Join John Adams, world renowned Intl Matchmaker, Monday nights 8:30 EST for Live Webcasts!
And check out Five Reasons why you should attend a FREE AFA Seminar! See locations and dates here.
View Active Topics View Your Posts Latest 100 Topics FAQ Topics Mobile Friendly Theme
Discuss and talk about any general topic.
It's a misconception that every married man has sex only with his wife. Many of the whoremongers that this thread is dedicated to, are in fact married men. There are also many, many married men who have affairs throughout their marriages. Some of the most successful married men I know, have a ton of side-chicks. This is very common. And there are many countries in which cheating is not, in fact, penalized. In some cultures, if anything, it is borderline expected of you as a man, to entertain multiple women, as long as you are still able to satisfy and provide for your main lady.
If you see a financially successful married man, well-dressed, decent looks, chances are he currently has, or at some point had, a mistress in his life. So the picture ContrarianExpatriate tries to paint of every married man as some miserable cuck thirsty for his wife's meager sexual favors while Divorce Rape hangs above his head as the Sword of Damocles, is a bit too bleak. It's mostly just wishful thinking... you want to believe every married man is a miserable cuck, because it makes you feel better about your own MGTOW lifestyle. The same way a married man would like to paint every MGTOW as some basement dwelling neckbeard. The grass is always greener on the other side. Of course not all married men are cucks, and not all MGTOW are basement dwelling neckbeards. Those just are the most vocal parts of each "group".
Finally... I know very few genuinely successful men who describe themselves as MGTOW. It's pretty much a unicorn. I'm sure there are a lot of George Clooney-esque bachelors living the high life who you might claim as "MGTOW", but they never heard of the term and couldn't really care less about what other men do, or what group they belong to. So why do you care so much?
Somehow you missed the point, perhaps because you are marriage advocate and it is in your interest to do so.
Whatever the case, accusing me of painting "Every married man" is disingenuous and the smart readers see right through that. But since you wanted to take it in that direction, let's go with it. If a married man has to seek sex outside of his marriage, that, by definition is a failed marriage and he likely regrets having wed the woman in the first place. It also means he is not sexually satisfied in his marriage, so again, it is further proof that marriage is a foolish endeavor for a man. Ask yourself how many of these men have wives who know about and are ok with it. Scant few I'm sure because in most cultures the blowback from the courts, community or the women's' families would be severe.
There again is your straw man. Perhaps you should go back read how I defined the term "Cuck" before you use it incorrectly and out of context. But again, you are likely a married man or one who seeks to be married so I should expect nothing less. For your information, married men who continuously lie about the bliss of marriage and encourage young men to do the same out of duty to the community, race, or country are CUCKSERVATIVES who see men as beasts of burdens who are to take the misery for the team. Those married men who are brutally honest about marriage are not Cucks.
To know the the true misery of marriage for men, we need only to ask married men themselves. Most who I ask come out with the truth (but only after the obligatory, "It's not that bad," or "I like my marriage") when they are probed for what the REALLY feel. There are numerous resources online now where men vent about the misery of being married. And then there is common sense! Men with foresight can fortell the misery of being married after the shine and cuteness wears off of the dear wife.
You obviously need to raise the quality people who comprise your social circle. Most MGTOWs have no clue about the term, but they are smart enough to be going their own way anyhow. My brother, Tom Leykis, Leonardo DiCaprio, My Attorney, My former boss, and multitudes of other high net worth individuals are sagacious enough to following the MGTOW lifestyle whether they know it or not. That you know very few is more a negative statement about you personally than it is about the lack of successful MGTOW.
So why do I care so much? Fair enough question so I'll address it. I fancy myself a truth teller on issues which can enhance the lives of men who toil under their social programming (upbringing, religion, peer pressure, mass media) that keeps them slaves to Blue Pill servitude. I expect reactions of aggressive cognitive dissonance because it means I've touched a nerve. With time, that cognitive dissonance turns to realization and I've therefore opened the eyes of yet more men. With some men, I have been the impetus to men getting therapy, leaving their fiancees, or vowing to divorce after kids reach a certain age. So do know that I wear the emotional blow back, such as that in your post, as a Badge of Honor.
The blowback from family and of course the woman would be significant, so of course people have to tread carefully. As always, "be discreet" is the keyword in these matters. But in many countries the courts care a lot less about these matters then they do in America. In many countries, furthermore, the law isn't always on the woman's side by default, either, unlike in America. So a lot of the advice you give, while perhaps perfectly reasonable for a certain subset of American males, does not apply for men everywhere. That, too, is disingenuous overgeneralization.
Basically, any man who does not claim marriage is a miserable hell is a cuck? Bit of a cop out.
No shortage of miserable men and women on the internet, both of the married and the unmarried variety. Their anonymous musings and confessions mean very little. It's just confirmation bias; you read into it, what you want to read into. Just because some men suck at picking a good woman, and some women suck at picking a good man, doesn't make the whole concept of marriage flawed. If you browse enough internet forums, you'll notice that there's a shit ton of absolutely miserable single people as well, but I'm not using their online ramblings to strenghten my case either; it's pointless.
I'm sure there's a handful of successful bachelors in the wider world, and probably a few in your social circle. I know of a few too, one of them being the mayor of my town who seems very uninterested in women and is unmarried in his late thirties. Most people just assume he's gay, lol. But he's rich and doesn't seem too miserable from what I can tell. Who knows, maybe he's just a latebloomer. Maybe he really is gay. Or maybe he's another (unknowing?) member of your illustrious group. The most successful men I know, however, are all married men.
There is no emotional blowback. You live your life, I live mine. You speak your truth, I speak mine. Your words don't personally affect me, they don't upset my view of the world, make me desire therapy or vow divorce. Don't flatter yourself too much. And blue pill servitude, really? I don't keep up with the whole "Blue Pill versus Red Pill" rhetoric, it's all nonsense to me. The world isn't like Matrix, I don't need to wake up from anything, I'm woke enough as it is to see things the way they are. Neither your mythical 'red pill' nor it's counterpart the 'blue pill' hold all the answers, they are overly simplified views of the world, too much focused on America and the Western world and simply do not apply in every other part of the world. It's too simplistic. If some guy in Indonesia or Russia or Saudi Arabia started to treat marriage and relationships according to American Red Pill rules and logic, he'd be wasting his time and likely end up less happy, because different rules apply to different countries. So on a website like HappierAbroad, MGTOW surely isn't the only viable path for men to walk.
All you guys promoting marriage are failing to see the point. If you want lifelong companionship and children, then YES, marriage is right for you.
But if you want tons of sex with tons of different women, then nothing beats the prostitution lifestyle.
I am not going to judge either group. It's each man's choice to live how he sees fit. But the men in the prostitution lifestyle category are indeed much more free and are probably f***ing more women in one year than a married guy has f***ed in his whole life.
These Cucks suffer from what is termed "Sunk Cost Fallacy" which means they are so invested in a losing venture that they are unwilling to simply cut their losses and divorce. In other words, "I have sunk so much money, time and effort in being married, that if I give up now, all my losses would be in vain."
It is an irrational mindset and one that dooms them in the end. But I don't care about foolish Cucks who will rationalize their miserable servitude till the death, I care about the unmarried men they are trying to poison with their filth.
If you needlessly marry, you deserve all the misery, drudgery, and wealth loss that you get. You've been warned.....
If their wife is a decent woman, no need to divorce. But if she's a bitch, then shit yeah you need to get rid of her. But the BEST option is to never get married in the first place and just go to Tijuana or Thailand and pound tons of p***y
In honor of your frequent use of the word 'cuck' in unclear and unmeaningful ways that have little or nothing to do with the original word it came from, cuckold, I propose we give you the honorary nickname, Cucktrarian Expatriate. We can employ this honorary title we can use whenever he uses 'cuck' in a way that doesn't make sense considering the original word, or whenever he uses 'cuck' to engage in MGTOW shaming. That seems to be the MGTOW alternative to reasoned, rational argument, to shame other men by calling them names.
Btw, MGTOW is not a good title for the anti-marriage MGTOWs I've encountered. It stands for, "Men Going Their Own Way". But when you talk to them, they seem to think that men don't go their way are stupid, ready to get divorce-raped. If they really were into men going their own way, they'd say if you want to marry, that's cool, and if I don't, that's cool to. Instead, they insult those who disagree with them. Contrarian Expatriate, you do seem to have a higher IQ than the fellows I got into a conversation with online, but I've noticed the shaming techniques and the lack of solid arguments.
You should acknowledge that marriage has some benefits to society as a whole, especially for children. Children with fathers in the home do much better on a wide variety of metrics. If your system of ethics goes beyond the individuals (supposed) pleasure, and takes into account what is good for society as a whole, marriage is good, certainly in societies that have a proper balance of power between men and women. Marriage began to disintegrate as a social construct and divorce began to increase as the feminist movement rose.
And there are many countries where the MGTOW arguments against divorce just do not apply.
You can insist that married men who say they like being married are just lying or self-deceived. I could say the same thing about MGTOWs, how they lie uncomfortably on their beds at night, unable to sleep, scratching themselves, either because of the fleas from their dog, their only friend, or else from the crabs from whoring it up with girls in clubs. How they lie there sad and lonely, longing to have a meaningful relationship with a real person, but avoiding it because they are scared they might lose their money in divorce court. I could insist all MGTOW do that, and that you are lying if you deny it and say you don't have an itching problem.
Ah yes! Some more misconceptions, fallacies and downright lies for me to feast upon.
By all means, call me that. It would simply be "projecting behavior" and further confirmation that I am correct. Let's not forget that quote by Socrates, "When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." So please do call me that
When married men are in rationalization mode, there is no argument that would be solid to them. They, by definition, MUST continue to advocate marriage or it would be admitting a colossal mistake which most egos cannot bear. In addition, their aforementioned "Sunk Costs" in their marriage prevent these men from reversing course easily. They are trapped in matrimonial and psychological bondage which only catastrophe can fix. I'm not sure I would behave any differently if I were enslaved to the state, to a wife, and to children!
Historically, marriage was beneficial in that way. But currently marriage is at best unnecessary and at worst downright damaging to the interests of men. Before the modern era, life was boring and the days were long. Having children gave people a life purpose and a means of day to day entertainment let alone extra hands to do the necessary work. Today, none of that is necessary due to mass media entertainment, simplified physical mobility, and individualized lifestyles. Marriage and children are no longer needed to make the days go by more quickly and grant men life purpose. In fact, marriage saps men of the means to achieve the best versions of themselves. Higher education, peak physical fitness, and excess disposable income are rarities in the married man due to the demands marriage takes on them.
And to your point about marriage being good for society, please spare me such weak pontifications. Any man who says he married as a means to be good for society is a LIAR. Men marry primarily to put the woman of his choice on lockdown without realizing they are the ones put on lockdown instead. Usually the choice of wife is his favorite source of sex, or in the case of smart men, the choice is the woman with the best wife and mother characteristics. But men NEVER, EVER, EVER marry for the benefit society at large; they marry out of what they erroneously believe to be self-interest.
And moreover, paying taxes is good for society also. Am I supposed to want to take it upon myself and pay more taxes because it is good? When you make arguments like this, it is clear you are reaching for any justification whatsoever to advocate for the unjustifiable.
Finally, why should we take on this responsibility of siring and raising children? For what? Do we gets some extra points for the afterlife or do we get karma points or are we simply reacting to female approval as the clap their hands in glee when they learn some other woman bamboozled yet another dupe into the slavery of matrimony? Newsflash: You get no extra points for raising children. You simply get more work, more debt and expenses, and less personal freedom.
Marriage is most inimical to the interests of men in the countries of the Anglosphere. However, marriage is an undue restraint on male freedom, wealth, and personal sovereignty in each and every country in the world.
I put it to you that having to sleep with a woman 10 years older, 10 years and 10 points uglier than she was when you married her is the most lonely feeling any man could ever have in life.[/quote]
There is a difference between being alone and being lonely. I, as one of the first MGTOWs to post YouTube videos, am grateful that women half my age come and go when I please because I have the youthful vigor, the high net worth, and the carefree demeanor that are direct results of my being a MGTOW. I shudder at the thought of being nagged and cajoled by some "formerly hot" female who exercises domain over everything that I have obtained and waves the power of the state or the community over me like a rolling pin.
The smart men will continue to say no!
Back up a minute there and re-think the conversation. You started with the 'cuck' name-calling, so you must have lost the debate from the get-go. Name-calling is a substitute for reasoned argument for those incapable of it, or those with few reasoned points. I have found the MGTOW's I've interacted with to rely quite heavily on name-calling and to be really light on reasoned argument.
I suggested the name for you as 'push back' against your name-calling tactics, which are both childish and annoying. I'd much prefer reasoned discussion without the name-calling. Are you able to do that, write out mature persuasive arguments without calling names? I do not agree with a lot of your positions on these subjects, but you do seem to be an intelligent fellow capable of such things. I think you've probably picked up the name-calling habit from reading certain pages on the manosphere.
Do you realize that the MGTOW arguments do not even make much sense in societies where the laws are not biased against men and the divorce rates are relatively low? They don't usually face the same social problems as the US either.
This reminds me of the story I heard about a test for witches in the middle ages. They tie them to a chair and dip them under the water for a long time. If the woman dies, she wasn't a witch. If she survives, she's a witch. So just dry her off and burn her.
You assume married men are unhappy and in 'defense mode' based on denial, instead of actually considering the evidence careful. In this case, the testimony of witnesses is evidence. I am sure there are plenty of married men who have chosen abominably bad women to marry who aren't willing to admit their suffering. Again, I could say the same sort of thing about single MGTOWs, that they are lonely miserable wretches, who create or find a philosophy to make them feel better about not being able to form a meaningful relationship with a woman. That would apply to men like yourself and also men who can't get a date with a woman who are in the MGTOW camp.
You also operate from a different world view. I do not think a man's value consist of how many possessions he has. A man can be happy with relatively few possessions. I don't consider emotional happiness to be the purpose of a man's life. (Aristotle's 'happiness' as the goal of life isn't about emotional happiness as we normally use the term.)
I'm sure you have a lot emotionally invested in MGTOW. There is no reason for you to be so emotionally invested in the idea, to treat it as axiomatic that marriage is a bad thing.
In terms of a selfish interest at emotional happiness, at my age marriage is the best alternative. You could probably go through dozens of meaningless, unfulfilling sexual relationships and several diseases before you can't pull the women like you used to. But marriage was the best option for me as a young man, too.
You basically have a very selfish world-view. You also forget that we are actually social beings. There is enjoyment in relationships, having a wife, children, etc. that is more than just entertainment. There are also good things to do that are good whether I receive temporary pleasure or not. You should consider what society would be like if everyone did what you described. Either it would be full of bastards or there would be no kids and society would die out. If women were as selfish as you want men to be.. well that's the problem you are reacting against. if all of them were that way, society would be worse. All women would use men and discard them. It's a huge problem already.
How are your personal morals? If you see a friend left his wallet in his car when he got out. You figure you could take $100 out without him knowing it was you, would you do it? If you really didn't like someone, and you just knew you could kill him without anyone knowing, would you do it? Does what's good for other people enter into your decision-making at some point?
And moreover, paying taxes is good for society also. Am I supposed to want to take it upon myself and pay more taxes because it is good? When you make arguments like this, it is clear you are reaching for any justification whatsoever to advocate for the unjustifiable.
I've got access to TV, Internet, and video games if I wanted. But kids still are entertaining and make your life fuller. Sure, they are a lot of work. And once you have them, you love them. I do. Your life philosophy seems a bit 'sociopathic'. I'm not saying you are one, just that the line of reasoning you take seems a bit like that. What you care about changes.
This is how I see it...
Under 30 years old - Don't get married. Don't have children. Divide work and play equally. Enjoy yourself as you're only young once but also plan for the future. Learn about women in the meantime. Get laid. Play the field. Whatever. Just don't get attached.
Over 30 years old - You're older, wiser and less likely to make dumb decisions so if you're inclination is marriage & kids, then fine. Look abroad for a woman where western influences are at a minimal. She has to enjoy the traditional feminine role. Cook, clean, look after the kids - you know the drill, but most importantly, marriage has to be held in very high regard. It cannot be seen as a method of convenience.
If you want to spend the rest of your life single and free that's your prerogative and perfectly fine too, but will you still feel the same way in ten or twenty years time?
Whether you remain single or eventually get married it doesn't matter, the goal is to be happy for the rest of your life, but remaining bitter isn't freedom or contentment, it's imprisonment. The woman or women that have orchestrated your mental state may have won the battle but if you can't move on and forget the past, they've also won the war.
Why do western men die before their western wives? Because they want to!
If English is not your first language, my apologies in advance. But you seem to have a fundamental lack of knowledge of basic terminology. Socrates quote, "When the debate is lost, slander is the tool of the loser," hinges upon the term slander which means an untrue smear. If it is true, it cannot be slander. So when people on this site brand you a Cuck, and you retort with the same, you've lost the debate in trying to slander those who are not Cucks. This is the point you are missing. You would be better off finding some other term to sling to avoid being the loser of the debate according to Socrates.
Ah yes, the old ignore the refutation and restate the refuted argument tactic. This is a common tactic that married men borrow from their wives. I have addressed that weak point in my previous post. Covering your ears and jumping up and down, and repeating your previously defeated point does not revive its debate value. Please go back and read how I smacked down that argument previously.
Oh, yes. The Straw Man fallacy! I knew to expect this eventually from you. I have never said married men are unhappy, in fact, most married men are blissfully content in their servitude to wife, especially in the early stages of the marriage. As Esther Vilar wrote, the intelligent wives relate to their husbands in ways that make him happy to be a slave. Only the foolish wife drives away her slave. What you were likely referring to is my assertion that most marriages are unsuccessful in that they result in either divorce or people staying together while miserable due to finances, children, obligation to religion, etc. My position is that only 10% to 30% of marriages remain happy for the duration.
A man going his own way is not following a philosophy. He is living his life, on his terms, with his enhanced wealth, in the freest manner of self-interest. Your charaterization of MGTOW is an example of Aesop's fox who could not reach the juicy, refreshing grapes so he walked away bitter telling himself that those luscious, refreshing grapes were likely just sour anyhow! Ok, if that makes you feel better, MGTOW like myself are bitter and lonely and miserable and poor and we don't travel have no variety of new women in our lives and we are simply sour anyhow!
You really do like the Straw Man tactic I see. I am a minimalist who gave away thousands of dollars of belongings. I have two suitcases, a laptop bag, and a car in long term storage while I travel the world. I am in Japan now and I move to another country about every month or so. So I have less possessions than most, but I have more WEALTH than most which grants me freedom to travel and meet new young, nubile women regularly.
Consider this: Any village idiot can marry, have kids and live his pathetic life out living the traditional cuck life. But scant few have the intelligence, freedom, and means to live the lifestyle of a wealthy, international, bon vivant. MGTOW are most able to do that however! If I had the chance to snap my finger and magically choose again, I would again reject the lifestyle of the married, traditional cuck in favor of the HNWI MGTOW without a second thought. What would most men who have been married more than 10 years choose? Most would look over at the fat, nagging wife and strongly consider MGTOW!
I am emotionally invested in the freedom and opportunities that being a MGTOW provides, not MGTOW itself.
Please tell me you did not use that bitter shaming tactic about having meaningless and unfulfilling sexual relationships! Your wife has literally invaded your brain.
I am 50 years old, but most people assume I am in my 30s. I am physically fit because I have time for ample sleep and regular workouts. I therefore only date women half of my age and below. I have a 19 year old who loves me very much and I have a bevy of lesser important twentysomethings who find it fun to hang out and enjoy my company. I can assure you these personal relationships are extremely fulfilling!
Now you are basically lashing out with cognitive dissonance and reaching for some altruistic argument which would serve to justify your decision to cuck yourself into marital servitude.
Maybe you are the selfish one because you certainly did not marry to save the world and society. You married out of self-interest and a desire to lockdown your wife so you could have her for yourself. Newsflash: Most married women eventually have an extra marital affair as respite from their slave who no longer can please her as well as before.
So married people are more "moral" than unmarried people? Does this apply to unmarried priests, nuns, and other clergy too?
Let me burst your moralistic bubble here. In any case of murder or homicide of a married person, the presumptive, prime suspect is the living spouse absent evidence to the contrary. How is that for married people being more "moral?"
I'm very glad your wife let's you have those things because she does not have to you know!
If you use another shaming tactic like calling MGTOW sociopathic, I am going to think you are a female posing as a male on this forum. If you are not female, you give huge indications of just how affected your thinking is by your wife.
Be a man, not a slave.
If you want to know more about your subordination to your wife, read "The Manipulated Man" by Esther Vilar and "The Predatory Female" by Reverend Lawrence Shannon. Also see the movie Gone Girl for a clue of just how enslaved you are.
Some married men become depressed and suicidal when Red Pill truths smack them in the face. I don't wish that on anyone, but with knowledge, you can navigate out of the marital morass you were programmed into getting yourself into. Good luck, you're going to need it!
Nice. Remember to mitigate your simple carb intake. I assume there's no GMOs out there in the UKR...at least not at the local food level, but maybe at the U.S.-based businesses there. I eat meat, veggies, and spicy sauces (sriracha, hot, green or red Mexican salsa) every meal; they are very fulfilling.
It's time to expatriate to evade your fate; it's time to expatriate before the barn door permanently closes on "US" sheep.
Debut mixtape "The Skilled Neophyte of RNB (x64)" dropping Spring 2016 - Follow me on Twitter @eirizarryRNB
I am 50 years old and as time goes on, I am more convinced that I have made the best lifestyle choice as a free and fulfilled MGTOW. I wish you were courageous enough to experience the same.
You're now engaging in projection. Perhaps it is women who have affected your own mental state to the point where you are defeated? If you are married or plan to do so in the future, your defeat as a fully-actualized man is but assured no matter how much you protest to the contrary.
Also, MGTOW is not about the women, it is about the system that makes men slaves to women, regardless of country. The fact that you all are focused on the pathology of the women should be a clue to you that something is wrong however.
Marriage tips the balance of power away from the man. If you think can be "happy" for the rest of your life under those conditions, you are truly very brainwashed by gynocentrism.
But please, do indeed partake in marriage so one day you and the other slaves will know I am correct
CE is right, at least for black males. Obviously it is insane for any male to get married to a Western female in the West. There is no reason for black males to get married at all where marriage entails any great obligation on them, as doing so is completely alien to their r-selected species.
I'm not a cuckold, so you calling me a 'cuck' is slander. You could redefine 'cuck' to mean something that has nothing to do with what the word really means, and say you aren't slandering me. So I could redefine 'Cucktrarian Expat' to refer to the poster who uses the word 'cuck' to mean something other than what it really means.
It does seem to be a common tactic for those who don't have a solid, reasonable, logical arguments to resort to name-calling. It also seems to be the culture of MGTOWs to try to shame their opponents into agreeing with them by calling them names. I wonder why that is?
Closing your ears and jumping up and down? That sounds like your attitude toward venereal diseases. Insisting that you have little risk doesn't make it so.
As far as your 'refutation', I found a little one or two line comment of yours that wasn't much of a refutation. You can assert that men in other countries lose wealth, etc. over marriage. In some cultures, getting a wife adds to your wealth (the wife as an asset, seen as property, a productive asset if she produces children.) Be that as it may, claiming you refuted an argument doesn't mean you have.
Also, you asked who wanted to have sex with the same woman? What is the real advantage of different women? I suppose you might feel some excitement due to variety. But I'd also imagine if you tried to get with a different woman every night, you'd strike out or just not have any fish bite a lot of nights and go home for a lot of sexless nights, and be less likely to have sex than a man in a sexually active marriage. I'd imagine the typical MGTOW sex life is basically celibacy or a sex life of masturbation and the sad practice of going to prostitutes to pay them to pretend to like him. As far as physical sensations go, sex with the same woman without a condom has to beat having sex with a variety of different women using a condom. And that's just the hedonistic, sensation aspect of it without the relationship aspects.
I wonder if you really understand the 'sunk cost' concept. When you consider sunk costs in business, you are supposed to consider, from this point going forward, what is the most profitable decision you can make. Like finance calculations in finance, the sunk cost philosophy can fall short on legal and ethical considerations. Profit is not the only consideration. Ethics, what the owner wants the business to be about, etc. are important considerations. If businesses made decisions based solely on what is profitable, they might all go into business selling illegal drugs.
And from an economics perspective, people seek to gain 'utility.' You fail to consider that what you get 'utility' from may not be the same as what other people get. You may think that being married and having kids is a bad thing from your perspective. For me, I certainly would not get utility from abandoning my wife and kids. I suppose having an affair would be physically enjoyable on one level just because sex feels good, but it would also be awful, like abandoning my wife and kids, because these things violate my sense of morals and ethics. A serial killer might gain 'utility' in terms of enjoyment from killing someone for sport. I wouldn't gain 'utility' from that.
That's a problem with your MGTOW arguments. You assume that other people gain utility from the same things you do. You even argue that a man may be happy in marriage, which you called servitude to wife, but you are still against it. That doesn't make sense if your religion is called 'Men Going Their Own Way'. If it is about each man being happy, and you admit that marriage makes some men happy, then you don't have much of an argument against all marriage. It makes sense for me to argue for certain principles of marriage for everyone. But your position doesn't make much sense. "Marriage is just bad' isn't a very compelling or sensible argument. It is not bad for society, especially what marriages where both husband and wife hold to more traditional views of marriage. And many individuals do find happiness in marriage.
As far as my own enjoyment goes, a 'sunk cost' analysis would lead me to stay in my own marriage and not have an affair. Having an affair would hurt my conscience and I'd enjoy life a lot less. Leaving my wife would probably result in a lot less sex. If I were to go to bars to pick up women, I probably wouldn't pull one as often as I'd have sex with my wife as a married man. I probably couldn't get some chick from a bar to come over and cook me a gourmet meal and do my laundry. Also, sluts from bars or even prostitutes haven't been trained for years through interaction with me in what I like. As far as going to bars go, I'd probably be able to get some interest from girls in parts of Asia without paying. But I'm not as young and good-looking as I used to be, and in 20 years, I'll probably look like some old geezer. My wife still looks a lot younger than her age, both face and body. I'd imagine if I went into bars looking for women, very few would be as attractive as she is physically, and then the odds that one I picked would be interested in me back, and that I'd have success in persuading her would be slim. I'd be facing a lot of sexless nights, combined with guilt over my wicked choices.
If that's what you mean, then you don't really have much of an argument against marriage, especially in the early stages of marriage. As to whether marriage resembles 'servitude to wife', that depends on how the man handles himself in the marriage. You probably apply all kinds of 'game' tactics to put yourself in a more dominant position. Married men have to know how to handle their wives in order to have a peaceful relationship where she respects him. He's got to pick a woman he knows he can handle before marrying.
MGTOWs are like radical feminists except they are men and reverse the genders. Radical feminists back in the 1960's were teaching women that marriage was like slavery and prostitution, souring impressionable women toward men. MGTOWs do something similar, souring some gullible young men toward marriage. Feminists teaching this stuff is partly what lead to the raw deal for men in US culture we see today.
If you think up to 30% of marriages remain happy for the duration, you shouldn't be against all marriage. You shouldn't have MGTOW as your religion.
I doubt you'd find 1% of men or women who are happy for the entire duration of their marriage. People get unhappy at times. Single people get unhappy at times. Marriage doesn't guarantee happiness, certainly not consistent happiness 100% of the time. If you spend enough time around someone else, that person is going to get on your nerves at least at some point. But people who are alone can be unhappy and feel lonely at times, too.
I'd estimate close to 100% of single people are unhappy at some point in time at something that relates to their singleness.
I said I could do like you do, and argue that you are just lying about how you feel. That's no way to persuade people. You might be able to persuade some gullible, impressionable person he is not happy with some of his life decisions, even if he was before you talked to him. But that's not going to persuade me.
If you mean wealth as in cash or assets, then those are still possessions.
I'm married and I've been to several different countries. I'd venture to guess most guys talking about MGTOW aren't high net worth individuals. (It's hard to communicate if you use abbreviations people need to look up.) I wouldn't call myself 'HNWI' but I do all right. But if I lost my savings tomorrow, I wouldn't be devastated or think my life was worthless. When I had no income I was just as a valuable as I am now.
You really have a strange prejudice toward married men. I don't think I've every heard my wife use that kind of terminology 'meaningless and unfulfilling sexual relationships!' Those are my words. Not every man thinks like you do.
If you are that old, it's likely that it will start to show soon. Do you think you can keep the new girls interested if you look like an old man?
Talk about a straw man. I did not say married people are more moral. I was responding to your comments about life decisions which seem to come from a very selfish philosophy, and particularly raising children. But maybe I shouldn't jump to conclusions. If you got a woman pregnant, would you be comfortable having nothing to do with your own son or daughter?
There were a number of factors involved in deciding to marry my wife. A lot of it had to do with following God's will for my life. This was something I prayed about and had gotten some direction on before I took action. But I did want to marry, and I wanted her to be my wife.
I don't know if it is true that 'most' women do that. I give my wife what she needs, physically, and then some, anyway. But my wife also has good morals in this area.
No, and that is a good example of a straw man argument. it's not about married people having better morals. I am commenting on the way you have portrayed your own moral philosophy. You ask why a man should raise children? Were you asking why a man should raise his own children if they exist? If a man has children out there, and he refuses to raise or support them, that's something I would consider very selfish and immoral.
Again, you are arguing against a straw man. But since a very tiny percent of married people murder their spouses, it's not really that strong an argument for your case.
Look in the mirror, man. You are the one using the shaming tactics. My wife doesn't control whether I have a TV. The sociopath comment was triggered by your asking why men should raise children and the very selfish philosophy you presented in the last post about making life choices, as if it is right for man only to care about himself and his own pleasure, and not other people.
Other people can be important to a man. It is as if you do not want men to care about other people, particularly a woman, not enough to marry her.
I am a man. I am not going to become a slave to these name-calling, insulting, shaming tactics, and become a MGTOW. Is that how you were persuaded to become one? Through the insults?