When a Woman Meets a MGTOW......

[Contrarian Expatriate]

Let's face it, some men are designed to be single. Predominantly Incels and Chads.

You have an incredibly narrow view of those who are better off remaining unmarried. What about Volcels, MGTOWs, Catholic Priests, non-Chad players who like variety, men who don't want children, men who don't want to live with women, etc. Incels and Chads are but two extreme ends of the continuum. What about the millions of people in the middle of those extremes?

If you think it is mostly Incels and Chads, than you are extremely poorly informed. Then again, I see you as one of the legion of arrogant married types whose been deluded into thinking that he's living the universal "right way." Newsflash: You're not...

[Zambales]

Let's face it, some men are designed to be single. Predominantly Incels and Chads.

You have an incredibly narrow view of those who are better off remaining unmarried. What about Volcels, MGTOWs, Catholic Priests, non-Chad players who like variety, men who don't want children, men who don't want to live with women, etc. Incels and Chads are but two extreme ends of the continuum. What about the millions of people in the middle of those extremes?

If you think it is mostly Incels and Chads, than you are extremely poorly informed. Then again, I see you as one of the legion of arrogant married types whose been deluded into thinking that he's living the universal "right way." Newsflash: You're not...

You've totally misinterpreted. I'm not referring to the ones who CHOOSE to be single. Anyway, I'm not married, so you got that wrong as well.

[Contrarian Expatriate]

Let's face it, some men are designed to be single. Predominantly Incels and Chads.

You have an incredibly narrow view of those who are better off remaining unmarried. What about Volcels, MGTOWs, Catholic Priests, non-Chad players who like variety, men who don't want children, men who don't want to live with women, etc. Incels and Chads are but two extreme ends of the continuum. What about the millions of people in the middle of those extremes?

If you think it is mostly Incels and Chads, than you are extremely poorly informed. Then again, I see you as one of the legion of arrogant married types whose been deluded into thinking that he's living the universal "right way." Newsflash: You're not...

You've totally misinterpreted. I'm not referring to the ones who CHOOSE to be single. Anyway, I'm not married, so you got that wrong as well.

Nice try, but bull crap. Since when do Chads not CHOOSE to be unmarried? They have the most choice either way.

Also, I don't know if you're married or not. I simply pointed out that you are the TYPE of which is arrogant and married while thinking he is has the key to the universal code of fulfilment. Your actual marital status is not the issue, your harmfully conventional mindset is the issue.

[flowerthief00]

MGTOW: Men who do not pursue marital or co-parenting relationships with women.

I had to make some slight adjustments to your input because there are asexual men, bisexual men, and even certain gay men are gravitating to MGTOW. GGTOW is now a thing but it reflects a move away from the LGBT movement more than a move for personal freedom. Some gay men often resent GLBT being abruptly changed to LGBT and they also are recognizing the dictatorship of gynocentrism in the West now.

Point taken about the LGBT.

By your adjusted definition several groups are effectively MGTOW by default, including PUA and Catholic priests. Do they know they are MGTOW? Someone should tell them.

Red-pilled "Incels" who just want a date are still there too, but that term also needs to be fixed, really.

[Contrarian Expatriate]

By your adjusted definition several groups are effectively MGTOW by default, including PUA and Catholic priests. Do they know they are MGTOW? Someone should tell them.

Catholic priests are required to be Volcels; there is nothing MGTOW about them because they are not refraining from that to protect themselves from female and state domination. In fact, they are commanded by faith to submit to state authority (The Vatican) which is anathema to MGTOW.

PUA run the gamut because many of them are very blue pill (Coach Corey Wayne), some are very red pill (Alpha Male Strategies), and some are actually MGTOW for life (Matt Cross). Matt Cross is one of the best PUA's out there (although he now is more of a masculinity coach) and he lives a very high end MGTOW life.

Red-pilled "Incels" who just want a date are still there too, but that term also needs to be fixed, really.

Very few people are truly incel. That term just gets thrown around a lot by people who no little about what that truly means. Anyone can screw an ugly or desparate female but most of what you consider incels are men undeveloped in value and they expect to screw models and 9's and 10's when they are 2's and 3's. True incels are mentally, psychologically or physically unable to have sex even though they want it (@@Cornfed comes to mind as one example of all three.) Those who are too ill, too disabled, or too injured can be incels because anyone else could pay a financially needy person to have sex on demand.

The nerdy HS Senior who can't get a hot girl to sleep with him is not an incel, he has not reached a high level of SMV for his goal or he has set his sexual sights too high.

[Zambales]

Let's face it, some men are designed to be single. Predominantly Incels and Chads.

You have an incredibly narrow view of those who are better off remaining unmarried. What about Volcels, MGTOWs, Catholic Priests, non-Chad players who like variety, men who don't want children, men who don't want to live with women, etc. Incels and Chads are but two extreme ends of the continuum. What about the millions of people in the middle of those extremes?

If you think it is mostly Incels and Chads, than you are extremely poorly informed. Then again, I see you as one of the legion of arrogant married types whose been deluded into thinking that he's living the universal "right way." Newsflash: You're not...

You've totally misinterpreted. I'm not referring to the ones who CHOOSE to be single. Anyway, I'm not married, so you got that wrong as well.

Nice try, but bull crap. Since when do Chads not CHOOSE to be unmarried? They have the most choice either way.

Also, I don't know if you're married or not. I simply pointed out that you are the TYPE of which is arrogant and married while thinking he is has the key to the universal code of fulfilment. Your actual marital status is not the issue, your harmfully conventional mindset is the issue.

What universal code of fulfilment? I’ve never mentioned anything of the sort - unlike you, with your "Girlfriend Allowance" creation . What were you saying about arrogance?

And for your information I’m the polar opposite to “conventional” and that’s because I’m my own person and do things my own way based on my own experiences. Following the crowd and listening to other people’s “advice” can send one hurtling down the wrong path. Another wayward assumption on your behalf.

[E Irizarry R&B Singer]

CE is unusual about labeling himself as MGTOW. I only use that label in forums like this one, where we all know what it means so it functions as shorthand. I would never call myself MGTOW in real life, anymore than I would call myself loner, amoral, selfish, impolite and various other not so flattering labels. It's just idiotic to go around labelling yourself in an unflattering way, though of course I expect other people to label me in unflattering ways, not that I much care.

There have always been men who act like MGTOWs, under different names. Confirmed bachelors. Loners. Most homeless men are effectively MGTOW. Much of the military has always been MGTOW, also expat contact workers, such as oil related workers stationed in Dubai, etc. Many of these unmarried men use whores, some date regular girlfriends, some just go without.

True.... I was living MGTOW long before the concept came into being. The term just happened to encapsulate everything I stood for better than any other term so it was a validation of sorts. But you're right, I don't go around in every day life using the term because most people would not understand it.

I would say I was a lot like this little boy who is essentially MGTOW though he likely never heard of the term:

We need to adopt this kid before an AW vampiress/succubus gets a hold of him.

[Contrarian Expatriate]

We need to adopt this kid before an AW vampiress/succubus gets a hold of him.

I'd say the kid is smarter than most simps and married cucks. Probably has a great father teaching him instead of lying to him like most fathers.

[flowerthief00]

That video clip of the little boy is the most hopeful thing I've seen on Youtube in months.
But getting down to business....

Catholic priests are required to be Volcels; there is nothing MGTOW about them because they are not refraining from that to protect themselves from female and state domination. In fact, they are commanded by faith to submit to state authority (The Vatican) which is anathema to MGTOW.

MGTOW: Men who do not pursue marital or co-parenting relationships with women.

There is nothing in our definition above that requires a MGTOW to have as his motivation the desire to protect himself from female and state domination.

Would you like to amend it to require specific motivation? If we were to do that, yes, we can keep the Catholic priests and other groups out, but I think we will discover other problems....

PUA run the gamut because many of them are very blue pill (Coach Corey Wayne), some are very red pill (Alpha Male Strategies), and some are actually MGTOW for life (Matt Cross). Matt Cross is one of the best PUA's out there (although he now is more of a masculinity coach) and he lives a very high end MGTOW life.

If they are not pursuing marriage or co-parenting relationships then they are MGTOW by the above definition. Since the marriage/co-parenting lifestyle clashes *real hard* with the PUA lifestyle is it that bad an assumption to make that most of them are?

Again, adding a clause about motivation to the definition might help....

Very few people are truly incel. That term just gets thrown around a lot by people who no little about what that truly means. Anyone can screw an ugly or desparate female but most of what you consider incels are men undeveloped in value and they expect to screw models and 9's and 10's when they are 2's and 3's. True incels are mentally, psychologically or physically unable to have sex even though they want it (@@Cornfed comes to mind as one example of all three.) Those who are too ill, too disabled, or too injured can be incels because anyone else could pay a financially needy person to have sex on demand.

The nerdy HS Senior who can't get a hot girl to sleep with him is not an incel, he has not reached a high level of SMV for his goal or he has set his sexual sights too high.

I completely agree that very few people are truly incel. There is an issue with how a comparatively larger (and I, suspect, fast-growing) group of men identify with what is, taken literally, an extremely exclusive label. After all, it's not just 2's and 3's unable to land 9's and 10'. 6's and 7's can't land 9's and 10's. Arguably, 6's and 7's can't land 6's and 7's any more, the way the sexual marketplace is headed.

What is the word we should use to refer to this larger group of men who are, for whatever reasons that could be both voluntary and involuntary, sexually/romantically frustrated? Simply "Cel"?

Whatever we call them, I think many of them could be considered MGTOW by the above definition. If you're not even getting that Tinder match then you're probably not thinking too much about marriage or co-parenting.

[Contrarian Expatriate]

There is nothing in our definition above that requires a MGTOW to have as his motivation the desire to protect himself from female and state domination.

Would you like to amend it to require specific motivation? If we were to do that, yes, we can keep the Catholic priests and other groups out, but I think we will discover other problems....

Not at all because that single line is only a very basic summary of MGTOW, not an exhaustive definition. Just a few lines below it I described the core intention of MGTOW, but anyone above the level of moron would know that Catholic priests are not MGTOW anymore than permanently comatose single men are MGTOW. At a certain point, common sense must take over. MGTOW is not for the type of men who would consider for a second that Catholic Priests are MGTOW. If we have other religious clerics to consider, most Catholic Priests WOULD pursue marriage and children if they were permitted to do so but the choice is not theirs to make.

Now a Protestant Pastor COULD be MGTOW (The YouTuber MGTOW Preacher comes to mind), because Protestant clerics have the choice to pursue women and co-parenting with women.

If they are not pursuing marriage or co-parenting relationships then they are MGTOW by the above definition. Since the marriage/co-parenting lifestyle clashes *real hard* with the PUA lifestyle is it that bad an assumption to make that most of them are?

Again, there are PUA's who are now married and with children. One of the most famous PUA's, Neil Strauss, is one of them. So PUA does not mean MGTOW by any stretch. As a matter of fact, many PUA's hate MGTOW because less guys purchase PUA classes, materials, and consultations specifically because of MGTOW. By the way, it was a manosphere scandal when Strauss married. MGTOW got the last laugh because he got divorce raped as we predicted.

What is the word we should use to refer to this larger group of men who are, for whatever reasons that could be both voluntary and involuntary, sexually/romantically frustrated? Simply "Cel"?

I think that refers to most younger men who go thru that phase. Most young men who are not gifted with top 10% looks, have to BECOME something before they start snatching girls successfully. The label is not really important. They are not yet developed men and they have not yet become attractive enough to women. I was a late bloomer myself, but I more than made up for it after I rose to the top of the food chain (even more so when I moved overseas).

The stage of a man's sexual life changes according to his circumstances. One light bulb moment for me was law school when I noticed that smoking hot white girls were asking my classmates to introduce them to me and I was quite popular with female classmates from wealthy and privileged families all of the sudden. That taught me that a man's circumstances and status can change EVERYTHING. So labeling men according to their sexual successes are not so useful in my view since it is so temporary according to circumstances.

[Man With a Plan]

This is stupid. Every man is mgtow. Only a fool would need to say he's "going his own way" when men are already wired to do so. Sometimes, his "own way" includes marriage. For a man such as myself, marriage is NOT in my future, nor is any long-term serious relationship -- but I'm not mgtow. None of you can even define what mgtow is so . . . that means everyone and no one is mgtow.

[Zambales]

The name isn't precise enough. Should be called Men Against Feminism. Instead it's more like Men Getting Confused.

[flowerthief00]

Not at all because that single line is only a very basic summary of MGTOW, not an exhaustive definition. Just a few lines below it I described the core intention of MGTOW, but anyone above the level of moron would know that Catholic priests are not MGTOW anymore than permanently comatose single men are MGTOW. At a certain point, common sense must take over. MGTOW is not for the type of men who would consider for a second that Catholic Priests are MGTOW. If we have other religious clerics to consider, most Catholic Priests WOULD pursue marriage and children if they were permitted to do so but the choice is not theirs to make.

Because I have read what else you wrote I know more or less what you mean when you say MGTOW. But for someone reading the one-line definition for the first time knowing nothing else, they might justifiably think that a Catholic priest fits it. I disagree that they'd have to be a moron to. Look at all the confusion about what this word means. This is not about who MGTOW is for. This is about having precise terminology to serve everyone whether they care to be MGTOW or not.

And Catholic priests do have a choice in becoming a Catholic priest at all. Similarly, a Mormon missionary made a choice whether to become a Mormon missionary. (Not only does a Mormon missionary not date, he's not allowed to even be in the same room alone with a woman per the mission rules he signed onto) So wouldn't we have to say that all single male Mormon missionaries are MGTOW for the duration of their 2-year missions, despite the fact that avoidance of female or state domination has nothing at all whatsoever to do with their decision to lead that lifestyle, and most end up marrying shortly after they return from it.

Again, there are PUA's who are now married and with children. One of the most famous PUA's, Neil Strauss, is one of them. So PUA does not mean MGTOW by any stretch. As a matter of fact, many PUA's hate MGTOW because less guys purchase PUA classes, materials, and consultations specifically because of MGTOW. By the way, it was a manosphere scandal when Strauss married. MGTOW got the last laugh because he got divorce raped as we predicted.

But how many active PUA are married with children? I'd guess very few. By the time they have gotten married they have typically given up the PUA lifestyle. Strauss did too. In some ways he became a critic of PUA. (while still playing the dance of reaping money from his former association with it)

[Cornfed]

The best definition of MGTOW would be men who choose to withdraw from traditional relationships with females to some extent as a response to the feminist persecution of men in such relationships. Of course there are degrees of withdrawal - not getting married vs. not living with a female vs. not having a girlfriend vs. not seeking sex with females vs. minimising all contact with females vs. joining a Trappist monastery.

[Contrarian Expatriate]

Because I have read what else you wrote I know more or less what you mean when you say MGTOW. But for someone reading the one-line definition for the first time knowing nothing else, they might justifiably think that a Catholic priest fits it. I disagree that they'd have to be a moron to. Look at all the confusion about what this word means. This is not about who MGTOW is for. This is about having precise terminology to serve everyone whether they care to be MGTOW or not.

I would say that MGTOW is not for men who would not be intelligent enough to understand that Men Going Their Own Way does not encompass men in prison, Catholic priests, quadriplegics, and those living under comatose conditions. If it is that complex a concept to understand from even that condensed description, than they do not have what it takes to be MGTOW.

If it makes you happy, you could say: MGTOW are "Red Pill" aware (having an understanding of true female nature and state-supported gynocentrism) men who avoid marriage and fathering children as a means of shielding themselves from legal and the financial exploitation from women and gynocentric state institutions. Many MGTOW actively engage in casual romantic relationships with women, others do not. Still others go so far as to relocate abroad to traditional cultures and countries less legally hostile to men.

At the core of MGTOW is the desire for maximizing personal sovereignty and personal freedom, and avoiding the legal and financial perils of marriage and fatherhood in many Western societies.

And as to your position that PUA has anything to do with avoiding marriage, it has no connection. RooshV was a PUA who made known his desire to find a wife with whom to start a family all while promoting is PUA business and materials. He has not found one yet, but he no longer considers himself a PUA. Mr. Locario is a PUA and he has been married for many years. PUA has no position on marriage. It is about game and sexual success with women, period.