Are there any countries or cultures were the women aren't fucking crazy?

thrownaway_MGTOW · 3時間前

It's more a matter of to what degree the "feminine nature" is properly trained, constrained and controlled by the culture.

There's always a certain level of "craziness" to women (as there is to men) -- it's just that craziness CAN be properly channeled, or else it CAN be unfettered.

As for cultures where they ARE properly channeled -- i.e. into productive behaviors, or at least relatively benign patterns -- they do exist; but they're generally rather closed/constrained (often deeply religious) communities, Amish, Hutterites, etc.

In part because it is NECESSARY in order to maintain that kind of "order" -- those groups generally do NOT take in "converts" (IOW you basically cannot "join" them, certainly not in a trivial and casual "hey let me in" fashion); and likewise, the behavior patterns of the people involved are heavily dependent upon remaining WITHIN that community (so "peeling off" an Amish woman for yourself {even if you could manage that}... well, outside of the Amish community, and absent it's inherent community constraints, she's rather VERY likely to quickly transform herself into becoming just like every other woman in whatever environment you live in, and move her into; in other words AWALT).

thrownaway_MGTOW · 3時間前

No the objective "real world" does actually exist.

It just ISN'T what they are describing -- they're mis-using/abusing a common phrase and applying it to their own distorted subjective worldview.

thrownaway_MGTOW · 3時間前

It's like the married guys who tell me (usually as an explanation about why they CAN'T do something -- busy with some "honey-do" project) that "Happy Wife = Happy Life".

I simply smile (or put on my best "shit-eating grin") and respond with: "No Wife, No Kids = no problems, No Drama, NO LIMITS!"

thrownaway_MGTOW · 3時間前

was reading up on stats on motorcycle accidents... if you're a long term rider (5+ years), the probability that you get into a catastrophic accident (resulting in your death, permanent disfigurement, or permanent disability) is sky high... like 90%+ in the US.

so yeah, if you live out in the boonies where you can ride free with no stupid drivers, go ahead. but whether you're looking out for numero uno or a family, driving in the city or even in the burbs on your bike has grim prospects.

That last part... CONTEXT of those statistics matters. The environment that the motorcycle is driven in -- literally which roads, how much traffic, what kinds of traffic, etc. -- are all important.

There's a massive difference between someone who goes out riding a hog with a couple/bunch of dudes on some rustic backroads on weekends -- or some guy who rides motocross trails, or even takes a cross-country "bike & camp" trip on some gas-sipping touring bike -- versus some dude who live in "Gotham City" and uses his crotch-rocket as his primary means of transportation in and around the megalopolis.

thrownaway_MGTOW · 4時間前

When I used to be very serious into lifting I got some comment from some guy on how he too used to lift, but once he got married and had kids he had to 'join the real world' and stopped.

Note the subtle shaming. I had something he didn't (a good physique), so the jealousy and insecurity drove him to espouse his own superiority and make excuses.

And the correct response is to simply deflect the underlying claim.

They didn't "join the real world", they made choices* that forced them to constrain and limit their definition of "the real world."

Because the "real world" didn't change -- lifting, bikes, bars, bowling, and (whatever) all still exist -- he's simply altered his OWN perspective on them.

* I say "choice" even though it may not have been a conscious one that was fully (or at all) aware of much less accurately understood the consequences of the actions, still the actions (the ones that landed them with a wife/kids) WERE in fact a choice.

thrownaway_MGTOW · 4時間前

That's not a "reminder", it's an opinion and a shitload of assertions from a person that is apparently really just anti-marriage & anti-child...

But who is also WHOLLY indoctrinated into and accepting of "feminism" and the gynocentric society.

Basically it's written by (ironic as it may seem) an effectively emasculated androgynous and perpetually adolescent "male" -- allowed to continue to possess and use (and follow the lead of) his dick (as essentially an unpaid male "whore" to satisfy female demands) -- but without gaining any of the benefits of it.

Seems more like a PUA than an MGTOW.

thrownaway_MGTOW · 4時間前

Because most men are easily pussy whipped.

Have you ever been around horses? Seriously, ever observed how a horse gets "broken" and eventually trained to accept a bridle and saddle?

Therein lies the answer.

thrownaway_MGTOW · 4時間前

Don't let articles like this fool you into thinking that women give a shit about men -- at least as anything OTHER than a "resource" for themselves.

What is hidden beneath the surface of this woman making seemingly "nice" statements about changing policies to help men enter trades and attend technical schools -- is really just more of the same -- men you see should CONTINUE to keep the infrastructure going; she wants them to be good little plow-horses and "morlocks" so that she can continue to live her life in an advanced civilization, as one of the "privileged" women (working in a nice air-conditioned office, and a "job" where her brain-farts ill-formed opinions and thoughts, as expressed in "policy papers" are taken as gospel truths and virtually divinely inspired mandates).

Meanwhile she wants women to CONTINUE to be given "special assistance" in all things "higher education" -- she denigrates the "college is for everyone"; but only because she wants college to become the EXCLUSIVE domain of women.

The goal? Isn't it obvious? To her mind WOMEN should be the ONLY holders of "bachelors, masters, and doctoral" degrees; and thus the ONLY people "qualified" to sit on boards, serving as CEO's, and effectively in charge and dictating their any & every desire to those men (those dirty, uncouth, uneducated male "tradesmen"), who should then "magically" create everything to fit those demands and dictates.

As to the fact that such a world would also be one where her (and other women's) desires for a man who EARNS more than her, has higher status than her, etc -- well, despite all of her ostensibly higher "education" her brain just doesn't really comprehend the inherent contradiction in that. (And why should it really? It's been trained "educated" into believing that "cause & effect" are SOCIALLY determined things, that "perception" is more important than "reality" {which she doesn't even comprehend as existing in an objective independent form} -- and moreover, her entire life she's been told that women are "superior" in ever way, that they SHOULD be "in charge" and that men are just oppressive brutal, beastly "rapists" -- useful only as beasts of burden).

thrownaway_MGTOW · 5時間前

Jesus fucking Christ, the first paragraph with the quote is scary enough.

Yup, but the thing is that it's entirely TRUE.

And it can apply to UNmarried men as well. Girlfriend moves in with guy (or indeed, even spends the night occasionally, and perhaps even unknown to him changes her "address of record" to his home or apartment)... and BINGO, the VAWA and DV laws and a "protection/restraining order" can now be used to kick his arse out of his home/apartment (and if/when he tries to return, well that is now a "crime" for which he can be arrested and held in jail).

Later on in the piece, the use of VAWA, so called "protection" (or "restraining") orders, and a simple domestic-violence allegation (or indeed, as they note, often even a very vague insinuation -- i.e. "I'm afraid of him, and what I imagine he might do!" -- that isn't actually an allegation/accusation, isn't based on any factual information, its merely a statement {a claim, not even necessarily honest} about an emotion & imagination {projection, possibly paranoia, even fictional "fantasy"}, and the whole thing really may as well be "pre-crime" ala the 2002 Minority Report film)... is given the label of "Instant De-Facto Divorce."

And they're right, that's really what it is. A sort of pre-divorce divorce settlement. Woman gets the home (and everything in it), full custody of the kids, and basically get's pretty substantial "support" payments too... at least in the form that the Man is still on the hook to pay the rent/mortgage, the utility bills, etc. -- IOW she lives "rent free."

Why? Because all of those things are almost certain still titled in his name, billed in & to his name, and these days are probably paid via "automatic payments" from his bank accounts (or worse yet from "joint" bank accounts in both their names) ... into which quite probably his paycheck and/or other income is probably already "automatically" deposited -- and, relative to other spending, she probably holds some debit or credit card that gives her direct access to the rest of the funds (including any/all savings accounts) as well.

Moreover, since no formal legal process of "division of assets" has (yet) been invoked -- i.e. to obtain the "instant de facto divorce" (via a protection/restraining order), the woman does NOT have to have initiated any "divorce" process, nor will she necessarily have filed any paperwork at all, other than a simple form with her claim (fictional or true is irrelevant) that she is "afraid" and which she is basically guaranteed a default approval of -- well, she's LEGALLY "free" to blow whatever cash she can from his accounts or to incur whatever debts she wants using , his debit/credit cards, etc.

He probably has the right to "sue" her -- in a civil lawsuit -- but good luck with that, especially these days since "restriction of access to spending cash" is increasingly being characterized as "abuse" in an of itself. Plus, even if he DOES succeed in winning such a lawsuit, and getting a subsequent "judgement" against her, etc... well as the saying goes, you can't get blood from a stone no matter how hard you squeeze it.

thrownaway_MGTOW · 13時間前

Hmm I never knew that but it makes sense. A small enough community will know everything about the leader and thus he cannot do shit to screw them over. Also considering how small communities tend to use less resources this must also help in sustaining this kind of system.

Well it's not that it's impossible for the leader to screw them over; consider that every "biological family" is essentially a "communal" and/or "socialistic" entity -- and it is entirely possible for a parent (or indeed even one of the kids) to "screw over" the rest of the family. But there is generally a "price to pay" -- emotional and psychological, etc.

It's also why such systems don't scale very well; especially to a "diverse" population.

They work well enough when the numbers are relatively small, AND when everyone has a virtually identical set of "shared values" -- that is to say morals, ethics, etc which the community has universally (and essentially "unanimously") agreed to, and which the community as a whole is fully prepared to enforce (literally) as a community. That is to say not merely demanding some potentate or quasi-outside authority perform the policing, but willing to "police its own."

Hence why I HATE collectivism. My family immigrated from East Asia and they are quite collectivist over there. What can I say, one of the few things that North America has going for it, is that there is so much land and so few people. I would NOT want to be in Beijing or Tokyo if there ever is a major collapse.

Oh, I wouldn't want to be in ANY modern western "city" -- major OR minor (and to define "city" versus "small town" or "village" I would say anything over 100,000 people) -- in the event of a major collapse.

For the simple reason that the INGRAINED ATTITUDE of majority of residents of such "cities" is one of an oblivious interdependent entitlement -- nearly everyone (of whatever class or status) within urban environments lives on a day-to-day and essentially hand-to-mouth basis; that is to say they generally make little or no provision (for even relatively MILD) "hard times." Even in seemingly trivial matters such as personal food supply... the general sentiment is that it all just "magically" appears on an as needed basis; after all, why concern yourself with stocking a fridge or larder when the grocery or deli is just around the corner, or at most a few blocks away? And of course there are restaurants, coffee shops, etc.

With the exception of people who might be "fresh from the countryside" -- when it comes to most people brought up in urban areas, there is quite literally virtually NO comprehension of where anything they consume comes from. Oh there might be some vague (kindergarten or nursery school song level) understanding that food comes from "farms", that metal, coal and oil etc comes from mines or wells, that even water is (somehow) "pumped in" or "piped in" to the city... but it just isn't something that most have given any significant thought or consideration to.

As a result there is not only a dependency (of necessity) on things like city water & sewer systems, and various supply lines in general; but there is generally a sense of both ignorance, obliviousness, ingratitude and "entitlement" to such -- a belief that ALL of it somehow just "happens" and they THEY should somehow be provided with it, in perpetuity, and preferably "free"; the idea that they should in any wise "pay" for it (that is to say contribute labor or effort to it's maintenance -- or indeed, even express the least care or concern for it, beyond their PERSONAL demands), is all too often only grudgingly accepted (at best).

The attitude tends to be a bit different for people who live in smaller towns (even those with "city" water/sewer), and/or moreso yet out in rural "countryside" areas. If only because there is likely to be some significant distance that must be traveled to obtain goods (and that inclement weather, road repairs, etc can all inhibit if not outright prevent the trip -- ergo some provision MUST be made against the possibility of being unable to make such a trip every day). And likewise there is at least a minimal amount of comprehension that there is a fairly large & complex "system" underlying all of it; that the food doesn't "magically appear" at the local grocery any more than it will "magically" show up on their doorstep... some planning and effort are necessary.

Those who live in the countryside, or more "rural" areas inherently tend to have an even better concept as well; chances are they are surrounded by or drive past various farms, fields, etc.; and quite probably encounter farm machinery at least occasionally if not regularly. Moreover their homes often have private wells, septic-sewer systems; so there is at least a theoretical comprehension that electric power is needed to runs the well pump; and there is probably some actual experience with maintaining the remainder of the system (the pressure tank, filters, water softeners, water heaters, etc), even if only at the point of having to hire some plumber to fix/repair it (and pay said professional from their own funds -- that is to say no "landlord" or "official" is responsible for it; it isn't simply a "utility").

Although, I gotta ask being a younger guy (early 20s) how would I prep for the decline in the USD value? I mean I can see it coming. Decades of TERRIBLE fiscal policies, trade deals, welfare programs etc. have created a ticking time bomb.

That's a very DEEP and complex question; for which there really is no "100% certain" (much less "guaranteed") answer or solution; and on which opinions differ across a ~~wide~~ vast spectrum.

About the only thing the opinions will agree upon is that one should "diversify" one's savings/investments.

But of course what is meant by "diversify"... well there's very little agreement on that; and what one person means by it will be wholly different from what another person means.

Not trying to avoid giving you an answer, but really that's a whole thread worth of comments, if not an entire BOOK worth of writing. (Plus it's late at night here, I've had a long day, and quite frankly I can feel my eyelids drooping... so perhaps another day.)

thrownaway_MGTOW · 14時間前

Humor or Reality?

I'd say most likely Humorously Pathetic Reality.

Even if it's not real, this is an entirely plausible list for a modern twenty-something skanky bar slut -- her main emphasis is on APPEARANCE: tanning, getting her hair done, whiten teeth, new clothes. Despite the fact that she's cutting out certain things (blow = powder cocaine; moondoggies = pot smokers), I rather doubt the change is due to major concern about (or even awareness of) health.

Note that in terms of drugs, she no doubt thinks she's being "safe" by sticking with prescription pharma Norcos (aka Vicodin, combination of acetaminophen {commonly known as Tylenol} & hydrocodone {an opiate}) and alcohol.

And (*sigh*) worse she apparently thinks that doing the one (Vicodin/Norco) during the day/workweek, and the other (alcohol) at night and/or on weekends makes it "not a problem" (I mean it's certainly better than popping a couple of Vicodin and immediately washing them down with shots... but not by much*.)

Seriously "drinking" only "4x a week" (assume that means fairly heavy alcohol consumption 4 days/nights) ... is hardly "limiting" -- again better than going and boozing every day of the week, but 4 days out of 7 ?

* While the painkilling effects dissipate within a few hours, opiates (even semi-synthetic ones like the hydrocodone in Vicodin/Norco) are only purged from your system slowly, and substantial amounts will stay in the bloodstream for anywhere from 24 to 96 hours (i.e. 1 to 4 days), and leave residual traces in hair, etc for months; combining alcohol with them (especially if taken repeatedly across multiple days) can very easily lead to acute liver damage/failure.

Worse is that she's also "tanning" -- which means that if she does begin to experience liver failure she'll probably miss one of the primary early symptoms (i.e. jaundice or "yellowing" of the skin) and think it's just an effect of the tanning booth and/or tanning spray.

thrownaway_MGTOW · 15時間前

Doesn't it say "narcos only at work" below?

Nope it says "Norcos" (Norco is a brand name of Vicodin) -- she's popping "Vitamin V" at work -- basically numbing pain/zoning herself out... I'd be willing to bet she works either as some kind of waitress, barkeep or maybe retail cashier (i.e. on her feet and justifies the painkillers for that).

As for the "no blow" -- given that the context is not just sex, but Norcos (Vicodin) and alcohol, and the "No Moondoggies" is most likely a reference to hippy/surfer dudes (i.e. pot-smokers & therefore probably including her getting high on marijuana) -- I'd say that "blow" is referring to powder cocaine, and not oral sex (if she was referring to oral sex, sucking dick, she'd probably have written "No BJ's").

thrownaway_MGTOW · 1日前

ROTFLMAO.

Clueless.

thrownaway_MGTOW · 1日前

I was referring to you calling me clueless,

That too... statistical probabilities aligned with your past/present behavior pattern (as presented by yourself above).

thrownaway_MGTOW · 1日前

I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, I think you make valid points, and I know you have more experience and foresight than I do, but you assume so much of a stranger and you're condescending to boot.

Not "assuming," simply looking at the evidence you have presented.

And "condescending"... LOL, too funny there junior.

thrownaway_MGTOW · 1日前

Nah, it's statistical probabilities aligned with your past/present behavior pattern.

thrownaway_MGTOW · 1日前

100%. They can't conceptualize restraint.

To be fair, a lot of men can't conceptualize it either.

thrownaway_MGTOW · 1日前

wtf, 6yrs ended and she's texting nudes already? how long did it take? i find it hard to believe she hasn't been doing that for the last 6yrs

She's been doing it for a couple of years already, OP was just clueless (and still is).

He really has no idea what's been going on.

thrownaway_MGTOW · 1日前

And how do these comments contribute anything?

It's important to present REALITY as it really is. Far too many youngun's think this (MGTOW) is some "movement" that is growing and will "change things."

It isn't, and it won't.

The vast majority of people who profess ~~"MEETOO"~~ erm I meant "MGTOW!" -- especially those like yourself who do so as an instantaneous reaction after a breakup -- simply DON'T really know themselves, and the extent to which their lives are in fact still "enslaved" to hormonally driven desires; they are fundamentally incapable of actually practicing life as an MGTOW.

Are you trying to discourage others?

Trying to make certain they keep things in perspective, and not follow suit with the kind of foolish thread post you just made -- because seriously, it's vain and pointless.

Why do you assume I want to a new gal?

Because you were willing to move across the country -- i.e. CHANGE your entire life -- for the last one.

That's a level of "obsession" with having a relationship that is NOT easily discarded -- no "vow" (or "brag") is going to matter -- it's simply a matter of how your mentality and worldview is arranged.

Also -- you're reaction to her instant sluttiness -- that too is demonstrative; you're still hung up on her, and moreso the idea of female "fidelity" and/or loyalty/innocence, etc.

And like I wrote to /u/TheAlphaRanger "My actions will prove my commitment to MGTOW."

I think they'll prove the opposite; and in fairly short order.

Seriously dude, I've seen your proverbial "twin brother" -- guys making essentially the exact same claim/commitment (i.e. post divorce {sometimes really NASTY divorce}, and/or post breakup they say: "That's it, they're DONE with women! Did you hear? D.O.N.E. No more dating, no more girlfriends, no more bullshit; zip, zilch, nada, never again... [yada yada blah blah] WooHoo!") -- and generally speaking, around 6 to 18 months later, I run into them with their latest squeeze; usually already cohabiting, definitely in a deep LTR, and often either already married or soon to be.

All of that talk about being "done with women"? It was talk... not worth the paper it wasn't written on.

The point? It's relatively simple; very FEW men can actually follow through on MGTOW, and in general the character that it takes to do so, is already readily apparent throughout their life (one indicator would be that if their "girlfriend" moved across the country, they'd say "have a nice life in [wherever it is she moved to]!" and then be back about their own business).

thrownaway_MGTOW · 1日前

They're also not believing her because this particular chick is obviously nothing other than a fucking Gold Digger.

Besides, all of the divorced women out there who have pulled the same kind of crap "abused" act, along with everyone else involved in the divorce industry -- know this particular routine cold; they also know it's a fraud.

thrownaway_MGTOW · 1日前

ROTFLMAO at these "I just broke up so now I'm vowing MGTOW!" threads.

Because... probably less than 6 months from now you'll meet someone new...

And forget everything that you think you've realized; besides the new gal? She'll be totally different, and not like THAT at all.

LOL

EDIT: Wow... that was fast. See here's the thing guys, if your level of "commitment" to an MGTOW lifestyle can't endure the very very MILD critique that I gave OP... then trust me, you're deluding yourself.

Not only did he delete this thread and account and all his comments... but I can pretty much guarantee you that he ISN'T even going to move out -- his (ostensibly "ex-") girlfriend will emotionally manipulate him into staying.

thrownaway_MGTOW · 1日前

This is where MGTOW is superior to red pill guys.

Personally I couldn't give a shit less where -- whether "superior" or "lame" or "luuuuzer" -- MGTOW appears on someone (anyone) ELSE'S measuring "schtick", notch count or otherwise.

I keep & take my own counsel; make my own choices, and measure things according to my OWN standards.

And while I understand the emotional and psychological "appeal" of having kids (especially a son*) -- or of having a "companion" in life, a warm body to cuddle up with -- and the hormonally driven compulsion to "fuck"...

Quite frankly -- in one form or another I've already experienced ALL of those things in "trial" form -- and the baggage and risk that goes along with ANY (much less ALL) of that on some permanent basis... to me it just ain't worth the risk, NOR the day to day price; certain not as our current society has rigged everything.

^{^*} ^{^With} ^{^some} ^{^vague} ^{^typically} ^{^not} ^{^{fully-consciously}} ^{^admitted} ^{^notion} ^{^that} ^{^finally} ^{^there} ^{^will} ^{^be} ^{^another} ^{^guy} ^{^who} ^{^REALLY} ^{^understands,} ^{^and} ^{^is} ^{^a} ^{^"best} ^{^bud"} ^{^that} ^{^won't} ^{^betray} ^{^you,} ^{^etc} ^{^(a} ^{^foolish} ^{^fantasy} ^{^that} ^{^almost} ^{^never} ^{^works} ^{^out} ^{^that} ^{^way} ^{^--} ^{^especially} ^ⁱⁿ ^{^a} ^{^society} ^{^that} ^{^HATES} ^{^and} ^{^DENIGRATES} ^{^men,} ^{^and} ^{^fathers} ^{^most} ^{^of} ^{^all).}

MGTOW know what they want and are satisfied with who they are. They achieve their goals without peer pressure, societal pressure, or most of all the opinion of women.

Indeed... or the opinion of anyone else either (including redpiller-PUA's etc).

thrownaway_MGTOW · 2日前

Making the world a better place, one smile at a time :)

It's Super-hyper-synergistic-alidocious!

thrownaway_MGTOW · 2日前

Synergistically empower people with innovative technology... so that they can buytoothpasteonline.com.

thrownaway_MGTOW · 2日前

You seem to miss the point.

What is it you are "worrying" about? This is nothing new, it is simply a "given," a known and long established FACT: women, like fire, are 'volatile' and dangerous.

Do you not understand the message of this forum?

thrownaway_MGTOW

次のモデレーターです

トロフィーケース

本日のreddit gold目標額達成率

Don't let articles like this fool you into thinking that women give a shit about men -- at least as anything OTHER than a "resource" for themselves.

Yup, but the thing is that it's entirely TRUE.

I'd say most likely Humorously Pathetic Reality.