MGTOW and DDLG - Trigger warning -

[cuppycakes]

BOOOOOOIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

 

Yeah fuck lego friends, those things creep me right out. You know who I'm voting for in the next election? Whichever candidate promises to bring back bionicle. Do you think it's a coincidence that they discontinued it and now we're on the brink of another cold war? DO YOU?! AHEM, i mean yeah lego friends suck and bionicle was awesome....

 

The study you reference about the infant makes total sense to me, we do think that way as a society BUT is that so unreasonable? At primary school ages boys tend to anger a greater amount or perhaps more easily than girls. Just my observation from experience working in education and from what I remember as a child. I'm not necessarily saying making assertions about the needs of a crying baby based on gender alone is in any way advisable I'm just saying it makes sense as to why society does it and at the end of the day it prooooobably isn't the end of the world as we know it (will concede if world ends due to this). 

 

I don't necessarily underestimate how children respond to feedback, I just don't place too high a necessity on it because we all grow up and that's when the real decisions begin.

I also note, again from my own experience, that girls here receive all the encouragement they need to succeed. They outnumber boys at uni A LOT and even on courses such as law, which i studied.

If I remember my data correctly, girls actually out earn boys in their early 20s in the UK but for the life of me I do not remember where I read that. PEW data? Maybe, probably that. 

 

At the end of the day, I suppose I don't have that much sympathy for the childhood feedback idea because I didn't have the nicest childhood and where I grew up wasn't that great. I was told my whole life I couldn't do this that and the other. Which for me just made me want to do it more. I succeed just to spite those who said I couldn't. I guess what I'm getting at, is that no matter what your childhood, you can succeed if you want to. You will carry your demons yes but if you wake up and ask yourself every morning "How bad do I want it?", and the answer is 'enough', then you will succeed; certainly in the west anyway. Do we need to stop laughing at children, regardless of gender, for their dreams? ABSOFUCKINGLUTELY. Do I think however that feedback is responsible for a persons life choices? Not especially. Regardless, I see merits to both arguments and I think the debate amongst people about it will go on for a while. 

 

As for your final point, no you didn't come across that way. I was just going on about it as I thought maybe it would be relevant or interesting. As for people who don't take high paying jobs as they are worried they may face discrimination. I don't really have much to say other than JUST DO IIIIIIIT. You gotta want it bad enough.

The way I think about it is like this. A couple years back, I was obese as fuck. I was worried to go to the gym and lose weight because I thought people would laugh at me. But I found a way round that and now I've never been healthier or fitter because I made a choice not to let what people might think or do to me define my choices. Perhaps that's not the best example but I'm trying to highlight a certain way of thinking that I believe to be healthy for the individual. I guess what I'm getting at is that if someone doesn't take a job, then they have no one to blame but themselves, regardless of the motivation. I may seem harsh or unsympathetic but all I'm saying is that I believe in the power of the individual to achieve anything. 

 

I think this has been really productive discussion, and I'm enjoying it. You seem like a real smart one mate,

 

ya boi

 

The Senate

I never played with Bionicle, but I had those magnetix things that were tiny and the magnets fell out and kids ate them so they had to take them off the shelves? Not even REMOTELy the same thing, but I miss those guys, too.

 

My point is this: do boys show anger more than girls because of biology, or because as a society we've showed them that's how they're supposed to act? There is an argument for both ways, and neither is really provable at this point. I respect that your opinion on this is different than mine.

Kids start picking up on that stuff from a super young age... I forget what it's called, but they start putting each other into groups. OHMYGOSH I HAVE A STORY my teacher was talking about her youngest kid. Obama was on TV for a speech and she told her kid that was Obama. The kid said "Obama" and she was like "yeah good! He's our president". Two days later, there was another show on TV and two black men were speaking and the kid says "Two Obama!" This fricking cracks me up BECAUSE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT A CHILD WOULD DO. I'm sure she was just glad that he didn't do that in the grocery store or something. The point is that as soon as kids are old enough to understand, they start putting things in groups. One of those groups they think "hey that's for me. I'm supposed to like that stuff." so they do. The other groups, they usually forget about it. Personally I think it can have a big impact on their future, but I'm with you 100% that "I see merits to both arguments".

Agree to disagree ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Good discussion thO!

 

D00d good for you I don't even know you but I'm proud of you with that story. I wish I had even a quarter of the self-discipline you have.

 

I see your point, but I also want to mention that sexual harassment is SUPER high in the sciences. I'll link to one of the sfw articles (not sure how good the source is, but all the other ones I read all said the exact same thing), but there's a TON of articles if you want to google it. I understand "wanting it" ("it" meaning the job) to a point, but... honestly? I don't know if I could do it. I don't know if I could do what I loved if it meant that I had such an overtly high percent chance to get harassed or assaulted. You can say "well you just don't want it enough", but I don't think it's worth it. I don't know if anything would be worth being harassed and assaulted. No matter how much I cared about my job, I couldn't do it if I thought there was a big chance that I could be hurt like that. Like, I know it was about discrimination, but I'd argue that discrimination goes deeper than that and it turns into situations like this or like in Hollywood.

 

I want to say that you're a great listener, and I live for talks like this. Thanks for talking with me, you also seem like a real smart one. You make opinions based off of factual evidence that you've experienced or learned about AND EVEN THOUGH THEY MIGHT BE DIFFERENT OPINIONS THAN MINE, IT DOESN'T MATTER BECAUSE THERE'S ALWAYS A GREY AREA NOTHING IS BLACK AND WHITE AND WE ALL HAVE DIFFERENT EXPERIENCES AND THEREFORE DIFFERENT OPINIONS AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA. I feel like that's getting super rare and I always appreciate seeing it. I'd give you an A+

[baby_k]

@letsgoforanadventure

 

I'm curious, why are u concerned about marriage and inheritance? What's the context of the relationship? Are we assuming it's a happy healthy marriage, is there a suspicion that the SO is a gold digger, are there organizations or other persons, friends, family members who you would prefer receive the inheritance?

 

As far as your questions, a breadwinner should be concerned about their partner's intention upon meeting and until trust is established. Marriage or lack of shouldn't have any bearing on those concerns because those concerns should be addressed prior to even considering marriage. Worrying about the amount of financial support during life and after should be discussed. If my daddy wanted me to stay home and see to his needs instead of working, I would expect that if something happened to him, I would be cared for. If I were allowed to work, I wouldn't need to rely on a Daddy during the relationship so I wouldn't expect anything from daddy upon passing, except that he have the foresight to prepare for end of life expenses.

 

Just to add: like in case couple get kids and other one is stay-at-home-person, that person should get compensation of that time. After all, they are working for the common good of the family then.

In my country the amount of your retirement money is calculated from the salaries you have earned -> not working has huge impact on your pension -> creating retirement fund for the stay-at-home is imo fair as otherwise their old age may not be too pleasant experience because of financial struggles.

Would be anyhow selfish from the working person to claim that all money they earn is purely theirs while the other person is at home with mutual agreement.

 

And yet another thing still: one can be worried of golddiggers but one can also worry if ther partner will cheat on them. And manymany other things. One Finnish song says: "Bullet proof heart has not  been invented yet, it is waste to be afraid of a shot, for loneliness will carve the same hole into your heart".

One should not be stupid but also worrying too much may not bring happiness: I would just trust my own judgement of the other person's character and their emotions/motivation towards me.

[I_AM_THE_SENATE]

I never played with Bionicle, but I had those magnetix things that were tiny and the magnets fell out and kids ate them so they had to take them off the shelves? Not even REMOTELy the same thing, but I miss those guys, too.

 

My point is this: do boys show anger more than girls because of biology, or because as a society we've showed them that's how they're supposed to act? There is an argument for both ways, and neither is really provable at this point. I respect that your opinion on this is different than mine.

Kids start picking up on that stuff from a super young age... I forget what it's called, but they start putting each other into groups. OHMYGOSH I HAVE A STORY my teacher was talking about her youngest kid. Obama was on TV for a speech and she told her kid that was Obama. The kid said "Obama" and she was like "yeah good! He's our president". Two days later, there was another show on TV and two black men were speaking and the kid says "Two Obama!" This fricking cracks me up BECAUSE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT A CHILD WOULD DO. I'm sure she was just glad that he didn't do that in the grocery store or something. The point is that as soon as kids are old enough to understand, they start putting things in groups. One of those groups they think "hey that's for me. I'm supposed to like that stuff." so they do. The other groups, they usually forget about it. Personally I think it can have a big impact on their future, but I'm with you 100% that "I see merits to both arguments".

Agree to disagree ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Good discussion thO!

 

D00d good for you I don't even know you but I'm proud of you with that story. I wish I had even a quarter of the self-discipline you have.

 

I see your point, but I also want to mention that sexual harassment is SUPER high in the sciences. I'll link to one of the sfw articles (not sure how good the source is, but all the other ones I read all said the exact same thing), but there's a TON of articles if you want to google it. I understand "wanting it" ("it" meaning the job) to a point, but... honestly? I don't know if I could do it. I don't know if I could do what I loved if it meant that I had such an overtly high percent chance to get harassed or assaulted. You can say "well you just don't want it enough", but I don't think it's worth it. I don't know if anything would be worth being harassed and assaulted. No matter how much I cared about my job, I couldn't do it if I thought there was a big chance that I could be hurt like that. Like, I know it was about discrimination, but I'd argue that discrimination goes deeper than that and it turns into situations like this or like in Hollywood.

 

I want to say that you're a great listener, and I live for talks like this. Thanks for talking with me, you also seem like a real smart one. You make opinions based off of factual evidence that you've experienced or learned about AND EVEN THOUGH THEY MIGHT BE DIFFERENT OPINIONS THAN MINE, IT DOESN'T MATTER BECAUSE THERE'S ALWAYS A GREY AREA NOTHING IS BLACK AND WHITE AND WE ALL HAVE DIFFERENT EXPERIENCES AND THEREFORE DIFFERENT OPINIONS AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA. I feel like that's getting super rare and I always appreciate seeing it. I'd give you an A+

I think when it comes to the first thing you mention, we're both probably right. It likely comes from the way we treat kids and some biological factors. In life, things are rarely black and white so I reckon it's probably a mixture of the two. I lean more to one side on this whole thing and you on the other but that's all grand because we can both justify what we're saying and see the merits to the assertions of the other.

 

Regardless, it has been a good discussion; would love to see more like this on the forum and I think it's swell when members of the wonderful community can talk in this way. 

 

As for sexual harassment in the industry, I don't see it as a problem of men harassing women. I see it as a problem of assholes assaulting people. It's really unfortunate that it still happens in the States as your telling me, but I think the only way it will stop is if enough people are harassed and their harassers prosecuted for genuine crimes. This will take bravery and I totally get what you're saying, why would anyone want to be a victim of that? Unfortunately however, I'm not really sure I see another solution. Again I'm not knowledgable about such things in the States.

 

What I can say is that in the UK people are frequently prosecuted to the full extent of the law for it a they should be. Spend plenty of my time dealing with cases like that. This is probably why it doesn't really occur to me to think about. I tend to naturally group the States and the UK into 'the west' and I forget that there are sometimes differences.

I'd honestly say the workplace rights have gone too far here. There's a couple of debates I saw on the tv a while back along the lines of "is air conditioning at work sexist" and "do women need a helpline for mansplaining at work". Yeah, really. We're heading in the other direction over here. Like, it's time to stop, we're there. Yes there will always be one or two jerks that ruin it for the rest of us but I think that's just part and parcel of living as humans. 

 

I don't think our goals for society differ that much at all, I think we just draw different conclusions as we grew up in different places and experience (and have experienced) different things. I think the States and the UK can both learn things from the other. It's very hard for me not to just think of the entire west the same way I think about the UK simply because my mind tends to think in a way that the rest of the world isn't like my world. There's a reason for it and it's just the way I am but I'm working on it as I recognise that it isn't particularly helpful.

 

Anywho, this has been a fun one!

 

Ya boi,

 

The Senate

Edited March 11, 2018 by I_AM_THE_SENATE

[Guest deactivated]

deleted

Edited September 10, 2018 by mung bean

[SweetCuriosity]

 

As for marriage, it's never been something I care much for. It's just potentially green card. Not much else. I think that people should be able to join together as two assets to each other and leave as they came if it doesn't work out. I would never want a legal union screw my partner over after a divorce. I wouldn't wish that on anyone. I'd much rather be marked as their property in other ways.

 

 

Hmm... I agree that people should be assets to eachother; however, leaving a relationship as u went into it doesn't always work. You say you wouldn't want to screw over your partner in case of divorce but what if you made a mutual decision to give up your career and stay home? You wouldn't be leaving in the same condition because now you would have to get back to work. Not a problem if you can find a job but what if you were together for years? It's harder to find work with a long gap in work history. Also, how would you handle expenses incurred jointly? Suppose you buy a house and your partner makes payments, either the entire payment or you work and pay half or some portion. Suppose your partner passes away and leaves you with that joint debt. If your income alone can't sustain you, you may suffer financial hardships because u built a life jointly but never prepared in case you lost one income.

[Guest deactivated]

deleted

Edited September 10, 2018 by mung bean

[Guest Naturalselectionissexy]

@letsgoforanadventure

 

I'm curious, why are u concerned about marriage and inheritance? What's the context of the relationship? Are we assuming it's a happy healthy marriage, is there a suspicion that the SO is a gold digger, are there organizations or other persons, friends, family members who you would prefer receive the inheritance?

 

As far as your questions, a breadwinner should be concerned about their partner's intention upon meeting and until trust is established. Marriage or lack of shouldn't have any bearing on those concerns because those concerns should be addressed prior to even considering marriage. Worrying about the amount of financial support during life and after should be discussed. If my daddy wanted me to stay home and see to his needs instead of working, I would expect that if something happened to him, I would be cared for. If I were allowed to work, I wouldn't need to rely on a Daddy during the relationship so I wouldn't expect anything from daddy upon passing, except that he have the foresight to prepare for end of life expenses.

I am part interested in peoples opinions on the matter and the other part is their reasoning behind specific actions. From there it can be deduced what the potential motives are. Oh that and I love LOGIC - the reasoning, not the rapper. 

[Guest Naturalselectionissexy]

3. I never said a man couldn't carry something to protect themselves, I even gave the example with my SO. Most of the time you see women doing things to protect themselves more than men. I'm not arguing about whether or not pepper spray is effective, but I would say with my pool of data (in college) I know maybe for every 15-20 women, there's 1 man who has a form of self-defense. We can't carry guns on campus anyways.

5. It's convenient because of the whole "transfer of wealth" thing (I think you were the one that said it?). If my boyfriend gets critically injured and I show up to the hospital, I may not be allowed to see him, but if he's my husband, they will let me see him. There's a few examples like that. Health insurance (this is the big one imo), kids having the same last name (someone in my family always has to explain why her last name is different than her son's and it's a pain), some couples get a break on their taxes (but some get the opposite so there's that), retirement benefits, etc. There's a lot of reasons to get legally married.

10. Woah man, you went from 0 to 100 real fast. I wasn't avoiding conversation, I just don't think about it because--although I realize it's a problem--it's a few bad eggs, not the majority of police. I actually am really close with a few people who are training to be police officers, they are not inherently bad people. They just want to get out of those situations alive so they can see their families again. I don't think that the government itself is abusive. Again, yes, there are some bad eggs, and there are people who have made unforgivable split-second decisions, but I'm not one to call them "the law", because they're the minority. You seem to have a "the government is out to get you" attitude, which I really don't have, so I doubt we'll find common ground on this issue.

11. There's lots of ways. Being part of a group--unless you're actively marching and writing letters to the government--still isn't going to do anything. You could go the Morgan Freeman route: "stop talking about it". You could write your own independent letters to senators and congressmen. You could find a group that you fully support and believe in. You can even do the opposite of Morgan Freeman and constantly talk about it, sharing facts and getting people to think about their actions.

3. Bummer! Certainly think everyone has the right to protect themselves... from anyone 

5. Fair enough

10. They might start off with some ideology of doing the right thing but the corruption with set in quickly. I'm sure you have seen the prison guard experiment? if not google it . If you have any doubts about the current standing of the police let me point you to one of the..... thousands upon thousands of corrupt government officials and murdering cops! It's not "isolated incidents" all though many wish to believe that to be the case. I wish i didn't have to work but I guess that wish went out the window! 

11. I feel like that reinforces the fact that number 10 is true. 

[Guest Naturalselectionissexy]

Interesting thread! Just thought I might as well chime in with my personal view on marriage and the DDlg dynamic. I won't get too much into the ideologies and what not, just people in general. I'm sorry if I'm way off topic here.

 

I'll be grouping BDSM and DD/lg together as they bleed into each other in my case. Anyway. To me, it's important to always remember that at the core of whatever else, ideally, we're adults. Both aware of and responsible for our own actions. My partner can tell me what to do and push me around all they'd like, but at the end of the day, I want to be able to sit down and talk about anything and everything like equals. 

 

As for marriage, it's never been something I care much for. It's just potentially green card. Not much else. I think that people should be able to join together as two assets to each other and leave as they came if it doesn't work out. I would never want a legal union screw my partner over after a divorce. I wouldn't wish that on anyone. I'd much rather be marked as their property in other ways.

 

As for restricting media, I'm not a fan. I think ideas should flow freely. People will latch onto anything. Restrict one idea and another will take its place. History, repeated. They would not be my partner if they weren't capable of intellectual thought and reasoning in the first place. I always make a point out of trying to understand people I don't agree with. Understand their personal attachment to whatever they believe in. I'd never want to just cut people off and shut them down just because I don't agree. It's neither healthy nor sustainable. 

 

Well, that's my two cents. I got so lost in my own thoughts, I'm not even sure what I'm trying to say anymore... I hope this was helpful in one way or another? 

 

Thanks for the input! 

 

Interesting take on the citizenship part and financial portion. 

On the restricting media- is it really restricting ideas or is it limiting constant toxic propaganda? Is there is difference? 

[Guest Naturalselectionissexy]

Hmm... I agree that people should be assets to eachother; however, leaving a relationship as u went into it doesn't always work. You say you wouldn't want to screw over your partner in case of divorce but what if you made a mutual decision to give up your career and stay home? You wouldn't be leaving in the same condition because now you would have to get back to work. Not a problem if you can find a job but what if you were together for years? It's harder to find work with a long gap in work history. Also, how would you handle expenses incurred jointly? Suppose you buy a house and your partner makes payments, either the entire payment or you work and pay half or some portion. Suppose your partner passes away and leaves you with that joint debt. If your income alone can't sustain you, you may suffer financial hardships because u built a life jointly but never prepared in case you lost one income.

 

One of the most financially sound reasons for some sort of back up plan. 

[cuppycakes]

3. Bummer! Certainly think everyone has the right to protect themselves... from anyone

5. Fair enough

10. They might start off with some ideology of doing the right thing but the corruption with set in quickly. I'm sure you have seen the prison guard experiment? if not google it . If you have any doubts about the current standing of the police let me point you to one of the..... thousands upon thousands of corrupt government officials and murdering cops! It's not "isolated incidents" all though many wish to believe that to be the case. I wish i didn't have to work but I guess that wish went out the window!

11. I feel like that reinforces the fact that number 10 is true.

10. Yeah I’ve seen the experiment. No I still don’t believe all cops are evil. Most cops are just doing their jobs. Again, we both have very different opinions about the government. Every single cop I hear talk about police brutality is just as disgusted by it as civilians are. They also are the only ones with enough experience to be able to tell someone’s why it might have happened that way, sometimes it’s inexcusable, sometimes it’s preventable, sometimes it’s necessary. You’re acting like they’re not even people anymore. I don’t think we’ll reach common ground here.

11. I have no idea what you’re talking about. I said a lot of things in that part of my response and I don’t know what that isn’t responding to.

[jondavids]

I dislike the use of the term red pill by the movement.

 

I think describing taking the red/blue pill is a great way of describing making a change and it's consequences as opposed to staying the same.

 

Also there are plenty of blue pills out there that a guy may actually have to take!

[Guest Little Otter]

I almost went MGTOW because I hated the conventional gender roles, and every woman I ever got with cheated on me or abused me emotionally. I didn't ever like the idea that I am required to be some "big strong manly man", it never appealed to me (dont judge my inner character by my physique). Unfortunately, every relationship I had the woman wanted and required this. When I wouldn't deliver, I was betrayed. So I was so jaded about women and relationships for so long, I went a year willfully staying away from all romanticism with women. Of course my last relationship after that year, she was a little. So she wanted me to be DD. I didn't want that, I kept rejecting her attempts to give me power both sexually and non. So 3yr into our relationship she finds another DD (MY BEST D**M FRIEND) and has an on-again off-again 8 month relationship with him. Then leaves him, and gets with another man for two months before I found out and we ended it. So yeah... bad experiences with relationships based around the fact that I disagree with the male/female dynamic. My ex and I loved each other to death as friends. Even during the relationship, when it was good, we joked that "Wed make just as good brother and sister as partners!" So there was love there, just not romantic love. 

 

Fast forward a bit and I find out Im a little. So yeah, the disdain for gender roles was obviously derived from this, and getting with submissive women was based around the fact that I was always close friends first, then wed engage. What I realized was that I adored them as people, but not necessarily romantically. I confused the two. I love having women friends, and sharing the same traits as littles we get along great, but it doesn't work in a relationship. I was confusing adoration and friendly love, with sexual attraction and romance. Which carried into a diff problem, I was never aroused by the women I got with, well seldom anyways. And Id sort of shutdown sexually. They would feel rejected. We both weren't getting what we wanted, and I was trying to sexualize a type of woman that I am normally not attracted to simply because I thought "Well shes really cute and fun to talk to and we laugh and play together, so that = relationship" which is so far from the truth. And again, these imposed roles of the male/female dynamic have always kept me operating in a haze, forcing me to be consistently dishonest with myself, confused, and unfulfilled. 

I am not MGTOW. I am not MRA. I really dislike both those movements for a lot of reasons, no disrespect intended. My issue was MINE and no one else's. I mean, being cheated on and betrayed is their individual problems, but hiding my submissive side from myself, and trying to confuse a friendly love with romantic love is all MY problem and MINE alone. So I own up to that, and now I am here where I am accepted as a LB/sub, and I can find the right person for me, as well as have platonic friendships with other littles that is completely wholesome, pure, and honest. 

 

These are my thoughts, and I dont know if this necessarily answers your question or helps at all, but I thought Id share a little bit about my journey and how it relates to the "redpilled" ideologies purported.

[Guest littlegirl707]

Well i dont know if im even supposed to be in here. But I think its fine to keep money sseprate. sorry can not spell. I have lost so much everytime the man gets it all. In the realationship area it revolves around both people. Intresting post 

[Losat]

I think only people who misunderstand MGTOW would think it excludes things like DDLG.  

 

MGTOW is not men going their own way away from women.

 

MGTOW is men going their own way away from people who demand the sexes be "equal", then turn around and demand that men carry the load of X (if it's equal, why is the man responsible?).

 

From what I've read in DDLG so far, it seems like this sort of lifestyle is right up MGTOW alley.  The MGTOW guys don't view the sexes as equal (BUT they do hold the equality supporters to their word of equality - they treat them all like men, regardless of sex), so it makes sense to MGTOW that the sexes should bear different loads, and play different roles - which has happened since the dawn of man, and continues to happen still (even in DDLG).  But the hypocrisy of "equality" is one target that MGTOW aim at, and are against; the supporters of it are the people these men go their own way away from.

 

MGTOW + DDLG = Perfect sense.

[Guest Little Otter]

I think only people who misunderstand MGTOW would think it excludes things like DDLG.  

 

MGTOW is not men going their own way away from women.

 

MGTOW is men going their own way away from people who demand the sexes be "equal", then turn around and demand that men carry the load of X (if it's equal, why is the man responsible?).

 

From what I've read in DDLG so far, it seems like this sort of lifestyle is right up MGTOW alley.  The MGTOW guys don't view the sexes as equal (BUT they do hold the equality supporters to their word of equality - they treat them all like men, regardless of sex), so it makes sense to MGTOW that the sexes should bear different loads, and play different roles - which has happened since the dawn of man, and continues to happen still (even in DDLG).  But the hypocrisy of "equality" is one target that MGTOW aim at, and are against; the supporters of it are the people these men go their own way away from.

 

MGTOW + DDLG = Perfect sense.

 

I've never seen this view of MGTOW espoused by anyone in the movement, even during my forays dabbling with the idea. I guess as a little boy/sub Im MGTOW? Seems odd.

[Losat]

I've never seen this view of MGTOW espoused by anyone in the movement, even during my forays dabbling with the idea. I guess as a little boy/sub Im MGTOW? Seems odd.

 

It's probably the number one view I've ever seen in MGTOW. 

 

The second biggest view I've seen is having sex with someone while spending as little money as possible - zero money if they can.

 

There are individuals who certainly have varying views of the sexes, some extreme, some tame.  For example, there are some people (not all MGTOW are men, oddly enough) who abhor the idea of marriage because of what happens in divorce court (esp. when kids are involved), so they dedicate themselves to never getting married; some prefer healthy committed relationships, others just sleep around and use women because (in my opinion) they're substituting the type of woman they don't like, and projecting that idea onto the woman they're with at the time.  But that's just my speculation. 

 

Sleeping around is something I am personally against, but there is a big following in MGTOW that is okay with it; I guess it's reflective of society in general when we get down to it.

[neworder]

I've seen plenty of what Losat described. 

 

It's been described once as Levels. Levels 1-4 i believe. The divisions can probably be categorized an infinite number of ways.

 

The first level being the 'angry MGTOW' and the higher levels no longer deal with being an angry boy anymore. Most of your internet and youtube trolls.

 

Some are incels because no girl will look at them ... these typically stay angry mgtow longer than most men.

 

Some (ie: monk mgtow) can get a woman but avoid it

 

Some can get a woman but maintain their independence (ie: not letting a woman move in, or get married). Leonardo DiCaprio is often cited as an example.

 

Fire can be a very destructive or a very beneficial thing to man. The most optimal end paths is monk or even better, be a DiCaprio mgtow - but knowing that pissing the wrong woman off can lead to her lying on a 911 call and ending your life/career/family as it is.