions were found during near the end of the Roman Empire, when patrician men were refusing to marry the women of the time, for much the same reasons that MGTOWs are not today. Caesar Augustus slapped a bachelor tax on men in order to try and get them to breed, in order to get bodies to fill the roles that the patrician class were expected to fill (such as in the army).

It didn't work. Bachelors paid the tax and just went on their merry way.

Bachelor taxes have been tried too through various points in history, including the UK, Turkey, and even Colonial America., so why should they stop now? Indeed, now with news of Japan's proposed "handsome tax" and Sweden's "man tax", it seems that history will repeat itself.

And since the idiots who run these sanatariums know nothing of learning from history, as the Roman citizens absconded to self-sufficient germanic barbarian estates to avoid the increasingly punitive taxes and laws, so shall men abscond to countries perceived as more male-friendly. It's not a prediction, it's already happening.


Current situation

Thankfully, women in general are not completely blind. Even though most non red-pill women don't understand the cause, they are certainly feeling the effects of MGTOW - which is why we have all these "where have all the good men gone?" pieces from the left, and "why is chivalry dead?" pieces from the right. The benefits are drying up like thin spit on a hot stove, and it's off to Pimp Daddy Government with more cries of "gimmedat!" as evidenced by the recent election.

Recently, Suzanne Venker wrote an opinion piece titled "The War on Men". Dalrock has carefully taken it apart and proven that it's nothing but toeing the usual tradcon party line on how we men are supposed to be good little traditional wage earners and try and buy back into the white picket fence dream - which no longer exists.

Fuck that. Even before I fully decided to turn MGTOW, I like to think I saw women as more than their reproductive organs, and if I'm going to do my share in any personal relationship she'd better be doing more than just selling access to her pussy, or else she's no more than a whore. Should I feel entitled for selling access to my sperm or my bank account?

The tradcons want traditional gender roles for men...but not for women, and prove themselves worthy of the label "pro-life feminists". As to why I'm quoting reactionaries as sources for this tradcon phemomenon...well, they're the ones who've got their eye most on this.

I'm planning to invest in cat food companies.

Some ladies, of course, at least are the exceptions that prove the NAWALT rule and are more honest about the situation. SunshineMary had this to say:

"When I first began reading on sites concerned with men’s issues, I did not understand the “Men Going Their Own Way” (MGTOW) concept.  To be honest, I found the idea a little bit threatening and kind of scary.  As a non-feminist, I fully understand that women are very dependent on men, even if it’s just Big Daddy government.  If large numbers of men bail out, women are in serious trouble.  This is scary for a woman to contemplate if she is honest with herself and drops the false bravado for a moment.  My knee jerk reaction was that men should not “go their own way”; they should continue to take care of women but just somehow make women behave with gratitude and humility.

However, as I have spent some time on sites like Dalrock, I have had the opportunity to read more personal anecdotes about decent Christian men whose wives divorced them due to congenital discontentedness, destroying their husbands’ and children’s lives in the process.  Some of these stories are truly heart-breaking, but I’ve learned never to express sympathy to these men; they don’t want sympathy.  They don’t want to be pitied.  What they wanted was for their ex-wives to honor the commitments they made about “until death do us part”.  That such behavior is perpetrated against these men not by supposed feminists but by women who are ostensibly Christian women, who ought to be about the business of the Lord, makes it particularly galling."

"Men will not want to put that yoke back on even if it is offered to them.

I don’t know this for sure.  Maybe they will.  Personally, I wouldn’t want to, at least not for a bunch of useless, ungrateful, nagging, slutty, overweight, entitled, self-centered, ill-tempered grumblers, by which I mean a large percentage of American women.  Maybe somehow women can bring enough to the table to coax men into taking charge again, but I’m not sure what that would be; they might want to read my bl*w j*b tip, which by the way I’ve updated after rigorous scientific testing."


Endgame

So what now? Knowing all this, can the MGTOW lifestyle survive indefinitely as a safe haven for men?

This, unfortunately, is unlikely.

Stu from AVFM had this to say:

"Let me tell you what happens when men just adopt a MGTOW lifestyle, or avoid the potholes and just go on with life. Remember when things started to get really crappy for marriage, and men just started to say, well, ok, I wont get married, I’ll just live together? They change the law so that living together is legally the same as being married.

So, next, you don’t live with a woman, you just have a girlfriend. Then they change the law so that long term relationships qualify too. And on it goes, until you have ridiculous laws like Australia’s “Mistress Law”, where even a married man, with kids, who has an affair on the side, leaves his assets open to being accessed by the other woman. Ok, so nothing but the shortest flings and one night stands from now on. Do you think they are going to leave it there? We can all not have anything to do with women at all, and they will demand the state find a way to extract those resources from us, and give it to them. Sweden has had two tries at a man tax...they will pass it eventually.

It’s not just in personal relationships, anyway. False allegations, discrimination in schools, jobs, etc. You can’t rule out working with women, or being with them in a train, or lift, or bus, or pub, or in the line at Macca’s. Whatever safe house, or piece of ground you are standing on now that you think is yours, they will come for it. And if the only answer to that from you is that you will retreat to higher and higher ground, then you will have nowhere to run in the end. You have to fight back. There is nowhere safe. There is no line drawn that you can cross where they can’t come after you. 

When enough men are doing whatever you are doing to deprive women and the state of your assets and income, that is the trigger for the next round of draconian laws to regain access to it. This is exactly why we are in this shit hole now, because men just looked after number one, and tried to solve only their particular problem at the time. They just keep coming, and men just keep giving up ground and running."

Slavery certainly is one possibility. The other is complete and utter societal and economic collapse as beta men realise that both the alphas and their little harems have screwed them over. Social programming can only go so far. Shaming can only go so far. The betas and omegas are noticing.

And then they shrug. Whether it means another Dark Ages for humanity like when it happened in Roman times, I don't know. I like modern conveniences with the lights on and water running, but the end seems inevitable at this point; we are laying the foundations for what is hopefully not another cycle of prosperity leading to degeneracy and despair, but a straight path out of this mess. Would humanity learn from its mistakes.

And this has been repeatedly warned about by everyone in the know.

It's interesting how a lot of predictions made by individuals within the androsphere/manosphere have come true. Back in 2004, Angry Harry predicted in his piece "organisms" that an enormous "male brain" would arise from the consciousness of "men-who-sit-at-screens". Such an organism would have no real head and no single mastermind leading it, and yet like neurons coming together to form a brain, have a direction and purpose gathered from the collective efforts of all those who entered into it.

Today, we have...well, we have what we have; you can see it for yourself.

An unmagnetised piece of iron is comprised of many tiny domains, each magnets in their own right. However, they are randomised and unruly, and produce no net magnetic field as they cancel out each other. Observable magnetic force only arises when all the domains are aligned in the same orientation.

And as rulers of regimes during revolutions can tell you, beta men are much the same way.

Cappy Cap leaves us with this post:

"We are not a fad or a fashionable movement.  We are not a "faux-crusader" hobby for people too lazy to work at anything (going green, PETA, veganism, etc.)  We are a backlash against the biggest psycho-social atrocity foisted upon a people.  You destroyed our lives, our country, our economy and our people.  And without those things in our lives, we have nothing else to do but exact our toll of revenge."

From Glorious Bastard:

"Look, I could go all day!  It is the end of the day, and you are running out of others' money; and you have run out of your men’s patience!  However, you will not see the anger outside of the redness of our faces.  You are physically secure from harm; for now, until your violent brood of fatherless “youth” turn on you and all of us.  We will defend ourselves, but not you!  This is a trap.

You don’t see it, do you?  The fact that men are now indifferent means that you will now have to earn your keep.  Your rejection of your men, will now lead to their rejection of you.

You only matter in your mind; your sex is nothing to save you.  You are merely being replaced, can you feel that?

Of course not, and that is the point!  I truly desire to give you everything you asked for; it just may not be what you want.

You have failed.

Good day, and good riddance.  I don’t want to harm you, just send you away."

And from Rollo Tomassi:

"I will be nobody’s fucking slave and nobody’s fool.

You owe nobody anything. You owe women nothing. You owe society nothing. All of those things, those forces, those structures wish to impose a slavery on you and you need begin to reject it right now. You need redefine to yourself, “What it means to be a man.” And you need to begin to live that declaration of what it could, should, and would to be a man if you filter that determination with the first filter.

I will be nobody’s slave and nobody’s fool.

We will stop being men that are useful to women, useful to society and start being men that live life on their terms. You have a power that you give away. We voluntarily let chains be placed on us because we think that is what “The Good Man” does.

Re-evaluate everything."

The betas will shrug.

The chips will fall.