How many of you are actually Mgtow?

[Shemp]

The dysfunctionality of both MGTOW and feminism have nothing to do with what feminists or anyone else thinks, but rather with the effects on child production.

To blame MGTOW for low child production in Western countries - this is ridiculous.

You cannot expect men to do something which often turns out to be harmful for them - Why should men sign up for something which is without any rights but requires financial obligations over decades and is without any incentive and reward in return?

MGTOW is not dysfunctional - it is the normal reaction and response

You're saying the same thing as me, except you're unable to connect the dots. Society no longer incentivizes the hard work of producing children. Feminism is one RESULT (not cause) and MGTOW is another RESULT. If there was a powerful incentive for women to want children, unwillingness of men to marry and support children would cause WOMEN to demand change of laws which cause this unwillingness in men.

Pensions are not a gift from the government, it's a kind of insurance you pay with a fairly large part of your salary over decades for the reason you are financially secured when you are old and cannot work anymore.

"Savings" is societal terms is mostly impossible, since the goods and services consumed today are mostly produced today or in the very recent past. (Maybe you could call infrastructure built in advance societal savings for the future.) Government tells stupid commoners they are saving when they pay into a retirement account, but this is a lie. They are actually supporting the current generation of retirees. True "savings" in societal terms consists in producing another generation of human beings. Childless men AND WOMEN (actually far more important to punish childless women than childless men) who don't participate in those process absolutely should be on their own in old age, assuming there is a scarcity of resources, which there will be eventually: all developed world governments are going bankrupt eventually.

As for Japan, it was always crowded but that didn't stop marriage and population growth in the past, so something has changed. Probably same as elsewhere: pensions for childless people and similar policies that make children a burden on parents rather than a form of wealth for parents. In modern societies, much simpler and cheaper to have a pet dog or cat to satisfy parental urges versus real children.

I agree that Japan should shrink its population, in fact so should the entire world. But it matters greatly how this is done. If the only people having children are the stupid people who don't respond to incentives, or welfare bums in some countries, that will be a problem in the long run. (Idiocracy here we come.) Also, the shrinking can't go on forever. At some point, society must once again incentivize production of high quality children.