From RationalWiki



Archives for this talk page: <1> <2>

This page is automatically archived by Archiver Archives for this talk page:

We've been DESTROYED [ edit ]

https://www.mgtow.com/forums/topic/humor-rational-wikis-entry-for-mgtow/ FU22YC47P07470 (talk/stalk) 06:27, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

*cowers in fear* БaбyЛuigi OнФire 🚓 T | C ) 06:30, 31 December 2017 (UTC) I love how the original poster complains that "pick up artist" tropes don't apply to MGTOW (do they not?) and then almost every other post that comes afterwards is a user calling us manginas and blabbing "I'm a real man standing on my two feet apart with my balls hanging down" and the whole "woman controlling you and bitching at you all the time". I certainly don't see any "pick up artist" stupidity in that. Humorous indeed. -- Shabi DOO 20:45, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

A better sign [ edit ]

This one or this? 86.191.120.238 (talk) 14:41, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

The (UK) No Through Road sign - even has a red pill. Anna Livia (talk) 19:21, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Nationalists [ edit ]

Most white nationalists and traditionalists are not very happy with them either. And national socialists think it is a ruse from the Jews to accelerate white genocide. There is serious tension between the groups. Perhaps interesting to note?

See https://www.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments/4le0n5/mgtow_vs_nationalism/ and And https://www.stormfront.org/forum/t1221388/ — Unsigned, by: 195.240.154.162 / talk 14:34, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

The "Herbivore men" of Japan [ edit ]

It's not unrelated . 217.119.171.154 (talk) 13:18, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

My edits were NOT counter-productive [ edit ]

https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Men_Going_Their_Own_Way&diff=1988767&oldid=1988766 Throughout all the time I spent making edits on Conservapedia I have never met such opposition to improving articles. I was adding worthwhile information to help explain what kinds of MGTOWS exist and you two decide to revert my edits without good reason. Reminds me of the bureaucratic jerkoffs who banned me from Wookieepedia for asking a simple question.

It also makes no sense to me why anyone in the Libertarian Left would oppose MGTOW, since some of them are essentially feminists who don't identify with the term. I see no reason why any liberal would want to oppose people refraining from being in interpersonal relationships or choosing celibacy, seeing how nobody is entitled to these people.

Interesting how some people claim that the only MGTOWS are all Incels who are single not determined by their life choices, yet in the same breath would say that nobody is an incel if they try to be likeable.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NOPQw1FXLY Ambition of Truth (talk) 10:35, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Here in Spain, when someone says they are leaving, it takes a long time. It could easily stretch out over an hour. Standing up, chatting, putting on the jacket, chatting more while slowly walking to the door, packing up some of the leftovers into a tupperware, chatting, standing one foot out the door, chatting and then eventually they step out the door and leave. If you are really unlucky, you have a friend who never seems to leave, despite him saying "I gotta go" five times and you saying "didn't you say you had to go"? You have to keep gently hinting they should go and after running out of patience, insist they go. If you are really unlucky the guest spends most of the time obsessing over some non-problem and no matter what you say the narrative repeats on loop. Despite motivating them to look at their problem in a new direction, the narrow glasses stay on their head and restrict any side view. These are the most difficult guests to get out of your house. If things become too tedious to bear, it's time to tell them "You're a broken record...just fuck off already". Though to be honest, most Spaniards are too polite and delicate to outright say something like that. Shabi DOO 19:03, 28 August 2018 (UTC) Honestly, do we even need an article on this subject? Are we going to write articles about every group of loners who unite around something stupid online? 141.134.75.236 (talk) 19:54, 28 August 2018 (UTC) Groups of losers who get together and put together insane ideologies driven off pseudoscience and wider crankery are kind of our entire focus. Not necessarily "online", but in general, yeah, it's necessary, if they manage to make claims that people are likely to be exposed to that are crazy, we cover it. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 20:06, 28 August 2018 (UTC) None of them are essentially feminists. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 20:06, 28 August 2018 (UTC) Ambition of Truth ☭Comrade GC☭ Ministry of Praise 21:01, 28 August 2018 (UTC) P.S. You seem to be conflating MGTOWs with Incels, don't. These are two subgroups of the Manosphere, not the same isolated movement. ☭Comrade GC☭ Ministry of Praise 21:01, 28 August 2018 (UTC) Well, that just calls for an answer. First of all, I wasn't the one who conflated Incels with MGTOWS; Matt Forney and Paul Joseph Watson did. If you bothered to read my edit before you deleted it, you'd see that (unless you're lying).

Second, you cannot prove that absolutely none of them are feminists. If you want to prove that to me, go out and sift through all 7 billion people, find every MGTOW under the Sun, and record what their opinions are. Until you do that, what you're saying is wrong. Feminism is an ideology that supposedly supports equal rights, whereas MGTOWS are a movement about men who choose to do their own thing. Saying that because the dominant voices in the MGTOW movement make the movement as a whole bad, then radical feminists, TERFS, lesbian separatists, and the authors of college Sociology textbooks (which are blatantly misandrist) all represent the feminist movement, making feminism a sadistic evil cult fundamentally that shouldn't exist. I mentioned this in my edit

And speaking of my edit, you gave no justification for removing it. My edits explained the types of MGTOWS that exist, and which ones were the ones you may not mind and the ones that are actual male supremacists. But it's okay. You don't need to tell me why. I already know the truth.

I know that secretly, you guys don't believe that any man should be able to choose to be single. Rather propagate the big lie that Return of Kunt's Matt Forney spreads that if someone is fuckable, then they all fuck and be good little slaves to their masters. But I actually am more enlightened than the MGTOWS, because whereas they believe abusers use them in order to gain money or just fucking, I know they do it out of SADISM. Abusers have Satan fingering them whilst they torment those they trick into getting into relationships with in order to bring them into the second circle of Hell with them. And yes, some MGTOWS (such as Mayor of MGTOWN on YouTube) do this too, and should be called out. However, shaming anyone for choosing to be single or not having sex is exactly what Return of Kings has been doing for years. But why would RationalWiki users do that? Don't you guys believe that everyone should be free to choose whether they are single or not? Is that not a legitimate choice? Or have misandrist, female supremacist abusers taken over the entire website and joined the ROK asswipes in shaming their victims in hopes of getting them into abusive relationships when most judges and juries are full of white knights? I know that the sweet sounds of human suffering make them wet, and they don't want society accepting people living a schizoid lifestyle without treating them like pariahs for depriving them of their supply of victims to abuse. So the PUA's, abusers, and neocons (who never get enough wage slaves and cannon fodder) will conspire against us. Ambition of Truth (talk) 00:13, 29 August 2018 (UTC) Just fucking wow. I haven't seen this much Manosphere lingo and soundbites in one place in a very long time. What about you Ikanreed ☭Comrade GC☭ Ministry of Praise 00:24, 29 August 2018 (UTC) I'm constantly immersed in a hell of my own making because I'm constantly exposing myself to "opposing beliefs". This stuff is not out of the ordinary for any given incel post, tbh. Especially the "Aha, I have it, I understand the sexual dynamics of the world truly, and guess what, it's that other people are evil to good and smart me". Regardless, about your edit: there aren't types or tiers or rings of supremacy to ideologies. There aren't deeper and more fundamental insights on the path to the true truth of your ideology. You don't have levels, and you don't have any special insight that places you above your peers, no matter how strongly you believe it. The people who think you're full of shit aren't deluded morons, they've got pretty good reasons like, say... you blaming satan for the friend zone, which is, without reservation, crazy. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 01:23, 29 August 2018 (UTC) Damn Ikanreed! Back at it again with the lack of evidence of me being friendzoned! At no point did I mention rejection, but that won't stop you from blatantly strawmanning me.

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ This time, you've misunderstood them, GrammarCommie. They were implying a horseshoe theory bullshit where both far left and far right want massive population growth. Which is spurious and wrong, but not incorrectly describing white supremacists. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 21:35, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

I tried reading the last paragraph Ambition of Truth's second post and I understood none of it. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 21:41, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Section removed [ edit ]

The alt-right and white nationalists are sometimes dismissive of MGTOW, as the former wants increased birthrates to prevent a decline in the white population, while the latter would tank birthrates if they got their way.

Agree with the removal here since the above about MGTOW is wrong. MGTOW won't result in decline of birth/fertility rates because its strongly anti-women's rights and anti-feminism. Note that the number of years a woman has spent in education is inversely correlated with the number of children she will bear in her lifetime, so the more education a woman has - the less children she will have e.g. across Sub-Saharan Africa, women with a university education have a TFR of about 1, high school education have a TFR between 2 and 3, whereas those with no education have a TFR of 6.Tobias (talk) 17:01, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Major edit proposal [ edit ]

I think we should remove the final sentence of the first paragraph:

In other words, it's a hilarious analog to the lesbian separatist movement, but without homosexuality — the LGBT rights movement is an feminist, Cultural Marxist, obstacle to male self-ownership, apparently.[4]

As I don't think it belongs in the lede and it distracts from the main point of the whole article. Instead I think we should focus on how sad and pointless the endeavour is:

In other words, it's a hilarious and terribly sad movement which leaves people, quite pointlessly, feeling alienated, bitter towards and entire gender, obsessed with non-existent "male oppression" and people self-banished to loneliness based on faulty assumptions and "problems" for which there is no reason they cannot be overcome.

Or something of the sort. ShabiDOO 12:52, 6 May 2020 (UTC)