#mgtow logic

[the-fruit-tea-devil]

[blk-chauvinist]

‘The Catalogue of Anti-Male Shaming Tactics’

“Shaming tactics.”  This phrase is familiar to many Men’s Rights Activists.  It conjures up the histrionic behavior of female detractors who refuse to argue their points with logic.  Yet women are not the only ones guilty of using shaming tactics against men.  Male gynocentrists use them, too.

Shaming tactics are emotional devices meant to play on a man’s insecurities and shut down debate.  They are meant to elicit sympathy for women and to demonize men who ask hard questions.  Most, if not all, shaming tactics are basically ad homimem attacks. 

Anyway, it might be helpful to categorize the major shaming tactics that are used against men whenever a discussion arises about feminism, men’s issues, romance, etc.  The following list contains descriptions of shaming tactics, some examples of quotes employing the tactics, and even color-coded aliases for mnemonic purposes.  Enjoy.

Charge of Irascibility (Code Red)

Discussion: The target is accused of having anger management issues.  Whatever negative emotions he has are assumed to be unjustifiable.  Examples:

“You’re bitter!”

“You need to get over your anger at women.”

“You are so negative!”

Response: Anger is a legitimate emotion in the face of injustice.   It is important to remember that passive acceptance of evil is not a virtue.

Charge of Cowardice (Code Yellow)

Discussion: The target is accused of having an unjustifiable fear of interaction with women.  Examples:

“You need to get over your fear.”

“Step up and take a chance like a man!”

“You’re afraid of a strong woman!”

Response: It is important to remember that there is a difference between bravery and stupidity.  The only risks that reasonable people dare to take are calculated risks.  One weighs the likely costs and benefits of said risks.  As it is, some men are finding out that many women fail a cost-benefit analysis.

Charge of Hypersensitivity (Code Blue) – The Crybaby Charge

Discussion: The target is accused of being hysterical or exaggerating the problems of men (i.e., he is accused of playing “Chicken Little”).  Examples:

“Stop whining!”

“Get over it!”

“Suck it up like a man!”

“You guys don’t have it as nearly as bad as us women!”

“You’re just afraid of losing your male privileges.”

“Your fragile male ego …”

“Wow!  You guys need to get a grip!”

Response: One who uses the Code Blue shaming tactic reveals a callous indifference to the humanity of men.  It may be constructive to confront such an accuser and ask if a certain problem men face needs to be addressed or not (“yes” or “no”), however small it may be seem to be.  If the accuser answers in the negative, it may constructive to ask why any man should care about the accuser’s welfare since the favor will obviously not be returned.  If the accuser claims to be unable to do anything about the said problem, one can ask the accuser why an attack is necessary against those who are doing something about it.

Charge of Puerility (Code Green) – The Peter Pan Charge

Discussion: The target is accused of being immature and/or irresponsible in some manner that reflects badly on his status as an adult male.  Examples:

“Grow up!”

“You are so immature!”

“Do you live with your mother?”

“I’m not interested in boys.  I’m interested in real men.”

“Men are shirking their God-given responsibility to marry and bear children.”

Response: It should be remembered that one’s sexual history, marital status, parental status, etc. are not reliable indicators of maturity and accountability.  If they were, then we would not hear of white collar crime, divorce, teen sex, unplanned pregnancies, extramarital affairs, etc.

Charge of Endangerment (Code Orange) – The Elevated Threat Charge

Discussion: The target is accused of being a menace in some undefined manner.  This charge may be coupled with some attempt to censor the target.  Examples:

“You guys are scary.”

“You make me feel afraid.”

Response: It may be constructive to point out that only bigots and tyrants are afraid of having the truth expressed to them.  One may also ask why some women think they can handle leadership roles if they are so threatened by a man’s legitimate freedom of expression.

Charge of Rationalization (Code Purple) – The Sour Grapes Charge

Discussion: The target is accused of explaining away his own failures and/or dissatisfaction by blaming women for his problems.  Example:

“You are just bitter because you can’t get laid.”

Response: In this case, it must be asked if it really matters how one arrives at the truth.  In other words, one may submit to the accuser, “What if the grapes really are sour?”  At any rate, the Code Purple shaming tactic is an example of what is called “circumstantial ad hominem.”

Charge of Fanaticism (Code Brown) – The Brown Shirts Charge

Discussion: The target is accused of subscribing to an intolerant, extremist ideology or of being devoted to an ignorant viewpoint.  Examples:

“You’re one of those right-wing wackos.”

“You’re an extremist”

“You sound like the KKK.”

“… more anti-feminist zaniness”

Response: One should remember that the truth is not decided by the number of people subscribing to it.  Whether or not certain ideas are “out of the mainstream” is besides the point.  A correct conclusion is also not necessarily reached by embracing some middle ground between two opposing viewpoints (i.e., the logical fallacy of “False Compromise”).

Charge of Invirility (Code Lavender)

Discussion: The target’s sexual orientation or masculinity is called into question.  Examples:

“Are you gay?”

“I need a real man, not a sissy.”

“You’re such a wimp.”

Response: Unless one is working for religious conservatives, it is usually of little consequence if a straight man leaves his accusers guessing about his sexual orientation.

Charge of Overgeneralization (Code Gray)

Discussion: The target is accused of making generalizations or supporting unwarranted stereotypes about women.  Examples:

“I’m not like that!”

“Stop generalizing!”

“That’s a sexist stereotype!”

Response: One may point out that feminists and many other women make generalizations about men.  Quotations from feminists, for example, can be easily obtained to prove this point.  Also, one should note that pointing to a trend is not the same as overgeneralizing.  Although not all women may have a certain characteristic, a significant amount of them might. 

Charge of Misogyny (Code Black)

Discussion: The target is accused of displaying some form of unwarranted malice to a particular woman or to women in general. Examples:

“You misogynist creep!”

“Why do you hate women?”

“Do you love your mother?”

“You are insensitive to the plight of women.”

“You are mean-spirited.”

“You view women as doormats.”

“You want to roll back the rights of women!!”

“You are going to make me cry.”

Response: One may ask the accuser how does a pro-male agenda become inherently anti-female (especially since feminists often claim that gains for men and women are “not a zero-sum game”).  One may also ask the accuser how do they account for women who agree with the target’s viewpoints. The Code Black shaming tactic often integrates the logical fallacies of “argumentum ad misericordiam” (viz., argumentation based on pity for women) and/or “argumentum in terrorem” (viz., arousing fear about what the target wants to do to women).

Charge of Instability (Code White) – The White Padded Room Charge

Discussion: The target is accused of being emotionally or mentally unstable.  Examples:

“You’re unstable.”

“You have issues.”

“You need therapy.”

“Weirdo!”

Response: In response to this attack, one may point to peer-reviewed literature and then ask the accuser if the target’s mental and/or emotional condition can explain the existence of valid research on the matter.

Charge of Selfishness (Code Silver)

Discussion: This attack is self-explanatory.  It is a common charge hurled at men who do not want to be bothered with romantic pursuits.  Examples:

“You are so materialistic.”

“You are so greedy.”

Response: It may be beneficial to turn the accusation back on the one pressing the charge.  For instance, one may retort, “So you are saying I shouldn’t spend my money on myself, but should instead spend it on a woman like you —and you accuse me of being selfish?? Just what were you planning to do for me anyway?”

Charge of Superficiality (Code Gold) – The All-That-Glitters Charge

Discussion: The charge of superficiality is usually hurled at men with regard to their mating preferences.  Examples:

“If you didn’t go after bimbos, then …”

“How can you be so shallow and turn down a single mother?”

Response: Average-looking women can be just as problematic in their behavior as beautiful, “high-maintanence” women. Regarding the shallowness of women, popular media furnishes plenty of examples where petty demands are made of men by females (viz., those notorious laundry lists of things a man should/should not do for his girlfriend or wife). 

Charge of Unattractiveness (Code Tan) – The Ugly Tan Charge

Discussion: The target is accused of having no romantic potential as far as women are concerned.  Examples:

“I bet you are fat and ugly.”

“You can’t get laid!”

“Creep!”

“Loser!”

“Have you thought about the problem being you?”

Response: This is another example of “circumstantial ad hominem.”  The target’s romantic potential ultimately does not reflect on the merit of his arguments.

Charge of Defeatism (Code Maroon)

Discussion: This shaming tactic is akin to the Charge of Irascibility and the Charge of Cowardice in that the accuser attacks the target’s negative or guarded attitude about a situation.  However, the focus is not so much on the target’s anger or fear, but on the target’s supposed attitude of resignation.  Examples:

“Stop being so negative.”

“You are so cynical.”

“If you refuse to have relationships with women, then you are admitting defeat.”

“C’mon! Men are doers, not quitters.”

Response: The charge of defeatism can be diffused by explaining that one is merely being realistic about a situation.  Also, one can point out that asking men to just accept their mistreatment at the hands of women and society is the real attitude that is defeatist.  Many men have not lost their resolve; many have lost their patience.

Threat of Withheld Affection (Code Pink) – The Pink Whip

Discussion: The target is admonished that his viewpoints or behavior will cause women to reject him as a mate.  Examples:

“No woman will marry you with that attitude.”

“Creeps like you will never get laid!”

Response: This is an example of the logical fallacy “argumentum ad baculum” (the “appeal to force”).  The accuser attempts to negate the validity of a position by pointing to some undesirable circumstance that will befall anyone who takes said position.  Really, the only way to deal with the “Pink Whip” is to realize that a man’s happiness and worth is not based on his romantic conquests (including marriage).

(This image may be freely distributed.)

[feminismisstillahatemovement]

what do you feel about the 4b movement in korea?

I hadn't heard of it before, but female separatism is the logical (and unavoidable) end result of feminist propaganda infesting a culture, and also the natural companion movement to the "grass-eaters" or "herbivore" separatist men in that corner of the world, or the MGTOWs over here.

I keep seeing 21st century women and men as these growing, growling, glum-faced echo chambers, all resolutely refusing to have anything to do with the other until the other "SEES MY PAIN".

Since both camps are so focused on their own personal feelings and realities, and have been seduced into a hopelessly adversarial mindset in which the other half of the human race is their enemy and so openly express glee at their suffering, there's little chance of the other ever finding anything to love or care for in them, and the end result of the waiting game will simply be that the human race dies out, or at least the most advanced, rational, democratic, civilized, cultured, economically successful and over-'educated' parts. The Islamic world, Russia and parts of Africa will probably be fine, at least for awhile, as long as they continue to refuse to let feminism get a foothold.

[galechives]

Women are not the only heteropessimists. From the indignant fury of the incel to the married man complaining about his “old ball and chain,” men clearly subscribe to heteropessimism even if, like all feelings, they are not exactly encouraged to express it. To be clear, men’s heteropessimist claims tend to be neither ethically nor logically equivalent to those made by women. Instead, they are a kind of funhouse distortion of feminist complaint. Nowhere is this perversion better illustrated than on Facebook, where the efforts of men’s-rights activists have led administrators to classify “men are trash” as hate speech and suspend the accounts of those who use the phrase. (Users may post “women are trash” with impunity.)

Heteropessimism has become a framework through which men process both demands for gender equality and the quotidian experience of romantic harm as evidence of a global female conspiracy. One of the most prominent male heteropessimist memes asserts that the #MeToo climate has made dating too dangerous—for men. The most zealous male heteropessimists—so committed that they are mocked by other male-supremacist groups for actually choosing to act on their heteropessimism—unite under the delightful banner of Men Going Their Own Way. MGTOW maintain that women are sly, parasitic, and essentially evil, that heterosexuality is wholly beneficial to women and severely dangerous for men, and that the only solution is for men to abstain from marriage, reproduction, and (according to some) dating, sex, and even masturbation.

The result is a strange parody of feminism. In place of heterosexual relations, MGTOW are encouraged to form homosocial self-care communities that will both shield and heal them from romantic trauma, ensuring a kind of prolonged anesthesia of the heart. The movement’s heavy reliance on the Internet makes it difficult to know how substantial it is in reality. Its members are prolific meme makers, and online forums are their consciousness-raising site of choice. Yet even if MGTOW became a prominent force in reality, in choosing to self-segregate, this group actually render themselves the least dangerous of male heteropessimists. Far more disturbing are those who’ve come to believe that contemporary culture cheats them out of their “right” to possess women—and choose to act on this belief.

from Asa Seresin, "On Heteropessimism" (2019)

[timewaster19]

HEY YOU SHOULD WATCH THIS NICE VIDEO ON YOUTUBE AND STOP ACTING COY ABOUT STUFF PLEASE: /watch?v=eijYEYzAQu0

I got a “failed to open” page. And if this is about me commenting on your “it’s useful to use AWALT even though it’s not true”: The fact that it’s not true means it can’t be useful. I read your the link in your response and it still doesn’t hold, because clearly there are still women who care about men’s issues, if in varying degrees, regardless of the fact that they were raised by feminists in what are basically a feminist nations (first worlds in the west).

So chanting “AWALT!!” isn’t edgy, logical*, true, or makes people rethink feminism and how they view men’s issues: it’ll cause drama at best, and if in the future it’s taken seriously by people with influence, then just creates more gender inequality.

* You know how it’s illogical? If it’s true that some (one or more) do care about men’s issues and tries to treat some men right (those that deserve it), then your universal claim that “All women are materialistic, woman-centered, misandrists” is flase, just like how the feminist’s universal claim that AMALT is false cuase it’s true that one or more men aren’t rapists, or oppressors, or misogynists. 

[imeverywoman420]

mgtows always say it's the girl's fault if she's in an abusive relationship and claim she should've chosen the ugly guy over the hot guy as if ugly guys aren't abusive

RIGHT like i dont understand the logic. Like its literally never “hot abusive guy” “ugly nice guy” more than 90 percent of the time both of them are ugly 😭😭😭

[clowngames]

It won't be surprising to hear, but the people writing this - and the people who believe it - don't think it through. "High value man" was the logical next step of the conversation "why don't women want to date you? because you're not providing value to them." Whatever merit that conversation has is removed when you turn value into this objective measurement, and this in turn divorces the concept of "high value" from its original purpose.

The idea of a "high value woman" only exists to add a symmetry to the worldview, in an effort to make it more substantial and therefore more legitimate. After all, if there were high value men but no high value women, that would either say something negative about women or about the substance of this belief, and both are bad conclusions for the ostensibly non-misogynist modern-day PUA who has bought into it.

The average believer in this idea may answer the question of "why are we assigning a value measurement to human beings" with "well people do this unconsciously to determine if someone is worth being around and I'm just trying to minmax my way through the system to get some sense of connection with others." But then we move on to "investing in other high value people" and, while the rationale for that makes sense in isolation (don't settle for lesser people or whatever) it completely contradicts their answer to the previous question.

And it's just because they haven't thought it through. It's vibes based. Even the measurement itself only creates the illusion of objectivity and is entirely vibes based.

What's interesting is that this article kind of doesn't even acknowledge the origin of the concept (probably - I briefly skimmed it). The idea has morphed from the MGTOW-PUA spectrum dating advice into this general grindset self-help thing. The alpha/beta male philosophy went through the same sort of thing and I think it gets at the aimlessness of men's movements and the manosphere.

what does "high value" even mean. never once i have i seen one of those grifters explain what traits make a "high value" man or woman and why those traits should be universally accepted as desirable. because its far easier to just let people project their internalized ideas of social value onto hypothetical people

[the-fruit-tea-devil]

Incel/MGTOW memes but Wojak

[blk-chauvinist]

Dumb Woke Logic....

[girlsmoonsandstars]

something interesting that i think i perhaps don’t talk about enough is now long i’ve been on the internet. prior to 2010 by a couple of years, during a time where forums/threads and blogs were the predominant form of “social” media. MySpace existed, but was primarily for sharing pictures and music; discourse was happening on forums and blog comment sections.

women have been using these forms of technomedia as long as they have existed, and feminist women have been using them to talk about feminism for just as long. the more prominent bloggers settled into their niches, but a wide variety of material was covered.

the thing i wish that i could impress upon young people, especially younger women who are growing up in the 24/7 twitter/instagram/tiktok era, is that not a single idea you see on these platforms is new.

i go on a lot about the dangers of social media, of being online every waking minute, of putting your face and personal info on the internet, and i stand by that, but i feel very strongly that this is more important. every argument you see being waged in a comment section on a post has been waged before.

the “sides” are called different names. the details of arguments shift with the times; we talk now about onlyfans the way women before us talked about internet porn the way women before them talked about video VHS rentals. but the core underlying principals upon which everyone’s belief systems rest? those are old.

the thing that i find particularly insidious now is that the arguments of people who formerly called themselves--openly, gleefully, and frankly as maliciously as possible--antifeminists, chauvinists, and misogynists, are now presenting themselves as feminists.

the belief that feminists, especially lesbians, are unfair to men, to the extent that they are said to be oppressing them? this was the view of misogynists before it was the view of pseudofeminists.

the belief that the sexual subjugation of the female sex class is “empowering” grew from both liberal feminists who refused to follow their own belief system to its logical conclusion and from misogynists who believe they have an unmitigated right to use women for their own sexual pleasure.

pull the threads of any modern pseudofeminist belief and follow them back through time, you’ll find a misogynist. Men’s rights activists, the mannosphere, PUAs, MGTOWs. They didn’t disappear. They didn’t stop sharing their belief systems. They didn’t stop harming the women in their real lives. They didn’t change their minds or their hearts or their ideas or their behaviors.

They changed their names, their faces, and their pronouns.

[femsolid]

I shall be 🌼 anon then

I'm feeling really frustrated with how south Korean women are being treated and I can't make myself feel happy with the rights I do have knowing that South Korean women don't. I'm hyperfixated on South Korean women specifically for some reason. How can we help significantly from over here? How long do you think it will be before they busy throw and get to a nice plateau like in the west (which is dubious whether out plateau of rights are going to stay with all the gender but I digress) 🌼

Hey 🌼 answering to this and your previous asks (it's long, as usual)

I think it's fine to be more focused on particular issues, countries, cultures when it comes to feminism, as long as you don't end up treating the struggle of other women with contempt, just because it's different or you perceive it as less important. That's how your previous messages came across. Following your logic I could argue that korean women have it easy compared to iranian women. And then I could argue that iranian women have it easy compared to ethiopian women. And on and on. It's a technique that men use a lot. "Well at least you don't live in *country name* and here we let you *activity* so you should stop complaining about *feminist issue*". Good way to point far away so that they don't actually have to change their behavior.

You mentioned the anti-feminist harassment campaigns in South Korea but as I showed you in the west similar things happen on a regular basis. Gamergate, incels, MRAs, MGTOW, TRAs, mass shootings, the firing of feminists, bomb threats, physical assaults, it happens everywhere. We have our own anti-feminist brigades in France as well. Gamers, hackers and so called "father's rights activists", with targeted harassment, doxxing, stunts, threats and humiliation, fighting the big bad "feminazis". Add to that the trans activists, who do essentially the same thing. One of our most prominent radical feminist recently ended up at the hospital for severe mental health issues from the constant harassment. I saw trans activists on twitter discussing which streets she was seen using, to catch her and attack her. I saw one tell her to prepare her loved ones' funerals. And one of our female politician who successfully campaigned towards the abolition of prostitution was sent an envelope with a bullet in it. That's what happens when you're a feminist and don't hide your identity in western countries, in asian countries, everywhere.

Also I want to point out that just because you have "rights" on paper doesn't mean you actually do. It's supposedly illegal to rape a woman in your country yet only around 2% of reported rapists are convicted. Same with domestic abuse, stalking, harassment, etc. In the USA men too secretly film women and post it on porn websites. Next to nothing is done about it. Technically illegal, actually permitted. And as we see with abortion rights, our freedom can be taken away quite easily. Korean women have gained the right to abortion recently, but some women in the US or in Europe can't abort, so do you feel like you can't be happy for korean women? See I think it's better to remember that we're all on the same boat fighting the same enemy. It might appear more shocking in South Korea because it's such a modern country in many ways so the idea that having short hair could get a woman fired seems insane. Like ms-hells-bells said it's probably that things are changing very, very fast in Korea right now, especially with how the country recently got very popular worldwide.

Nevertheless I'm glad you feel solidarity with our korean sisters. To help them you can try to get in touch with them, share their words, their petitions, their creations, donate if needed, promote their content, stop embracing kpop uncritically, call out korean men, let the korean government know that the rest of the world is watching and let our korean sisters know that they are an inspiration and that we support them all the way.

[papirouge]

i mean, he has lost in court TWICE and keeps trying to sue her. she's also an abusive POS, but pretending he's a victim is ridiculous at this point. maybe read the type of stuff he said about wanting to r*pe her corpse, lol

If it's wrong to call him a victim because he's an abuser, then why are the people rehashing this argument are hellbent on calling Amber Heard a victim when she ADMITTED HERSELF being PURPOSELY VIOLENT, then? 🤔

Aaaah yes "b-but abuse victim can retaliate and become violent uwu" cool, cool. Then would it actually occur to your mind the same thing could be said about Depp? 💀 See? Pretty much all the arguments to defend Heard could be used for Depp too, some ppl are just too biased and hypocrites to grasp it.

But you know what? I'm pretty much team nobody at this point. Both Depp & Heard are messed up individuals who mutually (psychologically & physically) hurt each other. BUT what I can't stand, as a VERY logical person, is the systemic double standards here.

when a woman is losing in court after accusing her abusers => the justice system is flawed and against women so I won't trust the sentence and keep being shady & calling these men predator¯\_(ツ)_/¯

when a woman is winning in Court => SEE? that's the proof she was right!!!

or

women who speak out about abuse get their career destroyed while men keep thriving 😤 MALE WILL ALWAYS PROTECT EACH OTHER!!

...m'kay, so which one of them has been put off their respective movie franchise? 👀 Didn't Aquaman's producer (a man) say he wouldn't "put into fans' pressure" to throw her out? lmao but suuuure, rich White women in Hollywood don't get defended at all....🤡

Didn't that Court case in the UK wss rather about a defamation thing about whether what Depp did to Amber was technically "abuse"? But the thing is: acknowledging that Depp has been abusing her doesn't absolve Heard being an abuser herself, so it's ridiculous how some #teamAmber weirdos are hellbent on this case as if it was unequivocally evidence that Amber dindu nuffin.

The text about him wanting to kill & rape her are disgusting but not material of abuse. This is character trial at this point. A psycho telling a bunch of messed up things on private message to his pal doesn't make them a predator. None of that ain't the big own you think it is.

Meanwhile, I find fascinating how #teamAmber degen argue that Depp wk "leave out things", when they themselves do precisely the same: why don't they talk about Heard lying about using a makeup product that wouldn't be released until a year later (Milani)? or the infamous cut finger on his right hand when Depp is right handed?? (it makes as little sense as shooting yourself with your left hand if you're right handed). Feminist will always be like "abuse victims lie about their wound to protect their abuser" but will totally ignore this possibility for Depp🤡

and let's not ignore that disgusting filth I've been reading about how women hitting men is no biggie because they have "physical advantage" and "could've stop her" because "she was unarmed"

I love how victim blaming is okay when it's men🤡 I mean, if men have a physical advantage over women, wouldn't it still be dangerous for them to defend themselves & really hurt their partner on the process? 🤔 See? damned if they do, damned if they don't.

Anyway, I didn't plan talking that much about this whole drama because, as I said, both Heard & Depp are weirdos who did deserve each other BUT I just can't stand radfem/femcel hypocrisy on this case. They pretend wanting justice but they outed themselves as being as biased & moronic as scrotic meninists & MGTOW who'll put their gender bias above actual fair judgement. I don't understand why they'll get so pissy at people acknowledging female abusers & wanting them to be punished, and act like it was them insinuating that women commit as much violence as men......??? I also hate how this discourse has turned into a pro Heard vs pro Depp when they're both abusive degenerates.

Also feminist have no room to act like they were better than misogynistic males when they've shown themselves being as prone to throw disgusting sexual slur at any woman who didn't blindly side with Heard (calling them "dick sucker/rider" or "pickme"). They are insufferable and annoying. It's so cringe to see them try to girlbossify Heard while thinking they're somehow better than corny Depp wk.

[thoughtsarestupid]

1st wave feminism: legal wave. Lawful equality.

2nd wave feminism: factual wave. Equality in court, stop bias against women.

3rd wave feminism: wait what’s going on? Wave. Defined by confusion and splitting into several groups

4th wave feminism: no United front wave. Tries to get social equality around, but some groups try to just drag down men to do so, while others empower women to do so.

(Both of those ways are unlikely to be the way to go, and there should be a middle way. If you drag down men, you’re effectively bullying the other gender and saying they’re all bad means you’re a misandrist. If you empower all women, you’ll also empower women who are in positions where they shouldn’t be empowered, for example morbid obesity is not healthy as evidenced by countless studies and common sense. Logically you shouldn’t say being fat is a good thing, but if a woman is fat it’s suddenly acceptable?)

There’s the feminist waves to my understanding, now for MRAs

Men’s rights activists: we agree with what feminism wants in the sense of gender equality but can we also address men’s issues?

MGTOW: well if you don’t want us in here, we don’t want you in here. We will aggressively ignore women now. Bye!

InCel (involuntary celibates): we will fix our issues with our inability to get a girlfriend by... becoming domestic terrorists in Canada. That seems like a good idea

Here’s these groups and waves to my understanding, feel free to correct me in the comments, because my knowledge is flawed because I’m a mere human being.

[anti-porn-unicorn]

Isn't it ironic how (one of) the main reason(s) mgtow men are against marriage is because of the high divorce rate meanwhile they make memes about 'porn > women' and consider it controlling when a woman doesn't want her man to watch porn even though porn is a leading cause of divorce. Do they ever consider that their misogynistic perceptions of women are influenced/caused by all the porn they watch? There is a lot of overlap between incel communities and the mgtow community and many incels are very misogynistic and have minimal, if any, empathy for r*pe victims, some of them even support women being r*ped, and I think that's interesting when it ties into how increased porn use is tied to decreased empathy for r*pe victims and desensitisation to normal sex leading to r*pe fantasies over time. I also think it's ironic when they refer to women as damaged goods as if the majority of men don't watch stuff that makes them misogynistic, perverted, and causes ED, lol.

You spit FACTS there bestie I can’t even do anything except 👏 👏 👏

I love using their logic against them

[such-justice-wow]

Judging by that logic, MGTOW guys can be classified as "queer". I mean, they don't wanna get married or have kids or society telling them that they should do those things 'cause they're guys. Sounds pretty queer to me. /s

Bruh queer theory will straight up declare a m/f GNC couple as more queer than a butch/femme lesbian couple because the lesbians are conforming to straightness

[the-fruit-tea-devil]

Incel/MGTOW memes