Thursday, April 5, 2012

You can go your own way

Captain Capitalism explains the difference between men who go their own way and women who claim to be doing so:
The origins of MGTOW hearkens back to when these men were in their early teens. Nerd or jock. Player or uber-beta. Virgin or porn star. All men have had to suffer the games, psychoses, drama, and just plain BS associated with dating and courting women/girls since puberty. Some men, with a low threshold for psychological pain or abuse (or as I like to call it "self-respect"), just give up. They make a conscious economic decision weighing the costs and benefits of continuing to pursue the opposite sex and came to the decision not to chase any more. To hop on their motorcycles, get the snippity snip, minimize their expenses and head out into the vast plains of life and maximize the time they have on this planet for their own benefit before they died.

This "process" or "epiphany" is different from the origins of WGTOW or how women decide going their own way is the best option. Most men go their own way in their prime. It's a conscious choice. It wasn't forced upon them. They purposely and consciously chose to quit because it was the wisest choice. Whereas with WGTOW, it's a situation that seems forced upon them. They wake up one day, at the age of 37, realize the past 7 years was not as fruitful as it was from 1990-1997 and are faced with the reality nobody cares about Winona Ryder anymore. They only care about Megan Fox. They never analyzed or assessed the ROI of their efforts on attracting a male. They never looked back and said, "Gee, I'm going to die here in a short 40 years, I better quit pissing away my time at the bars and go hiking in Glacier National Park." They just took the time to finally turn around and see men stopped chasing them back in Bush's first administration.

They then claim, "Oh yeah, me too! Fish-bicycle! I'm going my own way!" Sadly, because it's their only option. This, does not a deeply thoughtful (or intellectually honest) epiphany make.
I think the Captain's analysis is largely correct, except perhaps in failing to account for the one group of women who do genuinely go their own way, just as they have always done. These are the service-minded women, the sort of women who in an earlier time voluntarily pledged themselves to the Church and became nuns. There have always been women whose focus has been on service to others rather than to a husband and family, and their sacrifice has traditionally been honored and respected by men and women alike. Florence Nightingale is perhaps the ultimate historical example of a woman who truly went her own way whereas Saint Brigit of Ireland could be considered the classic example.

I don't think MGTOW is healthy in the least, in fact, the mere fact of its existence is an indictment on modern equalitarian society. But, unfortunately, it is an understandable and rational response.


Anonymous said...

"They then claim, "Oh yeah, me too! Fish-bicycle! I'm going my own way!" Sadly, because it's their only option. This, does not a deeply thoughtful (or intellectually honest) epiphany make."

Fair enough, but for some men, MGTOW is the only option available as well.

Anonymous said...

Not really. There's always mail ordered brides. An average working Joe can always score himself a hot chick from eastern Europe or Asia. I don't think there's an equivalent of that for women.

Bullitt315 said...

Purple saguaro

Daniel said...

There are plenty of women with mail order husbands. They are called correctional facility prisoner pen pals.

Der Hahn said...

MGTOW doesn't refer to unmarrigable people since they occur in both sexes, and not to scoring a male order bride either.

Women are by and large sought out by men for relationships. Therefore they are not making a conscious decision to forego creating relationships. Their decision is one of rejecting the advances of a particular man, not men in general, in hopes that a better offer will be made in the future.

Until they realize that not only are they not likely to get any better offers, they aren’t likely to get any offers at all.

Ian Ironwood said...

"I don't think MGTOW is healthy in the least, in fact, the mere fact of its existence is an indictment on modern equalitarian society. But, unfortunately, it is an understandable and rational response."

I disagree. I think under the circumstances MGTOW is perfectly healthy and valid. But I also think you are unfairly limiting the conception. MGTOW isn't a rejection of society, necessarily -- it's an establishment of an independent masculinity without feminine advice or consent. Within that sphere a man can go many different, equally profitable ways, depending upon his nature. Including the way of marriage. That seems counter to the whole idea, I know, but then there is marriage and there is Red Pill marriage, ala Athol Kay. For men like he and me, our conscious decision to wed and breed was part and parcel of our masculinity, even if it took us a few years to define it as such. We went our own way . . . and our wives followed us, because they were women of quality.

And that's the thing: if I was a young man and not so fortunate as to have met Mrs. Ironwood, then sure, I might be in Alaska trapping or panning for gold in Central America or following Roosh through Eastern Europe . . . but I didn't. I happened to meet a woman of quality who impressed me enough with her intelligence, her matronly abilities, and her lack of feminine bullshit to convince me that such a union was, indeed, the Way I Wanted To Go.

MGTOW is indeed a conscious, deliberate decision, and I urge every man to do so. It's an essential part of finding and valorizing your masculinity, a precursor to any serious exploration of your self. But it does not necessarily exclude a quality woman in your life, children, or other comforts. It's a lot harder to do it that way, of course -- Game at a whole different level, and over a longer period of time. But when the fates throw you One in a Million, then riding off into the sunset instead of following your destiny is the wimpy way out.

Besides, Mrs. Ironwood and I are convinced that there are entirely too many stupid people breeding, and we wanted to bring up the average. We're both over-achievers that way.

AmyJ said...

"They then claim, "Oh yeah, me too! Fish-bicycle! I'm going my own way!" Sadly, because it's their only option. This, does not a deeply thoughtful (or intellectually honest) epiphany make."

I have a friend that has taken this option. She, of course, portrays it as something that she wants, even going so far as to say she's exactly where she's supposed to be in her life. 30 years old, covering herself with tattoos, job hopping, playing roller derby, partying every other night, and by all appearances, doing whatever it is she wants to do. The image she projects to the world is one of a well rounded, free as a bird, "awesome" individual.

However, she also tends to keep quiet about the creditors who have come knocking (got a call from one trying to track her down last year), or the fact that she tells close friends she's met "the one" every six months or so, only for her to never speak of "the one" afterward - before the cycle starts again, she starts spouting the typical "I'm going my way, I'm perfectly happy as a single woman, I don't need a man to complete me, blah blah blah".

I don't think she's truly happy, but if I tried to tell her that, or get her to talk about it, she no doubt would see it as jealousy on my part because I'm settled down, happily married, and living a "normal" life. I wonder where she'll be at 40. Probably not anywhere good.

Giraffe said...

Fair enough, but for some men, MGTOW is the only option available as well.

True for many omegas. Mail ordered divorces are pretty stupid.

Anonymous said...

"Women have no sympathy . . . And my experience of women is almost as large as Europe. And it is so intimate too. Women crave for being loved, not for loving. They scream at you for sympathy all day long, they are incapable of giving any in return for they cannot remember your affairs long enough to do so."
-Florence Nightingale

LP2021 Bank of LP Work in Progress said...

Great post.

MGTOW isn't possible is it? Don't men always have girls stashed here and there? Sort of like game deniers, dudes are always signaling for some girl. WGTOW (women going at it alone) is a tragedy not a victory.

Perhaps for some men and women its best if they have little to offer to remain alone (if having nothing offer is true, that is). I don't know, it appears that many people failed to calculate what survival over happiness means. And those jobs that women think they have will sour.

Anonymous said...

"You can go your own way"

I'll take Fleetwood Mac for $500, Alex

Anonymous said...

I doubt MGTOW is compatible with Marriage 2.0, where the husband has all the responsibility and none of the rights. Relationships with women on your own terms are IMO compatible with MGTOW, as long as they take place in a country without anti-male laws. I doubt you can call yourself an MGTOW if you willingly engage in any contact with a woman that gives her legal power over you, be that in the form of a false rape accusation, divorce etc.


Anonymous said...

It's funny to see Ms. Walsh commenting on the original post that many of the lonely spinster women will blame feminism for their sad condition. That's ridiculous. It assumes women think logically about this issue and understand cause and effect. BS. OF COURSE they will blame men, not feminism.


Daniel said...

MGTOW sleep with women (except for the monk-like MGTOW - I've known a few of them) - what they don't build is legacy. i.e. No kids, no long-term relationship, no contribution to the improvement/survival/revival of the culture.

In short, no seeds, because planting seeds has become too fraught with regulation and criminality for their sense of freedom.

But there's no victory in that sort of freedom - freedom that isn't fought for is, in essence, a retreat to a place - chosen permanently, it is an act of robust cowardice. Every man for himself.

Daniel said...

I think you may be using a different definition for MGTOW than is presented. These are men with a low threshold for the moderne environment for relationships. They don't reproduce. They don't marry. Both are too culturally and legally restrictive for them.

Anonymous said...

Go your own way long enough and you might eventually really goh your own way.

JCclimber said...

Ha! that's funny. Except he didn't really go his own way, he was obviously very unhappy with the fact that he had zero social abilities.

Anonymous said...


Women in general, and feminists in particular, are incapable of accepting responsibility for their own failings.

And blaming feminism for spinsterhood would require that they accept responsibility for buying the idiotic worldview of radical feminism.

Therefore, men MUST be responsible.

Spectator said...

"no contribution to the improvement/survival/revival of the culture."

Well the truth is very few people really contribute much of anything significant to society, with the exception of reproducing and ensuring replacement, which is a net neutral.

Anonymous said...

Age has a lot to do with it. I think the most vulnerable time for men is right after college. In college, the worst person you'll be judged against is a senior. In real life, its some 35 year old Don Draper who had 15 more years to build a life. Almost every guy I talk to, they definitely seem to take a hit around 22-25. The more attractive ones still get laid sometimes, but its clearly a rut for many men.

If a man thinks, "this is what I'm worth" based on 22-25, he's easy picking for some broad when he is 28. He's just starting to get established. He's just starting to hit his prime, there is a reason Don Draper is 35 at the start of Mad Men. And girls his age want to cash in before he realizes his own value, just before their own plummets.

That's the risk, and that's where MGTOW is most useful IMO. Sample your options in your prime, don't settle. If your a real man, you'll have just as many options at 40 as 30. Those girls will still be there.

For girls though its just about them wasting their primes, and realizing it to late.

Anonymous said...

It is easier for a woman to forfeit an intimate relationship with a man.
Societal norms allow her more intimate talks and hugs with children, girlfriends and extended family. She is less sexually driven.

It is very difficult for her to forgo nurturing children, however. The childless 50 year old woman who is satisfied with that decision, doesn't exist. Once a woman has her own children, she can be fairly content without a man in her life.

Pip said...

"The childless 50 year old woman who is satisfied with that decision, doesn't exist."

Utter nonsense. Go to any childfree event, such as No Kidding! functions, and get ready to be proven completely in the wrong.

Anonymous said...

@anonymous at 10:10
For many men, the prime is early twenties, and it's all downhill from thence. For some men, 17-18 is their prime. Youthful body and face are their best assets.
Balding, dwindling sexual stamina, financial insecurity, cynicism, loss of body tone, debt, faded features all take tolls. Realism replaces potential.

Spacebunny said...

Therefore, men MUST be responsible.

Men are responsible for feminism. To claim otherwise is historically ignorant. In terms of Game I would assert that it is specifically Beta's who bear the most responsibility for the rise of feminism.

Anonymous said...

Feminism is old news. The real question is which game group is most responsible for the fast rising lesbianism these days?

All of the above except Alpha/Sigma and the weight lifting moustache guys would be my guess.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Life is messy and difficult. Why should it have to be as if our decisions must be based upon some kind of perfect and premeditated intellectual purity? Most of our lives are based on lots of our personal reactions to things that were beyond our control - we weren't raised right or knowing certain things about life, we were ignorant, other people were shitty or died on us, illness and injury, social changes around us over the course of a few decades, etc.

Anonymous said...

What about the people who are just genuinely all right for long periods of time without a companion?

Mr. Scott said...

Duskdrop, I get the impression that the Captain wouldn't count us as MGTOW... he made quite an issue of "emotional damage", which apparently you don't have, and I know I don't have. Of course, who died and made him the official definer of the term?
Personal example: I don't recall ever having a traumatic experience with a woman -- as soon as they began to be less-than-entertaining, I walked. Over time, appealing ones became fewer and farther between. Hardy the sort of drama the Captain seems to be describing.

Anonymous said...

Oh, yeah I quess I don't get it because I need very little social interaction to be fine (I do need some), but I can trace that back to when I was an infant. Now I do have that loyalty/obligation tic really bad so I'm not likely to walk away, except for one incident I never talked to a person after a date again.

Oh and I'm a girl so it would be WGTOW or just my natural state.

Anonymous said...

Leykis 101

Anonymous said...

what the hell is Daniel smoking. He has a mangina.

Anonymous said...

'and im a girl' attention whore.

Anonymous said...

Hey there! Do you use Twitter? I'd like to follow you if that would be ok. I'm undoubtedly enjoying your blog
and look forward to new updates.

My web page; asphalt

Post a Comment