TarantulaHawk
Banned
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2014
- Messages
- 191
- Reaction score
- 10
- Age
- 39
I'm not the only one who uses common sense in seeing Men "Going Their Own Way" A.K.A MGTOW is a cult and there is a specific poster on SS trying to recruit disgruntled men.
Face it, MGTOW is a Cult: Rocking Mr. E
There is nothing of greater importance in a just world than holding oneself to the same standards as one expects from others. In the case of the MRM the hypocrisy is rife in this sense. They understand the dangerous generalizations that come with feminist philosophy regarding male nature, but are far less inclined to see it right under their noses in the case of a cult within the MRM, known as Men Going Their Own Way, shortened to the acronym MGTOW.
Most in the MRM understand that feminists are enablers of misandric policies and theories, used as a justification to label all men as either direct or indirect beneficiaries of male power. This leads to consequentialist values that deem all men as deserving of punishment, regardless of how complicit they are. Either they are directly involved in oppressing women, or they are indirectly benefiting. Why make a distinction between the two given that both are living off the suffering of women? To some feminists this behavior is inherent to male nature, while those claiming to be moderates feel they are tolerant because they see this behavior as something that hurts men too, though still define masculinity as the root problem.
This thinking is driven from a leftist interpretation of struggle. Marx called it class consciousness. The theory is that an entire class suffers due to the tyrannical rule of the oppressive class. The consciousness of the oppressed class will eventually unite them, leading to the overthrowing of the oppressive class. Like everything Marx postulated this is highly simplistic, and a theory that appeals to the ego of the victim class, while de-humanising the oppressive class. This is called ‘othering’ in psychological circles, which perpetuates different standards for those in the group, to those outside it. Those in the group are subject to conditioning that fosters supremacy over anyone that doesn’t belong in the circle, and those outside the circle are deemed inferior, and deserving of scorn due to the shortcomings of their oppressive nature and values. This entire process is called groupthink. It was endemic in 20th century totalitarianism. Whether it was Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, both worked to foster such demagoguery, and inevitably a strong man later emerged to take charge and lead the group to utopia. The useful idiots then got more than they bargained for.
MGTOW are a carbon copy of feminism. This fit is so snug that leftists are flocking to the MGTOW banner, already accustomed to reinterpreting class struggle to different groups, be it race, sex, sexuality, or economic class. MGTOW believe that men have historically been kept down by women through obligations to protect and provide for them, and the entire system has been shaped for their benefit. By appealing to the ego of MGTOW, painting them as a victim class, this sets up the climate for groupthink. Pseudo-intellectual theories, backed by nothing but conjecture, are rife within MGTOW circles, deeming women as parasitic and incapable of virtue. Any exceptions to this rule are somehow dismissed, through talking points, as either a statistical anomaly or a case where the woman has not yet taken advantage of the man in her life. Chief among MGTOW pseudo- intellectualism is Brifault’s law, a communist no less. It’s therefore unsurprising that class consciousness is central to his thesis, and has thus become endemic within MGTOW circles.
MGTOW constantly redefine terminology and facts to suit their outlook, thus gradually building up the mythology of oppressive female nature. The acronym ‘NAWALT’ (not all women are like that) was originally created to counter the deflection that women are not all like that, when it is used by feminist apologists to side line any arguments that oppose feminist hegemony. It was supposed to indicate that while all women are not like that, this does not excuse the fact that many women can and will take advantage of men. This runs counter to the feminist notion that masculinity is the problem, not femininity. Even when feminists acknowledge that some women are part of the problem, somehow the ‘problem’ always comes back to masculine nature or values. MGTOW have appropriated this term to suggest that ‘all women are like that’, using this as a deflection against anyone that challenges their fatalistic interpretation of female nature and intent.
Even the acronym MGTOW has been appropriated in this fashion. It was originally a term that had nothing to do with fatalistic female nature and class consciousness, and certainly not the marriage and relationship strike now compulsory to the participation in the MGTOW cult. The website mgtowhistory.com shows that MGTOW was originally an outline to encourage masculinity in men, femininity in women, limited government, and personal responsibility. None of those things are acceptable to the leftist interpretation of MGTOW however.
Today MGTOW is centered on a denial of objective morality, and a total fixation on self-gratification. This is called egotism (a form of narcissism) and is why I often call MGTOW nihilists. Many MGTOW will openly acknowledge their adoration of Nietzsche, who is the quintessential nihilist, no matter what some philosophers might say - anyone that rejects values in nature, deeming all worth to be centered on individual perspective and desire is, by definition, a nihilist. It’s for this reason that leftists are all nihilists. They act as though nothing matters when shaping their reality, whether it’s socially engineering a utopia, or living like nothing matters except personal desire.
Face it, MGTOW is a Cult: Rocking Mr. E
There is nothing of greater importance in a just world than holding oneself to the same standards as one expects from others. In the case of the MRM the hypocrisy is rife in this sense. They understand the dangerous generalizations that come with feminist philosophy regarding male nature, but are far less inclined to see it right under their noses in the case of a cult within the MRM, known as Men Going Their Own Way, shortened to the acronym MGTOW.
Most in the MRM understand that feminists are enablers of misandric policies and theories, used as a justification to label all men as either direct or indirect beneficiaries of male power. This leads to consequentialist values that deem all men as deserving of punishment, regardless of how complicit they are. Either they are directly involved in oppressing women, or they are indirectly benefiting. Why make a distinction between the two given that both are living off the suffering of women? To some feminists this behavior is inherent to male nature, while those claiming to be moderates feel they are tolerant because they see this behavior as something that hurts men too, though still define masculinity as the root problem.
This thinking is driven from a leftist interpretation of struggle. Marx called it class consciousness. The theory is that an entire class suffers due to the tyrannical rule of the oppressive class. The consciousness of the oppressed class will eventually unite them, leading to the overthrowing of the oppressive class. Like everything Marx postulated this is highly simplistic, and a theory that appeals to the ego of the victim class, while de-humanising the oppressive class. This is called ‘othering’ in psychological circles, which perpetuates different standards for those in the group, to those outside it. Those in the group are subject to conditioning that fosters supremacy over anyone that doesn’t belong in the circle, and those outside the circle are deemed inferior, and deserving of scorn due to the shortcomings of their oppressive nature and values. This entire process is called groupthink. It was endemic in 20th century totalitarianism. Whether it was Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, both worked to foster such demagoguery, and inevitably a strong man later emerged to take charge and lead the group to utopia. The useful idiots then got more than they bargained for.
MGTOW are a carbon copy of feminism. This fit is so snug that leftists are flocking to the MGTOW banner, already accustomed to reinterpreting class struggle to different groups, be it race, sex, sexuality, or economic class. MGTOW believe that men have historically been kept down by women through obligations to protect and provide for them, and the entire system has been shaped for their benefit. By appealing to the ego of MGTOW, painting them as a victim class, this sets up the climate for groupthink. Pseudo-intellectual theories, backed by nothing but conjecture, are rife within MGTOW circles, deeming women as parasitic and incapable of virtue. Any exceptions to this rule are somehow dismissed, through talking points, as either a statistical anomaly or a case where the woman has not yet taken advantage of the man in her life. Chief among MGTOW pseudo- intellectualism is Brifault’s law, a communist no less. It’s therefore unsurprising that class consciousness is central to his thesis, and has thus become endemic within MGTOW circles.
MGTOW constantly redefine terminology and facts to suit their outlook, thus gradually building up the mythology of oppressive female nature. The acronym ‘NAWALT’ (not all women are like that) was originally created to counter the deflection that women are not all like that, when it is used by feminist apologists to side line any arguments that oppose feminist hegemony. It was supposed to indicate that while all women are not like that, this does not excuse the fact that many women can and will take advantage of men. This runs counter to the feminist notion that masculinity is the problem, not femininity. Even when feminists acknowledge that some women are part of the problem, somehow the ‘problem’ always comes back to masculine nature or values. MGTOW have appropriated this term to suggest that ‘all women are like that’, using this as a deflection against anyone that challenges their fatalistic interpretation of female nature and intent.
Even the acronym MGTOW has been appropriated in this fashion. It was originally a term that had nothing to do with fatalistic female nature and class consciousness, and certainly not the marriage and relationship strike now compulsory to the participation in the MGTOW cult. The website mgtowhistory.com shows that MGTOW was originally an outline to encourage masculinity in men, femininity in women, limited government, and personal responsibility. None of those things are acceptable to the leftist interpretation of MGTOW however.
Today MGTOW is centered on a denial of objective morality, and a total fixation on self-gratification. This is called egotism (a form of narcissism) and is why I often call MGTOW nihilists. Many MGTOW will openly acknowledge their adoration of Nietzsche, who is the quintessential nihilist, no matter what some philosophers might say - anyone that rejects values in nature, deeming all worth to be centered on individual perspective and desire is, by definition, a nihilist. It’s for this reason that leftists are all nihilists. They act as though nothing matters when shaping their reality, whether it’s socially engineering a utopia, or living like nothing matters except personal desire.
