So over on MGTOWforums — the festering hive of misogyny that is the internet’s largest forum for so-called Men Going Their Own Way — one of the regulars was so impressed with the Evo-Psychy insights of a YouTube commenter by the name of Moe that he decided to share them with the gang there. And I have decided to share them with you.
Brace yourself, though, because Moe is bringing some hardcore SCIENCE to the topics of feminism being awful and why women are such terrible selfish child-murdering monsters.
Moe starts off with some MGTOW basics:
Feminism is a natural development of women’s desire to hate, manipulate, exploit, and discriminate against men for women’s personal gain.
Yes, Moe, but why?
Women do not and cannot love men.
Dang. That’s rough.
Women only like gathering stuff, because they are biologically driven to gather as much stuff as possible. Women actually get an emotional rush from buying stuff and receiving stuff. They do not get the same rush from creating, achieving, or earning stuff.
Oh, because cavewomen were gatherers! You can’t argue with SCIENCE like that. Mostly because it isn’t science. It’s just words arranged in such a way that they sound vaguely like science to people who have no idea what science is.
Women see men as their competitors (advisories) and providers of resources. This all means women have an amorality similar to lower evolved animals that steal or do anything possible to procure resources.
Uh, so pretty much all animals then? I mean, evolutionarily speaking, animals basically need to do two things: they need to survive and reproduce, and eating is sort of essential to the first task.
Also, if you’re trying to relate womens’ interest in buying things with their role as gatherers in hunter-gatherer societies, wouldn’t that mean that men would be similarly interested in killing and eating stuff? How is killing and eating animals any less amoral than, you know, picking berries?
The government provides them with an opportunity to force employers, all men, their men (yes they like to cuckold), education institutions, and even other women to provide for them.
Wait, how did we get from gathering to cuckolding?
IMO Many women do not feel the need to have children. When big daddy government will take care of women from birth to death, then women will have less or no child(ren). Children were just an old age policy for women: something to use when their man-slave dropped dead.
Yeah, women carefully arranged all that pregnancy and childbirth stuff with Mother Nature — also a woman! — so they’d have children and grandchildren to sponge off of.
Women also used to practice infanticide overwhelmingly on little girls throughout history, because those little girls provided less future utility (use) to the the woman. Also boys are easier to manipulate and will be needed asap if their man-slaves drops dead quickly.
So, killing girls is actually a form of discrimination against … men.
The modern divorce laws in western nations also allow women to get the greatest utility from the ex-husband through holding the child(ren) hostage, while having multiple new men to exploit for even more resources and other benefits. This is the reason for the high divorce rate. Women do not want or need men, and given the option they will be happier acquiring more stuff from government, multiple men, and the babies daddy.
Never mind that welfare payments are dinky and that roughly 30% of custodial mothers don’t receive any of the child support money they’re owed.
The real fatal flaw of feminism, all women doing this in mass creates a situation where the population declines, while the welfare system increases. These women are illogical, because they just assume: men will continue to put up with their shit … .
Oh, dear. Is the apocalypse near at hand? I have the strange feeling that the apocalypse is near at hand.
Well, welcome to the new reality women: almost 25% of you will never be married. Discriminating against men pisses them off and drives them from education and work, so your hypergamous needs will be unfulfilled. The single men will produce less, so the government will receive less. Employers will leave the country, in order to flee high regulations, taxation, and lower productivity female employees.
And here it comes, right on schedule!
Women have less desire to produce as much as men, so they are inefficient employees in comparison. Lower standards and female accommodations also lower business productivity, and increase costs.
Oh no! Damn those lazy women.
Hey, while you’re at it, can you work lazy brown people into the mix somehow?
The government will increase immigration, because it needs more slaves to pay the growing women’s needs, but the new slaves are of a different culture that does not value the 40-60 hour week westernize male slave system. Also, the immigrants will take full advantage of your welfare system more so than the natives.
Thanks! Misogyny and racism, two great tastes that taste great together!
Welcome to a diminishing economy, where less men will give a shit about women. Your wants will increase, but the resources will decrease. Haha I am going to love seeing the world turn to shit in the next few years!
Well, I guess we can’t argue with SCIENCE.
Yeah, he’s a pillock. I had a few go round with him when he was saying it’s up to the women to make it plain to one and all that they aren’t interested, or everyone must assume they want it.
And then made all sorts of exception to what constitutes a no. I think about the only thing he was willing to cop to as definite enough was calling the cops, or pulling out a gun.
Then again, he tried to call me an unhinged loon, unable to reason because of PTSD, so I may be treating him less charitably then he deserves.
Well, no, I’m not, I’m being more generous than the facile douchbro merits. If it were my blog, he’d have been bounced years ago.
RE: Unimaginative
The thing that struck me was that Steve Jobs was such a raging control freak that he thought he could decide how everyone else gets to spend their money.
I am completely unsurprised. Everything I’ve read of Jobs made him sound like someone I would NOT want to ever have a beer with. At least freakin’ Nintendo, when sales went down, axed the executives’ salaries under the assumption that it wasn’t the common laborer’s fault that income was low.
He stated, during the US government shutdown, that he wanted federal employees to be punished for choosing to be employed by the government, because he doesn’t approve of government (paraphrasing).
The fuck? Why would you punish workers, a lot of whom are not wealthy and are LACKING power? My aunt is a nutritionist for Veteran’s Affairs… you know, the woman who pays house-calls to doddering old WWII vets with cancer to make sure they’re getting enough protein? She makes decent money, but she’s taking care of our vulnerable and aged, and she’s pretty solidly middle-class. What the HELL, dudes? Why would you punish HER for taking care of vulnerable people?
::sporfle:: He’d have no survival skills in that world and would fail as a kept man ‘cos he hasn’t the entertainment value …
Ah yes, the Pillock. How could I forget that PoS. I knew rape apologism was the thing there.
Heck, if there was a way to signal disinterest that everyone would honor I don’t know if there’s a person alive who wouldn’t be happy to use it. I hear of some single women using false wedding rings during conventions and such to keep the noise down and the general report is even that doesn’t help much.
Because she’s not exhibiting the Virtue of Selfishness…which, as any raving Randroid Galt-goer will tell you, is the ONLY virtue. Those guys are the economic equivalent of Satanists.
This whole thing is a lot funnier for those of us who know what moe means in anime/manga terms. Sad that you can’t find the big eyed, submissive waif of your dreams, dude? Shame.
@shayla
Of course, the reason they use that as a threat is because of the entirely false world view they hold. Because they have latched to this inane idea that marriage is some kind of resource leeching woman engage in, and simultaneously a gift from the “big strong producing men”, because woman somehow have no other way of supporting themselves, They literally think they are cutting off woman’s lifeline by refusing to get married. Its why the MGTOW think somehow their idea is supposed to be an insult, and why they think its going to ruin the world if they pull it off. Its pretty lame when you realize they have no connection to reality, to the point that they think they are being threatening with what sounds like a non sequitur to anyone not steeped in their world view.
In other words, they are using threats that make no sense to anyone who doesn’t apply to their philosophy… Probably because they assume everyone “knows the truth”, but doesn’t admit it. (because men are being cowardly and putting on a show for the woman, And because the Woman are playing innocent I guess?)
Ugh. its so very foolish.
Pollock has a retort for that; she might be poly, or just using it as a ruse, so even being told, “this us my spouse/partner/boyfriend/husband/girlfriend” may be no more than informational; heck it might be an invitation to a threesome.
Yeah, a piece of work he is.
I’ve never been to a convention (praise Ceiling Cat) but even having the ring and mentioning My. Husband. doesn’t make any difference to some idiots. “He doesn’t need to know” is a line one young sprat trotted out to me a while back.
Hope springs eternal, huh? Pity that following his “logic” means that sexual harassment does too.
You mean that big chunk of cubic zirconia that I bought for self-defence 20 years ago is worthless against these skeezeballs? Well, no wonder it’s gathering dust in my bureau drawer now…
On the plus side, I’m probably too old and intelligent for their tastes, anyway.
So basically crippling violence is the only thing Pollock would accept as a no?
I dunno, he might rationalize kicking someone in the balls as a unique and creative way of letting them know that you’re into BSDM and would like them to be your sub.
Only way he’d be my sub is if I was playing Vlad Tepes.
Except this hasn’t been the case. During those times everybody worked hard physically demanding jobs, even children. Only the rich people didn’t work. The story of the non-working woman and the man-slave provider since the dawn of times is nothing but a myth. Even today in the developing world women produce most of the food but they often don’t own land or property. If anyone is a slave in this story It’s quite obvious who it is.
If you fired a nuclear warhead at him and he survived he would say “so, this means you want to cosplay War Games with me and then have sex, right?”.
I wear a wedding ring. Sure didn’t do JACK about Creepy McGroperson the other day. (Thankfully, I haven’t seen him since. After the beating last week, I have NO patience for his shit.)
Pecunium was referring to Moe’s fantasy pre-modern world, not the real one. (An MGHOW referring to reality? He’d be kicked out of the treehouse.)
kittehs: When push came to shove, the only thing Pollock thought counted as a no was the dude being willing to accept no for an answer; AND, if any other person thinks someone is being harassed, they have to stay out of it, unless the victim specifically asks for help: FROM THAT PERSON.
Yeah, that weekend was a stressful time to be debating consent/harassment/policies on the internet. As I recall I was working too.
Gah, cassandra, he probably would!
Though I reckon some Vlad-style fun and games would make even him think twice. That boy played for keeps.
Men like Pillock definitely bring out my inner (not far below the surface) Vlad.
Diana: I was using Moe’s vision of the past, and applying it to the future (since Moe has such a gifted insight to these things) since that was what he based the present fall as being from.
If that is what was, and society is going to collapse, a rational person ought to assume the reversion is to that mean.
In short, no matter how Moe slices it, he’s gonna get screwed, without getting laid.
auggz – ugh, and it sounds like his buddies are men-children too (surprise, not).
It’s almost worse that it didn’t seem to ever be about *him* being the harasser (doesn’t go to cons, don’t you know), but there was no scenario unambiguous enough that he couldn’t think of a “what-if” that gave the harasser a plausible (to him) out.
He just couldn’t imagine a world in which a woman can’t just say “no” and have it be immediately respected. He was so insistent that, if anything untoward happened, then she failed to communicate clearly, and in the specific code that he would understand. It was maddening.