MRA vs MGTOW: Explaining the MRM

The men’s rights movement is stupid. All MRAs are doing trying to change laws, sending men right back on the plantation. MGTOW is the only way.

Now, I have read that kind of comment, in a hundred different forms and expressions over the past several years. I have heard similar sentiments expressed on some MGTOW YouTube channels that I follow.

It leaves me in a bit of a quandary. On one hand I think red pill philosophy, especially MGTOW, is probably the greatest gift to men ever. I’m in awe of it’s potential for men and boys. On the other hand I detest ignorance, even when practiced by people I otherwise admire.

So here I want to tackle the us vs. them-ism that sometimes shows itself between MRAs and MGTOW, and what I think is mostly at the root of it, which is a failure on the part of some MGTOW to understand the MRM.

Having said that, that I think the source of misunderstanding is mostly the mythology embraced by some men who identify as MGTOW, I also have to say that I don’t see these guys as representative of most men who identify as going their own way. Not only that, it isn’t that I am claiming perfection on behalf of MRAs.

I have been at this long enough to meet and interact with ignorant assholes on both sides of the fence. Unfortunately, plenty of them. I say this because it’s true, and because I want to in advance invite anyone who claims I am attacking MGTOW to stick it where the sun don’t shine. If you need to be a victim that bad, feminism is a better fit for you.

What I want to do here is explain what the MRM is and do it with the relatively new denizens of the red pillasphere in mind; those who haven’t been a part of this through all the growing pains. And I want to do it against the backdrop of the false, “MRAs are working with the system” narrative.

In doing this, it’s also important for me to point out that my only experience with this is through AVFM. While I think AVFM is now definitive of what we call men’s rights activism, it’s not the end word on the subject. The MRM is small, but not inconsequentially so.

But from the AVFM perspective, and mine personally as an MRA, it is hard to imagine how anyone could be so completely wrongheaded as to conclude that we were trying to work with the system. Or that we were trying to change laws.

First, I extend a very cordial invitation to anyone to sift through the 6,000 plus articles on A Voice for Men and find one example to support the claim that we took up any sort of political or legal advocacy. I can save you the trouble, though. You will pull up a goose egg.

What you would find, though, if you were to scour though that mountain of text, is a long history of social provocation. You will see time after time where AVFM sends the gynocentric outrage machine into overdrive, triggering the shit out of the very same people and groups you will see denounced and criticized in every MGTOW forum and video channel across the web.

There is a reason for that, which I think may have escaped some MGTOW commentators. It is to send more men directly to those forums and YouTube channels, and into red pill life.

By pissing on sacred cows and crossing lines that most good cucks would not dare of crossing, we drew outrage from the mainstream media, which was the only attention the men’s movement was or is going to get.

That outrage, and all the hit pieces that came with it, wasn’t backlash we were trying to limit. It was the exact result we were looking for. The gynocentric outrage machine isn’t just harsh. It’s high profile. High enough profile that the effect of badmouthing us so feverishly also sent people right through our front door.

MRAs and MGTOW both benefitted from that, which is to say that the men who found us benefitted from it. And the benefit wasn’t with changing laws or endorsing politicians. It was in having the lights turned on when they found our material. Many men, not being able to unsee what we have shown them.

With the work that we did, we attracted a young feminist filmmaker who wanted to document our hateful ways and ended up having her world rocked. She ultimately made a movie that shoved another big fat red pill down society’s throat.

Now there is red pill everywhere. And it continues to be seen as the threat to gynocentrism that it is. Even Maroon 5 is under fire now for their new album, Red Pill Blues, though I doubt Adam Levine is anything less than a confirmed gynocentrist.

Much of this happened because of AVFM’s brand of activism, which had nothing to do with working with the system. Hell, we never wanted to work with the system. We just wanted to kick it in the genitals, as an equal opportunity kicker.

AVFM has had three taglines. We started with “Take the Red Pill” and now go by men’s health, no apologies. In between those two, and by far for the longest time, our tagline was “Changing the Cultural Narrative.

Not changing laws. Not changing politicians. Changing the narrative. The same exact thing MGTOW commentators have been doing during the same time. And largely with the same message. Criticizing gynocentrism, supporting the marriage strike and encouraging men to take a second, much closer and more analytical look at the world they live in, and to adapt effectively based on the new information.

We have stayed so in focus on these matters that we have sometimes tested the resolve of non-gynocentric traditionalists who have been long time supporters of our work. Yeah, I am talking to you TMOTS and GOM, with great appreciation for all you have done.

Now, for the sake of full disclosure I have to admit there are a lot of legal and political changes I’d like to see. And we have already seen some of it, a prime example being the gutting of Obama’s Dear Colleague Letter by the Trump Administration.

Now, Trump isn’t any more red pill than Adam Levine, but he doing some things right, taking real action to correct the Title IX nightmares among them. Even the mainstream media recognizes that boisterous criticism, which ultimately culminated in Trump’s actions, originated with men’s rights activists. Well, they were partly right. MGTOWs were making noise at the same exact time for the same exact reasons. If you are MGTOW, you know this to be true. And don’t worry, I won’t accuse you of working with the system just because you played a role in the system changing.

I figured out a long time ago that cultural change precedes legal change. And that cultures change when their narrative changes, hence the time-honored tagline at A Voice for Men.

Now, I really understand the confusion. When you identify as an activist for certain rights, the modern western mind conjures up images of protests and lobbying politicians. All I can say about that is that the subtlety of social activism in the way AVFM does it isn’t going to register with people, even red pill people, whose ability to interpret the world is detrimentally literal.

That is not to say that the more standard activism is not practiced. It certainly is. There is shared parenting advocates in most states now. People who are looking to reform divorce laws and who try to use traditional means to deal with things like parental alienation.

Guess what the last thing they want to be called is? You got it, MRAs. I have several groups right now that bcc their email list communications because they don’t want others on the list to know I am even watching. The men’s rights movement, in their minds, is like their rich, embarrassing uncle, only in this case we are the uncle that has some media reach, not money.

I don’t offer these groups any assistance, and don’t even know why they want me secretly in the loop. I’ve known for a long time that they want to use MRAs when convenient and would disown us in a nanosecond if they ever got caught talking to us. They’d sooner be shot than make a public proclamation supporting men’s rights.

Still, they are very useful. Doing good work in their own way. And whenever anything they do goes public, they serve as the same gateway for some men to red pill life as does MGTOW and the MRM.

Even the few MGTOWs I have taken issue with; those so obsessed with hating anything vagina that they can’t see or think straight, serve the same purpose, even if they are the same ones clutching pearls over myths about the MRM. They carry the same torch. And after all, this movement, which I now prefer to refer to as Red Pill vs MRA or MGTOW, was born of the walking wounded.

We became a movement, albeit in different forms, because the lives of men and boys are being destroyed. Personally, I think getting hung up on a label, or peddling false narratives, or seeing the route back to the plantation around every turn, is a bit foolish, or at the very least simple-minded.

But I still think it is better than life as a blue pill zombie.

These guys who somehow perform the mental gymnastics to conclude that AVFM, myself personally or the MRM generally speaking is out to get them, are an occasional annoyance. But I try my best to remember well that they too are playing a role in freeing men from the bondage of gynocentrism. They are as valuable to the red pill movement as anyone else, perhaps because of their feral ways rather than in spite of them.

To be sure, this is not an appeal for a kumbaya moment where we all just join hands and, in the words of Rodney King, just get along. It’s just an effort to set the record straight and sweep some of the bullshit off my own porch.

Leave a comment

103 thoughts on “MRA vs MGTOW: Explaining the MRM”

  1. Good article Paul and an important clarification for the uneducated and the B/S artists in the manosphere. As stated so clearly in the article ‘changing the cultural narrative’ precedes and determines an eventual change in legislation….. even when legislative change is not sought.

    I explained this exact theme to Turd Flinging Monkey some time ago and he acknowledged it – ie. specifically that MRAs are primarily concerned with changing the cultural narrative. But after receiving that knowledge he became confused on how to differentiate MRAs from MGTOW, and also lost on how to elevate MGTOW to a position of superiority to his fans…. so he returned to the strawman that all MRAs want to do is lobby and picket politicians in order to change the laws.

    If some are satisfied by the stereotype of MRAs as mindless Don Quixotes’ – then they can hitch their wagon to it. But if accuracy is desired then the focal activity of MRAs should be recognized as an attempt to change the cultural narrative on default gynocentrism, and to promote male agency. Further, most of that narrative change is effected online, not in the streets nor by visiting politicians, and it is especially effected by personal modelling of our own values and self-determination, GYOW/Zeta-style, which MRAs have been promoting for years.

    MRA and MGTOW both try to change gynocentric narratives, with one point of differentiation between them: MRAs seek to change wider social narratives in tandem with changing their own personal narratives, while MGTOW lean more toward changing their personal narratives alone….. though MGTOW still have to argue for narrative turf in their own social circles, with family, in their workplaces, and with friends.

  2. I’d like to set the record strait here:

    I am many things, what I am not is a traditionalist. Let me explain: I share a lifestyle with another human being who I expect to share my concerns or in the least not get in the way of them. I expect each man or woman to carry their own weight in life without exceptions. At first it was uncomfortable ground for my partner who I call “wife” in respect for that place I give her.

    No, it was not all rosy. My “wife” lost faith in me at one point in our lives and I took our son(out of state) and raised him for a year as a single dad. This is an important point in that my “Wife” never questioned my position as our son’s father and as painful as I’m sure it was for her, she did not waiver in respecting that.

    After that year, she wished to reconcile, which there was no way in hell except for the fact she did not play the gynocentric game we are all too familiar with. She understood our son was both important to me as well as her and I recognized that in her. She is a good heart.

    20 years later I’d challenge anyone to separate us. Our son has grown out of the house and my wife and I have grown up and find ourselves more in love and “getting it” than we did in our youth.

    This testimony is not for the MGTOW or men out there who find our current gynocentric zeitgeist reality bat shit insane, I get it. It is for any women who may be watching or reading this. You want equality, you want men who respect and love you…that is a two way street. No exceptions.

    My participation in the MRM, specifically AVFM is because I agree with changing the cultural narrative and creating a dissonance. I also support MGTOW. I also talk to my representatives and support other fathers rights causes. I don’t see these things in conflict with each other, I view them as asymmetric warfare.

  3. I am both. MRA and MGTOW. I seek to change the narrative AND reject expectations placed on me solely because I was born male—the same thing we have done for females.

    Anyone that says one can’t be both hasn’t met me. What I aspire to do with my time here and what it means to me is up to me and only me. I am the only one to make that decision. It is mine and only mine.

    I am not of the extreme MGTOW variety, trying to ghost and all, but the extent I delve is my choice and it works fine for me.

    Sure I wish we would protest to get things changed. But I also want to be free to live my own life as I see fit instead of copying the herd.

    Both are possible and both are in me. I have gone my own way as an MRA and as a man that wants to be whatever he wants.

    1. Mate, you basically stole my thunder!

      People who say you can’t be both, are nothing but ideologues who are still trying to turn MGTOW or the MHRM into a feminist styled ideology. They are full of it.

      I have been going my own way since 2005 and I have been an MRA since the late 1990s. In fact the closest I have come to touching a woman since 2005, is shaking hands with a woman I met recently, or hugging my daughter. I’m still enjoying the freedom and that feeling like I just dodged a bullet, just 5 minutes ago. It is still keenly placed in my mind.

      Anyone tells me I am different to what I DECIDE I am, will be met with typical Ogre push back. I am here, because I choose to be here and it suits me. And I will remain locked in, while ever Paul keeps the objects/aim of this blog/website pure.

      As for the radical MRAs and MGTOWs, they are only a tiny minority. You want to know how I know this?
      Because all true MGTOWs are nowhere to be found. They are off doing their own thing, answering to no one and are not going to put their hands up for anything.

      They are definitely out there. We don’t need a head count. We just need to keep reading those idiotic sheila magazines. You know, the ones the majority of brain dead women read. Those magazines print stories like, “where have all the men gone?” Not good men, but men in general.
      So the more they talk about the man drought, the more we know MGTOWs are actively backing away and are increasing in numbers.

      Soon the femtards will start introducing Bills into parliaments around the globe to try and criminalise bachelors/MGTOWS. Hopefully these men won’t just lie down and take it, but fight back instead.

      I reject any notion that MGTOWs are gutless and are running away, leaving the fight to the MRAs. That is bullshit. Many of us are MRAs and we will fight for what is right, whether that be a change in narrative, a change in laws or a change in both. Whatever happens, happens!

      1. “Soon the femtards will start introducing Bills into parliaments around the globe to try and criminalise bachelors/MGTOWS. Hopefully these men won’t just lie down and take it, but fight back instead.”

        What will they do? Put us all in jail when we refuse to pay any fines for exercising our right to be just as free and independent as women? (Sorry feminists, but that is equality too).

        If they ever do what you said, it will prove the feminists are not about equality (not that we actually need even more proof). This also says that when men stop holding up their “other half of the sky” and the thing comes crashing down, feminist will be outraged by men doing the same thing women would if they were treated like men and boys are.

        And more on this “sky” thing: When I hear women “hold up half the sky” I am led to believe the half they want to hold up is the same half men are already doing…as if we need more people doing the same thing. This leaves the other half, that women used to hold up, vulnerable and perhaps already fallen. But when men abandon their holding up, will the women actually be able to hold up the half men used to do and the other half traditionally held by women…without men’s help? That is when I believe MGTOW will have its greatest impact. (Do not take that to mean I support a return to traditional gender roles. I do not. But my words still work because it helps put things into perspective for discussion purposes).

        As for the MGTOW, even the radical and ghosting types, if they do not come forward to join the MRAs when such a hateful bill rears its head, they aren’t worth dog sh*t in a feminist woodpile! If they can’t manage to join in to stop that abuse—which I believe they will have no choice—then they needn’t come schlepping around hoping we will forgive them. The thing to do is to work together NOW.

        1. Agree with all that.

          I remember when I first started working in the early 1970s, they still had a ‘single man’s tax.’ That meant that if you were a single man you paid a higher tax than anyone else. Women or girls paid much less and married men paid less.

          So even as recently as the 1970s in Australia they were punishing single men.

          There are many ways of punishing single men, but I would like to see all single men, with the support of older men be they married or single, to fight any new attempts at punishing single men.

          And I also agree with you that if men, any men including MGTOWs and MRAs, do not engage in the fight, then they have proven that they have never supported men’s human rights at all and are nothing but selfish individuals and should be ostracised by the rest of society for being that way.

          One of the best ways for single men to protest or fight the govt and society, would be for all men to reject any military service. This is of course a pipe dream, but you can imagine the furor that would occur if the majority refused. There aren’t enough prisons to house them and they would have to actually take notice of men for once.

          This holding up the sky bullshit, is exactly that. Women have never held up a damn thing. All the hard physical work has always been done by men. Whether women are willing or not, they will never do the hard work men do. It’s not just biology either. They will never want to and men will never force them.

          I will always credit people when it is their due and women have traditionally deserved equal credit. But for the past 50 years they deserve only a size 9 boot up the arse.
          And this would include all the purple poodle men who do their bidding.

          Regardless of the fact almost all of us here, including me, are against turning the clock back to a trad/con society that we had over the past say thousand years, at some point in the future when the movers and shakers start to decide what kind of society they want and how men and women will relate to each other, they will have to look further back into history to find those same basic fundamental tenets that people used, which proved to be so successful in bringing humans out of the caves and into the light of some form of industrialised living.
          And by industrialised, I am not referring to industry, but instead to how lives when from rudimentary to something safer and more comfortable. Like building homes and places to work in or for town gatherings. Or large scale food production.

          As I have said on this site before, there is one main tenet and it exists today in only small amounts. It is called ‘Charity.’

          Charity is totally blind, has no preconceived ideals or ideas. It can be pre-planned, but also opportunistic and be able to react at a moments need.

          Charity is the one thing that saw men and women treat each other with respect, then do the same to others in society.

          Will our descendants have the backbone to be able to care enough about each other to utilise this most worthy of all human traits?

          1. “Will our descendents….”
            I doubt it. Our species is malfunctioning, biologically speaking.
            The future does not look so good. Feeling better is valued more than what works better. Bad news for a species making it this far into “intelligence.”
            But if our species is foolish enough to venture this close to its self-induced demise then the process cannot be allowed to yield anything acceptable except absolute and true equality.

            I think women have held up their half, up until they didn’t like that half any more. Then they got all feelings overwhelmed and envious of something they mistakenly took to be “privilege” but was actually responsibilities instead, that men had and accepted even though it meant they would likely work their hearts to an early death, on average, much earlier than the women they toiled to support.

            So, things have changed. Not fair, but still…. What gets me is that I, and we men accept the changes women wanted even if it yanked the rug out from under not only men but our entire species, only for MGTOW men to be rebuked and hated for wanting to do the same thing as women: be freed from responsibilities and roles. Equality to a feminist is that only men should have rules.

            If they ever tax me for what would be deeply offensive if done to women, for doing the exact same thing, I will not pay. I retire in a few years, deliberately early, because I can, due to choices I made for myself. So trying to tax me for the same thing women get by with doing, will result in nothing for them unless they steal part of my expected s/security, which I will not have to have to survive well.

            I have made some big mistakes in my life but the best one I never made was getting married and having children. But the freedom I have gained from this, feminists don’t want me to have. And like you said and exampled as recent as the 70’s, they would support taxation punishment for me just for wanting the same freedom they fought to enjoy.

            Feminism is not about equality. It is obvious.

          2. “What gets me is that I, and we men accept the changes women wanted even if it yanked the rug out from under not only men but our entire species, only for MGTOW men to be rebuked and hated for wanting to do the same thing as women: be freed from responsibilities and roles. Equality to a feminist is that only men should have rules.”

            Yes, that is amazing, isn’t it? They want to opt out, but they don’t want us to. Not that they can stop us, of course.

            “I have made some big mistakes in my life but the best one I never made was getting married and having children. But the freedom I have gained from this, feminists don’t want me to have.”

            This is all about power. Have you ever noticed how the femtards are always going on about power, resenting men who have it while seeking it for themselves? “Being in control” is another femtard mantra. They’re so conditioned into believing that we need them to look after us, that we’d fall apart without them, that they cannot handle the reality, which is that we don’t actually “need” them for anything. That’s what hurts them and it’s quite sad really. I’m not so far up my own backside that I believe womankind is missing out because I opted out twenty-five years ago, but feminists aren’t capable of such humility. Bluster, yes. Delusion, most certainly. But never humility. Empty vessels, the lot of them.

        2. “women hold up half the sky”

          That has a few meanings
          is it in the way that cows on the line “hold up” trains,
          or the way criminals “hold up” banks

        3. No one will come forward. Not the MGTOW’s and not the MRA’s. Feminists can introduce a “man tax” to day and it will pass with little opposition. MRA’s whining about it on their websites and youtube channels is not going to make any difference.

      2. I have been an MRA since the late 1990s.

        And what have the MRA achieved in that time? The laws and politics and society as a whole has only become even more gynocentric since the 90’s.

        1. The kind of change “they” are trying to affect, takes decades, if not centuries. The fact that TRP is receiving international media attention, is proof of progress. MRAs did that, but you can call it “never affected any actual change” if you want.

    2. Sure you can be both, but as a MRA you will never make any significant change. It is a futile battle against the biological gynocentrism.

      While as a MGTOW you will make a significant change, if only to your own life.

  4. MRA foolishly think they can change the world
    MGTOW foolishly think they cant
    Blue Pill pretends there is nothing wrong

  5. “Men’s rights activists must wake up and realize that the time for trying to counter the hypocrisy with rationality – with essentially male arguments, using facts and truth, in the hope that sense will prevail – is not going to make ANY difference to the relentless feminist long march on men”

    -Herbert Purdy ICMI-16

    1. Absolutely correct. Humans are first and foremost story creatures and feminists have crafted a story of female suffering at the hands of a mythical patriarchy.

      If facts were going to set the matter straight it would have already happened a century ago with E.B. Bax.

      The only way this will be turned around is be telling a more compelling counter-story about how things are – our own just-so stories about the evil feminist snake in the garden of humanity, whispering lies about a patriarchy and driving families apart. We need to tell our own story about where gynocentrism sprang up and how it became strong, and about how there is a happily ever after future based on human fairness to both sexes. Reciting science and facts will always fall flat regardless of thier veracity. The pitch needs to be compelling, like a good saga.

  6. EDIT: Paul, you are right. This post was that of a troll, and I have cancelled it. My motives, however, were not those of a troll. I am working night and day to improve the relationship between men and women. If we get on better the support for feminists will evaporate.

    My post:

    Despite all your complaints about women you are still treating them as equals. In doing so you deny reality and listen far too closely to women. You should notice that all the misbehaving women are free of a man’s discipline, while women in a strong marriage are very nice. Only if you recognise the differences between the sexes does this make sense. Women need to be disciplined by a man to behave properly. Men, on the other hand, need to be questioned, criticised, complained about, ridiculed, etc. by a woman to behave properly. This exchange of favours is best accomplished in a marriage. Men are only truly happy when they have a woman to control, and women are only truly happy when they have a man to criticise. He needs a strong woman to withstand his discipline, and she needs a strong man to withstand her criticism. This battle/cooperation between the sexes is the essence of life — it is the only way both can grow stronger. Contrary to MGTOW, if we want more well-behaved women, more men must marry them. It is our responsibility.

      1. Thank you very much for allowing my post to stay up. No, I am not a troll. May I suggest that the one who keeps calm is closer to the truth than the one who resorts to insults?

        1. You’re a troll, even if you don’t know it. I don’t have time, or any particular reason to debate with you.

          Now that I’ve said that, I’ll delete you completely if you continue,

          Cheers, and thanks for reading AVFM.

        2. You may suggest it but that doesn’t make it true. The most effective liars by far, are the one’s who can lie with a straight face. Regardless, AVfM probably isn’t the best place to advocate for men to treat grown women like dependent children who have no personal agency.

          1. Thank you for taking me seriously. You are right, this is not the right place for this subject. If you key in my name into Google my website should be top hit. My email address is on the home page. Please contact me if you feel like it.

          2. If you are serious, if you think I am serious, and you want to discuss. I would like that very much.

          3. Almost all of you think I am crazy, I am hoping one person sees a valid point and wants to talk about it.

          4. I am almost sure that almost everyone in the world would think me crazy if they listened to me right now.

          5. “They’re coming to take me away ha-haaa
            They’re coming to take me away ho-ho hee-hee ha-haaa
            To the funny farm
            Where life is beautiful all the time
            And I’ll be happy to see those nice young men
            In their clean white coats
            And they’re coming to take me away ha-haaa!”

          6. I have just found out that people sing and listen to music when they are happy, so the news that you are happy makes me happy too. Thank you.

      1. But men are the only ones to have rules. Equality, you know? (wink, wink). Men must remain steady on the rails, but women can fly off them at any time for any reason and in which no man is allowed to notice, else “hates” women.

    1. In your adult mind, would you feel the same way if you were held responsible for child support. What if that woman was a family member or neighbor who you respected or reviled. Is there no long term considerations in your mind aside from your short term 13yo impulses?

      “Thirteen years old at boarding school, I myself longed to be ‘raped’ by a woman — any woman. I would have been so proud, and the envie of all my mates.”

      Here, let me fix this this one for you:

      Despite all your complaints about women you are still treating them as [individuals]. In doing so you [use the tools and knowledge learned on AVFM to establish a healthy and flourishing relationship]. You should notice that [most] misbehaving women are [given a pass] by a man’s [inability/reluctance to set boundaries and our Gynocentric Societies insistence in treating them like special snowflakes and victims perpetuating the dysfunction], while women in a strong [relationship tends to be happier, work towards a common enterprise, and] are generally very nice. Women need to have [boundaries set] by a man [to respect him]. Men, on the other hand, need to be [resolved in principle and not fear the possible rejection from simply saying no] and [most “sane” women will respond appropriately]. This exchange of favors is best accomplished in [any form of respectful relationship where the expectation is mutual assured flourishing]. Men are only truly happy when they have a woman [who shares their mutual concerns and respects the individual], and women are only truly happy when they have a man to [do the same]. He needs a[n] [emotionally] strong woman to withstand his [autonomy], and she needs a strong [centered] man to withstand her [autonomy]. This [mutual respect] between the sexes is the essence of life — it is the only way both can grow stronger.

      [Failing this, MGTOW is a reasonable alternative to the current zeitgeist].

    2. Boy are you deluded!

      I have actually witnessed ‘good marriages’ and I can tell you there is no such thing as the man disciplining the woman and the woman being a guts-aching bitch. Seriously. They both loved and respected each other and when they disagreed, it always ended respectfully.

      And you know what, I have heard the same thing from many other people too, who know of good marriages. It’s just a shame there are so few of them.

      There are only two things to say to your blue print for a successful marriage.

      1. If the man has to be the disciplinarian of the woman, then he’s a control freak or he picked a child to marry.

      2. If the woman has to criticise and bitch at him, he should open the front door, aim his size 10 boot at her arse and plant it firmly there prior to slamming the front door shut behind her.

      Marriages that are like what you describe, are the prefect example of why it has all been destroyed and why children suffer so badly living a life of hell within all that conflict.

      I think you need to find a femtard website to see if you can preach to them. You’re in the wrong place Mate.

    3. Do you have the sarc turned on in this post? It sounds like pure satire to me.

      So men need to treat women like grown children and this is supposed to make them…nice? Lol lol lol

      So women need to nag, hen peck, and ridicule men in order for men to be happy? Lol lol lol

      This is the very recipe for creating MGTOW in the first place.

      1. Yes. I have not worked it all out yet, but the above is in essence correct. It is the most serious problem in the world, so I would have to be a very bad person to lie about it. The only way you can tell is by the way I write.

  7. I have never understood why there has to be any conflict between MRAs – whether the A stands for activist or advocate – and MGTOWs. To me, they are just different approaches to the same problem, but are quite complementary. One is active and seeks to engage with other people, one is quieter and personal. But they both have their place and both offer men something far better than the stultifying conformity with the tired old narrative that the rest of the first world seeks to dump on us.

    Think of misandry as a cancer. There are researchers trying to find ways to beat it and publicising their analyses. They are the advocates. There are surgeons operating on sufferers and trying to remove that cancer. They are the activists. And there are people who understand how that cancer comes about, and set about consciously trying to live lifestyles designed to minimise the risk of ever contracting the disease, or of keeping themselves clear of it if they are former sufferers who have been cured. They are the MGTOWs.

    Maybe not the best analogies, but I hope the basic point is clear. Are they not all on the same side? And there is nothing wrong with any of them. There is no need for anyone who has escaped cancer to criticise those who are still engaged with it. There is no need for those who are fighting cancer to criticise those who do not want to engage directly in that fight any more. Even allowing for the fact that, in my view, MGTOWs are in fact fighters; because there is more than one way to win any battle.

    We can even dispense with the labels, if they only serve to divide. Look beyond them, and I think you see only great men always worth listening to. I certainly can.

    1. Because most men, young men in particular, have a need to compete so they can be king of the hill and attract the best women. Yeah, it doesn’t have to make sense. It’s a primate thing.

  8. Paul, as a woman who just finished watching the video ‘The Red Pill’, I really appreciated your contribution to this conversation. To all the all the men in the video and who are responding to your post, my heart goes out to you for all the pain that you’ve experienced at the hands of women. This video was an eye opener for sure. Some of the issues mentioned I knew. Others, I was appalled to discover for the first time.

    While I’ve had some extremely traumatic experiences at the hands of men (my father, family friend, boyfriend), I’ve always known that those who hurt are also suffering. I learned this from Warren Farrell’s books when I was in my teens (I’m 58 now). Men (and women) don’t become violent in a vacuum. It’s usually because they’ve been traumatized themselves. At some point, it has to stop. We need both men and women to be honest with themselves. Women especially need to own their part in their abuse.

    For my part, I have a son, daughter and granddaughter and I’m here to
    tell you that not all women hate men. Not all feminists are bat-shit
    crazy. Not all men deserve to be labelled as perpetrators.

    It’s my dream that women and men finally learn to really listen to each other as the producer of this documentary did and that we figure out how to stop projecting our own pain on each other creating more wounds and deepening the existing ones.

    I especially appreciated the voice of the ‘honey badgers’ – women who get it. I’m still learning and working toward true equality and justice for BOTH men and women. Because if it’s only for women, it’s not justice or equality.

    So, thank you Paul. For what it’s worth, I’m listening.

    1. As you take this journey one of the many things you will discover is this:
      Most MRAs, many non-feminists, and many MGTOW were once feminists who weren’t batshit crazy. What turned them away from feminism was the feminist response to everything they said that wasn’t batshit crazy. It was batshit crazy. Once a feminists begins to think rationally, he or she generally becomes a non-feminist.

  9. This is how I look at the manosphere community using a military analogy: The MRM’s are the strategist, they bring the issues and the marches to the front. The MGTOWs are the grunts, they do all the heavy lifting, even if they don’t do the practicing the absence of participation is still heard. The PUA, these are the special forces, because let’s face it there are some women that need to be named and shamed and there are some women even us men don’t want to deal with.

  10. There is no doubt in my mind that MGTOW, which is men going their own way, has a relevance that is profound, informing, eventual and unavoidable for every male. What becomes both eventual and unavoidable is the emerging tension and intuitive understanding that something is not right. It is this threshold, this cliff of uncertainty that a man in his time will peer from and look out; although he may be aware that there is no immediate threat, he is intuitively aware that he is surrounded by it. This irrational sense and the lack of ability to define its meaning may be the first sense of his individual identity. It is as if an ignited and burning corona has appeared or is now recognized and everything that it surrounds is him. Enclosed by this ring of energy he may begin to feel the meaning of his solitude and isolation.

    Until each individual male experiences selection as a mate or is selected for assignment by the culture, until his identity is socialized and plugged in, he lives within a tension of personal isolation. It is a narrated identity that each man is taught to struggle for and the conflicts arising between his individual identity and his social identity that he will struggle with. His relevance socially and personally will be defined by the identity he occupies; whether it is imposed, awarded, assigned or earned. It could be said that every man goes his own way and he is where he is from that result. He will never be free from external influences or the weather; every man even when drowning, drowns his own way.

    There is a necessary distinction to MGTOW that rises above and goes beyond its edicts, declarations and cautionary rules; it is the attempt to expose the male to the narrative of his conditioned awareness. The “laws” of MGTOW simply question the outcomes of accepting or occupying a borrowed or imposed identity; there are counter arguments to the conditioned beliefs that every male is occupied with. The question in fundamental terms is whether he has found or can find meaning in individual self-direction or simply follow convention as directed. MGTOW in essence can and should be the intended foundation of male cultural and institutional education and begin at the earliest age. For any life strategy to be effective it must consider the possible outcomes to include injury as well as benefit. This exercise in consideration will introduce every male to his authentic self.

    MGTOW with its brief acronym states at its core an ethos of individual definition by going your own way; simple in it’s statement but challenging in application. Compared to a lifelong experience of being directed to comply “going your own way” may suggest to some an unfamiliar freedom. For some it has become an imposed choice of last resort when no other choices exist. If “going your own way” is somehow a last and only choice to “belong” then the context, meaning and truth are easily confused. Most men of modernity have no idea of a personal way outside the experience of their obedience to narrated social conventions. Their compliance to artificial institutions and pretend governance have all but destroyed the personal constitutions that represent their own individuality.

    I identify myself with MGTOW or “men going their own way”; not as an adherent or follower of a group but as a practitioner of it’s thought and discipline. I have been subject to other forms of discipline and thought; institutional education, religion and the tribalism of culture and family. MGTOW in my view is not a conscious choice but a slow evolving realization that the culture and its institutions are dehumanizing to men. That realization increases in speed volume and depth once it achieves consideration in the individual man’s mind. MGTOW is the eventuality of a process that begins with exploitation, accusation, social isolation, marginalization and the manufactured policy of governing institutions. It is likely that I have always been a MGTOW waiting for others or waiting for myself, but always looking for it. MGTOW is not a movement to change the world, it is a practice to reveal the individual male to himself, it changes the man that remains and endures. That changes the world.

    Of course this in and of itself is an imagined narrative of storytelling if you will. There are no facts or statistics…. just a feeling. Possibly a transcendent feeling even if all it transcends is the pejorative.

  11. Gynocentric attitudes are so deeply embedded in the minds of many their really isn’t anything I can think to do anymore, I’ve stopped trying to arrogantly enlighten men and women of just how gynocentric we really are, because most don’t want to hear it. My opinion is such that I think with big change comes pain and most people don’t want to deal with the “Pain of Change”.

    Hence, I am trying to live out the rest of my days peacefully as a single man doing what I want, when I want, and how I want. I will love my children the best I know how, I will love my dog the best I know how, I try to help other men that really need it while placing ZERO expectations on them. I really like the definition of a Zeta Male >>> Zeta males consciously reject the traditional social position as it is based on how they are valued by women or gynocentric attitudes. Therefore does that make me a MRA or a MGTOW ? Personally I don’t give a rip, because after I post this rant I’m going to walk the dog, get a sandwich at the deli, take a shower and head into work, while I’m doing all that if I run across a women that asks for my assistance for just about anything I will as politely as I can say: “You’re an adult, figure it out”.

    1. Gynisentrism is in the biology. It is never going to change. That is why the MRA’s efforts is hopeless. The only way to make some change is to your own life, by checking out of it all.

  12. My apologies for the below essay. I am a diatribe waffler as you all know. And no, I am not trying to ignite a religious debate. I simply want to make a point about historical MGTOW.

    After all this time that MGTOWs and the new and improved MHRM, have existed, there are still those who believe MGTOW is a movement or a group.

    MGTOW, is simply a description of a practice adopted by men….zeta males if you want to use that term, where they have decided to disengage from society’s main demands, which we all know are highly gynocentric and chivalrous. These men who adopt this practice and are mature and honest as well, have no affiliation with others. They have made their rule book simple and very private and will keep it close to their chests, because they are not interested in having others join them or being forced to join others.

    There is no such thing as a group or movement called MGTOW!

    If any of you come across such an organised body, then turn and walk away, because it is yet another ideological group trying to establish their control over men by setting rules and condition upon their shoulders. Yes, just another yoke to put around their necks. Any man following these ideologues, IS NOT A MAN GOING HIS OWN WAY!

    Like Karl Dawg writes below, I too will remain as is, running my own race. I will give my children all I can of me, but will not bow to their gynocentric or chivalrous demands, should they ever have any expectations in that area.

    And the same as Karl, I am not going to assist a woman in a task she is very much capable of doing. And that would be just about everything! They have arms, legs and a brain just like me, but so we are now led to believe, they are far more capable than I am, so they simply do not need my assistance.

    Oh and I hate to burst anyone’s bubble here either, but I do have to say this. You can be with a woman and be a MGTOW. Yep, if you have a woman who shares your MGTOW dna, does not expect a chivalrous response from you and both are on board with abjuring from society’s gynocentric impositions, then how can they not be?

    MGTOW is a state of mind for the individual, it is not a set of rules as set down in any Canon that exists on this planet!

    I find it interesting that after all this time there are still people out there trying to categorise or corral MGTOW. I hate to disappoint you all, but it is never going to happen. True MGTOWs are off doing their own thing, WITHOUT any rules and they will not bow to your instructions.

    To the contrary though, MGTOWs will never fully escape this gynocentric and chivalrous society if they choose to remain living within it. We can only control our own behaviour and attitudes, but in reality, there are far more powerful people out there and at some point they will impose their will upon us using force.
    If that happens, then so be it. Being someone who is treated this way, doesn’t mean you have to capitulate. Do what you have to do to survive, but remain true to yourself.

    And another thing I reject outright. MGTOW is not in direct conflict with ones Faith. I am a traditional Catholic and I (try) to follow the tenets of my Faith from well over a thousand years ago. I do not subscribe to the Freemason Owned Vatican II Church that exists in Rome today. This church is filled with mafia, pedophiles and all manner of criminals, plus it has been under the rule of 6 Antipopes since 1958.

    As Catholics have always been instructed since the days of Our Lord, we must decide for ourselves if we trust the Pastor who is preaching to us. If we believe he is speaking evil, then we are to turn and walk away, even to shake the sand from our sandals. We are protected under Canon law (Church Law) to make such a determination, providing we remain faithful to Christ and continue to practice our Faith.

    These decisions are wholly inline with being MGTOW.

    All the men who for the past 2,000 years have walked away from their communities and found themselves in countries all over the globe working for their Faith, are also men who could be considered as MGTOW. These men were often not Priests, but became Monks or Brothers. They rejected the gynocentric world and the evil of chivalry.

    If you look at old Monastic communities, women were forced to uphold their end of the work bargain, or they suffered the consequences. Back in those days, chivalry was more of an unspoken and hidden construct that only ever came out during a time of darkness or a serious event. And chivalry was practiced by both men and women!

    I believe MGTOWs have been around for a long time. We aren’t inventing the wheel here. We are simply re-invigorating a ‘practice’ that has been in place with strong honourable men for thousands of years. These men never allow themselves to be degraded by women and they end up becoming the strongest pillars of any society they live in.

    Let us not try to compartmentalise MGTOWs in any way at all. To do such a thing is wrong and to place the term MGTOW and group or organisation within the same sentence, is indeed an oxymoron!

    1. You touch on a number of points indicative of individual struggle towards self definition. In contemplating my own observations of MGTOW I have recognized differing states of expression; adaptive states and natural states. Adaptive states seem to me to express more masculine tension, like a rubber band being stretched and released. I view them as a progression of liminal eventualities, cyclical masculinity, predictable; somewhat like a gynocentric recipe of result. Whereas a natural state seems to me to be more of a heuristic masculinity, more primal, present and somewhat unpredictable. I’ve had the honor of meeting such men and to be honest I couldn’t tell if they were happy or sad, single or married, rich or poor, gay or straight. But there certainly was one distinction I could see……….they went their own way.

    2. I am glad to see you touched on the topic of Faith, it almost seems taboo to speak it around this forum. Their are several biblical verses that brought me peace about going my own way, I’m not going into detail, but I will simply say our current gynocentric society is not and was not part of GOD’s plan. In my opinion “Faith” is not feeling, it is knowledge … Let me illustrate what I mean.

      Suppose I’m standing on the edge of a lake during the first cold weeks of winter in the Northeastern part of America. The lake is frozen over with a very thin sheet of ice. Being filled with faith and confidence I take a step to walk across the newly formed layer of ice. Unfortunately, even though I am extremely confident and “full of faith” the result would be a cold, wet shock. As long as the ice is thin, it doesn’t matter how much faith I have. The ice is not reliable.
      Now imagine a few months later, after the cold winter has taken effect. The ice is now several feet thick as I stand at the edge of the lake. Because of my past experience, I’m extremely cautious as I think about walking across the ice. I’m not sure whether the ice will hold me. After all, it didn’t before. Even though I’m frightened and have “less faith” than I did before, the smallest most hesitating step will be rewarded by the feeling of a firm footing. What’s the difference?
      The object is more reliable.
      It’s true that the power of faith rests in the reliability of the object. However…
      The degree of faith one places in an object is directly proportional to the knowledge of the object.

      My point is the interesting change in my life … I blindly believed (had faith) in our society that I was doing the right thing, as I began to be torn by the things I believed (gynocentric and chivalrous ways) I began to lose faith in them. After many years of being beaten, raped, ridiculed, and laughed at for simply being a man, I began to pull myself out of the swamp and went on a quest to find the truth … I found several things >>> Angry Harry >>> then AVFM >>> and somewhere in there was GOD screaming at me saying “Here I am”.

      I now have a different faith ……..

  13. Addressing cultural change of narrative let me start by saying I generally watch CBS news. That’s because I like my liberal bias straight, not watered down.

    So when the Trump administration — explicitly Secretary De Vos — rescinded the order that colleges dig up assaults which must be there, CBS filmed a demonstration of feminists solidly chanting, (I have my TV turn on the CBS morning show because I do like their “Your World in 90 Seconds”.)

    “HEY HEY. HO HO.

    Not a surprise from CBS news. Then they pulled the camera back and showed it was only a dozen demonstrators. I never expected a CBS editor to allow that.

  14. You or anybody else is never going to change gynocentrism Paul. And that is all that you need to know that the MRA’s can never change mens rights in any significant way.

        1. Those things men had as rights once, the majority of which were actually responsibilities and often times burdensome!

          1. Feminists talk about ‘male privilege’ but they don’t quite realize the burden of responsibility it comes with… is that what you mean?

          2. Feminists are not only liars they are also idiots. Never in the history of Mankind has there ever been such a thing as “Male Privilege.”

            Men and women have always had their own roles to play, even from the beginning of time. And it was mostly gynocentric in its purest and most innocent form.

            There have never been privileges. All had responsibilities.

            Problem is, we came into the industrial age and women started agitating and demanding to have what they saw rich men having. Mind you, these women were also fairly well off too and didn’t want for much. They saw whatever men were able to do that women were not able to do, as a privilege, when in fact it was all pretty much responsibilities and most of it burdensome.

            Women have never suffered to the same extent as men. And that is in the general community. So anything women have been given that benefits them, is a privilege in its purest form and it is something they do not deserve, nor can society afford to keep giving them these privileges.

            Women have had all their responsibilities removed or forgiven, whilst men have had more responsibilities placed upon their shoulders.

            This house of cards the femtards built, is in the process of crashing down as we speak.

        2. I don’t entirely agree with that. One of the ways we assert our rights is to enact systems of government which are designed to help us protect our rights, since asserting and protecting our rights is much easier to do collectively than individually. However millions have died attempting to do so. They didn’t surrender their rights voluntarily, and though many surrendered their lives voluntarily, many were forced. Giving in to extreme coercion is stretching the definition of “voluntary surrender.”

          1. I see what you mean: surrendering a “right” at gun point is not really voluntary… although one could in theory still choose to come back with a gun of your own… and the we would be back to “law of the jungle”.

    1. I find it amusing when people come here making statements such as yours. Gynocentrism has been around since year dot, but since its beginnings, it has morphed into something different a few times.

      Recently it has turned into a cancerous sister to chivalry where the two somehow were joined together as one large cancerous lump, causing the enslavement of men and in many cases the destruction of masculinity, but the annihilation of the innocence of children.

      This last period of change in Gynocentrism was effected by women. Hateful spineless greedy women. And not just feminists either. Feminists could not have achieved their goals without a large number of the female population supporting them. Plus many male supporters as well.

      So knowing that this social construct has been altered by women, who by the way happen to be human beings, in case you hadn’t noticed, then I would say it is not actually a big stretch of the imagination at all to see men in the MHRM effect some changes of their own.

      One of the ways we will do this, is by tossing a Stinger on the road in front of this juggernaut that the femtards and their supporters have created and blowing all 4 of its tires. Then it will skid out of control until it crashes and burns.

      And whether you like it or not, the stinger has been deployed and the tires have been popped. The stinger is represented by the greatest expansion of an online community in my memory of any organised group for a very long time, which is AVfM and its affiliates, the inception of the ICMI conferences, but the sharp points on the spikes are represented by The Red Pill movie and the huge numbers of WOMEN and men who now follow Cassie Jaye.

      Don’tcha just love it when someone sticks a knife into the ribs of an areshole and takes them by surprise. It’s such a sight to behold!

      Now we just sit back and wait to see where this filthy thing lands, so we can run over and take its rabid head off and permanently kill the beast.

      Then let us see what kind of society will emerge, knowing full well that there is a very large group of men who want nothing to do with women. I would think there would be a lot of women eating humble pie at that stage and all the ‘menginas’ will slink into the shadows, lest they be identified by the MEN who will dominate that period shoulder to shoulder with strong minded determined WOMEN.

      Won’t be any infant girlie syndrome in those days and no girlie mans either!

  15. The topic of Faith almost seems taboo to speak around this forum. Their are several biblical verses that brought me peace about going my own way, I’m not going into detail, but I will simply say our current gynocentric society is not and was not part of GOD’s plan. In my opinion “Faith” is not feeling, it is knowledge … Let me illustrate what I mean.

    Suppose I’m standing on the edge of a lake during the first cold weeks of winter in the Northeastern part of America. The lake is frozen over with a very thin sheet of ice. Being filled with faith and confidence I take a step to walk across the newly formed layer of ice. Unfortunately, even though I am extremely confident and “full of faith” the result would be a cold, wet shock. As long as the ice is thin, it doesn’t matter how much faith I have. The ice is not reliable. Now imagine a few months later, after the cold winter has taken effect. The ice is now several feet thick as I stand at the edge of the lake. Because of my past experience, I’m extremely cautious as I think about walking across the ice. I’m not sure whether the ice will hold me. After all, it didn’t before. Even though I’m frightened and have “less
    faith” than I did before, the smallest most hesitating step will be rewarded by the feeling of a firm footing. What’s the difference?
    The object is more reliable.
    It’s true that the power of faith rests in the reliability of the object. However…
    The degree of faith one places in an object is directly proportional to the knowledge of the object.

    My point is the interesting change in my life … I blindly believed (had faith) in our society that I was doing the right thing, as I began to be torn by the things I believed (gynocentric and chivalrous ways) I began to lose faith in them. After many years of figuratively being beaten and raped (there’s more then one type of rape) and literally being ridiculed and laughed at for simply being a man, I began to pull myself out of the swamp and went on a quest to find the truth … I found several things >>> Angry Harry >>> then AVFM >>> and somewhere in there was GOD screaming at me saying “Here I am”.

    I now have a different faith ……..

    1. Karl, I don’t think they have an issue with discussing Faith as such, providing it falls within the realms of the article.

      Religious debate, as with political debate, is not tolerated, because it is so divisive and AVfM would self destruct within a few months if they let it happen. For the sake of keeping this place alive so that all men of all walks of life can come here to talk freely, we must keep these forms of debates off the site.

      There are indeed many other places to go and argue the toss over religion if that is what rocks someone’s boat. I have no inclination to argue religion, because I am secure within my own beliefs and am not interested in questioning it. My beliefs fit perfectly with what I find here. Sure, not all the rough language and many statements, do I agree with, but it is after all only spoken out of frustration and hurt, by men who are no better or worse than myself.

      One thing most people do get hung up on with regard the word ‘faith,’ is that they fail to fully understand what it actually means.

      Most people who come here actually have strong faith in what is being done by Paul and his wonderful staff. All that AVfM has achieve to date, has been achieved through faith and nothing else. If no one had any faith that anything could be achieved through the work that these people had been doing, then nothing would have happened.

      The scenario you described above, is something Paul and the rest of his crew have been saying to us for a long time now. They haven’t included a ‘faith’ component, because that is purely for the individual, but each of us must travel our own path and establish our own moral values.

      Thank you for expressing yours.

  16. Why can’t everyone just be equal, as it should be? Back in the day, women had no rights but men did. Now women have all the rights and men are getting trampled on. We need to balance it out now and be fair to EVERYONE.

    1. You’re half right and half wrong. You are mistaken in your assertion that back in the day women had no rights. Women had many rights, but some of those rights were different from the rights men had. Now women not only have all the same rights as men, but we still keep many that men never had. You are correct however, in that we do need to balance it out. We can start by debunking the lies told by feminists – like that whopper about women having no rights.

      1. I am not mistaken. Women were treated like children. That means they had very little rights, including no rights to own land or even vote. I think you need to read up on your history a little bit.

        1. Bullshit. There have been very few places where women were forbidden either. Most of the women who “couldn’t” own property, were married and “their” property was legally owned by the head of the family – you know, the only person in the family who could be forced to pay debts and taxes. However even married women owned property independently. There were men who went to debtors’ prison because they couldn’t afford to pay the taxes on their wives’ property. Why? Because married women were not required to pay taxes. Single women OTOH, who owned property and businesses, DID pay taxes. They also paid debts (yes they had credit, yes they were full fledged guild members.) And except in rare cases they also voted. They also held political office.

          You see, voting was not a universal right; it was a privilege to be earned. If you didn’t pay taxes, you didn’t vote on how the government spent taxes. There was a time in history when this concept made perfect sense. Does the phrase “taxation without representation” ring a bell in your mind? Perhaps from grade school history class? What do you suppose it means? Maybe that taxpayers wanted a say in how their taxes were spent? Do you suppose that might have been one of the reasons that taxpayers created new governments in which taxpayers were the ones who voted?

          Women were not treated like children. Women were treated like dependents, because most women WERE dependents. Women saw how hard life was for most “independent” women, and they not only chose dependence, they created and refined the terms of that dependence. They also taught said terms to their children of both sexes, passing them on to future generations. Back before government safety nets, and before working outside the home was as safe and comfortable as working inside the home, most women understood from daily experience that the only thing standing between them and very real privation, was the husbands, fathers, brothers and sons, on whom they were grateful to depend.

          You have clearly been well “educated” by feminists, which means you have been meticulously indoctrinated with factoids that have been removed from their historical context. Said factoids have then been cobbled together into a half assed narrative that paints women as victims of oppression, and paints men as oppressors.

          1. Of course it is. Her brain shut down and shattered with the phrase “bloody women.” The Nice Feminists are the most fragile of all. Imagine how painful it must be for them to reconcile their good intentions with the lies they have been living. They sincerely believe they’e coming from a position of virtue. What a shock it must be to discover that they’ve been holding themselves above men all their lives and they don’t even know it.

          2. The silly thing about it was, where I said “bloody women,” it wasn’t even an attack on women in general either. It was simply an expression of frustration that for too long, EVEN in my own personal life, we men have had to give way to women and carry the social burden for women. So it was and is an expression of fatigue and frustration.
            Like, “that bloody car. I have spent so much money on the damn thing and yet it still costs me more!”

            Maybe I could have positioned it better within the sentence or paragraph, but then, I still think it would have triggered her?

            She came here to wag her finger and pick a fight. If she was genuine, she would have seen all the other stuff I wrote in my first response to her and she would have ignored the ‘bloody women.’

          3. Yes! But you know what is so sad about all that you said, which by the way is so true, so many innocent children and men who should have never been abused, have suffered so terribly, but worse still, the future for girls and women is looking more and more bleak as time goes on, simply because of exactly what you have said. They just cannot see that they are wrong. It’s like the Communists or the Nazis or Jim Jones (Jones town massacre) has brainwashed them so effectively that nothing else in this world is right anymore, save for what lies in their heads.

            That level of brainwashing makes me feel sick to the stomach and I actually do feel sorry for them.

          4. Yes dear. Of course dear. It’s always an attack when someone disagrees with you, isn’t it? So much easier than coming up with a cogent argument, right? Yes, we know. We’ve known your sort for a long time.

    2. Hahahahaha.. Men had rights and women didn’t. Hahahahhahahahahahhahaha. What a silly joke. It was a joke wasn’t it?

      Men had no more rights than women did. You should do some research and learn a bit more about history. Back in the day when men could do more things financially and women were inhibited, it was mostly about responsibility. Men had all the responsibilities and women had almost none.

      Funny thing is, I actually agree with you. It was wrong to place all that burden onto men only!

      I agree, women should have had he same financial rights as men, plus the same responsibilities. Problem is, when women were given the same rights, plus a whole host of other rights and privileges men have never had, they were not equally endowed with the responsibilities that come with so many privileges. Men are still carrying the can for bloody women.

      Time to change things and bring in true equality. And that means all you women must be fully responsible for everything you do and say and be punished as harshly as men are as well.

      I’m glad for one thing though. You have recognised the need to bring in a true equality. Good for you. Now go spread that around all your female friends and tell them that this is the way it should be.

      EDIT: Oh and tell your male friends too, because too many men are as bad or worse than feminists!

        1. Hahaha. No just sick of carrying the can for women. And I see your response to Suzy below. You apparently think you know more about history than Suzy.

          So tell me, when was it that men could vote and women couldn’t?
          Do you really know or are you just here to spruik feminist factoids?

          1. And…….?

            Do you think you are posting something I don’t know or have never seen?
            By the way, where I live, men were never allowed to vote either, but when they were, women were given the same privileges as men just 6 years later, but without any responsibility to the nation.

            Do you believe women should have had the ‘RIGHT’ to vote, when it is actually a privilege?

            Do you believe women should have the ‘privilege’ to vote without being forced to hand over their life for the good of their country?
            I certainly don’t think women should have the right, unless they are prepared to sign up for selective service and be eligible for the draft in times of war.

            Like I said, men have carried the can for you bloody women far too long. It is now time for you to grow up and take responsibility for your actions and behaviour. And you are correct, women have been treated like children, which mostly happens because the majority of women act and behave like children.

            Time to change all that. We need to see women forced to live in the same manner men are forced to live. Made to work in the same filthy dangerous industries men are forced to work in. Made to go to war to be blown to pieces, the same as men are forced to.

            Should I go on? Are you really that foolish that you would come here and argue a stupid point about poor bloody women when it is an absolute fact that women throughout all human history have never suffered to the same degree as men have?

            You lot have been inhibited and prevented from having certain rights and privileges in the past, which as I have stated I disagree with. However, knowing just how much women have all but destroyed our western culture with their selfish demands on govt, their out of control consumerism where natural resources are under a heavy burden, I can only wonder if it may have been a good thing that you lot were prevented from having access to financial and political decisions.

            Maybe I’m right and maybe I’m wrong, but either way, it doesn’t look good for you women!

        2. Oh and one last comment on this post. Out of all that I said, all you could see were the words, “bloody women.”
          I find that very interesting. You are obviously a feminist and you are here to wag your finger. Silly girl!

          1. I came here stating only the truth. Women were mistreated in the past, now men are being mistreated and it needs to balance out for all. Period. You insulting me proves you need help and don’t deserve my attention. Bye.

          2. Sure women were mistreated in the past. However there is no place or time in history were women as a class were mistreated BY men, or MORE than men. In fact human history is packed with examples of women (as a class/because they were women) being protected from mistreatment. Most effectively by men.

            Your statement, “Women were mistreated in the past,” is lacking in logical context, and is therefore essentially meaningless.

          3. Excuse me, I never insulted you. I never said a word to you that could ever be misconstrued as being a personal attack on you. Until that is you called me a woman hater. Even then I have been respectful.

            I used a non-descriptive “Bloody Women” and it triggered you to then attack me personally.

            If you are going to play the victim card, for crying out loud, at least get your story right!

    3. It’s very hard to tell if you’re being ingenuous or not. You look very young, so it’s possible you are being sincere (as opposed to accurate). But I would like to address one salient point.

      Young women as a population in the West these days are so sheltered and/or brainwashed that some of them seem actually confused that young men don’t want to marry. Such women can’t, simply cannot be putting themselves in their male counterparts’ shoes for a second. Take one silly little look at what Marriage to a contemporary womyn would feasibly have to offer anything that has parts that have to be made room for on a train. And then consider that most Western wymyn want to deny them even that.

      Do you see where this goes?

      1. Thanks for the compliment, lol. I’m 44 and have 3 kids, one who is an adult now. I’m not young, and that photo is only a couple of years old so yay! 🙂 But anyway, yes I totally understand how men are being mistreated and that’s what I said already. I saw it years ago, men being belittled on tv sitcoms, being portrayed as if they were all bumbling fools and idiots. It upset me, the day I realized it.

        The thing is, this article was hinting as if women were never treated wrongly in the past and yes they were.

        My point is just what I said – we can’t be one way or the other, but everyone realize we’re all just humans and we all deserve respect, regardless of sex, color, faith, etc. The only thing that one should be judged on is behavior.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *