It all started in the primordial ooze, where an up-and-coming molecule called RNA arouse from countless years of chaos. RNA could replicate itself, spreading out into the natural void. And some of these strains were a bit better than others. They survived and replicated even better, giving them bigger numbers. Fast forward an eternity later, and RNA has conquered the world, with no immediate sign of stopping. We have been fortunate enough to evolve emotion due to social living and high cognition, but in the end, we're still made to follow nature's rule - those who dominate an environment will shape its future. It is not only the law of humans, or even biology - both are expressions of the physical laws of the universe that allowed life to occur in the first place.

In nature, there are few exceptions to the constant cycle of self-replication. Better offspring = Better replication. Better father = Better offspring. So given the choice, the female would always support the bigger, healthier male over the weaker one. When there is an energy difference in terms of raising children, the one with the burden (usually the female) is going to be the picky sex. This framework fits perfectly with the issues priests, philosophers, and politicians have been pondering for years - the differences between genders did not come from God or some mysterious, nefarious "patriarchy", but as the by-product of evolution and the sexes maximizing their success.

It is no wonder why we want to separate people from nature. Because we don't want to put all our value in what it takes to survive. Biological chance has given us aspirations, emotions, and insecurities that pervade our thoughts even in the face of reproductive failure. Perhaps the best explanation is that we need a sense of purpose to fill our role as societal species. In the past, we could simply do it by carrying a spear. Now, being a provider is the bare minimum, completely unnotable in a society dominated by media. Of all things, many men will betray their biological urges, and send themselves to an early grave, despite essentially conquering the threats of nature. The human mind can't withstand life on resources alone. Yet approaching relationships with this kind of philosophy will be the worst decision you'll make in your life.

The problem with relationships is that men want women to be fulfilling to their emotional needs, when they are primarily driven by biological needs. Women may tolerate losers as orbiters, but as romantic interests? EWW! While a woman may accept a man if there is no alternative, the idea of passing on bad genes to her children makes her asexual. And who could blame her - if women didn't gatekeep bad genes, who would? So a man must prove to her he is high quality at all times - buying her gifts, giving her creative dates, taking on demanding jobs, acting as an emotional tampon, lifting weights - just to prove he didn't lose the genetic lottery. But many men will struggle to balance this with their personal feelings. They want their SO to be their best friend as well...but what kind of friend always takes away, barely giving anything in return? What kind of friend loves you for your status, wealth, and physique over your personality?

When women talk about the correct way to be vulnerable, they always emphasize the importance of being strong and non-needy at the same time. Which proves that they never were attracted to vulnerability in the first place. They want you to open up on THEIR terms. They want you to have problems...that you immediately know the solution to. They are still filtering if the man is truly masculine. And this is why men will never get the relationships they want from women. Because they can never be themselves without damaging their relationship. Instead of finding a respite from the constant challenges of modern life...they find another insect judging them for their value, rewarding him sex instead of income.

Men have avoided this instinct because men do not need to invest so many resources into women, as they can always find another one to raise their kids. Their intense sex drive arose from this, making most women fuckable, and thus loveable. Status is almost irrelevant - as long as the woman isn't clearly using them, a man wouldn't mind dating a girl who lived in a trash can. For one of the extreme examples - ever hear of Katawa Shoujo? Its an anime dating simulator featuring a cast of girls who attend a school for the disabled. The characters range from blind, footless, armless, partially burnt, and deaf. Any one of these would indicate terrible biological fitness. Yet the game became one of the most well-known visual novels. Men loved a game mostly focused on dialogue and crippling insecurities because they were attracted to even wounded cartoon representations of women. Such a story could have only arisen from male minds, because a disabled man is incredibly unattractive for women without an immense amount of confidence or status.

My primary reason for going MGTOW is because I know I will never get the love I want from women. I respect people's negatives, and feel closer to them because of shared experiences regardless of their current lot in life. Women only want the positives, and will deem any chinks in your armor as "neediness" or "immaturity". Why waste my time and resources on a person who disrespects my core conflicts with my existence? Good bros will do far more for your mental health than an entire sea of fish ever could.

All men must go their own way at some point in their lives to achieve confidence. Why stop for the women when they were laughing at you when you started?