Counter-Currents
979 words
Author’s note: I wrote most of this in January of 2017 and forgot about it. Back then, the Singles Epidemic wasn’t quite as far along as it is today, and it wasn’t in the news, so I didn’t incorporate it into my analysis, but the thesis still holds true: namely, that men should not give up no matter how bad things get. Yes, we need to fix the singles problem on a societal level. Maybe we can do it with economic and social policy, or maybe we can do it with cultural innovations, but in the meantime, we should encourage lonely single white men to try to find someone. I was anti-MGTOW in 2017 and am anti-MGTOW in 2021.
MGTOW refers to “men going their own way.” Its proponents believe men should drop out of the dating scene because of modern women’s bad behavior and the laws which enable it. While MGTOWs are correct that the average man faces historically novel perils on the dating scene, their solution is wrong from a White Nationalist perspective.
First, we must acknowledge that MGTOW is not an ideal scenario. Suppose that by some magic power, we could bestow upon MGTOWs the option of either remaining MGTOW or meeting their soulmate. Alternatively, we could offer them the option of remaining MGTOW or becoming a chick magnet. Something tells me that in either scenario, there’d be mass defections from the MGTOW movement. Clearly, MGTOW isn’t an ideal condition.
This is not to say that men who choose to be single for reasons other than MGTOW are necessarily living a bad life. Some men are better actualized as bachelors. For instance, Nikola Tesla gave the world alternating current electricity. If he had instead spent his time raising a family, the world probably would have been a dark place for longer. But hypothetically speaking, if there were no opportunity costs in having a large family – i.e., if one didn’t have to give up something to have a large family — then most men would probably opt for one.
MGTOW doesn’t harm men who become more self-actualized in bachelorhood, but rather those who might otherwise be able to find a woman if MGTOW ideology hadn’t discouraged them. Discouraging white men from seeking white women is very problematic from a White Nationalist standpoint because marriage and the births of white babies are crucial at a time when whites are proportionally declining relative to other races.
If one declares procreation to be the primary goal of sexual relationships, then MGTOW men effectively move from being in an unfavorable position – i.e., looking for women in a historically poor social climate — to entering one where any hope of passing on one’s genes is doomed. Only from a perspective where procreation is not the primary goal can MGTOW make any sense — and even then, as demonstrated earlier, it’s still not an ideal scenario.
You can buy Greg Johnson’s Truth, Justice, & a Nice White Country here
MGTOW certainly doesn’t make sense as a kind of protest. If white men think they will induce white women to draw up a better societal contract with them by going on strike, they are wrong, because non-white men will happily step in to serve as strikebreakers.
The present relationship environment will not last indefinitely. Cultural and technological changes may eventually provide the average man with more bargaining power in sexual relationships. We may simply be in an evolutionary bottleneck of sorts. Whites of the future will be descended from the survivors of this bottleneck. They will probably not look back on the MGTOWs of the current year as altruistic sacrificial lambs, but rather as not worth remembering. Even if they do venerate MGTOWs for having spoken out against a poor social environment, they will not laud them for casting their genetic endowment into the dust as an act of protest.
MGTOW is a slave religion in the Nietzschean sense insofar as it attempts to cloak a less than ideal scenario as righteous protest. White men considering MGTOW should instead opt to live a noble life. They should date, marry, and have children. Invariably some of them, including some of you reading this, will experience divorce, custody battles, and so on — but these are the inevitable sufferings of those who live a noble life.
It’s not all that easy to live a “noble life” in 2021. While boomer and Gen-X women divorced their husbands at high rates, millennial and zoomer women aren’t pairing up with a guy in the first place –primarily due to economic reasons.
Women will continue their incremental glacial takeover of the white-collar workforce. While 60% of college students are women, experts project that in the coming years, about 67% of college graduates will be female, since women graduate at higher rates on average. Because women prefer to marry across or upwards in status, they will refuse to go with men without degrees who earn less on average than they do.
What’s more, entry-level young men make almost half of what their girlfriends’ fathers do, making them seem as being of a lower status than their fathers. These two factors are playing a major role in influencing what I believe will be about a quarter of women who will remain perpetually single. This isn’t just the usual segment of approximately 10% who have traditionally been single, but an additional 25% (approximately). As a result of this, we no longer live in a society where nearly everyone can find someone. Counting those men who would have been single in any generation, over a third of men will be single indefinitely because a third of women are unwilling to mate with them. White men, and particularly White Nationalists, should endeavor to avoid falling into this category.
This may be a cliché, but it’s better to try and fail than to give up without trying. Regardless of the outcome, men who try to build a relationship with a woman outrank men who give up and go their own way.
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.
- First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
Paywall Gift Subscriptions
If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:
- your payment
- the recipient’s name
- the recipient’s email address
- your name
- your email address
To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.
48 comments
Good article. MGTOW is for losers. A man should always be willing to interact with women.
One thing to keep in mind is the fact that women are getting more degrees and young men are not making great money is not a big dealbreaker with dating. Many guys use this as an excuse to avoid taking action. My 30 year old brother doesn’t have a degree or a high paying job but he managed to get engaged to an attractive woman who does have a degree and they’re making ends meet.
Don’t be discouraged.
Also, that is a goofy looking White family.
People need to be told that smiling does not mean the same thing as showing your teeth.
What I meant in my article is that on average, guys without degrees are losing out.
Since the 1970s, about 40% of women with college degrees have married men without them. The problem is that back then more men got college degrees than women. However today nearly double the number of women are getting college degrees, so they should be marrying non-degreed guys at much higher rates, but the number of undegreed rate has only gone up from 6% to 23%, but it should have risen by much more. I bet getting a degree improves a man’s chances of marrying and reduces a woman’s chances, other things being equal. In other words, much of the gap in the singles epidemic consists of highly educated women and less educated men.
https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-gender-gap-in-marriages-between-college-educated-partners
https://theprint.in/opinion/unmarried-women-us-face-shortage-of-economically-attractive-male-partners/299404/
I should phrase this better. The percent of women who marry men without degrees has flat-lined since the 1970s at 40% despite women getting degrees at well over double the rate they used to. While 6% of men without degrees married women with them in the 1970s, 23% do today, but that figure should have risen by much higher. It hasn’t because women are very strongly hypogamy avoidant, meaning they hate marrying down.
Just look at female celebrities who, once they get fame and money, dump their boyfriend they knew from before they got famous. Even if the guy is only mildly famous and she’s reached stardom, she often dumps him. I mean, he still outranks like 95% of men in terms of income and fame, but it’s not enough if she outranks 99.9999% of women. It’s only 5 percentile points, which is hereditarily irrelevant, but they still care so much about it. I’m sure in some cases other reasons motivate them to split from pre-fame partners, but it’s hard not to notice the pattern. Just look at the relationship histories of Demi Moore, Lindsay Vonn, and Gabrielle Union. A lot of coincidences if you ask me.
In sum, women are much more hypogamy avoidant or hateful of marrying down than hypergamous or interested in marrying up, and when they are getting double the number of degrees as men, many wrongly believe they outrank men because of them. Nevermind the degrees women get at higher rates, like psychology, have much lower average IQ among recipients than those men get at higher rates like philosophy. We need to distinguish between intelligence validating degrees and superficial degrees. If they can claim a degree has value by fiat, we can price its real value.
https://thetab.com/us/2017/04/10/which-major-has-highest-iq-64811
http://www.randalolson.com/2014/06/25/average-iq-of-students-by-college-major-and-gender-ratio/
You phrased it fine, you’re just taking it to an autistic extreme.
Women are not hiding somewhere waiting for a man who makes more than them. This ain’t happening.
Women are not hiding somewhere waiting for a man who makes more than them. This ain’t happening.
One observation doesn’t tell us anything about a population. It’s like saying that because you know a Nigerian who scored in the 99% percentile on the GREs that the average Nigerian must be smart.
Just because you can find women married to men with lesser incomes doesn’t mean that women don’t have a preference for a man’s income.
This paper (quoted below) analyzed data from a 1980 census and 2008-2012 survey and found that the more education a woman had the more likely she was to marry a man with a higher income. Excluding couples where both spouses were high school drop-outs, women do have a preference for men with comparatively higher incomes.
“This result indicated that if marrying across income deciles, women tended to marry
up more than marry down in income in both time periods even after controlling for gender differences in the marginal distributions of income deciles.
The tendency for women to marry up in income was greater when they married down in education: Women were 93% more likely to marry men in higher income deciles than themselves among couples in which the wife had more education than the husband than among couples in which the wife had less education than the husband.”
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308706518_Gender_Asymmetry_in_Educational_and_Income_Assortative_Marriage/link/59ed31eca6fdccef8b0dc686/download
I realize this is 2 weeks after your post (thanks for it), but what do you mean by women “marrying down”? Marrying a man with a lower income, or with less education? (Actually, I’m a purist wrt things like “education”; that to me means studying the kinds of issues and articles found here, among other places; but I assume you mean “degrees”.) A lot of degrees are garbage anyway. And a college degree in history from a third rate school is unlikely to see its holder making more money 20 years down the road than a good union plumber sans any degree.
‘MGTOW is for losers.’
Don’t talk about our men that way. Whatever else they are, they are still White and they deserve our support, not our ridicule.
I had the same reaction to that comment.
I disagree. White men that won’t even try are just a drag on everyone else.
There are two kinds of losers: people who play the game and lose and people who won’t play because they fear losing and thus ensure that they lose. The first category is not necessarily shameful. Some people try their best and still lose. The latter category is just shameful, though.
Just from the comments I see here, MGTOW supporters look around and see happy families and broken families. Instead of treating these as best-case and worst-case scenarios and aiming for the best, they think “This guy who was divorced by his unfaithful wife, lost his kids, and got raped for child support will be me. I’m opting out.” How exactly is that not the mindset of a “loser” in the second sense? “I might lose, therefore, I won’t even try. Yes, that ensures that I will lose. But defeat is inevitable in any case, and by going MGTOW, I take control of my inevitable destruction, which allows me to feel self-righteous about it.” It is fatalistic, risk-averse, and, frankly, unmanly.
I wrote a short article on “Honorable Defeatists” that should be read in this context.
Identifying losers as losers, like identifying fat people as fat, is necessary to help them overcome their problems. Saying that white people are so precious that we can’t hurt their feelings is counter-productive because it removes frank talk about problems, which is the first step toward self-improvement.
I’m a confirmed bachelor (read: Loser). I can only speak from my own experience and observation, but I suspect many other men are precisely in my situation: they are single by force of habit.
I can’t help but see MGTOW as the rationalization of lonely people. Even in cases where divorce is a factor, they should face facts: The continuation of their situation is directly or indirectly a result of decisions. The kind sentiments of Joe Gould speak well of him, but do very little in this regard.
Sure, social dysfunction certainly has a good deal to do with it. Even where it is the predominant cause, the most actionable change – by far – would be a change in our own behavior. Lamenting general social malaise is not actionable except in the long run. Grand social projects may have helped destroy family formation but, in my opinion, human agency and the grace of God are the only plausible remedy.
When there is a 70% chance you will loose everything in a divorce which is pretty much inevitable when your wife files the papers. You are going to loose most of your wealth you accumulated including your house! And 90% of the time you will loose your kids too! So you can find another place to live since the wife, even though she filed for the divorce, will get that plus alimony and child support! Is that a game you are ok playing with the odds stacked against you? Why would you want to play that game? The only way to win is not to play. Until they change the divorce laws you are welcome to play Russian roulette it’s always the husbands fault and it’s no secret the judges, regardless of the circumstances will always take the wife’s side! Good luck to you though!
Shakespeare’s sonnets should be required reading for all young men (and women). Many of them put in pretty sobering arguments, the importance of continuing the lineage.
From fairest creatures we desire increase,
That thereby Beauty’s rose might never die…
Sometimes I wonder if arranged marriages really are the way to go, given how disastrously modern marriage-for-love has failed. Marriage as societal/genetic obligation rather than wish fulfillment. With rare exceptions, romance is an ephemeral phenomenon.
Why would arranged marriages be any panacea? Sorry, but that’s just nonsense.
🙂
Arranged marriages definitely have some benefits but Whites are too individualistic for it to be a workable solution. That’s probably why arranged marriages died out in Europe.
millennial and zoomer women aren’t pairing up with a guy in the first place –primarily due to economic reasons.
So why scapegoat MGTOW for a problem that is primarily economic?
MGTOW could blow sunshine up men’s asses about “confidence,” “goals” and “hard work” (as if it’s the 1960s and women are looking for responsible providers) and men would still have a hard time finding a mate.
The author should have written an article asking what purpose is served by sending our daughters to university. What is the DR’s advice to women on this issue?
The author should be addressing this to white women, not the white men that he has reached. I’m all for more white babies, but not at the expense of millions of white men being divorce-raped for participating in the process. By the way, I’m 75 years old and quite extraneous to the process. My opinion does not derive from personal circumstances.
Your comment is exactly what anyone even familiar with mgtow thinks. Far too many married men dread going home. I’ve had multiple men married multiple decades tell me in crystal clear terms marriage is a horrible thing and the only reason they are still married is because they would lose everything if they divorced.
If people want happy families, they must destroy the family court system first. Be worried about male suicide from courts raping men of absolutely everything, not men that see the reality and refuse to play the very broken game.
“This may be a cliché, but it’s better to try and fail than to give up without trying. Regardless of the outcome, men who try to build a relationship with a woman outrank men who give up and go their own way.”
This is definitely not true given #MeToo, divorce law, and family court.
I would also add that I have seen a few really good single men turned into sad husks after marrying controlling and narcissistic shrews. They “ranked” much higher in my eyes when they were single.
[…]
We will no longer approve your comments until you stop the gutter vulgarity.
From a theoretical point of view, there is no question that MIGTOW is detrimental to the survival of the White race. But from a practical point of view, in this day and age, there is no other way around it.
You work hard, save money, buy a house, and then your wife will divorce you, keep half of your hard earned assets and refuse you access to your White children.
A cheaper option is to hire an Ukrainian mother surrogate, have White children who are all yours, and hire a Filipino nanny to help you out.
But this is MIGTOW.
Just straight lipstick on a poor little piggy this mgtow.
Actually most marriages do succeed. Many fail but not most. Alot of 2nd(or even 3rd) marriages turn out to be the best thing that ever happened to them.
Soooo…most marriages do survive and alot of 2nd marriages are even stronger than strong 1st marriages what with experience being such a stern taskmaster.
And, too, not all those divorce rapes weren’t without their merit. How many times did the noble bastard have a chance not to ever do that again and how many are enough to throw the towel in?
I knew a guy that was a stay at home dad for nearly all of his marriage to a very high ranking officer. He had 20 fucking years to stop drinking but did he? He sure did. Right after she tossed him to the curb and the only place he had Togo was rehab on her insurance. And he took that gal. Half her retirement. Half her shit. She paying his busted arse a couple grand a month until their was nothing left for him and his lawyer to get(that she paid she paid for his fucking lawyer) so he had to settle. And I’m sure she regrets allowing that asshole to drink himself into unconsciousness around her children for all their lives. And none wanted to see that fuck up…but as they were still kids they had to. Cause ya know dads gotta dad.
I could tell similar stories of other women I’ve known. One i dated for 5 years. That asshole she was married to got her and the kids good. Fucked them proper he did. Proper fucking.
I know of others that were truly and literally fucking terrorized by their ex thru their children. And to no fault of their own beyond hanging around for abuse. They say eventually you can get used to anything. Just gotta stick with it. Eventually, no matter how shitty things are you’ll come to accept it and get your mind right for moar of the same until you kick the o2 habit.
I ain’t coming to any of these women’s defense. Call the call. Hire a lawyer. Do you. But it’s ridiculous to square up the women on this relationships gone bad rapey stories. Who wouldn’t fuck over some asshole? Show’em.
Innyhoo…you can add prolly another 20-25% of failure(considering 50% i would just say are truly no fault and usually amiable divorces where they even co-parent if thats the case) of marriages due to men.
So…very uncritically and unscientifically I’d estimate 50% are no-fault, 20% or so is the man’s and 20 plus the woman’s. Some both need to rid themselves of the other before someone is killed.
So it’s not most marriages and it’s not anymore than half(my guess is somewhat less than half) are the woman’s blame. In some cases it’s both.
Mgtow are lying themselves into a corner that I’m sure all women are only to happy to not be bothered by them if they believe men are getting raped in divorce court. And i fully agree some have been.
So.
I’ve been divorced 18 years in December. Never considered remarrying altho i strongly believe the vast majority of men and women would be far better off to get hitched and stay hitched. Have kids if you can.
Some men are much Bette at bachelor hood and I’ve had no desire to remarry but I’ve mostly not been single either. I suppose that’s a big difference. I’m not opposed to getting remarried but no way would i marry a woman that didn’t have moar money and property than me. And that ain’t likely brother. But hell yeh. Send her my way.
Why would anyone want to marry somebody that has less shit than you? Because they love them? I love my cat. My cat will never fail me. And hey most people i know hate cats so they don’t come over. I choose the fucking cat.
Can’t imagine men that don’t make any bother to be in the company of women. strange. Half the population just forgot about you to buddy.
I’m a big fan of the 2nd marriage(or 3rd if that’s what it took) because i know soooo many and they mostly seem pretty happy.
I know a guy that has been married 9x. He’s been looking for 10 for a couple years now. No matter how much he has to comp compromise himself to find her he will. Then it’ll turn to shit and after so many years welp here we go again. 9x. And you’re never too old or too stupid to get married so why not? Keep trying till you get there i say.
Unless you don’t care or prefer to not be married. Women allllll over are desperate for a man that can actually fix shit around the house but…
And, too, not all those divorce rapes weren’t without their merit. How many times did the noble bastard have a chance not to ever do that again and how many are enough to throw the towel in?…
So…very uncritically and unscientifically I’d estimate 50% are no-fault, 20% or so is the man’s and 20 plus the woman’s. Some both need to rid themselves of the other before someone is killed.
Mr. Massey,
I’m afraid you misunderstand the whole point of MGTOW. They don’t recognize that a divorce can ever be a man’s fault. For a man to be at fault in the breakdown of a marriage, there would have to be some preexisting obligations on his part to his wife to do or not do certain things. They don’t recognize the existence of any such obligations. They are unwilling to form a domestic partnership on any terms that are not completely one-sided, leaving the woman powerless in the relationship.
It is not frivolous divorce they fear, but rather the challenge of living on equal terms with another person and the loss of freedom and control that entails. The process by which a female partner asserts her needs and desires in a relationship they call “nagging,” and this is what they truly wish to avoid.
MGTOW will make no sense to you until you understand these things.
In my mind, MGTOW always sounds like some really obscure Chinese beer that only hipsters from Portland drink.
Terrible essay. “Yeah statistically you’re probably gonna get screwed getting involved with women but you should anyway because maybe things will turn out ok.” Now I need to go read something sensible to cleanse my palate.
The reader has probably gathered by now that Women’s Infidelity is not the sort of book that would inspire a young man to go out and fall in love. Concerned as all of us must be about declining birthrates, I could not in good conscience urge any young man coming of age in America today to marry, or even to date. There is simply no point in continuing to play by the old rules with women who openly despise those rules. Instead, I would recommend working hard, saving money, refusing to socialize with spoiled women, and reading Michelle Langley if you want to learn what kinds of things you are missing out on. If you still cannot rid yourself of the desire to marry, learning an Eastern European language might not be a bad investment.
Rotating Polyandry—& its Enforcers, Part 1
It is futile to say to such men, “You have a racial duty to beg a spoiled Western girl to accept a diamond ring from you and put up with her nagging until such time as she gets bored, walks off with the children, and sues you for child support.” White men do not have any such duty, and outside the ranks of a few hardcore racialists, such exhortations will be entirely without effect. If you wish to influence the average man of the West, who does not read American Renaissance or The Occidental Quarterly or perhaps even think much about race directly, to marry a white woman and start a family as his ancestors did, the only way to do it is to make white women marriageable once again. This means undoing at least forty years of feminism.
Back to Africa:
Sexual Atavism in the Modern West
So slowly, patiently, by dint of much hard work, amid uncertainty and self-doubt, our bachelor makes a decent life for himself. No woman is there to give him love, moral support, loyalty. If he did make any effort to get a wife, he may have found himself accused of “harassment” or “stalking.”
Kick a friendly dog often enough and you have a mean dog on your hands.
What were our bachelor’s female contemporaries doing all those years while he was an impoverished, lonely stripling who found them intensely desirable? Fornicating with dashing fellows who mysteriously declined to “commit,” marrying and walking out on their husbands, or holding out for perfection. Now, lo and behold, these women, with their youthful looks gone and rapidly approaching menopause, are willing to go out with him. If they are satisfied with the free meals and entertainment he provides, he may be permitted to fork over a wedding ring. Then they will graciously allow him to support them and the children they had by another man for the rest of his life. (I have seen a woman’s personal ad stating her goal of “achieving financial security for myself and my daughters.”) Why in heaven’s name would any man sign up for this? As one man put it to me: “If the kitten didn’t want me, I don’t want the cat.”
Western woman has become the new “white man’s burden,” and the signs are that he is beginning to throw it off.
Sexual Utopia in Power, Part 4
F. Roger Devlin’s writings on women and feminism are 24 carat gold. If you’re not familiar with them go read them instead.
MGTOW as a Slave Religion might be useful if it leads men to read F. Roger Devlin’s excellent writings on women and feminism.
I am as much a fan of F Roger Devlin as you are. He foresaw much of the trouble behind the singles problem before it started. For example, he wrote about romance novels being a distraction before social media was. He has written a lot about hypergamy and other topics too. Much of the analysis in my Singles Epidemic article from earlier this year was informed by his writings. I agree with your quote of Devlin that the only way to have strong families again is to fix the social system, but in the meantime, let’s not pass up any good women who come our way.
Starting at 45 minutes through the podcast Devlin did with Nick Jeelvy, they discuss MGTOW. Devlin states he understands why many men MGTOW, but he never says all western women are unmarriageable. He also affirms the need of whites to have children. He also doesn’t contest Jeelvy’s idea that men should form groups and become the “alpha” of their group and impress women that way. My interpretation of Devlin’s writings and interviews is that he doesn’t demand that his readers be MGTOW.
There are non-economic assets that we can create for our young men. First there is tribal prestige. Second, there is networking via the tribe. Third there is politically-based social status. None of these things require an advanced degree. And none of them cost money (or not much). What I am saying is, instead of pursuing women and money, pursue power and authority independent of money.
Here in Europe all the boys and girls are still as date-happy as they were in the ’90’s. Either the sexlessness of the American youth is overblown or they’re a symptom of a fundamentally broken liberal society trying to commit suicide.
Dating is not the same as marrying and staying together, though.
The problem is not with men: they are merely responding to an issue that is happening in the real world. The problem is with feminism in general and the women going to college in the first place.
What was the point of women going to college again?
For secretaries? Nurses? Teachers?
Those are about all you need women to have a higher education for in a bare-bones liberal society, so why are they getting anthropology, gender studies and political science degrees? They just talk about stupid shit that no MAN is remotely interested in.
I can say if wanted a wife, I would want three things: prolific mother with lot’s of little white boys and girls; a good cook and homemaker who knows what is going on in her house at all times (even when asleep); and who provides a nurturing and calming spirit for me when I get frustrated, irritated, etc.
There. That is what needs to be addressed. Not men having unrealistic expectations, not men having sex with too many other women, not men fulfilling their woman’s desires to the best of their ability! Women are a Man’s helper and follower; their emotional makeup is unsuitable (generally, with exceptions) to be leaders and warriors in the realm of hearth and home. This is why women mature faster than men; so their emotions and spirit switch to serving a brand new generation, not their own sexual gratification.
Men have been designed to be warriors, leaders, thinkers, fighters, kings, poets, philosophers and inventors–nurturing and care-giving does not come instinictually to a Man.
The argument for MGTOW is thusly: “making lemonade out of lemons.”
The argument against MGTOW is thusly: “stop whining, bitch!”
Yes and no. There are all kinds of situations. I agree though about family courts. There really need to be changes there. Alas, if we can’t even secure the border against endless waves of illegal aliens, the chance that we can get the anti-male bias removed from divorce courts is nil.
Pass. I saw what happened to my dad. Going through it myself holds absolutely zero appeal.
I rather expected to be piled on, or maybe completely ignored, for standing up for the MGTOW guys. I’m pleased to see that so many of the guys here at CC are aware of the tough spot that feminism and the Left have put men in.
As some information to all those reading on C-C here; I would be nominally considered part of MGTOW, if not actively an advocate, I am bidding my time for the future. A lot of articles and writers here talk constantly about playing the long game–but I never here the advice about getting married later in life–my parents did it and they had eight happy, pure-as-the-driven-snow-white children. And that’s my template.
But for the time being the only way to go is MGTOW.
We do not have a defeatist attitude, we are merely NOT playing the enemies’ game.
To submit to your enemies’ tactics is to surrender the mind; the battle is thus over.
Might we learn a lesson here?
MGTOW has created a distributed movement which actually affects the real world, even if in a passive-aggressive way. Non-cooperation is a very effective tactic for civil resisters. Bear in mind that MGTOW has been up against the same manic egalitarian Regime which is hostile to White people and perhaps there are lessons to be learned. So…
…how about WGTOW (Whites Going Their Own Way)?
White people can go on strike in any number of ways. This might take the form of working through the MLK and “Juneteenth” national holidays. Or not standing for the black national anthem. Or calling in sick on Robert E. Lee Day. Or buying only from local White businesses. Or homeschooling. Or engaging in activities which are mainly White (bowling?). Or tipping your White service worker extra $$. Or wearing Rhodesian Army pattern camouflage T-shirts. Or developing specialized vocabulary (substitute Racial Mating Value for Sexual Marketplace Value?). Or if you have to go to a campus, “ghosting” by wearing mirrorshades and adopting a stance of calculated indifference to any indoctrination. Needless to say, kill your television and boycott sportsball, then send the money formerly spent on Regime agitprop to national-populist websites.
The idea is to develop a networked community of resistance, preparatory for a General Strike of White People. On that epic day, White people walk off their jobs and out of their classrooms. The next day, White people walk back onto the job and into the classroom, this time in control of their own ethnostate.
Let us not forget it was MGTOW which can make a claim to originally popularizing the mighty meme of the Red Pill. WGTOW can take this to the next echelon.
Any more ideas on this?
Romance novels, romantic comedies, sitcoms, etc, condition people that life should be this exciting all the time. A lot of young women, are susceptible to this. Life doesn’t work like that. You have to put a lot of long boring hours in at work. Americans, I believe, get bored quicker, even marriage. The church and other institutions use to communicate this to people. There is an old saying, “It’s hard to live with someone, but it’s hard to live alone too”. Once the collapse happens, we will quit eating bad food and go back to hunting, gathering, and small scale farming. Whites will lose weight and become attractive to each other. We won’t get our values from pop culture. White males will be in demand because we will be necessary to rebuild society.
I disagree with the notion that as white advocates we should view the MGTOW phenomena through a purely numbers lens. While it’s perfectly sensible to say that the demographic decline of whites is a problem, this argument ignores the qualitative aspect of human beings. I certainly can’t speak for everyone on our side but I don’t think I’m alone in saying that I don’t just want a generalized mass of people with white skin. Rather, I want people of quality who embody all the virtues of our race.
With regards to MGTOW people, what have they communicated about themselves? That they’re quitters, that they can’t compete and that they’re so risk adverse that they’d rather deprive themselves of one of life’s greatest joys than risk failure. If these are the kinds of people removing themselves from the gene pool I say good riddance, Darwinian selection will ensure that the next generation does not face these problems.
Perhaps this is an unfair characterization or MGTOW men, in which case I invite them to man up and stop feeling sorry for themselves. Otherwise, I see no reason why white advocates should be wasting their energy on burdensome people who – by all available metrics – will serve only to make future generations of white children less capable than their forefathers.
Sympathy for MGTOW should go a long way, given the practical realities, but it must not go all the way. Infertility cannot be a White ideal.
Well said.
Yawn. More lies and scaremongering from the usual suspects, specifically,
Women will continue their incremental glacial takeover of the white-collar workforce. While 60% of college students are women, experts project that in the coming years, about 67% of college graduates will be female, since women graduate at higher rates on average. Because women prefer to marry across or upwards in status, they will refuse to go with men without degrees who earn less on average than they do.
Meanwhile, here in the real world…
https://time.com/7442/wives-are-now-more-educated-than-husbands/
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/social-mobility-memos/2016/08/19/the-most-educated-women-are-the-most-likely-to-be-married/
What better way to protest these ridiculous divorce laws as well as judges who think that in every circumstance the woman is the best parent to leave a child with is to not play the game! Women can be kicked out of the house for constant infidelity and still be the preferred parent to leave the child with! Now you are still working for three only you added another house to the formula because you will either have to give it to wifey or buy her another before you get your house! Until society changes these ridiculous 16th century divorce laws marriage will continue to decline! As Suzzanne Venker wrote “men are not acting irrationally they ar3 being smart” by not playing the marriage game! The only way to win is not to play!
Actually, no. There are men with happy marriages and families, who would not have them without playing the game. Your idea of winning is merely sparing yourself the risk of losing because, in your heart, you think you are destined to be a loser. That’s pretty pathetic. Frankly, it is unmanly.
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Edit your comment