Pinned: Misogyny Thread
- Thread starter Jerry Mathers
- Start date
WinterBorn
Verified User
Women don't offer leadership, they worry about things and create problems in their own head.
And regarding problems, they don't solve them; they focus on elaborate blame strategies instead.
and when they have any real leadership impulse, its about fucking up the work place with more dei and misandry (hatred of men).
You need to get out and meet more women. I know numerous women who are nothing like your description.
Jerry Mathers
Was it me?
no you don't.
WinterBorn
Verified User
Ok, if he wants to stay hidden and avoid any interactions, so be it. I think it is a sad way to live.
Jerry Mathers
Was it me?
I'm sorry you don't know what the fuck you're talking about, boomer senility expert.
A reasonable defense of MGTOW—“men going their own way”—is that some young men are responding to a social environment in which they feel relationships, institutions, and public debate no longer reliably reward their participation. At its best, MGTOW means emphasizing independence: building a career, maintaining friendships, improving health, developing purpose, and declining marriage or dating when the perceived costs outweigh the benefits. A man should not be required to pursue romance, fatherhood, or conventional masculinity to be considered successful.
From a young man’s point of view, this stance can seem understandable for several reasons. He may see public institutions increasingly organized around group identity, diversity targets, and historical redress, while being told that his own frustrations are either trivial or evidence of moral failure. The 2023 Students for Fair Admissions decision, for example, ended race-based affirmative action in college admissions at Harvard and UNC after the Court concluded that the policies impermissibly treated race as a negative factor for some applicants. The decision did not concern gender or establish that every diversity program is illegal, but it reinforced a broader public argument that individuals should not be treated as representatives of inherited group categories. Encyclopedia Britannica1
That argument can resonate with young men who believe that fairness should be individual rather than demographic. They may also feel that modern discussions of gender often treat men primarily as beneficiaries of patriarchy, potential threats, or obstacles to be managed. High-profile debates over sexual misconduct, workplace equity, dating norms, and male privilege have addressed real problems, but a young man can experience the surrounding rhetoric as collective suspicion: he is expected to accept responsibility for historical wrongdoing while receiving little recognition for difficulties affecting men today, such as educational underperformance, social isolation, precarious work, or uncertainty about acceptable masculine behavior.
MGTOW can therefore function as a refusal of compulsory participation. Its strongest version says: “I will not define my worth by female approval, and I will not enter arrangements I regard as legally, financially, or emotionally unsafe.” That can be a rational personal boundary. Marriage and relationships involve genuine obligations, and men are entitled to evaluate those obligations carefully rather than being shamed into accepting them.
The important distinction is between withdrawal from an institution and hostility toward a class of people. A man may decide not to marry without concluding that women are manipulative, inferior, or collectively responsible for his disappointments. He may criticize family law, workplace policies, or dating culture while still treating women as individuals. Likewise, opposition to race-based preferences can be grounded in equal treatment without denying the historical discrimination that gave rise to affirmative action. The Court itself left room for considering an applicant’s individual experiences, including experiences of discrimination, so long as the person is evaluated as an individual rather than assigned a group-based advantage. Justia1
Constant organized discrimination—whether actual, perceived, or inconsistently applied—can produce hostility and apathy through a predictable process:
- Loss of trust: If institutions repeatedly communicate that a person’s sex, race, or class makes him morally suspect or less deserving, he may stop believing that rules are neutral.
- Status threat: Repeated exclusion or public devaluation creates anger because it signals that advancement depends on identity rather than effort.
- Learned futility: When people conclude that hard work will not change outcomes, they often disengage rather than continue investing in institutions they consider rigged.
- Group generalization: Frustration with organizations can be redirected toward the people associated with them. This is where justified institutional criticism can become misogyny, racism, or another form of scapegoating.
- Emotional self-protection: Apathy can become a shield against rejection. If a young man decides that dating, school, politics, or work are pointless, he no longer has to risk disappointment—but he also forfeits opportunities for connection and achievement.
A constructive defense of MGTOW should therefore defend autonomy, equal treatment, skepticism toward coercive social expectations, and the right to opt out—not contempt for women or permanent isolation. The healthiest version is a disciplined personal philosophy: improve your life, choose relationships freely, demand reciprocal standards, criticize institutions specifically, and avoid turning private disappointment into a theory that half the population is inherently corrupt. That preserves the legitimate insight behind MGTOW while rejecting the hostility that can make it self-defeating.
WinterBorn
Verified User
Good debate strategy! Avoid the topic and just attack the posters.
I do know what I am talking about. And what is wrong with what I said? Seeing only worthless women? Either expand your search, live with the worthless ones, or be celebate.
Jerry Mathers
Was it me?
A reasonable defense of MGTOW—“men going their own way”—is that some young men are responding to a social environment in which they feel relationships, institutions, and public debate no longer reliably reward their participation. At its best, MGTOW means emphasizing independence: building a career, maintaining friendships, improving health, developing purpose, and declining marriage or dating when the perceived costs outweigh the benefits. A man should not be required to pursue romance, fatherhood, or conventional masculinity to be considered successful.
From a young man’s point of view, this stance can seem understandable for several reasons. He may see public institutions increasingly organized around group identity, diversity targets, and historical redress, while being told that his own frustrations are either trivial or evidence of moral failure. The 2023 Students for Fair Admissions decision, for example, ended race-based affirmative action in college admissions at Harvard and UNC after the Court concluded that the policies impermissibly treated race as a negative factor for some applicants. The decision did not concern gender or establish that every diversity program is illegal, but it reinforced a broader public argument that individuals should not be treated as representatives of inherited group categories. Encyclopedia Britannica1
That argument can resonate with young men who believe that fairness should be individual rather than demographic. They may also feel that modern discussions of gender often treat men primarily as beneficiaries of patriarchy, potential threats, or obstacles to be managed. High-profile debates over sexual misconduct, workplace equity, dating norms, and male privilege have addressed real problems, but a young man can experience the surrounding rhetoric as collective suspicion: he is expected to accept responsibility for historical wrongdoing while receiving little recognition for difficulties affecting men today, such as educational underperformance, social isolation, precarious work, or uncertainty about acceptable masculine behavior.
MGTOW can therefore function as a refusal of compulsory participation. Its strongest version says: “I will not define my worth by female approval, and I will not enter arrangements I regard as legally, financially, or emotionally unsafe.” That can be a rational personal boundary. Marriage and relationships involve genuine obligations, and men are entitled to evaluate those obligations carefully rather than being shamed into accepting them.
The important distinction is between withdrawal from an institution and hostility toward a class of people. A man may decide not to marry without concluding that women are manipulative, inferior, or collectively responsible for his disappointments. He may criticize family law, workplace policies, or dating culture while still treating women as individuals. Likewise, opposition to race-based preferences can be grounded in equal treatment without denying the historical discrimination that gave rise to affirmative action. The Court itself left room for considering an applicant’s individual experiences, including experiences of discrimination, so long as the person is evaluated as an individual rather than assigned a group-based advantage. Justia1
Constant organized discrimination—whether actual, perceived, or inconsistently applied—can produce hostility and apathy through a predictable process:
- Loss of trust: If institutions repeatedly communicate that a person’s sex, race, or class makes him morally suspect or less deserving, he may stop believing that rules are neutral.
- Status threat: Repeated exclusion or public devaluation creates anger because it signals that advancement depends on identity rather than effort.
- Learned futility: When people conclude that hard work will not change outcomes, they often disengage rather than continue investing in institutions they consider rigged.
- Group generalization: Frustration with organizations can be redirected toward the people associated with them. This is where justified institutional criticism can become misogyny, racism, or another form of scapegoating.
- Emotional self-protection: Apathy can become a shield against rejection. If a young man decides that dating, school, politics, or work are pointless, he no longer has to risk disappointment—but he also forfeits opportunities for connection and achievement.
A constructive defense of MGTOW should therefore defend autonomy, equal treatment, skepticism toward coercive social expectations, and the right to opt out—not contempt for women or permanent isolation. The healthiest version is a disciplined personal philosophy: improve your life, choose relationships freely, demand reciprocal standards, criticize institutions specifically, and avoid turning private disappointment into a theory that half the population is inherently corrupt. That preserves the legitimate insight behind MGTOW while rejecting the hostility that can make it self-defeating.
Jerry Mathers
Was it me?
half of the population would find the above essay repellant, however.
WinterBorn
Verified User
Before we do that, how about we get men to try not being violent towards women.
1 in 3 women with be physically or emotionally abused in their lifetime. If something was harming 1 in 3 men, it would be considered a national emergency.
"We"? I'm not violent toward women. If you are, turn yourself in to the police.
BTW, it is possible for society to do many things simultaneously.
That looks like a guess to me. How does anyone know what the future holds?
Childhood physical and emotional abuse experienced by men occur at meaningful rates (various studies put lifetime physical abuse of boys/men in the 20–30% range depending on definition and sample), and adult men experience abuse from family members, acquaintances, or others. National crime surveys capture only a fraction of incidents because many men do not report to police.
Male victims are consistently under-recognized. Help-seeking is lower, services are fewer, and cultural expectations around masculinity contribute to underreporting. Both men and women experience IPV; patterns of severity, frequency, injury, and fear often differ by gender in population studies.
When was this declared a national emergency?
Remember, you're all about being opposed to abuse of minorities.
WinterBorn
Verified User
You misunderstood me again.
I am not talking about having abusers police themselves. I am talking about the general public, society, putting a stop to it. Granted, we will likely never stop it completely. But we can damn sure make sure the abusers pay, one way or another.
Have I? Maybe it's your problem. Have you considered improving your communication skills?
Does that mean you won't confess?
Aren't you glad we have laws?
Who's "we", and what won't "we" be unlikely to stop completely?
Do you have a mouse in your pocket?
I'm not a vigilante. Are you?
WinterBorn
Verified User
Seems odd that you are one of the very few who seems to have difficulty understanding me. Should I use smaller words?
Confess what?
Yes, most laws passed are good laws.
We (as in our society) will likely be unable to completely eradicate domestic violence.
Jerry Mathers
Was it me?
now you're just a simp ass little nutless feminist simp.
no it wouldn't.
society hates men.
you and your stupidity prove it.
Seems odd that you'd claim that without a shred of proof.
If it helps you type 'em, go ahead. Try using some that make sense, while you're at it.
I seem to recall that you mentioned violence against women in this meme thread a few minutes ago. Inappropriately, I believe. If you don't have a guilty conscience, why'd you introduce what is IMO an incongruous subject like that?
Let me guess; you'll be the judge of said "goodness"?
I'm doing my part by not committing any. How about you?
BTW, didn't you mention "emotional abuse"?
Jerry Mathers
Was it me?
winterborn is a fake alpha simp groveller, allegedly "holding other men accountable", trying to appease his pussy-holding abuser.
You've nailed him, Jerry.
The tell is usually when he posts a laugh emoji or says he's bored.
Jerry Mathers
Was it me?
this is what I do.
Don't you think it's odd that he posted about violence toward women in your meme thread, Jerry?
Was that "white knighting", or something more sinister?