The whole Jordan Peterson business (with him calling MGTOW "pathetic weasels" and later retracting that statement) got me thinking.

The main thing I took away from Peterson's remarks on MGTOW, especially those he made in his most recent Dave Rubin interview, is that there seem to be (at least) two kinds of MGTOW.

The first comprises mostly older men who got screwed over by the divorce courts. These men got Peterson's sympathy, as he had treated and gotten to know a number of them in his own clinical practice.

Then there are the bitter and resentful younger guys, who have been rejected by women many times, or more generally have had unsatisfying love lives. These men were censured by Peterson even in his seemingly apologetic statements. (I guess the "pathetic weasel" epithet was aimed more specifically at this type of MGTOW.)

Personally, I think the distinction made by Peterson, and even some MGTOW themselves, is useless. The path through which each of us reaches, or at least approximates, the truth about women and relationships doesn't matter all that much in the end.

I propose that bitterness and resentment are eminently useful emotions, provided they are not indulged in endlessly, because they sensitize you to see some of the less pleasant realities of life more clearly. I also propose that younger, never-married MGTOW pose more of a threat to the present social order (and probably also to Peterson personally) than the older, divorced ones, because the latter have already sacrificed at the altar of gynocracy and the feminine imperative, while the former may never do so.

Let us not be divided. The six-figure divorce rape victim and the neckbearded basement-dwelling incel are equally my brothers in MGTOW, as are all possible other types. Personally, I'm in my thirties, disabled, and unemployed, and therefore not interesting to women. Does this make me any less worthy to be called MGTOW. I think not.

Any thoughts on this subject, critical or otherwise, would be warmly appreciated.