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 Anti-Feminism, Men's Rights and Misandry.
I agree that society would probably function better if women are under the care of fathers and husbands, legally. Exceptions or other arrangements could be made for widows. It would also clear up many of the marriage law related issues that MGTOW use as a basis for their anti-marriage argument. They could exclusively resort to name-calling and shaming tactics.
I don't think feminism is sustainable in the long-term. Western society has been moving in the direction of 'freedom for all' and egalitarianism for a long time. Monarchies gave way to democracy. The experiment with slavery during this time gave way to anti-slavery laws. People who did not own land were given the right to vote in democracies. Women were given the vote. But then feminism took that to an extreme where it has begun to hurt men. Women voting and having the influence they have is solely due to the 'benevolence' of men, possible a distorted and uninformed benevolence in some ways. This sort of thing leads to chaos in society. There could very well be a backlash toward a better-ordered society, or else things could disintegrate more into chaos. What has happened to marriage through the sexual revolution and feminism is part of the chaos.
Being opposed to marriage is being in favor of chaos in society. If there is marriage, the woman has someone to be legally responsible after dad dies if she doesn't have a father to be responsible for her legally.
If you are not angry, and you are based on your last few posts, then you should be.
You are legally bound to a depreciating asset that will soon be a liability in due time. The fact that you cannot simply walk away should make you furious at the bait and switch which was perpetrated on you.
You should be livid that you have been made into a domestic slave, a beast of burden, and a bamboozled dupe of a man. Your weak-willed platitudes of "Marriage is just good and it prevents chaos!" fall upon deaf ears.
How do those blue pills taste? Your mouth is chock full of them!
Did anyone tell you that we human beings are mortal and our bodies are deteriorating. I've got news for you. It's not just women. You are getting older, too. So am I. I got married knowing that we would both get old. My wife is holding up really good for her age.
Again, an illustration of how your radical anti-marriage MGTOW-ism is just a gender reversed form of radical feminism. In the 1960's, the radical feminists were saying similar things about women being domestic slaves.
Since my wife stays home and does the 'domestic' stuff like cooking and cleaning (when we don't have a maid, and the cooking when we do), your assertions don't even make sense. As is usually the case, your assumptions are false.
Typical "sour grapes" response from an individual with the inability to enjoy the freedoms, wealth, and prerogatives of a man going his own way.
It might not have occurred to you, but all of my "domestic" stuff like cooking and cleaning is done for me also. You don't have to be married to enjoy such arrangements. Is that all you got?
One thing about happily married men like some on this site, they quietly enjoy their married lives in their own way without trying to convince others (and therefore themselves) that it was not a mistake.
You on the other hand, clearly are irked by the notion that someone dares find your voluntary enslavement "less than ideal" and your resultant response is to justify, justify, justify which is essentially your trying to justify it to yourself.
But to depersonalize the matter a bit for perspective, MGTOW is exploding in popularity and importance while men burdening themselves with the married-slave condition is declining. The funny thing is, most of the men who are forgoing marriage have never even heard of MGTOW, but they are smart enough to override the social conditioning of outdated religious blather, family influence, and pop culture in ways you were not. So now that you made that bed, just lie in it and don't get rattled that others were smart enough to not do the same. Misery loves company, but in your case, no thanks.
Since it is clear to me you are engaged in some internal struggle regarding your decision to marry, if you want to learn more about how you can rectify your mistake, I encourage you to read the PDF, "Fire Your Wife" embedded in the link:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments ... _escaping/
Your attempts at psychoanalysis tell me that you probably are not a psychologist. If you just go on and on with speculation based on your attempts at psychoanalysis as a form of insult, that would be consistent with your character as demonstrated in this forum. But if you actually believe it, something is wrong with your mind. It's not rational.
Did your mom sleep around a lot? Was she a prostitute? Did a girlfriend cheat on you? Is that why you think other men's wives cheat on them? Is that why you don't trust women? Other people can play the same game, too, you know, rude inflammatory assumptions and irrationally taking a guess at your life situation. I could also accuse you of lying about the 19-year-old girlfriend to cover up your shame of being a typical MGTOW who gets no interest from women. Or I could say that you are dating the 19-year-old, that you have homosexual tendencies, and get a girlfriend to justify to yourself that you don't. That's the same sort of thing you do in your posts, with just a different set of accusations and assumptions. I could make up a bunch of crap about you like you do about me and act like I'm psycho-analyzing you. It's not that hard. But it is childish.
It's also like if you are trapped in an elevator with someone else and you pass gas and try to blame it on the other person. There aren't that many posters on this forum. It could be no one else is reading this stuff. I know what you are writing about me are lies. If you really believe you can guess stuff into existence with your lousy homespun psychoanalysis skills and MGTOW philosphy, you are the one with the problem.
Oh look, more "Christian" commentary from the pious one himself I guess it is clear just what kind of "Christian" you are, a fake one.
Passive aggressive digs at me won't unmarry you nor will they free you from your squat, fat, aging wife who you seemingly resent having to stay with. Was being told this by me what sent you off the edge? I know when I trigger someone and, you sir, have been majorly TRIGGERED.
I guess that is only fair for putting your tiresome and false justifications for marriage in a place where red pill men have cuckified dupes like you for a light lunch. But go ahead with your, "Murrage is guud, MGTOW is bwaad, and binding yourself to an aging, squat, former stripper who worked the Jakarta bar circuit is just the Curstian thang to do." You go on and keep living that dream life mate!
But in the meantime...., http://www.nowife.com/
Me pointing out your trashy discussion tactics doesn't make me a fake Christian. How is it wrong for me to call you on this? You keep on doing it. If your anti-marriage MGTOW stuff was really so logical and convincing, you wouldn't have to resort to name calling and this poor attempt at insulting psycho-analysis. My last post wasn't passive aggressive. I was direct and made my point clearly.
You are too old to post like a juvenile delinquent. Your tactics can also undermine whatever influence you have on a forum like this, if people actually read your posts.
Again, passing gas in the elevator. I know my wife wasn't a stripper. If you really believe this stuff you write, you really need to get a grip on reality. If I were to play your game, I could say I hit a nerve when I asked if your mother were a prostitute or if you were a repressed homosexual. That's the sort of thing you do, except with a different set of speculative accusations. I could also act as if your insistence that you were rich were proof that you were poor, homeless, eating out of a garbage can, and spending your time in a library posting about how rich you are to feel imporant. And I'd have to keep it up, mentioning my scenario that I made up about you, about the prostitution, and the trash can, throughout several posts. That's pretty much your tactic, but with a different set of insults and scenarios.
The thing is, I am not sure if you really believe what you post. If you actually do, you may be delusional. Do you really believe it, or are you just being insulting to entertain yourself?
Now that I used you to wipe the floor of the "Murrage is guud" malarkey, time to move on to bigger game. You are no intellectual challenge. Even the irrepressible Cornfed can put up a better challenge than you. Your argumentation is almost female in nature. You don't have to be a genius to know why either. When your wife uses that on you, you internalize it and use it on others, looking the married Cuck in the process.
Let me know when you want to dump your insufferable wife (or she dumps you) and start really living
Lot's of ego and manipulation with your posts, and little substance. When I asked tough questions you did not want to answer, you acted as if you won some kind of argument. So I'll ask again.
I am not sure if you really believe what you post--the psychoanalysis of your fellow poster's thoughts and life situation. If you actually do, you may be delusional. Do you really believe it, or are you just being insulting to entertain yourself?
Your questions are sophomoric and quite often full of false premises (by "triggered" design I'm sure). Any such question is therefore rhetorical and not worthy of serious attention.
But your zeal make me wonder why a man who claims to be so "happily married" even cares? I put it to you that you care only to erect and preserve the veneer of marital bliss when in all likelihood you are as immersed as can be in routine drudgery, sexual deprivation, and marital regret that your cognitive dissonance will not yet permit you to acknowledge.
If marriage past the first few years were as blissful and pleasurable as you claim, there would be no need for the state to force you to stay together under penalty of law or financial ruin. That's the purpose of marriage, "Come together on choice and temporary pleasure, but stay together on official obligation or be subject to the penalty of (depends on the country)!"
Given your description, I would categorize you as #4.
#2 Married but Red Pill
#3 Married but Blue Pill
#4 Married Cuck
Again with the irrational lousy armchair diagnoses of people's personal life. Do you know that your chances of guessing right on this are next to nil, or are you just delusional enough to believe the garbage you type?
You constantly engage in pseodo-psychoanalytical rhetorical bull crap yourself. But its too sophomoric to be Sophmore level. Its more like middle school.
Here you go again. You have no idea whether my life is drudgery or involves sexual deprivation, marital regret, etc. I'm pretty sure I have a lot more sex than the celibate MGTOW.
The thing is, if I defend marriage on a discussion forum, there is no logical reason there to conclude that my life is drudgery, that I have marital regret, or that I'm sexually deprived. A sane, intelligent person would know that. My guess is that you are reasonably sane and intelligent, and you know what you write is dishonest bull crap. My guess is that you know you can't guess someone has marriage problems because they speak positively about their marriage.
But I could be wrong. You could lack some basic sense and reasoning skills that cause you to believe so strongly in the anti-marriage MGTOW philosophy that you've gathered from men who have demonstrated themselves to have gained great wisdom about how to live their wives by the ability to put up a blog or YouTube channel.
I never said marriage was blissful, whether past the first few years or before it. That depends on the marriage. Some people suffer quite a bit in marriage. Other people enjoy it. A lot of it depends on one's choice of spouse. A lot of it depends on one's own character and how one behaves. A lot of it depends on whether a man leads the woman in the right direction in terms of how he directs the relationship. My philosophy is not purely hedonistic (marriage for the sake of individual 'bliss') either.
I could also argue that sense you spend so much time on these forums arguing against marriage, that you must be struggling with your own beliefs on the matter, trying to defend your beliefs on marriage because of the cognitive dissonance you are experiencing as you weigh the potential benefits of marrying a teenager.
I suppose that scenario is possible, but if I were absolutely convinced that I could arrive at that conclusion based on the fact that you argue against marriage, that might be symptomatic of either mental health problems or a basic lack of reasoning skills.
But it isn't hard to apply our formula back to you. If I wanted to do the equivalent of what you do, though, I could insist I were convinced that your girlfriend, who I've never met and know very little about, were sleeping around on you.
And of course I have nothing personal against your girlfriend or your mother, and no reason to believe either of them were sleeping around.
And of course marriages exist in many places in the world where the deck is not legally stacked against men, like where I live.
My wife is part of my family. Doing good for my family is basic decent ethics.
I don't know if your mother is still alive, but were you good to her? Do you think it is or was right to treat her well?
Your philosophy is stupid, as evidenced by the fact that it compels you to constantly draw irrational conclusions. Of course, you could just be dishonest in these conversations and knowingly be skewing bull crap and insults for the sake of your own entertainment. Again, I don't pretend to know which one it is without evidence.
You've got me curious now. Do you realize your posts are full of illogical bullcrap? Are you just so used to spewing it that you don't realize you do it anymore? Do you really think that you can guess the details of another person's life by assuming twisting what they say in the opposite direction? I'm trying to figure out if you really believe what you right? Are you this irrational in other areas of your life, or just on the marriage issue?
If you know what you write is false, what is your objective, just to annoy people? It's not very convincing to the other person you are talking with when they know what you write is false.
Last edited by MrMan on September 13th, 2017, 1:54 pm, edited 2 times in total.
This conversation reminds me of this a little bit, except the Superhero trainer may have better intentions toward the victims of his overused formula.
Last edited by MrMan on September 13th, 2017, 1:55 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Well no sh.t! The question is why do it at? You did it because Mommy, your church, and the guy on TV from the government told you, "Murrage is just guud?"
I have seen scores of marriage apologists crash and burn in marriage over the years. Some of them even remarry again and again until they realize the extent of the social bamboozle being played upon them.
Almost every married man I know who has been married over 10 years has confided in me that they would not do it if they had the chance to do it all over again.
You seem like an extra special case of being afraid to acknowledge and call out that the "Emperor has no clothes" due likely to your religious programming.
Religiously programmed Cucks like yourself are generally the last to get the memo, and they always get it too late.
You need to get a larger sample size. How many men throughout history have had wives? If marriage is as bad as you make it out to be, what have men perpetuated it throughout the generations for ages? Why haven't all the men just hooked up forever and let the women raise the kids alone? Marriage can be a good experience if you are a decent responsible man and you choose a good partner and be responsible going forward. Not everybody does that.
How many anti-marriage MGTOWs are there? Ten thousand? A hundred thousand? How many billions of men have been married throughout history.
You treat anti-marriage MGTOW like a religion. In your case, your religion doesn't have to make sense. You don't have to have evidence to support it. This is a forum about living abroad. A lot of your arguments about marriage don't apply to marrying a woman overseas and living there.
Your approach doesn't make sense for society, either, because it contributes to the same melt-down of our culture that feminism contributes to. If you want a male-led society where women are responsible to their men, you should start by supporting homes with strong father's. Female-led households help perpetuate men being tolerant of women being controlling. Boys who grow up without fathers who see the mother lead are going to think that's normal. If men didn't marry and all the children were born out of wedlock, then either fathers would not be in the picture or many of them would be visitors in their children's lives as they exercise their visitation rights.
You make this all too easy.
Your "Men throughout history" argument is DEAD ON ARRIVAL. Men throughout history did not have the vast wealth, education, and opportunities to flourish that modern MGTOW have. Most men throughout history lived their entire lives in their village and worked their farm or their craft because they had no other choice as a matter of survival. Having families and children was the primary way to recreationally pass the time and ensure the survival of the people who supported your survival. So if you are basing your life decisions on what men throughout history had to do as a matter of survival, you have truly lost the game.
Men today can travel the world relatively cheaply, they can invest and explode their wealth online, and develop relationships with people across the globe on their phones. To give all that up just to live closer to the way the illiterate farmers did throughout history is lunacy.
Also, men today have exponentially more means to enjoy themselves in the high arts, fitness and sports, multiple business ventures, social venues, culinary pursuits, and even altruistic/philanthropic activity in ways that our fore-bearers could not have imagined. But if you want to emulate their limited and burdened existence, you go right ahead.
The vast majority of MGTOW have never even heard of the term. Morever, different cultures have different terms for what we call MGTOW. My estimation is that MGTOW is in the hundreds of millions AND GROWING.
We see evidence of this exponential growth in various phenomena like books imploring men to "Man Up" and start marrying against their best interests again, falling reproductive rates in the middle and upper classes, and the ubiquitous female complaints of, "Where have all the good men gone?" My response is that they have gone their own way!
This is an example of PROJECTING behavior. In other words, you are a self-professed "Christian" full of blind and irrational faith in what was written millennia ago and faith in what you are systematically programmed by family and church to believe. This is quintessentially divorced of reason.
MGTOW tend to live life based on RATIONAL, LOGICAL, and PRAGMATIC considerations, yet you are accusing MGTOW of being like a religion. If you had more self-awareness, you would know you are describing and criticizing yourself when you project in that manner.
Most MGTOW recognize that "society" as you write of it, is irredeemably gynocentric and anti-male. If you take the case of the United States, chunks of my wealth reside abroad because the USA is the leader of the West and the leader of feminist and anti-male public policy. Most MGTOW long for the day that a melt-down occurs in the USA so that a more just and male-friendly society can develop accordingly. So I say let "Society" crumble under debt, war, and conflict. When it is all over, MGTOW can look from abroad and decide whether or not to participate in any reset or rebuild. Women would have to be prevented from voting and would have to be under the leadership of men before I, for one, would ever be interested in such a rebuild.
Societies and families led by women ultimately FAIL. The Roman Empire suffered this fate and Western society is doomed to suffer it also. The world has a great track record of self-correction with regard to historical mistakes. The women's rights movement of the West has been on government supplied steroids for 2 or 3 generations, but "the other shoe is about to drop."
Face it, you were bamboozled into the marriage trap like so many others have been. I do not blame you because the confluence of religion, culture, peer pressure, and natural impulse are insurmountable for most men to overcome. MGTOW is there to be that defense mechanism for men to use to construct their rational and logical rejection of that confluence. Once complete, one is said to have taken the Red Pill metaphorically. The pinnacle of Red Pill is MGTOW!