The incompatibility of "True Forced Loneliness" and MGTOW

Topic by IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)

IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)

Home Forums MGTOW Central The incompatibility of "True Forced Loneliness" and MGTOW

This topic contains 25 replies, has 10 voices, and was last updated by IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)  IGMOW (I Go My Own Way) 3 years, 6 months ago.

Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 25 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #57178
    +2
    IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)
    IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)
    Participant
    2570

    So another thing I ran into in regards to MGTOW, the “manosphere”, MRA, and so on, is this thing called “True Forced Loneliness”.  I am going to try to be positive in what I am doing here, but there are some things that really test that.  I will say True Forced Loneliness is one.  I am not even going to get into the conspiracy theories on it, how such is meant to destroy men, by government powers.

    What I can flat out say is “True Forced Loneliness” is not compatible with MGTOW at all.  As I see it, a MGTOW may be put in a place where he does have “True Forced Loneliness” (I did have Rejected as a category for why a man would go MGTOW), but when one decides to go their own way, they take what doesn’t work, and let it go, and move on to what can.  As I see it, if women end up rejected a MGTOW, the MGTOW will then treat it as a document of liberation, and work on themselves.  Yes, the loneliness can hurt like hell, but you pick yourself up, go on, and find out what works, and get a better attitude and not care what others reject you.  You be true to yourself, and you don’t care haters hate.  If you need some emotional support, you get it.  You find real friends who can help, if you need them.  You use the rejecting as a sign that the person rejecting just isn’t a fit.

    What I see from “True Forced Loneliness” is these individuals think they have a special kind of victim card, and playing it will cause the world to come rushing to them, give them goodies and take pity on them.  Maybe they think that women will find them so desperate that they need to help.  Maybe they get media coverage and there will be funds to study it.  Maybe people will break through and help, because they are dire.  This playing the victim card I don’t see in any way as compatible with MGTOW in any way.  We are all victimized to some degree by the system, others, and so on.  Some are less so, others get it real bad, but you need to move on and step forth.  And yes, you can get really, really wounded, but you won’t get over it, if you insist on using the victim as your identity.  The SJW/Feminist side plays this card all the time, and I am sure MRA does it also.  But a MGTOW?  Well, you own up to your hurt, but you turn it into a strength if you can, or a known limitation.  You don’t expect the world to jump on your bandwagon and pity you to success.

    Please feel free to comment and correct me here.

    "I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

    #57211
    +4
    RedHeadedStranger
    RedHeadedStranger
    Participant
    204

    Are you saying that because some men have no choice but to go their own way, they aren’t going their own way?  That some men are so unattractive (socially, physically, mentally, financially, etc.) to women, that MGTOW is not freely chosen?  That some men are just losers with no chance of a relationship, so by claiming to be MGTOW, they are taking credit for something which they have not freely chosen?  That such men would likely be blue-pill men if they were indeed more attractive to women, and never become MGTOW, even after being offered the red-pill?

    Not trying to put you on the spot, just reading between the lines.  Correct me if I am wrong.

     

    My $0.02:

    It comes down to free will — where there is no choice, there is no morality.  Don’t make the mistake of abstracting pride of being a MGHOW away from its causes.  Pride is the virtue a man acquires from moral achievement.  Rationality, independence, integrity, honesty, justice, and productiveness, are all virtues that result in pride.  In regards to TFL and MGTOW, I believe that it is rational to be a proud MGTOW in the face of TFL.  A MGHOW is choosing independence; he is choosing integrity; he is choosing honesty, justice, and productiveness.  Therefore, his choices legitimately result in his pride of being a MGHOW if the face of his TFL.

    TFL may seem unjust, but it is not unjust – it is unfortunate.  Justice is simply the principle that each man gets what he deserves – in accordance with his choices, not in accordance with his fortune.  So, while it may seem as if TFL MGTOW cannot properly claim to be MGTOW, when we look closely at the way in which the pride of being a MGHOW is earned by each man, regardless of his fortune; we can see that MGTOW is indeed compatible with TFL.

    Furthermore, and more to the point, the TFL MGTOW is also choosing independence.  He knows that if he only lowers his standards far enough, he could have a mate.  For every TFL man, there is a TFL woman.  He refuses to lower his standards, and therefore chooses the virtue of independence over the vice of dependence.  Again, resulting in legitimate MGTOW pride.

     

     

     

    #57235
    +4
    Cipher Highwind
    Cipher Highwind
    Participant
    1143

    “True forced loneliness” is a label concocted for the sole purpose of denigrating MGTOW.  Anyone who adopts it is an imbecile.

    #57236
    +2
    IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)
    IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)
    Participant
    2570

    Maybe I should clarify a bit that someone can be in a TFL situation, and life dealt them really bad cards.  To get empowered, and go MGTOW, they have to move past being stuck in the TFL, and work on getting empowered and making the best out of wasn’t a good situation.  Take ownership of it and make the best.  As I see TFL, they don’t take ownership but blame conspiracies for their situation, as if it is some sort of giant plot.  Heck, I could go TFL with myself, and my life, but I don’t.  I prefer more MGTOW with things.  I just can’t play victim mode and get on with my life.

    I don’t mind tweaking this and my goal isn’t to say “suck it up”.  But, it is to do what one can to get somewhere.

    I guess also I am not a huge fan of “justice” as a concept, nor rights actually.  People don’t get what they deserve in life, and to end up believing you are entitled to something is a road to depression, when lacking power.  I see power coming from overcoming what didn’t work and compensating.  Empowering comes with helping with this and helping others.

    "I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

    #57237
    +1
    IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)
    IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)
    Participant
    2570

    “True forced loneliness” is a label concocted for the sole purpose of denigrating MGTOW. Anyone who adopts it is an imbecile.

    I disagree here. It was a label someone adapted on YouTube, and got some other followers with it, to be able to try to play a victim card, hoping it would result in companionship.  I won’t deny that TFL does happen, just the MGTOW way is one of moving past that, and empowering oneself.  Life deals you lemons, either send the lemons back and demand that it give you better or make lemonade.  I think Cave Johnson spoke on this best:

    "I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

    #57245
    +1
    Cipher Highwind
    Cipher Highwind
    Participant
    1143

    I’m glad you disagree. It is never a good sign when fools agree with one’s self.

    “True forced loneliness” is a label concocted for the sole purpose of denigrating MGTOW. Anyone who adopts it is an imbecile.

    I disagree here. It was a label someone adapted on YouTube, and got some other followers with it, to be able to try to play a victim card, hoping it would result in companionship. I won’t deny that TFL does happen, just the MGTOW way is one of moving past that, and empowering oneself. Life deals you lemons, either send the lemons back and demand that it give you better or make lemonade. I think Cave Johnson spoke on this best:

    #57261
    +1
    RedHeadedStranger
    RedHeadedStranger
    Participant
    204

    . I guess also I am not a huge fan of “justice” as a concept, nor rights actually. People don’t get what they deserve in life, and to end up believing you are entitled to something is a road to depression, when lacking power. I see power coming from overcoming what didn’t work and compensating. Empowering comes with helping with this and helping others.

    True, people do not get what they deserve in life.  But they should.  This is the principle of justice.  So if you believe this; you believe in justice.

    If you don’t believe in rights, then you believe it is OK to kill, assault, rob, and cheat.  For, how can you say that people don’t have the right to live, but it is wrong to kill them on a whim?  Or that people don’t have a right to safe passage, but it is wrong to ambush them just for the hell of it?  Or that people do not have the right to own anything at all, but it is wrong to steal when the opportunity presents itself?  Because God said so?  OK.  But this does not solve the contradiction.

    Rights do not tell us that we must do anything; they only tell us what we may not do. We may not aggress against another person.  We may not kill, steal, or threaten to kill or steal.  If you agree with this, then you believe in rights.  To believe in wrongs is to believe in rights.

    If you still believe that justice is a vacuous concept, or that rights are illusory, I’d be interested to know why.

    #57268
    RedHeadedStranger
    RedHeadedStranger
    Participant
    204

    As I see TFL, they don’t take ownership but blame conspiracies for their situation, as if it is some sort of giant plot. 

    I would argue that these men aren’t in a state of TRUE Forced Loneliness, but Falsely Chosen Loneliness.  I agree with you that many of the men who see themselves as being subject to TFL are in fact just whining and playing the victim; and are not truly forced to be lonely.  There are very few men who are actually experiencing TFL.  There are many more who fraudulently choose the label as an excuse to garner pity.  I wasn’t speaking of those men.  I was speaking of men who do not use it as an excuse, but rather accept the reality of their inability to attract a suitable mate.  These men can be MGTOW.

    #57270
    +1
    IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)
    IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)
    Participant
    2570

    Ok, let me take several things here on, one at a time:

    * In regards to rights, it can be part of a framework for law, that enable a society to allow people to have access to things, and also prevent loss of things.  There aren’t rights outside of a framework of a society that can enforce them with law.  Without the society and law, there is just freedom.  So, rights, by their nature are limited and not sufficient for resolving issues regarding conflict in will of people.

    * With rights, people argue anything and everything is a right, and they are entitled to it. the SJW/Feminist side plays the rights card all the time.  It then comes down to the acquisition of power and using it.

    * All rights, by their nature will impose upon the freedoms of someone else, unless everyone is in isolation.  There is no such thing as rights that aren’t restrictive.

    * Rights center around having your will imposed on others to get what you want.  In this, there is no personal responsibility at all that can be found, and how I should restrain myself, or what I should to with my freedom for others.  Only something with duty can do this, or something else (love?) that can cause people to act in a manner that is positive and people benefit.  You never get this out of rights.  Even respect, which is needed to honor rights, has to come from duty or something, or it isn’t done.  Anything else is just forced compliance by individuals to a bully, whether it be the state or some sort of person weapons and bullying system that is used.

    In regards to justice, while I do believe that it is best if we can have people improve, the whole, “Get what they deserve” is fundamentally flawed and can’t be answered in a way that works well, and it will come from again coercion:

    * It is human nature to believe you are wronged and need it fixed.  So, you look for someone to fix things.

    * The reliance on justice is now empowering for someone else.

    * People get dealt wrong cards in life, and have to deal with it, often without help.  It ends up impossible to determine what level help someone needs to get what they “deserve”.

    * Endless reliance on justice results in there not being an end to cycles of retribution.  A justice system, to deter people, will often make someone suffer far worse than what they did.  Steal money from someone?  You not only pay back the amount of money stolen, and even more, you are punished and paid even far beyond this.  This level of deterring punishing ends up being less just than the wrong, but is done in the name of justice.  A “gets what they deserve” will mean causing someone to lose things, and also never forgiving someone, which is a way to end the cycle of retribution.

    * Thinking about who “deserves” what is a recipe for discontent for someone.  It leads to resentment over someone who gets lucky.

    * There is untolds amount of evil that have been done by someone who goes on a vindictive campaign to cause loss, in the name of justice.  It is debatable whether or not more evil has been done in the name of vice or justice.

    That being said, I would say that a different framework for doing what is right is needed, besides “justice” and “rights”.  I do believe laws should be followed, and so on.  I am not one to do it out of fear of punishment, but for other reasons.

    I am sure I am missing a number of things here, but this is off the top of my head.  And with this being said, feel free to support justice and rights and argue for them.  I just seen such as not really productive to do what I need in life.  I can spend way too much time trying to “get even” with someone, and not enough getting head.

    "I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

    #57271
    +1
    IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)
    IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)
    Participant
    2570

    As I see TFL, they don’t take ownership but blame conspiracies for their situation, as if it is some sort of giant plot.

    I would argue that these men aren’t in a state of TRUE Forced Loneliness, but Falsely Chosen Loneliness. I agree with you that many of the men who see themselves as being subject to TFL are in fact just whining and playing the victim; and are not truly forced to be lonely. There are very few men who are actually experiencing TFL. There are many more who fraudulently choose the label as an excuse to garner pity. I wasn’t speaking of those men. I was speaking of men who do not use it as an excuse, but rather accept the reality of their inability to attract a suitable mate. These men can be MGTOW.

    I would say that going MGTOW is a good way for the TFL to get out of their rut and make something of themselves.  Just because you were forced to be somewhere, and life does that, doesn’t mean that someone can’t find other ways to get on with their lives.  There are lives fed that, “if you do so and so, you can get someone” and “there is everyone for someone”.  TFL need to reframe their being and find strength in where they are and become resourceful.  Losing the you deserve someone also will help there.

    "I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

    #57278
    RedHeadedStranger
    RedHeadedStranger
    Participant
    204

    Agreed.

    #57300
    +4
    Smitty the Great One
    Smitty the Great One
    Participant
    1528

    Richard, it seems to me you’re looking for some sort of validation of an orthodoxy for MGTOW. That’s not going to work, and I’ll tell you why. These guys you call TFL are our brothers. They need our help, and have already been s~~~ on enough, now here you are trying to drop another load of s~~~ on them…. f~~~ you buddy. I don’t think you appreciate the perspective they bring, and what they can gain. Who are you to deny them an opportunity at self actualization? I know I won’t deny a man a chance to improve his life and escape the bondage that women and society sentenced him to. I will help ANY man to find his own path, regardless of how he came to his “Red Pill” moment.

    And another thing, you’ve been here like a minute… who are you to label and categorize us? This isn’t an organization, we have no leaders, AND WE LIKE IT THAT WAY. Every man deserves a chance at a better life, whether he avails himself to it is his choice, but you sir don’t get to disqualify anybody.

    Life is too long to play by someone elses rules....

    #57302
    RedHeadedStranger
    RedHeadedStranger
    Participant
    204

    In regards to rights, it can be part of a framework for law, that enable a society to allow people to have access to things, and also prevent loss of things.

    Agreed.

    There aren’t rights outside of a framework of a society that can enforce them with law.

    Absolutely correct.  Rights place a negative obligation on an individual only in the context of his interaction with another individual, i.e. a society.

    However, imagine a desert island with only 2 men (not strangers).  The simplest society.  It would still be wrong for one to assault the other on a whim.  Just begin to whoop his ass for no reason.  The very act of the man successfully defending himself from his attacker would instantiate the enforcement of rights by society.  That’s all it means to for a society to enforce the law.

    Without the society and law, there is just freedom. So, rights, by their nature are limited and not sufficient for resolving issues regarding conflict in will of people.

    Agreed: a man alone with no possibility of interaction with other individuals is free;  rights are limited; and rights are not sufficient for resolving issues regarding conflict.

    However, rights exist as a property of an individual even though he is not consciously making use of them. For example, a lone man still retains his right to not be ambushed by another person.  Even if there is no other person, he still retains his right to not be aggressed against.

    Rights are indeed limited — limited to the interactions of at least 2 people, and limited to acts of aggression.

    Rights are not sufficient for resolving issues regarding conflict.  A right is not a magic shield that protects you from attack.  A right is moral property of an individual.  As such, it only imposes a negative obligation on another individual, an obligation to not aggress against you.  This does not violate his rights.  He cannot have the right to aggress you for no reason at all.  Rights only pertain to freedom from unwarranted aggression, there is no such thing as a right to aggress (force, fraud, or threat of these) against an innocent person.

    With rights, people argue anything and everything is a right, and they are entitled to it. the SJW/Feminist side plays the rights card all the time. It then comes down to the acquisition of power and using it.

    This is because they do not understand the concept of rights.  They falsely believe that rights can impose positive obligations upon people.  Rights cannot and do not.  They misuse the word.  The elite do it on purpose, because they wish to use the force of the state to force people to bow to their will.  They negated the concept of rights in people’s minds by equating coercion with rights.  This allows groups to claim ‘rights’ that impose positive obligations on others.  The people do not know that they have been duped.  They really believe they have a right to force others.

    All rights, by their nature will impose upon the freedoms of someone else, unless everyone is in isolation. There is no such thing as rights that aren’t restrictive.

    Absolutely true, see above.  May I add only that, while a man is free to aggress against another, he is wrong to do so.  We are differentiating between moral and immoral behavior.  Rights are simply ‘triggers’ or ‘lines in the sand’ so to speak.  If a man violates the rights of another person, the person is right to act in defense of his person and property.  That’s all it means.

    Rights center around having your will imposed on others to get what you want.

    True — only in the sense that a man has a right to live free from coercion and aggression.  They do not enable you to use force to get what you want.  See above.

    In this, there is no personal responsibility at all that can be found, and how I should restrain myself, or what I should to with my freedom for others.

    I do not agree with this one.  Rights are your obligation to not aggress against others.  You are free to act, but it is your personal responsibility to restrain yourself from initiating aggression.

    Only something with duty can do this, or something else (love?) that can cause people to act in a manner that is positive and people benefit. You never get this out of rights.

    Duty is non-chosen obligation.  It is an obligation imposed upon you by another.  It is a positive obligation, and remember, rights are negative obligations, therefore, rights cannot be a duty.  A chosen obligation is simply an obligation.

    There is no need to look any farther than rationality when choosing to ‘act in a manner that is positive and people benefit’.

    Even respect, which is needed to honor rights, has to come from duty or something, or it isn’t done.

    Respect is a rational response to those who have earned it.  It is rational to respect those who have not aggressed against you.  It need not come from ‘duty or something’.  It will be done because it is rational.

    Anything else is just forced compliance by individuals to a bully, whether it be the state or some sort of person weapons and bullying system that is used.

    Always a violation of rights, and always wrong — except in self-defense.  Remember we are talking about the initiation of force — not retaliatory.  A man does not violate an attackers rights by defending himself.

    In regards to justice, while I do believe that it is best if we can have people improve, the whole, “Get what they deserve” is fundamentally flawed and can’t be answered in a way that works well, and it will come from again coercion:

    ‘Get what they deserve’ in the context of justice, simply means that: if they violate the rights of another person by assault, theft, fraud, or the threat of these, the person acts in such a way as to protect his person and property.  This does indeed come from coercion — from the attacker’s decision to coerce an innocent person.  If you mean that it is wrong to use retaliatory force to right a wrong, you are mistaken.  A man has the right to defend himself and his property from the aggressions of others.

    It is human nature to believe you are wronged and need it fixed. So, you look for someone to fix things.

    Absolutely true.  The concept of justice is primordial in human beings.  We often are unable to defend against others without help.  We yell for help.  We hire detectives to solve crimes.  We hire judges to hear our case.   There is nothing wrong with this.

    The reliance on justice is now empowering for someone else.

    Yes, but not in the sense with which you were speaking.  They come to our aid, and help reconcile the aggression.

    People get dealt wrong cards in life, and have to deal with it, often without help. It ends up impossible to determine what level help someone needs to get what they “deserve”.

    We have been speaking within the context of rights and law and justice.  People deserve to be treated in accord with their chosen actions.  If a man aggresses against another person, he deserves to be stopped.  As for charity, a person may deserve a helping hand.  This does not give him the right to demand it.  A person may not use force against another except in self-defense against an aggressor.  A man may not force you to help someone who is in need.

    Endless reliance on justice results in there not being an end to cycles of retribution. A justice system, to deter people, will often make someone suffer far worse than what they did. Steal money from someone? You not only pay back the amount of money stolen, and even more, you are punished and paid even far beyond this. This level of deterring punishing ends up being less just than the wrong, but is done in the name of justice. A “gets what they deserve” will mean causing someone to lose things, and also never forgiving someone, which is a way to end the cycle of retribution.

    Our justice system is very flawed.  But I am talking about things as they should be, not as they are.  We are discussing rights and justice.  Sure there are frequent abuses of the system — and these are unjust.

    Thinking about who “deserves” what is a recipe for discontent for someone. It leads to resentment over someone who gets lucky.

    I believe you are writing in the context of charity here.  This is unavoidable, and is no reason to dismiss the concepts of justice and rights.

    There is untolds amount of evil that have been done by someone who goes on a vindictive campaign to cause loss, in the name of justice. It is debatable whether or not more evil has been done in the name of vice or justice. That being said, I would say that a different framework for doing what is right is needed, besides “justice” and “rights”. I do believe laws should be followed, and so on. I am not one to do it out of fear of punishment, but for other reasons. I am sure I am missing a number of things here, but this is off the top of my head. And with this being said, feel free to support justice and rights and argue for them. I just seen such as not really productive to do what I need in life. I can spend way too much time trying to “get even” with someone, and not enough getting head.

    Yep, people do evil things in the name of justice.  Those people have unjustly aggressed against others.  They need to be punished for their misdeeds.  What is needed here is more justice, not less.  Go get some head!

    Thanks for responding with such a detailed post.  It was fun to talk about these things.

     

    #57316
    +1
    Ned Trent
    Ned Trent
    Participant
    4892

    What I see from “True Forced Loneliness” is these individuals think they have a special kind of victim card, and playing it will cause the world to come rushing to them, give them goodies and take pity on them. Maybe they think that women will find them so desperate that they need to help. Maybe they get media coverage and there will be funds to study it. Maybe people will break through and help, because they are dire. This playing the victim card I don’t see in any way as compatible with MGTOW in any way. We are all victimized to some degree by the system, others, and so on. Some are less so, others get it real bad, but you need to move on and step forth. And yes, you can get really, really wounded, but you won’t get over it, if you insist on using the victim as your identity. The SJW/Feminist side plays this card all the time, and I am sure MRA does it also. But a MGTOW? Well, you own up to your hurt, but you turn it into a strength if you can, or a known limitation. You don’t expect the world to jump on your bandwagon and pity you to success.

    One question there, richardhutnik:

    Would you ever imagine that it could be possible for say the “odd one out” TFLer type to A) get tired/sick of all the pity he might or might not have received over a long period of time and therefore eventually abandon his “victim card” as you put it to really become and truly embrace MGTOW full score and B) that he (again over time) eventually may have hardened more than enough through life experiences of women’s rejection of him, to eventually develop a strong enough character (whilst learning about female nature gynocracy etc. ie. in here) to fully and consciously withstand his “urge” to get laid altogether, since he after all wouldn’t even know what sexually he might have missed anyway, hearing about what it’s (supposedly) like to get laid only by hearsay in an oversexed society, by eventually realizing, that the media more often than not tend to overrate sex and relationships…?

    — just asking in my 2 cents kind of style  —

     

    Ned T.

    I'd rather die a natual death with a clear MGTOW conscience somewhere off the grid than one within "modern" civilisation with a big stress mark on my forehead and a couple of dozen tubes plugged into my body. Back to the plantation..? Me..? Hey, literally: I won't ever fucking kid myself...YZERLMNTSIC

    #57322
    +8
    ILiveAgain
    ILiveAgain
    Participant

    Labels labels labels ….. that’s how they break you down.

    If a supposed TFL, gay, straight, black, white, amputee or just plain privileged white male comes to mgtow …. for whatever reason …. then he is welcomed …. hopefully given a little education and insight.

    Then he can label himself as he sees fit.

    The bottom line is that we are all brothers in a system that labels us evil, dangerous & rapists.

    Our job is to help guys move forward at their own pace. Be their own man with their own agency.

    Some will and some won’t. Once we start judging and labeling …… we are no better.

    #57326
    +1
    Ned Trent
    Ned Trent
    Participant
    4892

    @ ILiveAgain: Well spoken there, sir (+1).

    I'd rather die a natual death with a clear MGTOW conscience somewhere off the grid than one within "modern" civilisation with a big stress mark on my forehead and a couple of dozen tubes plugged into my body. Back to the plantation..? Me..? Hey, literally: I won't ever fucking kid myself...YZERLMNTSIC

    #57334
    +1
    Mango Ingaway
    Mango Ingaway
    Participant
    2262

    To me tfl’ers are not really 100% compatible with mgtow, they want relationships but can’t get them, so they get frustrated so they join the tfl movement/group/whatever you call it. (It’s not called “forced loneliness” for nothing…)
    It seems like they’re more of a bunch of frustrated f~~~s rather than like mgtow’s are, people who have “been there, done that” and weighted the pro’s and con’s, then decided to go their own way.
    I bet if you gave a chick to a tfl’er, he’d want to f~~~ her really really bad…

    But tfl may be a gateway to mgtow, methinks.

    I will agree that a tfl’er could go past the “I’m a victim” mentality and go his own way. My biggest fear is that since they never really interacted with women, once they will have improved themselves, they may start attracting women, which would cause some kind of “blue pill relapse”, to call it that way. He’d then go back to the blue pill bs, and would get put through the meat grinder by a woman.

    Now this is where I may get some flack:

    I think a lot of this kind of guys, if they would go mgtow, would not be as mgtow as they would think they are (remember the video sandman made which had some strong blue pill aftertaste?). They’d be one blowjob away from the bluepill, I may say. They’ll try to skip the “frustration/anger” part of going your own way, but it is something you HAVE to go through and think about.
    They would directly like to pretend they give zero f~~~s about women while they’d still do, like a drug addict pretends he’s clean, even though he’s on the verge of going to his dealer to get “just one last dose”.
    This is one sure way to fail really going your own way and REALLY stop caring about women. Pretending you don’t want them like a fat f~~~ on a diet pretends he doesn’t want cake would be lying to themselves, and would eventually come back to bite them in the ass. So I’m saying this for their own good, I least that’s what I like to think.

    Members here seem to be hardcore mgtow, so they’re not concerned, but I’ve seen some comments on youtube mgtow vids that seemed more like the author had to vent than anything else. This is obviously NOT a bad thing, but we should provide them with mgtow knowledge that allows them to go past that. Anger and frustration can be very powerful drives in the beginning, but eventually you have to let it go, becase being angry all the time is not healthy AT ALL.

    These guys you call TFL are our brothers.

    First, THEY call themselves tfl, and I’m gonna be harsh, but actually they’re more like our retarded cousins. But I gotta say I tend to absolutely hate anyone with a victim mentality who’d rather bitch about life’s unfairness rather than improve themselves, be it feminists or whoever the f~~~ity f~~~ that is. To me, tfl is a bunch of bs. Sure they need our help, and I’ll gladly give it to them, but not if they keep the victimhood thing going.

    Here is a little knowledge from James Baldwin:

    “Any real change implies the breakup of the world as one has always known it, the loss of all that gave one an identity, the end of safety. And at such a moment, unable to see and not daring to imagine what the future will now bring forth, one clings to what one knew, or dreamed that one possessed. Yet, it is only when a man is able, without bitterness or self-pity, to surrender a dream he has long possessed that he is set free – he has set himself free – for higher dreams, for greater privileges.”
    ― from “Nobody Knows My Name”

    That’s perfectly suiting this discussion, I think. If you want to change things, start with yourself, because that’s the first thing you’ll have to deal with for your whole life, and anyway no one can change it for you.

    I don’t think you appreciate the perspective they bring, and what they can gain.

    I totally understand what they can gain. I fail to get what they would bring to us though. Victim mentality, nothanx. To me tfl is emo f~~~~~ry, end of story. In my native language we have a saying that roughly translates to “God helps those who help themselves”.

    Here’s an extract that suits very well from johntheother’s blog:

    “The sad Emo boys of the manosphere have to drop their sad Emo act and the TFL identity that goes along with it. If you call yourself a loser, and buy into it, you can expect to have the miserable life you have chosen.”
    He’s right on.

    I’m gonna get s~~~ for that, but truth hurts.

    Edit: sorry for the long ass reply

    It is a common failing of childhood to think that if one makes a hero out of a demon the demon will be satisfied.

    #57427
    IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)
    IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)
    Participant
    2570

    Richard, it seems to me you’re looking for some sort of validation of an orthodoxy for MGTOW. That’s not going to work, and I’ll tell you why. These guys you call TFL are our brothers. They need our help, and have already been s~~~ on enough, now here you are trying to drop another load of s~~~ on them…. f~~~ you buddy. I don’t think you appreciate the perspective they bring, and what they can gain. Who are you to deny them an opportunity at self actualization? I know I won’t deny a man a chance to improve his life and escape the bondage that women and society sentenced him to. I will help ANY man to find his own path, regardless of how he came to his “Red Pill” moment. And another thing, you’ve been here like a minute… who are you to label and categorize us? This isn’t an organization, we have no leaders, AND WE LIKE IT THAT WAY. Every man deserves a chance at a better life, whether he avails himself to it is his choice, but you sir don’t get to disqualify anybody.

    I am pretty close to ending up in a TFL camp.  I went through that and looked at one bad situation after another, with wants and so on, going unmet.  This is in a lot of areas.  I just had to develop coping skills, and maybe my difference is that I don’t make it my end all and be all.  So, I can relate to repeated rejection and so on.  I have tried and it failed, for the most part.  Hey, I am late 40s and haven’t ever had a girlfriend (I did get a woman who dropped marriage hints, but we were never a bf-gf. She soon after went down a real bad slide).  I am prime TFL candidate, but I learned from experience with other areas, going that route doesn’t get you anywhere.  Trying to play a victim card doesn’t get you anywhere at all.  It may for SJW/Feminist camp, and people trying to score political points.  But a white male playing that in society gets laughed at.  You look pathetic if you end up doing that, because the other side thinks you have all these privileges.  In this, I can say it is harsh what I say, by my interest is getting guys to snap out of it, if possible, and get healed, and eventually move beyond.

    As for validating MGTOW Orthodoxy, my interest is in understanding it, and not going off and saying things that don’t fit for what it is.  I also see some things hovering about that look to be counter-productive, which I wouldn’t adapt at all.  In what I write, I have an interest in trying to get some clearer insights that can help empower.

     

     

    "I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

    #57439
    Mango Ingaway
    Mango Ingaway
    Participant
    2262

    We don’t need the man up speech, again.  Okay tradcon?  Yes we are all special little snow flakes.

    Is the comment aimed at richard or somebody else? I kinda fail to see to who you’re replying :/

    It is a common failing of childhood to think that if one makes a hero out of a demon the demon will be satisfied.

    #57483
    +2
    RedHeadedStranger
    RedHeadedStranger
    Participant
    204
    As for validating MGTOW Orthodoxy, my interest is in understanding it, and not going off and saying things that don’t fit for what it is. I also see some things hovering about that look to be counter-productive, which I wouldn’t adapt at all. In what I write, I have an interest in trying to get some clearer insights that can help empower.
    Well said.
    Gents, the issue here is not one of labeling for the sake of judging.  We label for the sake of clarity.  We isolate the aspects of a complex set of ideas in order to better understand the issues.  Concepts represent classifications of things according to their relationships to other things.  We label our concepts, in order to define and delimit that which we are seeking to understand.  Labeling is a vital step in the formation of valid concepts.
    Sure, in the early stages of any movement, we might form invalid concepts and apply invalid labels.  The goal is understanding.  We may make mistakes along the way.
    In the context of MGTOW we start from observations and label people as red-pill, purple, and blue-pill.  I don’t hear anyone objecting to this.  But when we focus upon red-pill men, and attempt to explain the differences between a rather motley group of men, all of the sudden we refuse to be labeled.  This only hinders a more thorough understand of the phenomenon.
    I think we don’t like to be labeled, because it is seen as the first step toward discrimination and exclusion.  We are members of a group and want that group to remain robust.  The big tent approach.  We welcome red-pill men, and see no need to use labels other than the red-pill label.  This is mistaken.  Differences between us exist, and ignoring these differences will not help to further our cause.  Labeling the many facets of our group only helps to clarify our thinking when understand ourselves and our role in this movement.
    In the context of this thread, TFL has been identified as a particular state of being in a complex society.  We notice that some men share a common condition, and we isolate the properties of this condition and label it as TFL.  This is the essence of definition.  Definition is genus and species.  It say that something is a member of a group (genus), and then differentiates it from the group (species).
    There is nothing wrong with this, and in fact, attempts to define should be praised, not shunned.  Definition/labeling is the tool by which we develop and refine the complex concepts we encounter in our daily lives.
    But hey, to some, ignorance is bliss.
    note: whats up with this weird format?
Viewing 20 posts - 1 through 20 (of 25 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.