Why I think the MRA/Angry MGTOW bitches will ultimately fail

Spectacularly. 

dis gonna be good anticipation pull up a chair listen watch

I’ve been asked this and it’s a fair question, this’ll be the one time I address the topic so I can leave it alone. To fail. On its own. Some joke about the entropy of sexual frustration.

What unites the two groups?

Condition 1:

“society is unfair!”

hmm uhuh o rlly really ah sure thing

Life is unfair but go on.
Condition 2.  As I put it earlier:

wah wah wah Matriarchy is keeping me down”

don draper crying baby wah wah wah

Passive and unmanly but I’ll roll with that as premise.
The writing will be clunky, probably.

Why does modern society hate men?
Men fight the Government.

Think on that for a bit and come back.

Men don’t ask for things like women. Men overthrow, men topple, men destroy and war. They don’t need you for war anymore. What do they need you for, that they can’t get elsewhere?
If you are not willing to do those things, give your life to a cause, you are not a man and what you are defending is a luxury of the First World rather than a right. If you can live without it, it isn’t a right.
This is the point where they get anecdotal and apply injustice/victim mentality to areas of life that do not and will never apply to them e.g. the old canard, marriage is evil but I’m never getting married or women are dumb bitches I don’t need them why don’t they like me or my personal favourite I don’t need children where is my pension. 

Quick test: do they read the Victim Bible called The Guardian? If so, Pass Go and fuck yourself.

Let’s take the feminist metaphor that they want to use, to make the Government fuck men over further, but these guys keep agreeing with for suicidally stupid reasons: the Gender War. Let’s buy into their frame further.
Life isn’t a movie, it doesn’t matter which side is ‘right’, it is made by who has the biggest bastard on their team.
In this case, the Government. Who literally hold all the cards, and write all the laws, and hold all the guns (UK edition).

My sentiment on the tide against PC.

So what are you gonna do?
What can you do?
Sweet FA.

Government will crush the bitchy MGTOW and MRA agenda.
The equality paradigm (that isn’t fair! that’s discrimination bc I’m a man!) requires victims. The physically stronger sex cannot take a dive and fake an injury, this isn’t football. It doesn’t work. It will never work, whining delta, gamma and omega males cannot speak for their stronger counterparts, as feminists cannot speak for normal women. It’s called History. History is the proof men are not the weaker sex. Yet they keep going. At this point it’s embarrassing.

This isn’t all good for women and many women do not support the actions of Government, as many men don’t either (one of the issues with democracy, check out neoreaction some time folks).

The women who do (feminists) make a grievous error.
Women think Government will protect them. When things happen, SHTF, which do they need?
The sociopathic pen-pushers or men, in the street?
Yet they stab their guardians in the back and with crimson hands say “what happened?”. You became a concubine for the system. You are the whore for Babylon. That’s what happened. No wonder the men are doubtful. Distrustful. Some are just as bad though, and deserve no moral high horse, they deserve an ass. They don’t object to female parasitism, as long as they get a good, long suck off the State teat too. So it isn’t about sex. Sex doesn’t divide us. It’s about politics, it’s r/K. The fake MGTOW are the r-selected and want the world to improve around them, the real are K and want to improve themselves.
They want all the goodies too, to be ‘equal’ with feminists, with none of the responsibility too. Like feminists. They want a wife, all the cooking, sex, affection, kids but with none of the obligation, so they get a free hooker and call her a girlfriend. The girlfriend isn’t really giving it up for free, but he keeps up the pretense that it might get serious. To keep her, he must deceive her. He is the male equivalent of the feminist monster, who marries you to divorce you.

For the free hooker label;

What’s the point of a hooker? You enjoy their company. You leave when that stops.
What’s the point of a bf/gf, again?…

It used to be husband/wife auditions, there was a set timing to it, for courting. Now it’s a way for a man to claim a woman, like he owns her legally (wife), use up the best years of her life (youth) and ward other men off…. without commitment. Without any responsibility on his side.
And they complain about the societal decay, the fallout from this. Sure, there are many women on welfare, but how many of the fathers wanted to marry the mother of their children and financially support them? Are we all adults here? Do men deserve some moral exemption from a problem caused by two?
And you hear all these stories like “my gf cheated on me boo hoo” and it’s like, there’s no such thing. There are two relationship statuses: single or married. This is why men ‘cheat’ on their gf. They know this. What is the duty of a bf/gf? What? The idea is almost laughable.
There is no commitment that is not codified in law. She owed you nothing because you gave her nothing.

Counterexample: Same way a gf isn’t entitled to a proposal after X years. Or your money.

And which sex allowed it to become this way? Which sex allowed Patriarchy to decay and crumble?
Men. Men have only other men to blame.

Most of it, is that they wanted free sex. The primary motivation for men. Except nothing in life is free. So they had to give women excess power in exchange. If men wanted to reinstall a Patriarchy, all they would need to do is swear off sex with women. Then what? What can they do? What can they dangle as incentive, like training a dog? We all know they’ve got nothing, as a whore’s only value is sex. The MRA/angry MGTOW group are fighting against other men, sociopathic men running the system (and still blaming women somehow, which does make them misogynists). Do you think the sociopaths of the system really care what’s fair? What do you have to offer? You don’t have a pussy to whore out. You don’t have money. The tax system already took it. You’re already screwed.

Surprise! The Sisterhood lied to you to try and steal your prospects for themselves.

But go ahead, keep bitching about it. Like a girl. It makes you look really competent and adult.

Our elders are criticizing us because we see past their BS.

The rest of us are watching you and it’s quite funny. We lost sympathy when you started being stupid.
When it collapses, you’ll blame everybody but yourselves. That’s why it will fail.

Women who spoke for men, against misandry

http://unknownmisandry.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/womans-voice.html

…I often wonder that the modern woman does not perceive that she is killing the goose that lays the golden egg by her attitude toward men. By which I mean to say that it is women themselves who are destroying the things that they value most in life. It is women’s hands that are tearing to tatters the chiffons of romance and sentiment and idealism in which men have always clothed them. It is women who are stifling tenderness and slaying chivalry in the hearts of men. It is women who are doing away with all the graces and sweetnesses that made charm in the relationship between men and women and that incidentally lured men into matrimony….

A theme that could be applied to this blog: smug

..I joined this club primarily because I wanted to see justice done, and I feel that that very often a woman can attack her own sex with more effect than can a man. I am intensely against the ‘woman chiseler’ who marries not for a home and a husband, but for alimony and a good time at some decent man’s expense….

…That many women marry for the sole purpose of getting divorces a matter of common knowledge. The women who practice this hold-up game marry men they don’t love. They  don’t make an effort to get along with them, or do their duty as wives in any respect, and in the course of a year or two they pick a quarrel and fly to Reno….

…It made me consider afresh what I often have thought of alimony; that alimony is essentially unfair, and that men who make and change laws so easily, are rather stupid that they don’t regularize this one….

Liberals hate honour culture

https://theweek.com/article/index/267126/why-honor-causes-all-of-societys-problems

Because it involves backing up your words with actions.

As if South America is a model for anything when history is the biggest honour culture sample of all. And it worked great, peace for centuries within a nation. Handily, left academics have no reputations in the real world, preferring to shun the society they pretend to study (and bitch about it behind its back, like a teenage girl). Biting the hand that feeds… and writes your pay cheques.

You can read between the lines on this one, it’s a negative example.

One redeeming paragraph;

After all, there’s nothing inherently wrong with honor or reputational concerns. They can encourage people to treat others with kindness and be respectful of boundaries. In fact, in the control conditions of Nisbett and Cohen’s experiments — where there was no prior insult — Southerners tended to act in less aggressive and more courteous ways than Northerners.

You neglected to mention that earlier, it changes the experimental condition of the entire thing.

For an American example if you must, look to the Wild West. Contrary to stereotype, few people died in that honour culture from shooting, when guns were new and everyone had one, because no one started shit they couldn’t back up. Duelling and small fights make larger events rare. Unlike nowadays, where school shootings are commonplace because people let it build up until they explode.

…it’s not unreasonable to picture a world 25 years from now where the meaning of honor has shifted to encompass backing down from violence and seeking help for mental health trouble.

Completely out of touch. The opposite: defending and protecting, self-reliance.
In that event? Cui bono? The writers of the studies for mental illness (psychiatry) and mind’s psychology, these people. What a coincidence.

It ends covering its arse;

Ultimately, we’re still a long way from understanding enough about honor ideology to easily alleviate the problems it may cause. While researchers have made great strides in linking honor concerns to a variety of different outcomes, more must be learned about the specific cognitive processes, emotions, and individual differences that determine whether an abstract endorsement of honor norms will lead to a specific behavior. Perhaps one day the aggressive pursuit of honor or respect will be so farfetched no TV writer will consider it worthy of their attention.

Notice the common barrage of inference it’s a bad thing? Not just bad, EVIL! Every evil. “All of society’s problems.”

Honour culture? Used to be called chivalry.

The Politics of Randomness

http://aeon.co/magazine/world-views/is-the-most-rational-choice-the-random-one/

Excerpts;

The list goes on. It could – it does – fill books. As any blackjack dealer or tarot reader might tell you, we have a love for the flip of the card. Why shouldn’t we? Chance has some special properties. It is a swift, consistent, and (unless your chickens all die) relatively cheap decider. Devoid of any guiding mind, it is subject to neither blame nor regret. Inhuman, it can act as a blank surface on which to descry the churning of fate or the work of divine hands. Chance distributes resources and judges disputes with perfect equanimity.

Thinking about choice and chance in this way has applications outside rural Borneo, too. In particular, it can call into question some of the basic mechanisms of our rationalist-meritocratic-democratic system – which is why, as you might imagine, a political theorist such as Stone is so interested in randomness in the first place.

Let me suggest that, in the fraught and unpredictable world in which we live, both of those ideals – total certainty and perfect reward – are delusional. That’s not to say that we shouldn’t try to increase knowledge and reward success. It’s just that, until we reach that utopia, we might want to come to terms with the reality of our situation, which is that our lives are dominated by uncertainty, biases, subjective judgments and the vagaries of chance.

Science says: Intelligent people contribute more to the economy

No shit, study here.

It doesn't take a genius to notice

The Middle Class fallacy: extraordinary people come from ordinary circumstances.
OR
If only Jr. went to the right school, and studied the right degree, he’d be a genius!

Money doesn’t buy creativity or genius.