Should we fine tune our replacement of marriage?

Workingmother.com has a post up about the question of whether men should be able to legally opt out of fatherhood:

The woman said the idea came from a friend—a woman who had a child out of a friends-with-benefits situation with a man. Although he didn’t want the baby from the beginning and didn’t help during the first couple years, he recently “decided that he wants to have access to the child and start to build a relationship now [that] he is older.”

To prevent such a thing from happening to other women who had accidental pregnancies, the friend proposed the following solution: Before the baby is 1-month-old, a man who wants to opt-out of fatherhood would sign a document that states that he “has no desire to be a part of the child’s life in any way, will not ever be able to seek any type of access, and will not pay money.”

By having men sign the document, it would save mom and child “significant stress and heartache.”

Not surprisingly, this proposal didn’t go over well with the single mother crowd.  I would predict that it would fare equally badly with the My Lord Mary Lee crowd.  While the proposal is an effective way to troll both groups into an impassioned defense of our current child support family model, in my opinion in the US at least it isn’t likely to be even seriously entertained by lawmakers.

Moreover, note the absence of even a mention of the fact that the proposed fine tuning of our family model addresses important questions that our previous family model (marriage) used to address.  Prior to the child support model, marriage was the way both men and women resolved the question of involvement by and support from the father.  In the past, marriage granted men fatherhood rights they otherwise could not expect to receive.  It also granted women the right to support from the father.  This way of viewing marriage is absolutely foreign to us now, as marriage is now about the moral primacy of romantic love.

Related:

This entry was posted in Child Custody, Child Support, Chivalry, Illegitimacy, Marriage, Replacing Marriage, Romantic Love. Bookmark the permalink.

216 Responses to Should we fine tune our replacement of marriage?

  1. The Question says:

    Aside from the trolling, it might have been more rhetorically effective to phrase it as “empowering” the mother: Should women be able to legally remove deadbeat dads?

    The way it’s put is making it clear that this move would give the father more authority or control, not the mother.

  2. Anon says:

    The good thing is that at least a woman is the one actually presenting this idea.

    But yes, it has zero chance of passing as a law in the US. The current system is too lucrative to too many evildoers (both financially and in terms of virtue signalling).

    I have often said that there are two laws that have what it takes to utterly destroy our society. Both happen to be feminist-oriented laws. They are :

    i) The current CS laws, which are really just slavery and debtors prisons by other names, but structured in a way that can fool most people, and get cuckservatives to be their staunches defenders.

    ii) The removal of due process for false rape/sexual assault accusations.

    These two laws, in their current state, do catastrophic damage that is very hard to fully measure, and have a lot of clueless people supporting these laws due to the deceptive nature of their wording combined with the innate FI wired into all humans.

  3. Anonymous Reader says:

    This was called “Choice for Men” back in the 1990’s, and only a handful of various cranks supported it, typically on soc.men and other newsgroups. The feminists did their usual doublethink, along with their sock puppet Traditional Oh So Conservative allies – “Her Body, Her Choice!” but “His Body, His Responsibility”. Nobody else cared, because the idea had zero chance of enactment.

    It’s risible to see this showing up again, only from the “I want what I want when I want it” babymomma crowd. Of course there’s zero chance still of any enactment. But as Darlock notes, it’s a very useful Christmas tree to drop out of the boat and slowly troll down the lake, just to see what bites one can get.

    As we all know, or should know, the reality is so far from this as to be in orbit around Pluto. A man doesn’t have to have intercourse with a woman to wind up the designated father paying child support.

    Here is a blast from the past to show what US paternity / child support really looks like: how a single session of oral sex can be turned into 18 years of monthly payments.

    https://www.lasisblog.com/2011/02/26/man-receives-oral-sex-ordered-to-pay-child-support/

    And here is another one I just found today in a duckduckgo search:

    https://caselaw.findlaw.com/la-court-of-appeal/1240516.html

    Rare events, to be sure, but they do show how the modern marriage child support system works.

  4. Trust says:

    On a related note, I watched Vox’s Darkstream 411 titled Men Going the Evil Way, where he basically calls men who won’t marry evil cowards, despite acknowledging the system is stacked against them.

  5. William of Orange County says:

    Let’s take this to its logical conclusion: What do you think a world where this is legally instituted looks like?

    A) Males in minority communities where this is practiced de-facto with child support quite literally throw their hands in the sky in praise. This is – in essence – the final completion of family destruction: abortion and feminine primacy on one end and now complete unfettered seed-spreading on the other. Marriage is already dead. Now it’s the family’s turn.

    B) Nothing changes for other higher-income higher-status communities because no such woman would actually present such an option. Moreover, if they did the legal community begins licking their chops at loopholes (like they did with pre-nuptial agreements) to enforce accountability exo-posto, most especially if it’s the woman that changes her mind, not the man. In other words, things don’t change substantively at all in this regard, birthrates continue to plummet even faster now because of even further risk, and marriage is still dead with the family now having an initial nail in the casket of ‘closure’.

    C) A first generation of children are born to an outsized sample set of the first group of men and women who opted for this ‘option’. I.E. The acknowledgment of a huge segment of newborns growing up to an understanding that many of their fathers bailed and its attendant damages. In other words, extend the ‘fatherlessness’ trend of the last 40 years we’ve seen in underclass communities to the nation. Marriage is dead. Family is dead. The nation is dead. Turn the page…

  6. Anonymous Reader says:

    @Trust

    There is something about the whole issue of MGTOW that clearly triggers Vox Day to an extreme level of rage. Perhaps it is something personal. This isn’t the first time he had a temper tantrum over the issue, either. His tantrums never offer any actionable suggestions beyond “marry a church girl”. Although some of his followers will produce suggestions in comments – never anything new, generally very, very basic Manosphere concepts. Certainly more actionable than the irrational noise their Supreme Dark Lord puts out.

    Now, his other website Alpha Game Plan used to have a little bit of useful info (although generally cribbed from Roissy and Rollo…) but it is moribund, the last entry spring of 2018. He’s just got some kind of personal issue about MGTOW and, as I noted above, it triggers him very deeply.

    Now, if this sort of “manUP! Marry that slut! NOW, you maggot!” thing entertains you, search for vintage Mark Driscoll from the old Mars Hill church days, especially the “How Dare You” sermon. Driscoll was a much, much better public speaker than Day.

    Lastly, one of Day’s previous MGTOW temper tantrums featured him urging men to murder anti-Family court judges, then kill themselves. That puts his rants on the topic into the kook-land category, on a par with some homeless man yelling in the subway. Not serious discourse, certainly nothing any man can learn from.

    For entertainment purposes only.

    Serious men would benefit much, much more from Deep Strength’s book, as well as from Rollo Tomassi’s three books, plus a selection of Dalrock’s essays on marriage.

  7. Horst Muhlmann says:

    Wasn’t there some guy form Nazareth who never married? And some other guy who wrote half the New Testament on a book count basis?

    Furthermore: “To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single, as I am.” 1 Corinthians 7:8

    Vox Day is a schmuck.

  8. Anonymous Reader says:

    William of Orange County
    Let’s take this to its logical conclusion: What do you think a world where this is legally instituted looks like?

    Perhaps something like this:

    https://infogalactic.com/info/Mosuo#Walking_marriages

    Note that the Mosuo are a tiny minority in single region of China. Also note that the social elites who rule them don’t practice that kind of marriage; they are more patriarchal. Different rules for elites than plebes…

  9. texinole says:

    I brought this up to a women who’s ex is being sent to modern debtor’s prison for lack of child support payments. She was adamant that, in Texas divorces at least, a father could sign away his right to the child and with it the legal obligation of child support.

    Any insight into this claim before I start down the long, boring path of researching state law to verify?

  10. Anon says:

    On a related note, I watched Vox’s Darkstream 411 titled Men Going the Evil Way, where he basically calls men who won’t marry evil cowards, despite acknowledging the system is stacked against them.

    Vox is no different than a screeching cuckservative pastorbator. He might as well join up with Brad Wilcucks and Jim Gay-ratty and make cuckservative videos.

    Remember that race trashionalism is a goddess cult, as virtually any race or ethno-centric ideology will inevitably become. Many White Trashionalists say that outright paternity fraud and cuckolding is acceptable as long as it produces a white baby. They are certainly not friends of men, and they don’t think fatherhood matters (since they think everything is 100% nature and thus 0% nurture).

    Even worse, more and more White Trashionalists have openly said that they would rather have sex with a white man over a black woman, since race loyalty supercedes sexual orientation, and producing no baby is vastly better than producing a mulatto baby. This way lies madness.

  11. Anon says:

    I wish there were an episode of Black Mirror where the forcible transfer of wealth from men to women and consequences from women to men were taken to its logical conclusion. Unfortunately, that is too politically incorrect even for Black Mirror.

    I would be extremely impressed if they in fact decide to make even a cautious version of this.

  12. @Anonymous Reader

    Even in Vox’s Alpha Game posts from a few years ago, he described MGTOW as a “rational” response on the part of low-SMV men to the environment. But now a lot of his recent content on his blog & stream relating to the sexual marketplace has the tenor of “you’re a feckless, cowardly piece of shit! But you need to marry a 2 and have children anyway!”

    And you’re right, Alpha Game really does contain little actionable advice, except for the “Graduating Gamma” series, which Vox didn’t even write. In my case, the best help came from Good Looking Loser and PD Mangan.

  13. Anon says:

    texinole,

    She was adamant that, in Texas divorces at least, a father could sign away his right to the child and with it the legal obligation of child support.

    I am no lawyer, but I am almost certain that this is not the case, as no one in the ‘sphere has ever mentioned it even once. Red States are actually more brutal and gratuitously punitive towards men in such matters.

    By contrast, in the deepest blue places, the judges have internalized the blank slate so totally that, ironically, we see instances of women being hit with alimony and CS imputation. I don’t know what the stats are, but many anecdotal instances of this have piled up in Marin County, San Francisco, etc.

  14. SirHamster says:

    On a related note, I watched Vox’s Darkstream 411 titled Men Going the Evil Way, where he basically calls men who won’t marry evil cowards, despite acknowledging the system is stacked against them.

    Liar, he calls the MGTOWs who try to demoralize other men the cowards. And they are evil because they are trying to destroy the courage and morale of other men.

    Demoralization and not marrying are different things.

  15. Vox is no different than a screeching cuckservative pastorbator. He might as well join up with Brad Wilcucks and Jim Gay-ratty and make cuckservative videos.

    Vox Day be like: “I married a model, why can’t you? Oh, by the way, did you know my family was rich, and I was an NCAA Div-I athlete? What you need to understand is that I really don’t like talking about myself. Also, did you know I have a 150 IQ? Despite my hesitation in talking about myself, I look for any opportunity I can to say on my blog that I have a 150 IQ.”

  16. Dylan Sexton says:

    Trust says:
    June 26, 2019 at 2:37 pm

    >On a related note, I watched Vox’s Darkstream 411 titled Men Going the Evil Way, where he basically calls men who won’t marry evil cowards, despite acknowledging the system is stacked against them.

    I don’t know wtf that guy even purports to stand for. Other than his intriguingly feasible assertion that marital rape is a contradiction in terms, I find his site valueless.

  17. Anonymous Reader says:

    Anon
    I don’t know what the stats are, but many anecdotal instances of this have piled up in Marin County, San Francisco, etc.

    Eh. The plural of “anecdote” is not “data”.

    Perhaps some “house husbands” have gamed the system well enough to be declared primary caregiver by some anti Family judge, and obtained at least child support from a lawyer / banker / finance wife, but it’s got to be essentially statistical noise. 10 out of 1,000,000 kind of noise.

    If it becomes more common for men to stay home while their college-educated-women wives bring home all the bacon, and if such men survive the first few years of growing contempt, and if they have the smarts to make sure they are sole-caregiver, and if some other stuff, then maybe enough high income women will be inconvenienced that “male choice” will be proposed.

    But I’m really skeptical anything even like this will happen.

    However, “choice for men” would be a great lure to troll the WELL with – until getting banned.

  18. locustsplease says:

    This already does exist. You can sign away all custody rights just like in an adoption its how large amounts of cs are erased it is one of the single moms favorite way of disposing of you. You get an unachievable amount behind and have no other options she gets to tell the kids you dont love them and volunteered to leave.

    But it of course has the one thing our society needs to draw a moral line and that is she has to sign off on it. Majical female permission. Without her permission you cannot waive child support obligations.

    This is what the career gal loves. Shes got her own money in all reality and this is the long painful crushing blow of defeat they love. Imagine the stress of getting behind 10s of thousands in cs you ignore the hearings for obvious reasons and they pick you up with a warrant the only time you might see your kids is within 6 months after this hearing. When facing lets say 5 years in prison after your third time you break and sign a sheet of paper stating i never loved my kids let me go.

  19. locustsplease says:

    The whole thing is female permission. The govt does not prosecute cs without female permission. They never chase you she can waive your cs at anytime. If she shows to court and says i dont want him to go to jail your never going if she says otherwise your on the brutal and terrifying road of judicial descretion. You will b forced to lie to keep buying time till you run out. I really think its mostly about getting you to loose any morality. Anyone involved in this process certainly has none to loose and it loves company. Its her money shes the victim you dead beat.

  20. Pingback: Should we fine tune our replacement of marriage? | Reaction Times

  21. In California, which of course is our nation’s finest example when it comes to divorce and family court outcomes that annihilate the family – courts take parental rights very seriously and they are not so quick to terminate someone’s parental rights just because one parent does not want the other parent in the child’s life. As a general rule, the court only terminates parental rights when there is someone else who desires to step in and take on the role as an adoptive stepparent, or an adoptive parent.

    If terminating the person’s (e.g. father’s) parental rights would leave the child with only one parent who is responsible to care for and financially support the child then no, the court would not terminate the parental rights.

    Additionally, if someone’s parental rights are terminated, it DOES NOT eliminate the child support that they owed. If there are child support arrearages, they are owed up to the date the parental rights were terminated.

    So I think the entire question is moot about modifying marriage.
    A father and husband’s responsibility and accountability – legal, financial and parental – must be commensurate with his level of authority, rights and privileges.

    But this is not the case now. And it will never be the case ever again.
    So it just doesn’t matter.

    The main takeaway for men today is to become aware of these immense legal, financial and emotional risks associated with marriage, as well as the probability of no fault divorce and the certainties of family court rulings regarding custody, spousal support and child support.

    The majority of men don’t think about this.
    And the Christian church continues to go out of its way to ensure men do not become aware.

  22. Anonymous Reader says:

    locustsplease
    This already does exist. You can sign away all custody rights just like in an adoption its how large amounts of cs are erased it is one of the single moms favorite way of disposing of you.

    Cite, please. Preferably to a state law code site.

  23. PokeSalad says:

    On a related note, I watched Vox’s Darkstream 411 titled Men Going the Evil Way, where he basically calls men who won’t marry evil cowards, despite acknowledging the system is stacked against them.

    yup, sez the blogger comfortably ensconced NOT in USA, but Italy, IIRC. Do as I say, not as I….

  24. 7817 says:

    For the off topic guys: https://therationalmale.com/2011/10/17/indignation/

    If you are are the indignant one, it’s about you.

    On topic:

    he recently “decided that he wants to have access to the child and start to build a relationship now [that] he is older.”

    To prevent such a thing from happening to other women who had accidental pregnancies

    Oh the horror that a dad would want to be involved with his child.

    Before the baby is 1-month-old, a man who wants to opt-out of fatherhood would sign a document that states that he “has no desire to be a part of the child’s life in any way, will not ever be able to seek any type of access, and will not pay money.”

    This idea accidentally gives some measure of power back to fathers, which is why I think you are right Dalrock, in that both feminists and chivalrous types will hate it.

  25. Random Guy says:

    Oh, look, Gammas going straight to Gamma whining after being outed as Gammas.

    This is why MGTOW is poison.

  26. Spike says:

    Any man who has a child with a woman out of wedlock is setting himself up for an apocalypse of pain. It’s hard enough within wedlock.
    -if she lives with you, you are only a “I don’t love you anymore!” away from being separated from your child.
    -if the child is a transaction, the deal stays in place right up to the point where she ”feels” the situation is right and suits her. Then you are either on the hook for child support or out of the picture, with a tragic, “Oh, we broke up…”.
    -the piece of paper that is signed is therefore of no value anyway, because a woman will use child support, the courts, the law or any combination of the above to get what she wants out of the man in question.

  27. Marquess of Little Red Jumbo Jet says:

    Liar

    Vox throws that around a lot. From his comments section, his reply to a poster:

    85. VD June 18, 2019 11:32 AM

    If people are concerned about the falling birth rates, instead of bashing MGTOW as cowards, which is a waste of time anyway, they would do better to criticize the licentious behavior of modern women which make them unfit wives and mothers.

    People have been doing that non-stop since the 1960s. And it’s not as if one can’t criticize more than one evil at a time.

    You’re just trying to defend the indefensible. Don’t bother. As long as they are preaching their evil philosophy, they will be rightly hammered.

    People have been doing that non-stop since the 1960s.

    Pants on fire.

    No one of consequence in mainstream American discourse has “been [criticizing women’s behavior] non-stop since the 1960s.”

    He knows this.

    When our masters decided to implement eugenics, everyone– everyone engaged with the cultural mainstream– took the shekels and cucked, embraced sin, or, worse, simply went along to get along.

    They were liars. They were cowards.

    Then, they failed, and continue to fail, to call out the sin for fear of disapproval and foot-stamping by the sinner. Next, the revolutionary spirit set in and the inmates took over the asylum. We are now hostage to their insane mindgames and depredations.

    The righteous outliers already pulled back and withdrew. They GTOW’ed.

    Today, the mask finally falls off, and the palatable eugenics program everyone from the Fin de Sicle’s to X’ers signed-on for is revealed for it truly is: mass sacrifice.

    At civilzational scale. Panic sets in.

    OMG, OMG! whiny incel groypers ruining our gay ops! fuggin’ GAMMAS, amirite?! RALLY! REEEeEeeEEE!

    Noise.

    Too late. No one expects Generals Butt-Naked II to DCLXVI and the children’s brigades.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Butt_Naked

    Except, maybe Vox. He already boxed up all his Prince albums and Cavaricci jeans and fucked off to Italy.

    I like my societies pre-collapsed.

    Yeah.

    If you want a fun history, an eclectic, cathcuckian take on all of this, I recommend “Libido Dominandi” by E. Michael Jones. He’s hilarious.

    On that note, even the cathcucks– one of the last influential belligerents in our mid-century kulturkampf– bent to feminism by the 1970s. Nowadays, even when it comes to recreational fetal slaughter, they can only muster up the mildest sort of tacit, near-subliminal, disapproval in carefully hushed, dulcet tones. Can’t spook the stroppy pozgirls and their white knights, you know. The masters would be upset!

  28. Anonymous Reader says:

    From the article linked:

    On June 19, Mumsnet user jemimapuddleduckpancake asked people what their thoughts were on giving men the ability to sign away any involvement in their baby’s life

    First of all, anyone with a screen name of “jemimapuddleduckpancake” has no opinion anyone should take seriously. Nothing personal, well, not too much.

    Second of all, this is yet another case of “fried ice shortage”. In babymomma world long term there’s no Goldilocks point for men. He’s either not around enough or around too much. As with many in marriage – “working too many hours, never home” or “underfoot in the house, not earning enough”.

    This does demonstrate that a man who wants children should marry, if for no other reason than he has stronger legal position vis a vis children than otherwise. Yeah, not as many rights as should be, but more than none.

  29. BillyS says:

    Hork,

    Most MGTOW are not fully devoted to carrying out God’s will, so that argument is about as strong as marrying a single mother because Mary got pregnant before her marriage to Joseph.

    Vox Day is very disappointing. I used to really like reading his stuff, but he is turning me off bit by bit, especially after all the “MGTOWs are complete liars and losers” posts. I don’t agree with all of it and never will, but to ignore the risks inherent in modern marriage is foolish and naive. Telling others to do that is even worse, since it is misleading them.

    The comment sections are now almost always a bunch of suck ups attacking the one or two people who dare to challenge the post, along with Vox calling them ignorant gammas. Really sad for someone who had great respect in my eyes.

    We all can’t have a hot band member, video game producer, etc. that has now found Christ backgrounds. Some of us are much more plain. Though that is the same argument type that I saw in Il D’s replies in another thread. (Not to restart that argument.) Too many today still blame men, even those who claim to support them.

  30. BillyS says:

    Random Guy:

    Gamma

    Definition: Anyone who disagrees with Vox Day or someone acting in his place.

    Give me a break. As someone noted in the latest post’s discussion, gamma has become a hitler word.

    It may be news to you, but you can disagree and not be a gamma, though I suppose he made up the definition so he can put anyone in that category he wants to.

  31. Days of Broken Arrows says:

    Men on the right use “gamma” the way people on the left use “racist.” It’s thoughtless namecalling that shows intellectual laziness and an unwillingness and/or inability to truly engage in the subject at hand. Whenever I hear either word I tune out whoever says it, whether it’s Vox or AOC.

  32. Athanasius says:

    The laws stink- correct. Women are given a pass for promiscuity and men in the church are afraid to correct them- alas, too often correct. That still doesn’t give anyone the right to run from God’s normal path (marriage and children) except for those called to celibacy. Very few are called to it. If you are hitting porn sites or picking up chicks as a sexual outlet, you aren’t one of them. While it’s true you need to exercise discretion (and no, you don’t need to “wife up a slut”), it’s simply a lie that all women are slags.

  33. 7817 says:

    Robert Greene’s word for gamma is “deep narcissist.” His definition is similar to Vox’s, as his prescription. From chapter 2 of The Laws of Human Nature.

  34. CK says:

    The OP may be confused about what she is trying to say, but it will boil down to cutting further into fathers’ already-feeble rights. I think what she is getting around to is, the mother should be able to terminate the father’s rights completely (forgoing CS), or to force full CS. Further, she should be able to switch back and forth between the two options, similar to turning on and off a Netflix subscription.

  35. RigsOfChad says:

    I am a single Millenial guy in my late 20’s and have commented on Vox Day’s recent anti-MGTOW threads. I tend to agree that MGTOW in the sense of eschewing contact with women is inherently a cowardly strategy that lends itself to the hedonist lifestyle. I have limited knowledge of Christian theology but can see the stark distinction between ascetic devotion to God and withdrawal from worldly pleasures, and the lifelong bachelor materialistic MGTOW lifestyle.

    My personal dilemma is that red-pill knowledge, information gleaned from this blog and others, and right-wing content have drastically changed my perception of women as potential marriage partners. Most women that I encounter exhibit several obvious disqualifying traits at the first introduction. I have an extremely limited dating history compared to my peers and even the notion of a successful date with a virtuous woman seems unlikely, let alone marrying one. I have always been successful in social circles including many different groups of men, often alpha types, but never with women.

    I always intended on starting a family someday but it feels like an ocean separates me from getting there.

  36. Ranger says:

    Vox also said all MGTOWs are liars. I thought he was exaggerating, but so far, in this thread at least, it’s 100% accurate.

  37. Opus says:

    Matrimony implies that there is a woman both willing and able to marry you but even that uncertainty does not alleviate a man’s responsibility to choose wisely that is to say assortively (I fail on both counts). Many Christian men unsuited to wedlock opted for the monastic life. As even women do not have a 100% marriage take-up rate not marrying should not be sufficient to gain the wrath of the supreme dark lord himself but he can spot and berate a Gamma at fifty paces and thus none of us are safe. In my frustrated inability to impose my will upon the world I realise now that even though I previously flattered myself to be an Alpha (or greater Beta or perhaps even Sigma) all along I was a pathetic Gamma but at least that is, I suppose, better than being Omega.

    There is surely a way and a common way at that in which women can exclude the father of their child in the child-support free way described in the OP: adoption. The State loves adoption but it does not however love being forced to pay for children. The proposal of the self-serving dim-witted bints (‘accidental pregnancy’ must be an oxymoron together with their implication that somehow the unfortunate man had from the beginning some possibility of forcing his will on the woman but chose otherwise) is still-born.

  38. Pete says:

    Painting all MGTOW as cheeto-stained virgins in Mom’s basement makes them feel superior, so that’s the line they repeat. The reality is that MGTOW became sour on re-marriage AFTER getting married once, having kids, getting divorced, and then getting the full brunt of the divorce machinery.

    I mean, you don’t end up [i]paying a thousand bucks a month in child support[/i] if you can’t get laid. Thus, Vox and his commenters are the real liars.

    Secondly, Vox’s commenters are clueless Boomers who have no idea how the dating market has changed. I doubt they’ve ever been on Tinder.

    Women don’t WANT to get married, at least not until they’ve plowed their way through every hot guy in college, gotten their “careers” established, and traveled to various exotic locales and put it all on Instagram. You can propose to all the church girls you want, but unless she’s approaching age 30 marriage is the last thing on her mind.

  39. FatR says:

    Vox also said all MGTOWs are liars. I thought he was exaggerating, but so far, in this thread at least, it’s 100% accurate.

    Well, by his definition of lying, which increasingly seems to be “having arguments that Vox cannot counter”, sure. But here he has no moderating power, and therefeore the normal definition is used, so provide examples where posters in this thread have lied or be outed as a liar.

  40. We all can’t have a hot band member, video game producer, etc. that has now found Christ backgrounds. Some of us are much more plain.

    Then look for a plain woman who isn’t an alpha widow. You might not find her your entire life. That’s a much better fate than marrying someone with obvious red flags. Most of the men I know who’ve been screwed by the system married women with… obvious red flags because they were too controlled by their little heads to let the big one say “nope, not a smart move.” If being plain bothers you, pick up some things on game and try to apply them seriously.

    Vox also said all MGTOWs are liars. I thought he was exaggerating, but so far, in this thread at least, it’s 100% accurate.

    Case in point, Anonymous Reader saying Vox urged readers to go on a killing spree and commit suicide afterward. I remember that post. I’ve cited and probably actually linked it here. He doesn’t urge direct action saying “here’s what you should do.” It was shaming MGTOWs by saying “this is how a Roman Patrician would deal with this injustice” to show that historically men wouldn’t have taken such a thing lying down.

  41. It may be news to you, but you can disagree and not be a gamma, though I suppose he made up the definition so he can put anyone in that category he wants to.

    Because it’s about how you disagree. I get called names here and don’t care. I call names and cast aspersions on others (besides you) and watch the triggering ensue. That’s how gammas roll, buddy. Chances are if you’re the guy who can dish it out, but can’t take it you’re a whiny gamma bitch. Like Anon. He can’t represent someone’s position honestly if he tries, then loses his shit if he feels someone has done that to him.

  42. Arguably the best comment over at mumsnet.com for this article that summarizes modern western gynocentrism attitudes about sexual reproductive and parental rights & authority versus commensurate responsibility and accountability (legal, financial, etc.):

    VivienneHolt Thu 20-Jun-19 09:18:49
    This would be disastrous for women. Every irresponsible twat who didn’t feel interested in his kid would opt out and there would be no prospect of the mother ever being supported. And what if a man changed his mind and decided that a previously wanted baby was no longer wanted?

    This is stupid and misogynistic. Women get to terminate pregnancies because it’s wrong to force anyone to bear children they don’t want. The fact that it is not men bearing children (and accepting the consequent physical, emotional, social and financial costs of pregnancy) is NOT a disadvantage to men.

    If men don’t want children they can abstain from sex, use condoms or have a vasectomy. That is the point where they get to opt out. Once the baby is conceived they are on the hook for the (far less significant than for a woman) consequences of that.

  43. After reading Vox Day and also this blog for some time, both of which I have found to be very informative, I have yet to hear or read a compelling, persuasive argument against what Mgtows have been saying all along, and about what they recommend.

    In fact, every day the Mgtow lifestyle is start to make more sense and seem more sane.
    Don’t marry. Don’t cohabitate. That’s it.
    Sounds like what a bunch of dudes in the Bible did centuries ago.

    Sure. You can use putdowns like calling them incels, gammas, liars, momma’s boys and soyboys or whatever else. But this is just pointing and sputtering nonsense, because when it comes to assembling a salient and convincing set of arguments AGAINST Mgtow, most of you – myself included – are just standing there holding an empty sack of nothing. Nothing has really changed on this point since Mgtow started gaining momentum around 2013.

    So one would have to do a little bit more than simply hurl ad hominems at these guys, and hope that some semblance of shame sticks to them.

    Yep, trying to sell life on the plantation is hard work.

  44. FatR says:

    Il Deplorevolissimo:
    Case in point, Anonymous Reader saying Vox urged readers to go on a killing spree and commit suicide afterward. I remember that post. I’ve cited and probably actually linked it here. He doesn’t urge direct action saying “here’s what you should do.” It was shaming MGTOWs by saying “this is how a Roman Patrician would deal with this injustice” to show that historically men wouldn’t have taken such a thing lying down.

    Besides the fact that we have no shortage of examples of Roman patricians reacting to tyranny with meek compiance and nauseating sycophancy (from Roman writers bemoaning this behavior), therefore making Vox’ point ahistorical nonsense.

    “He doesn’t urge direct action” are words of a weasel. And not calling to direct action is generally a weasel excuse employed by someone who clearly approves of certain behavior equally clearly labeled as criminal, but does not want to land in hot water for incitement. In this particular case this is doubly true, because Vox specifically says that the society is the way it is because of weak men screwing feminism up not being willing to commit murder-suicides. Unless the opportunity to follow a course of action X is already in the past, the main meaningful difference between “I urge X” and “I shame you in very strong terms for not choosing X and declare that your predicament is your own fault because you did not choose X” is that the latter is a slimeball’s formula that allows the writer to cover his own ass. Which is rich, when “X” in question is murder-suicide.

  45. Oscar says:

    Prior to the child support model, marriage was the way both men and women resolved the question of involvement by and support from the father. In the past, marriage granted men fatherhood rights they otherwise could not expect to receive. It also granted women the right to support from the father. ~ Dalrock

    I think a more accurate way to write that statement is that marriage imposed obligations on both mothers and fathers.

  46. Oscar says:

    @ constrainedlocus

    Don’t marry. Don’t cohabitate. That’s it.
    Sounds like what a bunch of dudes in the Bible did centuries ago.

    Which dudes?

  47. I reread the post again…

    http://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/12/mailvox-low-morale-men.html

    Once again proving that yes, most MGTOWs–at least here, are pathological liars. You have to really read what isn’t there in that post to get what FatR got out of it.

  48. FatR says:

    It takes a very special sort of idiotic arrogance to accuse others of lying while posting the link that proves they said the exact truth.

  49. Oscar says:

    @ Matthew “Uncle Maffoo” Morgan (@UncleMaffoo)

    Vox Day be like: “I married a model, why can’t you? Oh, by the way, did you know my family was rich, and I was an NCAA Div-I athlete? What you need to understand is that I really don’t like talking about myself. Also, did you know I have a 150 IQ? Despite my hesitation in talking about myself, I look for any opportunity I can to say on my blog that I have a 150 IQ.”

    I can’t argue with the second, hilarious part of that. As for marrying a model, Ted often states that men need to learn to set their sights lower, which is a criticism often leveled at women here.

  50. vandicus says:

    Doing a quick review of the post. Note I’m not MGTOW.

    1. Starts by blaming MGTOW explicitly as ‘low morale cowards’, ‘useless parasites’, etc.
    2. Why are they these things? Because they ‘refuse to defend civilization’ (I take it this means refusing to support the current order with their labor or efforts, the only other alternative interpretation is this is also related to recommending violence)
    3. Child-bearing is their primary purpose in life as men. Something about toys (I think MGTOW is generally happy to watch the current order burn, toys and all)
    4. Men shouldn’t tolerate the legal system. The example of how not to tolerate the legal system is a murder-suicide. If he has some other specific recommendation, it is not made here.
    5. MGTOW value their toys more than, what does Vox mean by honor? What is it that they are doing that is dishonorable? Far as I can tell they’re not hurting anyone, they’re just abstaining from a system designed to exploit them. Sure if enough men do this the civilization collapses, but such a civilization deserves to collapse. We’re not far off from Canaan or Sodom and I’m not going to be upset about dying in some civilizational scale comeuppance.
    6. Men could end the entire divorce machine in 30 days. This is a pretty stupid assertion. It may be true in some technical sense, but MGTOW is not the head of a secret decision making patriarchy. Men collectively could do that, but it’s well acknowledged that most men are on board with perpetuating the current order or making it more feminist.
    7. Are all MGTOW refusing to marry as he says here? I’ve heard of some self-identified MGTOW who are married or open to marriage if they happen to encounter ‘the right’ woman. Making a decision based on how costly or beneficial it is acting on reason, not fear. It may even be reasonable to assess certain aspects of marriage as having a negative value(delaying the end of a civilization cycle, putting children out into the world to be trannyfied and abused). The whole legal slavery to one’s wife thing is not supposed to be a part of marriage, so taking it into account seems reasonable.
    8. Boilerplate platitudes.

    That’s a rough summary of what I see here. He tries to end with a boilerplate call to action but the only specific action he ever recommends seems to be violence against the legal system and a misrepresentation that implies because men collectively are responsible for not ending the divorce system, MGTOW are also somehow responsible. It’s like holding pro-life women responsible for pro-abort women. Doesn’t track.

  51. Novaseeker says:

    I have no time for Vox, really. He’s a heretic who has created his own pseudo-religion (don’t be fooled into thinking he’s a Christian .. he’s as Christian as Thomas Jefferson was, and likely much less), openly describes himself as a “cruelty artist”, is characterized mostly by his extremely high opinion of himself, and creates his own realities of which he is utterly and unshakably convinced, regardless of their objective relationship to the truth. And, unsurprisingly, given his particular bag of tricks, he has attracted a rather ignominious troupe of internet groupies, styling themselves “the ilk”, who seem to worship every word that proceedeth from their sadly very fallible, human Dark Lord’s lips. The whole thing is a joke and a charade, as is Vox. Is he bright? Yes, he’s bright, as he endlessly reminds everyone — a rather obvious display of insecurity if there ever was one. But his ego undermines his abilities time and time again, and often to a fatal degree. Ultimately, Vox believes firmly in only one thing: the infallibility of his own mind. In this he is sorely mistaken, and demonically so, for it has led him to reject the faith, to create his own pseudo-religion, and to mislead countless others with his often rather misguided musings. Alas, the world is filled with types like this — it is only regrettable that he has managed to scrape up even the meager influence that he has over his groupies.

    —–

    As for the matter at hand, in re: MGTOW, I think most people would be more tolerant of MGTOW if the MGTOW were really going their own way and not acting like a proselytyzing group. It’s the latter element that generates a lot of negativity towards MGTOW. In other words, if most MGTOW just quietly dropped out of the male/female scene, did their own thing with their time, pursued their own interests and so on, it really woudln’t generate a lot of negativity, because it would be largely invisible. However, there is a solid core of MGTOW who don’t do that — rather they are quite aggressive and confrontational with their viewpoints, seeking to convince/convert others to them, or attacking contra viewpoints openly, and punch above their organizational weight on the internet (as is commonplace for other similarly sized groups as well). This approach leads them into direct confrontation with any number of other groups on the internet, for a wide variety of reasons — such groups often having nothing in common with each other (such as feminists and Vox). When these confrontations become acute, as they are wont to do given how radical the proposed life solution of the MGTOWs is, things can become exceptionally heated and vitriolic, as fundamental life strategies and worldviews are at stake. So the hyperbolic nature of the confrontations appears to me to be inherent in the discourse involving MGTOW.

    As for Vox’s take on the MGTOW, as far as I can tell from having skimmed through the recent threads that everyone seems to be discussing, he openly admits that he is motivated by a social and political agenda. Since he openly admits this, I think that aspect of his advocacy is fair to discuss, both in theory (do people, and should people, make life decisions “for the good of the white race” — which is what Vox is interested in, make no mistake) and in practice (is this the best course for me?).

    And finally, as for the substance of MGTOW, I don’t have any particular issues with individuals choosing this, provided (1) it is a choice and not a cover for a lack of options, (2) the person really does go his own way, rather than hanging around and being a nuisance to others who are not doing so, and (3) for Christian MGTOWs, the person remembers that Paul advocated celibacy that one may be more attentive to the matters of God and Christ, and not to further one’s own personal hobbies, interests and pleasures — for Catholic and Orthodox Christians who are pursuing the MGTOW path, the monastery would certainly appear to be a compelling option.

  52. vandicus says:

    MGTOW is anti-civilization in the context of our current civ. I’m skeptical that they would be so in a different environment.

    That being said, It’s hard to call the view that the current society should be destroyed and remade wrong. I have moral qualms about my tax dollars going to evil. However since the tax dinars of the ancient Christians also went to evil, including their own persecution, I think I’m just supposed to live with it. I understand why people would take the view that they shouldn’t.

  53. Acksiom says:

    Like certain pastors of mention here, MGTOW-bashers shouldn’t be taken seriously unless and until they address the issue of slutty communities rather than slutty women.

    Because as I have said, here and elsewhere, over and over and over again, marriage isn’t just a contract between a man on one side and a woman on the other; marriage is also a contract between a man AND a woman on one side and a community on the other. And while there are plenty of marriageable women out there, the same cannot be said about marriageable communities.

    Because that’s what the real driving condition behind MGTOW is, and what is really threatening to the MGTOW-bashers. They want to prevent MGTOW’s from raising the price for other men’s commitment to providing their communities with their surplus production.

    MGTOW is not just about Men Going Their Own Way relative to women, but to their COMMUNITIES as well.

    And that’s why people who characterize MGTOW ideology as evilbadwrongthink usually do so. Because they don’t want to pay men what their traditional masculinity is increasingly worth in today’s market.

    But most MGTOWs have one-itis for women’s approval and individuation in general, and miss the deeper separation issue.

    Bottom line, when it is trivially easy to point MGTOWs at the National Parents Organization, which takes the traditional social contract of adult surplus production in exchange for guaranteed monogamy and paternity seriously, and say, Well, There Y’are Right There; Go Thou, And Do Likewise. . .then castigating and denigrating them is a poor second, and indicative of something else going on.

    The most likely something else is the usual basic reason behind namecalling: the devaluation and dehumanization of the targe, training them to accept less compensation for their surplus production, and training normal, healthy people to more casually accept the devaluation and dehumanization of their own family, friends, congregations, and colleagues for similar benefits.

  54. vandicus says:

    The Bible says, why not be wronged, why not be defrauded. Though indeed unjust wages are a mortal sin to us Catholics.

    Paul likewise directs those who burn with passion to marry.

    I am not holier than Job or Hosea that I should expect to be blessed with a wife who is not a harlot in this society of harlots.

    MGTOW says many true things. I am not blessed with chastity however so I will simply endure in suffering(meaning marriage not celibacy). For those who have the gift, may all be well for them.

  55. In terms of general behavior patterns, there are a lot of similarities between vegans and MGTOW who are not the type that quietly goes their own way.

    He is at least correct about the fact that men could change the system tomorrow if we collectively decided to do so. Even others who are polar opposite of him in many was like Zippy Catholic I believe said as much about how this ultimately boils down to our collective commitment to the status quo.

    “But that would require a coup!” Err, well, not entirely. If “men” and some married women collectively wanted to we could easily force through a series of constitutional amendments to the howls of feminists that would shatter the entire program. It’s not happening because most people from the prolest prole to the most elite are in agreement that the boat may rock, but the boat may not be turned around.

  56. Nathan Bruno says:

    It’s the Scott Adams Two Movie phenomenon:

    Vandicus: ” Far as I can tell they’re not hurting anyone, they’re just abstaining from a system designed to exploit them.” You have not looked at the behavior that incited the article, and you have accepted at face value that Vox Day woke up one day to attack MGTOWers. Behavior of a persistent group of MGTOW-flag waivers not unlike Jordan Peterson fanatics on repeated Dark Streams led to that article.

    Novaseeker: “As for the matter at hand, in re: MGTOW, I think most people would be more tolerant of MGTOW if the MGTOW were really going their own way and not acting like a proselytyzing group. It’s the latter element that generates a lot of negativity towards MGTOW. In other words, if most MGTOW just quietly dropped out of the male/female scene, did their own thing with their time, pursued their own interests and so on, it really woudln’t generate a lot of negativity, because it would be largely invisible. However, there is a solid core of MGTOW who don’t do that — rather they are quite aggressive and confrontational with their viewpoints, seeking to convince/convert others to them, or attacking contra viewpoints openly, and punch above their organizational weight on the internet (as is commonplace for other similarly sized groups as well).” You have seen the people who show up to recruit for Team MGTOW.

    Vandicus, you’re looking at the motte; Novaseeker sees the habitual defecation done out on the lawn of the bailey.

    If you’re a man going your own way, you should look more like Roosh or Thoreau than like a fervent JW or an intentionally-unescapable drag queen at the public library drag queen story hour. Go your own way. Be the man.

    The ones who will go their own way have gone their own way. The ones who will go God’s way have gone God’s way. The current people who use the badge and wave the flag are whiners who are recruiting fellow whiners; they are not going their own way; they are trying to recruit a leader to direct them.

    As a number of people ran from “Alt Right” once it got the RS/AR/WN stink on it, get away from the MGTOW label; it has the stink on it; its etymology is useless for understanding the current behavior that is demonstrated time and again by Evangelical MGTOW champions.

  57. Because as I have said, here and elsewhere, over and over and over again, marriage isn’t just a contract between a man on one side and a woman on the other; marriage is also a contract between a man AND a woman on one side and a community on the other. And while there are plenty of marriageable women out there, the same cannot be said about marriageable communities.

    Early Christians had to deal with Jews and Romans, two groups that were even crueler on divorce than we are. For example, in Rome a powerful patron could legally force you to divorce a wife you loved unless you wanted to be driven into the gutter. Among the Jews, women were subjected to a tyranny even worse than ours where simply displeasing a husband could allow him to throw her out of the house with minimal right of support.

    Yet somehow they practiced sacramental Christian marriage…

  58. white says:

    The more I observe the behaviour of MGTOW-bashers the more I’m convinced the human race is biologically/naturally a matriarchal species which actively seeks to root out males perceived to be “beta” or unproductive to gynocentric society

  59. vandicus says:

    @Nathan

    Sure if they’re prosletyzing MGTOW is a misnomer. They are in fact hoping to overthrow the current system by strike(or violence if they get large enough). I’m saying this isn’t necessarily immoral.

    @Il D
    The early Christians were frequently martyrs. Yes, Jesus asks us to take up our crosses and follow him(that is to the death), but this is not a light thing to ask. Stridently demanding men to be martyrs isn’t going to persuade anyone. And martyrdom doesn’t involve going out in a blaze of glory either(as far as any ideas of assassinating judges or fighting the state goes).

    Telling men that they can have control over having a good marriage is a lie. They can influence it to a modest degree but the odds are stacked against them. It is not a matter of merely trying hard enough. If you live in Sodom or Canaan, odds are you’ll be marrying a local(spiritually as well as literally).

  60. 7817 says:

    The current people who use the badge and wave the flag are whiners who are recruiting fellow whiners; they are not going their own way; they are trying to recruit a leader to direct them.

    As a number of people ran from “Alt Right” once it got the RS/AR/WN stink on it, get away from the MGTOW label; it has the stink on it; its etymology is useless for understanding the current behavior that is demonstrated time and again by Evangelical MGTOW champions.

    Right on. Going “Monk mode” for a time can be good for a man. The present crop of people waving the mgtow flag have destroyed any value the brand had with their continual screeching.

  61. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    The present crop of people waving the mgtow flag have destroyed any value the brand had with their continual screeching.

    It was never a brand, so its “brand value” doesn’t matter. The whole point of MGTOW is not caring what others think.

    I’m MGTOW. I don’t care what others think of MGTOW. I don’t care if others go MGTOW or not. I don’t wear the letters on my forehead so people will cheer me in the streets. It’s just what I am.

  62. Anonymous Reader says:

    Il Deplorevolissimo

    Case in point, Anonymous Reader saying Vox urged readers to go on a killing spree and commit suicide afterward.

    That’s not what wrote, you have created a strawman argument. So by your own standards, you’re lying. Of course you’re also lying by objective standards, by the standards of the Stoics, by the standards of the Bible, and even by Vox Day standards.

    I don’t like liars.

    I remember that post. I’ve cited and probably actually linked it here. He doesn’t urge direct action saying “here’s what you should do.” It was shaming MGTOWs by saying “this is how a Roman Patrician would deal with this injustice” to show that historically men wouldn’t have taken such a thing lying down.

    It was a feeble attempt by Vox Day at plausible deniability, and now it’s a laughable attempt by you to deflect justified criticism from Day for his childish, foolish, immaturity in a previous temper tantrum. In the real world, away from keyboard jockeys, words mean things and “kill the judge” is not at all ambiguous.

  63. 781u says:

    The whole point of MGTOW is not caring what others think.

    This is demonstrably untrue. MGTOW’s care immensely what others think of them, otherwise there wouldn’t be so many triggered screeching denials when the mgtow’s, as a group, are attacked.

    A person who doesn’t care shows indifference.

    You mgtows need to go back to the basics and internalize some of the basic concepts. Go to the trp reddit or mrp reddit and work your way through the side bar, not so you can find a woman, but so you can fix yourself. Read some Rian Stone.

    Help yourselves, there are tools out there. Yelling “I don’t care!11!!” isn’t fooling anyone.

  64. Anonymous Reader says:

    Il Deplorevolissimo

    If “men” and some married women collectively wanted to we could easily force through a series of constitutional amendments to the howls of feminists that would shatter the entire program.

    Oh, is that how Roe and Obergefell were overturned?

    Tell me, have you ever been in charge of anything, even a committee of three dormitory mates deciding what game to play?

  65. Anonymous Reader says:

    CK
    I think what she is getting around to is, the mother should be able to terminate the father’s rights completely (forgoing CS), or to force full CS. Further, she should be able to switch back and forth between the two options, similar to turning on and off a Netflix subscription.

    Exactly, very accurate and succinct summary of the OP.

    Viewing men as “utilities” / vending machines; “I want what I want when I want it”; authority to rewrite any agreement / contract / vow at any time on a whim. It’s all there if a man has on The Glasses to see. There’s insight into the nature of women, for those who aren’t afraid to look.

  66. Acksiom says:

    >Yet somehow they practiced sacramental Christian marriage…

    Yes, “Man up and marry those sluts”, including those slutty communities, has been a thing for literally millenia, just as you point out. Do you have something better to offer?

    Because back then, they didn’t. They didn’t have much of a choice. The radical difference today is that people can live better for less than ever before in history. Hence MGTOW on the one hand and TFSM (Taxpayer Funded Single Motherhood) on the other. It is a result of technological advances simultaneously lowering the costs while improving the quality of meeting human survival and entertainment needs and wants. That in turn increases the price range adults can charge for providing surplus production, and that gives us MGTOW and TFSM.

    Why are you citing ancient practices in a radically different socio-technological environment as though they were relevant?.

  67. Anonymous Reader says:

    RigsofChad
    My personal dilemma is that red-pill knowledge, information gleaned from this blog and others, and right-wing content have drastically changed my perception of women as potential marriage partners.

    This is a normal stage in the process of unplugging. As a millennial you likely were submerged in propaganda about women from an early age, and it’s very unpleasant to realize that people whom you trusted told you a stack of lies – although they generally were just repeating the brainwashing that they got earlier in their life.

    I urge you to look for the Dalrock essays on “interviewing a wife” on this site using the search window on the top right. Whether you are a churchgoing man or not, the information is useful. If you have not yet read Rollo’s books, do so. I also urge at least a Kindle copy of Deep Strength’s book.

    You need a larger social circle, especially if you are in the age range of 25 to 35, if nothing else so that you are “fishing” in a bigger “pond”.

  68. emery says:

    @Red Pill Latecomer: “I’m MGTOW. I don’t care what others think of MGTOW. I don’t care if others go MGTOW or not. I don’t wear the letters on my forehead so people will cheer me in the streets. It’s just what I am.”

    And yet here you are, loudly declaring that you don’t care what other people think. It’s already been acknowledged that there are Thoreau’s and Rooshes and such who go wandering their own way without needing to leap to the defense of M’lady M’gtow.

    MGTOW is sloth. Yes the description is correct of a tough environment but the prescription, to do nothing but masturbate facing a mirror, is telling men not to fight. It logically doesn’t make sense. If the system is what’s making it so hard for you why not fight the system, ‘walking away’ simply leaves the system intact and they come after you in the form of increased bachelor taxes and etc anyways while mothers, sisters, potential wives and actual men who are trying to fight are left behand. And we both know MGTOWs are gonna pay their taxes like good boys, don’t wanna actually have to fight the IRS or anything do they? Don’t want to actually resist society in any way right? In this small way even MRAs have more courage than MTGOWs.

    Walking away is an admission that you can’t win. That’s fine, walk away if you don’t think you can win. But don’t say you’re ‘brave’ for it, or ‘rational’ or even people saying they are Godly for it! Can you imagine it, people in this very thread saying they are like an apostle who walked with the actual physical Christ and died teaching his Word because they are afraid to get married lest Ceaser take away some of their money.

  69. Acksiom says:

    “This is demonstrably untrue.”

    Except, of course, for how it isn’t.

    “MGTOW’s care immensely what others think of them,”

    Except, of course, for those who don’t.

    “otherwise there wouldn’t be so many triggered screeching denials when the mgtow’s, as a group, are attacked.

    So many?

    How many is so many?

    Which is why it’s not demonstrably untrue. When you figure out some way to count all those MGTOW who can’t be bothered to care about your existence, let alone your criticism, then you might have a sensible argument. But the fact that some fraction of them succumb to insecure juvenilism and take it personally does not prove anything.

  70. emery says:

    @Acksiom

    Ah, the good old ‘Not All X Are Like That!’. Also known as ‘No true scottsman’.

  71. Anonymous Reader says:

    Novaseeker
    (don’t be fooled into thinking he’s a Christian .. he’s as Christian as Thomas Jefferson was, and likely much less)

    Vox Day / Theodore Beale has stated more than once he does not accept or believe in the Christian Trinity. If I understand correctly, that makes him more of a Unitarian than anything else. Thus, if the Roman Catholic Inquisition were to be revived, as Day has called for more than once, he would surely be a subject for investigation on grounds of heresy. I leave further theological discussion to others.

    One thing is obvious: his series of essays bashing MGTOW has clearly resulted in a lot of comments – one thread was over 270 a few days back – and thus increased page views of his website. Could be a coincidence.

  72. vandicus says:

    Even if they pay taxes, considering they probably earn less than if they were married and are not supporting a woman and future slaves in the process, they are adding a burden to the welfare state. One more woman on welfare + less tax revenue than otherwise. Even if unintentional, their choice represents a partial strike at worst. A full strike if they go out of their way to avoid taxes.

    To put it bluntly, everyone who marries is helping to perpetuate the existing society through their efforts intended to support their family. Now that is not the intention of someone who marries, but it is there.

  73. Red Pill Christianity says:

    I am puzzled by this article from WorkingMom.

    If she does not want him to have any contact with child at all, all she has to do is agree to visitation, then come over to his place to pick up the child, punch herself a couple times and beat the child a little and call the cops. Not only dude will be arrested and she can then pillage his place for valuables, he will be barred from custody for years.

    Honestly, she can just accuse him, no need to even hit herself at all. Her word is all that is needed in court for the man to be convicted and imprisoned anyway. She can just say she saw guy touching the child inappropriately. That’s it. Bye bye freedom, custody, everything.

    You know this whole child custody thing is such a first-world country problem. In Ukraine, some MARRIED dudes will bail on their kids regularly if the woman pushed it on them. It is rare when the woman even try to go after the now ex-husband for child support. He never requests custody, I do not know a single case like this where man came back later for custody/visitation. Matter of fact, an amazing girl I met there married when she was 17 and guy was 19 but after she got pregnant, husband wanted to divorce and left (he was already cheating during pregnancy anyway, so all her friends told me). He has shown zero interest in his son, who is now 10. She has no worries about him re-surfacing for contact with child or child support.

    We see the Turks and Arabs try to impregnate women in Ukraine regularly and the dumb women who allow it and then decide to have the kid then has to suffer through raising the bastard alone in a poor country with no welfare system, since the Turk/Arab dude will leave country. Then Mohammed will then come back decades later when “their child” is later a teen or young adult and give kids all sorts of gifts and now they have a kid they never worked for to befriend. Sickening situation, ruins the girls life, but these women who do this are dolts anyway. Thankfully, most women in Ukraine today are well aware of this and avoid these guys for this very reason.

    Anyways since we have these 1st world problems here, yes yes yes yes, men should have the right under Federal and State laws to “opt-out” completely, especially when man was dragged into “becoming a father” by woman’s deceit and lies.

    The only catch is that full, plain-language disclosure that this document would terminate all his parental financial and legal obligations AND his rights, until child turns 18, when child and father can choose to seek out each other or not.

    I support that completely. I see guys being roped in by lying women all the time. The woman wants a kid and they sucker some dunce with a job into impregnating her unwittingly. She gets child she wants and man is sent into financial jail (and actual jail, if he loses his job) for decades. They always serve child support court summons at guy’s job, so everyone knows he is gonna have to pay and let HR know of legal case and upcoming wage garnishment order.

    Where do I sign the petition to make this “opt out of fatherhood” law? 🙂 I am all in!!

  74. vandicus says:

    The Inquisition still exists and doesn’t investigate members of other denominations. The Inquisition is an internal affairs department. Easy reference would be Jews in Spain. The Spanish Inquisition(national Inquisitions of this sort answer to the monarchs rather than the Papacy, though the inquisitors are from the Church) did not investigate Jews, it investigated Catholics who were alleged to be secretly Jews or believe heretical doctrine. Unless Vox went around calling himself Catholic, he wouldn’t be investigated by the Inquisition for heresy.

  75. 7817 says:

    @acksiom

    You are in the category I’m talking about or you wouldn’t be screeching.

    When you figure out some way to count all those MGTOW who can’t be bothered to care about your existence, let alone your criticism, then you might have a sensible argument.

    They’re fine. I have no problem with Men who actually go their own way.

    You are a perfect example of a whiny bitchy mgtow screeching “I dont care I dont care I dont care!”

    STFU and improve yourself. Go do something that makes you happy, quit having your period out here in front of everyone.

    It’s not the quiet mgtows, it’s YOU. Prove you don’t care. STFU.

  76. Anonymous Reader says:

    Returning to the OP:

    The woman said the idea came from a friend—a woman who had a child out of a friends-with-benefits situation with a man.

    Men need to understand the full set of implications connected to Hidden Estrus. It’s not just Alpha Plays, Beta Pays, it’s not just cuckolding, it’s also how babymommas generate a collection of WiC recipients. I have seen examples of each, from a safe distance, more than once. Bad things have resulted, but I’m sure it seemed like a good idea at the time to at least one person involved.

    It is trite, but true, to observe that women lie to themselves first, and then to others.

    “I’m on the Pill” and “I’m pregnant, the baby is yours” are two sides of the same lie. In the context of the larger androsphere, see my comment way up at the top about women who became pregnant via oral sex…

    In the context of this site, FwB is a “Don’t. Just Don’t” category, removing one hazard from a man’s life.

  77. Anonymous Reader says:

    RedPIllChristian
    I am puzzled by this article from WorkingMom.

    Perhaps you are thinking of her as a rational entity, as a “man with boobs”? That’s an error.

  78. Anonymous Reader says:

    vandicus
    The Inquisition still exists and doesn’t investigate members of other denominations.

    Whoosh!

    Sigh.

  79. vandicus says:

    Hey, I just go out of my way to correct common historical myths now and then. It’s got nothing to do with what you’re trying to communicate, but you don’t want to be the “Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor” guy.

  80. Acksiom says:

    >You are in the category I’m talking about or you wouldn’t be screeching.

    No; you don’t have a sensible, adult answer to my points or you wouldn’t be namecalling and telling me to STFU.

  81. Acksiom says:

    >And yet here you are, loudly

    Loudly? I see no all-caps. What do you mean, “loudly”? What’s your basis for that characterization?

    >declaring that you don’t care what other people think. It’s already been acknowledged that there are Thoreau’s and Rooshes and such who go wandering their own way without needing to leap to the defense of M’lady M’gtow.

    [shrug] So? What’s your point, besides a cheap attempt at kafkatrapping?

    >MGTOW is sloth.

    Except, of course, for when it isn’t.

    >Yes the description is correct of a tough environment but the prescription, to do nothing but masturbate facing a mirror, is telling men not to fight.

    Except, of course, for how that isn’t the prescription.

    >It logically doesn’t make sense.

    A common characteristic of straw men, yes.

    >If the system is what’s making it so hard for you why not fight the system,

    Because they can afford not to. Because it’s cheaper than ever to live better than ever with less community support. What’s in it for them to fight the system?

    >‘walking away’ simply leaves the system intact and they come after you in the form of increased bachelor taxes and etc anyways while mothers, sisters, potential wives and actual men who are trying to fight are left behand.

    [shrug] So? Let them be left behind. What’s in it for MGTOWs to care?

    >And we both know MGTOWs are gonna pay their taxes like good boys, don’t wanna actually have to fight the IRS or anything do they?”

    Why should they care about fighting the IRS? What’s in it for them? They can live better for cheaper than ever before in history. They don’t need you and your community. Why should they create surplus production to make life easier for you and yours?

    What’s in it for them?

    >Don’t want to actually resist society in any way right?

    [shrug] Not really, no. Again, what’s in it for them to do so?

    “In this small way even MRAs have more courage than MTGOWs.”

    Or, alternatively, MGTOWs have more self-respect and social awareness than MRAs.

    >Walking away is an admission that you can’t win.

    Except, of course for when it isn’t. I’ve walked away from good money and good women and other good things because I wouldn’t put up with the crap that came with them. It wasn’t about winning or losing. It was about self-respect, self-determination, and self-worth. It wasn’t and isn’t a contest, no matter how much somebody like you wants to characterize it that way.

    >That’s fine, walk away if you don’t think you can win.

    It’s still not a contest, no matter how hard you try to reduce it to just that.

    >But don’t say you’re ‘brave’ for it, or ‘rational’ or even people saying they are Godly for it!”

    Oh, and if they do? What are you going to do about it, Mr. Internet Tough Guy?

    >Can you imagine it, people in this very thread saying they are like an apostle who walked with the actual physical Christ and died teaching his Word because they are afraid to get married lest Ceaser take away some of their money.”

    Again, straw men. It’s not just about the money. It’s about men being able to negotiate a better social contract for their surplus production than people like you are willing to provide.

    The old contract was surplus production for the community in exchange for the enforcement of monogamous paternity from the community. Then communities decided to go no-fault frivorce and Duluth Model indentured servitude.

    When the communities start enforcing monogamous paternity again, MGTOWs will come back. But just calling them names and challenging them to benefit you and yours with their surplus production in exchange for your good opinion of them just proves them right.

    Again, and again, and over and over again: What’s in it for them?

    >Ah, the good old ‘Not All X Are Like That!’. Also known as ‘No true scottsman’.

    Except, of course, for how it isn’t.

  82. Yes, “Man up and marry those sluts”, including those slutty communities, has been a thing for literally millenia, just as you point out. Do you have something better to offer?

    There is no such thing as marrying a community and the community is not party to the marriage. Having authority to adjudicate disputes does not make them party to the contract and has never been required for contract enforcement in the secular world. So yes, I have something better to offer, namely a view of marriage that is based in reality.

    Oh, is that how Roe and Obergefell were overturned?

    The Supreme Court is not a wicked institution holding back a noble and moral people. Its ruling philosophy is a pure distillation of our core commitments as a people to liberalism. If that were repented of it, the entire political system would change and the SCOTUS would be swept aside and be replaced accordingly.

    Why does this never happen? Because even people like you who whine about the social order are fully committed to the core liberal propositions and simply pissed that your interpretation of them isn’t the authoritative one.

    Man rebels against the king and then acts offended when his wife simply applies the same standard to her husband.

  83. If you believe:

    Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

    Then you implicitly support the philosophical foundation of feminine rebellion. You believe that authority does not arise from the natural and divine laws, but the consent of those subject to authority. There is fundamentally no difference between a people simply choosing to no longer “consent to being governed” and a wife choosing to no longer honor and obey her husband Because Reasons.

  84. 7817 says:

    Acksiom:

    Thus it is proved.

  85. 7817 says:

    If a man goes his own way in a forest, do the trees still hear him whine?

  86. Anonymous Reader says:

    Il Deplorevolissimo
    There is no such thing as marrying a community and the community is not party to the marriage.

    Funny stuff! It’s so very wrong, it’s hilarious!

  87. Nathan Bruno says:

    I read these MGTOW comments, and my general reaction is the following:

    God bless you; I don’t think your’e going to succeed at changing the system. I’m not sure God has called you to change the system. I suggest you become a MGGOW: a man going God’s own way. I want to reach out, because I know that a man going his own way, if taken too literally, sounds like it’s a recipe out of Judges, and I would rather dip a toe in to encourage a Christian man to recall an article of faith is that no man is free – whereas a Christian man is a slave of Christ, a non-Christian man is a slave of sin and sinful desires.

    For inspiration, I recommend the little Psalm 131. In particular, when the king himself says that his eyes are not too high, and he is not occupied with things above himself. The king himself quieted his soul in the presence of GOD, because he knew GOD was so far above him.

    Brother Roosh offered the exact same advice: Pray and ask God for direction, and that your path should be revealed. Be content in the response you get. Then, go do it cheerfully and with a spirit of Christian joy.

    If God has revealed to you that he wants you to fix things, great. If God has put you on a marriage strike, great. I never found myself in a position to negotiate with a community – any community – but I do not claim to be anyone else.

    Jesus Christ never promised His followers anything in this life except the world’s hatred. If your cross to bear is being a MGTOW marriage striker, bear it with grace.

  88. Anonymous Reader says:

    I D

    Oh, is that how Roe and Obergefell were overturned?

    The Supreme Court is not a wicked institution holding back a noble and moral people. Its ruling philosophy is a pure distillation of our core commitments as a people to liberalism. If that were repented of it, the entire political system would change and the SCOTUS would be swept aside and be replaced accordingly.

    Nice example of motte and bailey argumentation. In the real world, where the rest of us live, your “all we gotta do is” argument fails for obvious reasons, and is therefore not merely useless, but a time wasting distraction from the serious business of adults.

    How old are you? Have you ever been in charge of anything, even a group of 3 dorm friends trying to decide what game to play?

  89. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    I have no problem with Men who actually go their own way.

    You are a perfect example of a whiny bitchy mgtow screeching “I dont care I dont care I dont care!”

    STFU and improve yourself. Go do something that makes you happy, quit having your period out here in front of everyone.

    I don’t hear anyone whining, screeching or being loud. I’m participating in an online conversation. We MGTOWs can do that, same as you.

    You seem very triggered by the expression of an opinion different from your own.

  90. Anonymous Reader says:

    Il D

    Because even people like you who whine about the social order are fully committed to the core liberal propositions and simply pissed that your interpretation of them isn’t the authoritative one.

    Yet another keyboard jockey who claims the power to read minds?
    Funny stuff!
    Let’s test it: what am I thinking right now, at 1:47 EDT? Ready…..go!

    [ this space provided for I D to reveal his god-like powers]

    Say, didn’t you used to comment here as Kid Charlemagne, and isn’t one of your hobbies ranting on other sites about “mah Catholic Monarchy” ?

    Just asking.

  91. vandicus says:

    @Il D
    The Bible tells us that monarchies were set up because men wanted them, not God. He in fact tells us a list of bad things a king will do to them.

    What you are citing is a cassus belli. As a general rule cassus belli are not truthful.

    Till the end of the world all civilizations and systems of government are doomed to fail. We are not in fact entitled to demand that our fellows slow down the doom of our society as much as possible so that we might live enjoyable lives.

    All I have to say to MGTOW is: You don’t owe me anything. Follow God where he leads you. I’m always willing to lend you a hand if you need it.

  92. vandicus says:

    I think I’ve seen before Il D is not Catholic so unlikely he’d post about Catholic monarchy.

  93. Damn Crackers says:

    I read and comment both here and at Vox Day.

    I am almost 50 and have lived my whole life I guess as a MGTOW, but I’d never call myself that.

    I have no problem with what Vox Day said because we all know the best thing in human nature is to find a wife and have a family. You don’t need to be a Christian to understand that.

    I’m also one of those rare exceptions that people asked Vox Day about, an infertile man.

    So, like Vox Day said, don’t worry about the exceptions. Try and find the best wife you can, if you can. Otherwise, like the birds in the air, don’t worry about it. (Matthew 6:25-34.)

  94. Funny stuff! It’s so very wrong, it’s hilarious!

    So says the authority of one who contradicts the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and every major Protestant church on the matter with precedent going back all the way to the apostles and Christ.

    Have you ever been in charge of anything, even a group of 3 dorm friends trying to decide what game to play?

    Yes. The details are none of your business.

    In the real world, where the rest of us live, your “all we gotta do is” argument fails for obvious reasons, and is therefore not merely useless, but a time wasting distraction from the serious business of adults.

    Only children speak about the business of adults like that. Look in the mirror. Chances are you are the social order you hate. Every great societal change for the better begins with many people deciding to become the change the want to see in society.

  95. Try and find the best wife you can, if you can.

    And if you cannot find one who you feel is committed to being a wife, then accept that not marrying is the right choice. Would you be so desperate to get a dog that you’d even consider a former fighting dog with serious mental issues from abuse? Of course not. Then why would you marry a woman who shows signs she has commitment and submission issues that might be unfixable?

  96. Gunner Q says:

    On a related note, I watched Vox’s Darkstream 411 titled Men Going the Evil Way, where he basically calls men who won’t marry evil cowards, despite acknowledging the system is stacked against them.

    I fisked it on my blog for the interested. TL;DR I always expect society to criticize MGTOWs for not being voluntary chumps but Vox Day lied about Christianity in order to name all MGTOWs evil.

    https://gunnerq.com/2019/06/19/mgtow-life-white-nationalist-anklebiters/

    Acksiom @ 8:39 am:
    “MGTOW is not just about Men Going Their Own Way relative to women, but to their COMMUNITIES as well.

    “And that’s why people who characterize MGTOW ideology as evilbadwrongthink usually do so. Because they don’t want to pay men what their traditional masculinity is increasingly worth in today’s market.”

    Bingo. MGTOWs want to be participants in society, most of us, but when society only accepts us if we voluntarily enslave ourselves then there’s going to be noise.

    I have similar trouble as a Christian. I want to be part of the organized, realspace Church but if the Church has no place for me but tithing to false priests then I will neither quietly fade away nor pretend that serving the devil is God’s Work. Prepare for noise.

  97. 7817 says:

    @Damn Crackers

    Good on you man. You’re not whining, you are living.

  98. Opus says:

    I had no idea that there were militant MgTows. As such they sound as unpleasant as the militant Queers and both the natural accomplices of the Feminazis. Presumably the line between MgTow and Homo is very slim? I mean I am 100% MgTow but am only too well aware of my ability to allow my sentimentality towards a woman to turn my head. By their fruits shall ye judge them and not what they say.

  99. Anonymous Reader says:

    Il Deplorevolissimo
    There is no such thing as marrying a community and the community is not party to the marriage.

    My reply:
    Funny stuff! It’s so very wrong, it’s hilarious!

    So says the authority of one who contradicts the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and every major Protestant church on the matter with precedent going back all the way to the apostles and Christ.

    Even funnier! You are asserting “The community is not party to the marriage” in one comment, then babbling about “mah CHURCH” in the next one. Ok, I’ll play. Why do Christians and even Churchians marry in front of a community?

    Have you ever been in charge of anything, even a group of 3 dorm friends trying to decide what game to play?

    Yes.

    Since your words are childish and immature, revealing binary thinking. I am skeptical. Plus since you are arguing in bad faith, I demand evidence to support every assertion you make. As a bonus, since I’ve already caught you lying once, the evidence must be very, very good.

    In the real world, where the rest of us live, your “all we gotta do is” argument fails for obvious reasons, and is therefore not merely useless, but a time wasting distraction from the serious business of adults.

    Only children speak about the business of adults like that.

    Project much? Funny stuff!

    Look in the mirror. Chances are you are the social order you hate. Every great societal change for the better begins with many people deciding to become the change the want to see in society.

    The 60’s called, your hippyness…

    Now, previously you claimed to know what I think and believe. When will you demonstrate your god-like powers?

    Previously you lied about me. When will you either admit error and apologize, or prove the truth of your lies by quoting my actual words?

  100. Acksiom says:

    >There is no such thing as marrying a community

    So you’re saying you’re Cathy Newman?

    Because I didn’t say there was such a thing. I said marriage was also a contract between a couple on one side and a community on the other. Marriage is, among other things, a contract, but it is not the only kind of contract.

    >Having authority to adjudicate disputes does not make them party to the contract and has never been required for contract enforcement in the secular world.

    And again, I was talking about two different contracts, and that authority is one among several aspects of the latter social contract to which I was referring. That community acknowledgement of the particular kind of relationship involved is one of things necessary to the existence of marriage, because without it, there is no marriage. There is hooking up, or living together, or whatever else one wants to call it, but it’s not marriage. The community’s recognition of the relationship is necessary for it to be marriage.

    The community has — or rather, is supposed to have — reciprocal obligations to the married couple, and, very importantly, to any children of the union, just as the couple is obliged to obey the community’s standards, codes, laws, and so on. The point being made is that too many communities can no longer be trusted to fulfill their obligations to families in general and men and children in particular.

    >So yes, I have something better to offer, namely a view of marriage that is based in reality.

    Except, of course, for how you don’t. Because your view isn’t better than marriage as it actually exists today, which was the original standard being applied, and not your Cathy Newman misrepresentation of what I actually posted.

  101. Even funnier! You are asserting “The community is not party to the marriage” in one comment, then babbling about “mah CHURCH” in the next one. Ok, I’ll play. Why do Christians and even Churchians marry in front of a community?

    You are truly proud of your ignorance of Christian theology.

    I said marriage was also a contract between a couple on one side and a community on the other.

    And you’re still wrong.

    hat community acknowledgement of the particular kind of relationship involved is one of things necessary to the existence of marriage, because without it, there is no marriage.

    And you are even more wrong here. The existence and validity of marriage arises from the order of creation, not the will of the community.

  102. Red Pill Christianity says:

    GunnerQ, for Vox’s Darkstream to demand men marry even knowing it is a financial and legal trap for them is absurd and contrary to male logical nature. Humans only respond to incentives or fear.

    The fear is there on marriage (prison, child support, alimony, losing all his assets). Where is the incentive part to entice men to marry?

    Unless you threaten prison for men who will not marry (fear, the prefer method of the Soviets) only the highly optimistic and the Blue Pilled amongst us will marry. There is no incentive with pre-martial sex so prevalent and so easy to get.

    No incentive + no fear = no action.

  103. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Yet another mother kills her son: https://pix11.com/2019/06/26/woman-charged-with-capital-murder-in-death-of-son-8-says-demons-told-her-to-sacrifice-the-boy/

    As usual, the article makes no mention of a father.

    A Texas woman has been charged with capital murder in the death of her son after a relative told police the mother said demons told her to kill the 8-year-old.

    Tisha Sanchez was being held Tuesday in the Dallas County jail on a $750,000 bond after being arrested in the suburb of Irving. The 30-year-old is also charged with assault of a peace officer and resisting arrest. …

  104. Red Pill Christianity says:

    Ackisom, you said to “Prepare for noise”.

    Does anyone here remember 2008, when Soros and a small group of leftist billionaires purposely made massive cash withdrawals from the highly over-leveraged US banks, setting off a “bank run” and the need for the bailout? This set off a massive economic depression that lasted from 2008 until 2017. (The depression lasted for everyone, except the politically connected and corporatists who profited from the misery and destruction of the middle class).

    Consider how much the last decade weakened the country. Major chain stores that catered to middle class women went belly-up, like Payless Shoes, Dress Barn, and others. Then Toys ‘R Us disappeared, since middle class cannot afford to buy toys that cost more than what they can sometimes buy at Walmart. The middle class married couple has almost completely evaporated from our country during the Obummer recession. The erosion of the middle class dad and stay-at-home mom is gone, and with it, the stores that catered to them.

    Do you all remember what 10% official unemployment did to the country? The amount of restlessness, of social turmoil, of anger and fear we experienced nationally? A Muslim Jr. Senator with zero accomplishments during his entire existence was elected President and his part got super-majority on the entire Congress.

    Then we have been in a constant state of social upheaval… we had the Tea Party, Black [only] Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street, The Resist Movement, AntiFa, and numerous others. That was a decade-long of 10%+ unemployment.

    Image 15% or 20% unemployment. How about 30%? Imagine the level of social turmoil we are talking about here. In a country where people do not even recognize each other as “Americans” anymore, where citizenship and the idea of nationhood is being eroded daily, where “diversity” and “multi-cultural tolerance” has created a sense of distrust and disunity everywhere, even within churches.

    We are basically a bunch of people who have nothing in common and don’t like or trust one another, who happen to be living near each other in the same “country”, if we can even call this mess that anymore.

    Oh, there will be noise. It will not be due to a “marriage collapse” and it will not be a gender-relations reset, as some expect. It will be an economic “reset”, if you can only call it that, with terrible widespread societal consequences.

    Do not celebrate such a “reset” because you will suffer right along with everyone else, no matter how prepared you are and no matter how much you hate the current system.

  105. GunnerQ, for Vox’s Darkstream to demand men marry even knowing it is a financial and legal trap for them is absurd and contrary to male logical nature.

    What you and a lot of others miss is that people like me and Vox aren’t telling you “man up and marry those sluts.” We are telling you “look for a wife who isn’t a slut and is serious, and marry her.” If you honestly try and can’t find one who seems to be an objectively good catch, then don’t marry! Again, not everyone is feeding you the cuck line that burned out sluts who can doll themselves up on Sunday are your responsibility to wife up.

  106. vandicus says:

    The ‘reset’ will involve war(which is an awful thing to live through). But over 50 million abortions. Trannyism and homosexuality. Sexualization of children. Fornication as a norm.

    Can we say we don’t deserve it? Can we say war would really be worse?

  107. Earl PoloShirt says:

    Let’s be extremely clear about who Teddy Vox Day is: a pathetic effete whiny tiny North Korean dictator wannabe muppet ass feaux internet “celebrity” leading some very weak woke boomers on strange little quests not unlike an evangelical megachurch pastor with headset directing the insecure rabble in whatever way his fragile ego dictates. VD doesn’t have shot to say about shit – his sjw book was fine but a child could’ve made the same insights. He exists to call anyone who doesn’t suck up hard enough names and trot out very poor quality comic books and mediocre sci fi while a very undiscerning fan base laps it up like rubes.

    So, whatever his opinion on intergender issues, I don’t care and neither should you.

  108. Karl says:

    Sometimes the laws turn against women.

    https://www.fempositive.com/woman-arrested-after-asking-her-husband-to-help-out-around-the-house-more/

    She lucked out and her case was thrown out because the husband wouldn’t testify.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9381871/wife-court-nagging-husband-hoovering/

    Favorite part of the first article

    “Michael says that Valerie had been supportive of his bodybuilding until she changed her mind.”

  109. Anonymous Reader says:

    Even funnier! You are asserting “The community is not party to the marriage” in one comment, then babbling about “mah CHURCH” in the next one. Ok, I’ll play. Why do Christians and even Churchians marry in front of a community?

    Il Deplorevolissimo
    You are truly proud of your ignorance of Christian theology.

    More projection on your part.

    Titus 2:
    3 Likewise, teach the older women to be reverent in the way they live, not to be slanderers or addicted to much wine, but to teach what is good. 4 Then they can urge the younger women to love their husbands and children, 5 to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God.

    The older women in church are a part of the community. They are to be involved in the marriages of younger women in a constructive way, because the community is a party to the marriage. If you really knew anything about the church names you wave around, you wouldn’t write such dumb stuff.

    You’re not proving your god-abilities at all, while at the same time you’ve been caught lying.

    Il Dep, what is your purpose here? You are unable or unwilling to learn anything from anyone; you don’t help men; you don’t discuss Dalrock’s original topic; you make claims that you cannot support at all, you get caught lying — and you constantly are attempting to argue, but not doing a very good job. Oh, and now you’ve become a defender of Vox Day, but not an effective one.

    Let me restate my question: Aside from ineptly trolling for flames what is your purpose here?

  110. Acksiom says:

    @Red Pill Christianity
    >Ackisom, you said to “Prepare for noise”.

    No, that was GunnerQ, responding to me. I don’t claim to know how things are going to fall out.

    But that said, I don’t think you know either. I think it’s also possible that we’re on the verge of a golden age. Despite the media’s taste for peddling panic, many economic indicators today are positive, and there is one fundamental bottom line, at least in the usa, that keeps me basically optimistic: we are an armed society, and an armed society is a polite society.

    If and when things go bad, they are most likely to go the worst in the most progressivist enclaves. But the massive internal genocides of the 20th century are unlikely to occur here, because of the prevalence of personal firearms, and I think the same goes for the kind of general societal breakdown you seem to be predicting. Some limited areas of a few cities may burn, but most of the country will get along just fine.

    @Il Deplorevolissimo
    >The existence and validity of marriage arises from the order of creation, not the will of the community.

    So you’re still saying you’re Cathy Newman? Because that’s not what I said either.

    Nor am I going to argue the primacy of replication versus revelation with you, and particularly so when it’s irrelevant to the larger point: the growing popularity of MGTOW ideology being the result of men’s lifestyle options increasing and improving and their communities not keeping up their end of the foundational contract of civilization, i.e. men’s surplus production in exchange for the enforcement of monogamy and paternity.

    That’s the issue at hand, regardless of your straw men about the nature of marriage.

  111. Anonymous Reader says:

    Il Dep
    What you and a lot of others miss is that people like me and Vox aren’t telling you “man up and marry those sluts.”

    Marc Driscoll, is that you? Need to improve your trolling skills.

    Say, when are you going to support your false claim against me with facts, or admit that you were wrong and apologize for lying? What does your Supreme Dark Lord teach about lying?

  112. Anonymous Reader says:

    Since so many Vox Day followers are trolling here, and the thread has drifted pretty far from the OP, I will ask a question and see if any VD’rs can answer. Their Supreme Dark Lord obviously cannot.

    When does POA = POI?

  113. Damn Crackers says:

    “I’ve cheated on every boyfriend I’ve ever had, and I don’t regret it”

    The tag line to this headline on Yahoo was “If you’re in your early 20s, you shouldn’t too!”

    https://www.yahoo.com/style/ive-cheated-every-boyfriend-ive-104700654.html

  114. Anonymous Reader says:

    Another driver of jemimapuddleduckpancake’s desire to switch her sperm donor’s access to her child on and off like a Netflix account – open hypergamy. Because a version of this fantasy would enable her to switch from one provider to a different provider, but without all that messy “marriage” and “divorce” business. Legal monkeybranching with no muss or fuss.

    Open hypergamy: the next great thing. Because one man isn’t enough for a Strong, Independent Woman ™, How Dare You deprive her of what she deserves?

  115. More projection on your part.

    Once again, they are not parties to any agreement. You have literally no idea what a party to a contract is.

  116. Rudolph says:

    Saying you are MGTOW or vegan is very much like saying you are Atheist in my experience. When I simply reply to questions about my religion with, “I’m atheist.” I’m not the one who can’t leave it at that for the most part. Most take it as an attack on their beliefs and then start wanting to tell me what I think and believe.

    I dated a vegan girl and she couldn’t just “no, thank you” on food. She’d get badgered till she had to say she was vegan. Then she would get all what I took to calling “carnivore posturing.” No one could leave her alone about it. People were really awful to her about it when her only thing was to not use animal products. Like being an atheist it was taken as an attack on them.

    MGTOW is a similar thing. A lot of time you can just leave it as “just a confirmed old bachelor.” And as long as you don’t try to red pill it too much and just leave it at things like, “Seen too many guys get screwed in divorces.” Sometimes folks especially in these quarters can’t leave it at that because they are very attacked by my choice which came with no judgments on their choices.

  117. Anonymous Reader says:

    Fact:
    More projection on your part.

    Il Dep
    Once again, they are not parties to any agreement.

    Another feeble motte and bailey. Titus 2 proves you wrong in the Christian context, which applies since you waved “mah CHURCH” around earlier. An adult would admit error and get on with a real discussion, but you sure are not doing that. How old are you again?

    You aren’t even close to tall enough for this ride, especially since you are a liar who isn’t able to back up claims.

    What is your purpose here, Dep, beyond ineptly trolling for flames?

    PS: You need to pick a trolling persona and stick to it. Either the Wise Old Boomer Grandpa who is always ready to advise young’ns to Just Buy A House, Real Estate Always Goes Up In Value plus Just Marry A Church Girl, You Will Be Fine….. OR the precocious home schooled 15 year old pretending to be Charlemagne the Kid, asking “Mommy, why don’t all the good people just to to the state capitol and make the Governor pass a law that all people must be Good? Why, Mommy? Why don’t you and Daddy do that? Why? Why?”

    You need to pick one or the other, because switching back and forth between your two modes of trolling makes your trolling for flames less effective. Although it is funny stuff to laugh at…

  118. FatR says:

    I don’t think that considering loud MGTOWs specifically as enemies of the society is pretty strange. Let’s consider the social situation the entirety of the developed world is in.

    (1)The old social contract was betabucks that the society needed to prosper in exchange for guaranteed sex and paternity. “Betabucks” here means not just generating extra income but all sorts of involvement by approximately 70-80% of the male population, every society that accomplished anything needed some method to make the majority of males interested.

    (2)This contract is broken, the value of betabucks in the sexual market has dropped radically and is on the way to approach zero. Both practitioners of the Game and tradcucks admit it, they just give different proscriptions: the former directly teach men how to become artificial alphas, and the latter command to shovel more betabucks while indirectly admitting that you have to “man up” and “self-improve”. Both solutions are temporary at best, because betabucks devaluation continues, and “alpha” is not an absolute set of traits, but an evaluation relative to the available pool of men. And getting, so to say, peak alpha, pretty much always required anti-social behavior, and doubly so when a wife has all of the legal threatpoints.

    (3)Furthermore, not only marriage in today’s USA is basically one step from selling yourself into slavery any sort of interaction with women off-camera is increasingly risky.
    But at the same time living alone and for yourself has never been easier and more pleasant.
    The society pretty much actively punishes family formation, and furthermore, despises men just in general, and all men short of alphas in particular (just watch how a transactional marriage is considered the second worst thing ever after rape in the popular culture), while singleness is passively rewarded.

    I trust none of the points above are particularly controversial, at least here.

    Now, in the light of that, I have a question to those who want MGTOWs to shut up. Do you really want men not cut out to be thugs just checking out quietly in increasing numbers until the whole society goes the way of Black ghettos, with the corresponding consequences to the economy and everything? Because that is what WILL happen on the present course. Men react to incentives. Propaganda and cultural indoctrination can slow down the process, but not stop it. (And by the way Vox and his minions are utterly deluded if they think they can do so for the sake of their political cause). If you only pretend to pay, sooner or later men will start only pretending to work. At least if they cannot really mount some sort of active protest. And in today’s developed world they can’t, because any group with any sort of political clout – and most groups who only wish to have some – are wholly on board with the gynocentric program, only maybe wishing to fix the worst excesses of crazy feminists. No one, not even in countries which aren’t remotely as gynocentric as USA, will seriously consider abolishing no-fault divorce, for example. Therefore is a man is disaffected with the current situation the most he can do politically, besides something as pointless as individual terrorism, is stating his cause on the net in the hopes of raising awareness of the whole problem. You may in fact consider it an attempt at the last warning to the society.

  119. Anon says:

    Il Deploro said,

    If you honestly try and can’t find one who seems to be an objectively good catch, then don’t marry!

    Lost in this sloganeering is the fact that there are far too few such women to go around, and under the strict application of this principle, only 20-30% of men will marry.

    Il Deploro and Cux Day can’t grasp the existence of scarcity here.

  120. BillyS says:

    Athanasiusm,

    Can you please provide the Scriptural references for the command to marry?

  121. Tax atty says:

    @ texinole
    In Texas a man may voluntarily relinquish his parental rights with the court’s approval. This is usually done in a step-parent adoption. I have seen once that a judge allowed the father to voluntarily relinquish his parental rights without the mother having a step parent adopt the child, but the mother had to show that she had not been using public benefits and was able to support the child, herself, without probable future use of public benefits.
    I have also seen judges approve of custody orders in which the mother retained all of the rights and agreed to child support of $0.
    In Texas a man who is made to believe he is a child’s father can seek termination of his parental rights once he has reason to believe that he is not the child’s father, but he must file to do so within 2 years of finding out. Again, it is not guaranteed that a judge will decide in his favor, but the judge in these situations can continue a man’s visitation but discontinue child support if it’s in the child’s best interest.
    If the mother wants the father to voluntarily relinquish his parental rights he should use his consent to do so as leverage to make the mother agree to forgive his child support and medical support arrears. If any child or medical support arrears are owed to the state of Texas (if the child was on medicaid) then those cannot be forgiven by the mother, the state will not forgive those arrears and the man will still need to pay that, or go to prison, etc.

  122. 7817 says:

    I have a question to those who want MGTOWs to shut up. Do you really want men not cut out to be thugs just checking out quietly in increasing numbers until the whole society goes the way of Black ghettos, with the corresponding consequences to the economy and everything?

    Two things wrong with this.
    1. No one cares about low value men and what they say. This isn’t how I wish things were, it’s how I observe that things are. MGTOW’s talking about societal problems just draws derision… from every quarter. That’s why you guys need to read the mrp sidebar, read rian stone, read keoni galt, lift weights, do something, almost ANYTHING to raise your value if you want to be heard.

    2. Thugs aren’t the only alpha’s. You just need to have thug potential. That’s why the advice to lift weights, improve yourself, all of that.

    MGTOW’s were lied to. I was lied to. Men were lied to. But you have all these tools. Make yourself high value so someone will listen to you.

    You think talking about the problems is helping. It isn’t, and I have sympathy, but you are in one of the only spots on the internet trying to help weak men. Are you going to take advantage of the help or are you going to bitch and moan?

  123. BillyS says:

    Il D,

    Then look for a plain woman who isn’t an alpha widow.

    I did, at least I thought I did. My exwife was thin, but her face wasn’t going to win any awards. I didn’t care at all. Unfortunately she only married me because all of her friends in the small church we met in were getting married and she didn’t want to be left out, at least that is my assumption. (She said God told her to not let me get by as well, but she must now think God changed His mind, or something.)

    I suspect she pined too much for another man who had no interest in her as a wife. Lots of things I wish I had clued in on at the time, but it is not as easy as you think. Even being plain (or fat from what I read) does not make a wife faithful.

    As to what Vox says, that is plausible deniability. That is the same thing he berates in others, yet her practices it. That is too bad.

    I have been called plenty of names here, though I haven’t written them down here so I can’t note which ones. This is more than a bit of a free for all and even those who agree often argue about some points.

    I am sure Vox would call me a gamma, bit that is largely because I disagree with him, not because of how I argue. I am used to being called names. I used to argue for Creationism on boards way back in college 30+ years ago. Don’t tell me I can’t handle being called names. I am even a bit better at calling them back now.

    Ironically, Vox is fine with gamergate or the alt-right, but he agrees with them. Many loosely in the MGTOW arena are doing the very same thing in the area of marriage.

    Once again proving that yes, most MGTOWs–at least here, are pathological liars. You have to really read what isn’t there in that post to get what FatR got out of it.

    See the comments on the article later. Though this shows why I was calling you a “man up” guy in the other thread. I am somewhat surprised few others call you out on it, but maybe they just ignore your posts as I probably should. People who don’t want to learn are a waste of time.

    Novaseeker,

    Vox’s problem is that he said “all” MGTOWs were liars, meaning even those who quietly go about their lives. It is ironic that he wants to save the civilization he doesn’t live under. I am fine with him doing whatever he does, but commanding others is hypocritical in this area.

    Paul doesn’t really address staying single or being married in the context of general life, except that he said being single would avoid a lot of troubles “in this present time” (or something close to that). I find his arguments in the Scriptures to be that we should live all our lives for the glory of God. Is Vox doing that? Are others who push marriage as the only way? Not that I can see.

    I would still love to be married to a woman who shares my interests and is wildly attracted to me and I to her. I am highly unlikely to find such a woman, but I would probably still take risks if I thought I had. I don’t expect to have to make that choice though and I suspect many MGTOWs are that exact way.

  124. BillyS says:

    So if you are MGTOW or even close to it and you challenge idiotic claims about it, you are the problem?

    Nice logic there, just like progressive leftists. Have you taken a bit of the Duluth Model juice (where you are guilty if you claim you are not guilty) juice?

    Are so many of you really that stupid? (I know the answer is yes, but it is still sad and needs to be asked.)

  125. BillyS says:

    Nathan Bruno,

    Nothing in the Scriptures indicate that Hosea’s marriage is something that all of us should aim for.

    Job’s wife had problems as well, but her comment was her saying “give up and end this suffering” rather than being a slut. Note that Job had another batch of kids, so she was likely fertile still, we are told nothing about another wife coming along.

  126. 7817 says:

    Look, I’m not interested in tearing down any man that genuinely wants to improve. If any single MGTOW here that has been talking wants to improve, to bust out of this mental prison and make something out of himself, I support that. Literally.

    I will buy one of you guys a one hour consult with Scott, or with Rian Stone, take your pick, provided Scott or Rian is amenable to it and it’s not over $100, just to get you started out on the right track.

    I don’t think these guys are going to be easy on you, but if you want to improve I think they’ll help you.

    One of you guys done with the pity party and ready to move on? Red Pill Latecomer? Anon? Acksiom?

  127. BillyS says:

    Vandicus,

    A side note on monarchies: The Scriptures indicate that David was planned, so Saul was the problem (the people wanting things too early, not ultimately having a king). God did want to be there king, but David being planned puts a spin on that.

    It was not completely clear, but the failure of modern democracy is making me think a godly king is much preferable to this mess, though ensuring the godly part could be rough or even impossible.

  128. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    7817: Make yourself high value so someone will listen to you.

    You don’t have to be “high value” to be heard. You only need to write well.

    I’ve had books published (not self-published) under my own name, plus paid articles in respected magazines.

    I don’t write about MGTOW or the manosphere under my own name. I discuss other (safer, less controversial) topics. But I am read and heard, MGTOW though I am.

  129. BillyS says:

    Rudolph,

    No saying you are an atheist shows you are stupid. No one can know for certain no god exists anywhere. Thus you have shown your foolishness. Go ahead and believe it, but it is not the same as other things.

  130. BillyS says:

    7817,

    No one cares about low value men and what they say.

    While true in principle (no one really cares what the poor has to say per Proverbs, even if he saves the city) it is false to claim all men who can’t land a perfect faithful wife are “low quality”.

    Reminds me of progressive leftist logic that ignores what people in “flyover country” think since they are all “low quality” as well, at least in the eyes of those progressive leftists. It is no different when coming form others who should definitely know better.

  131. Tax atty says:

    @ men in Texas
    If you want a good chance at not having to pay child support, and you want a custody order in which the kids to live with you and visit their mother every other weekend: take your kids with you when you or she leaves and don’t let the mother see or talk to them until a court order says you have to. If the kids are in school or daycare this can get trickier because she can get them out of school, so be creative. Whoever has the kids on the court date is usually who gets to keep the kids in their home. The other parent gets weekend visits and child support payments.
    I’ve been reading through comments here in several posts and I don’t think that has been said, but it needs to be said.

  132. Nathan Bruno says:

    @Billy

    “Nathan Bruno,

    Nothing in the Scriptures indicate that Hosea’s marriage is something that all of us should aim for.

    Job’s wife had problems as well, but her comment was her saying “give up and end this suffering” rather than being a slut. Note that Job had another batch of kids, so she was likely fertile still, we are told nothing about another wife coming along.”

    I don’t disagree with these sentences; they’re just a non-sequitor to me; I don’t understand your point.

  133. Durasim says:

    I brought this up to a women who’s ex is being sent to modern debtor’s prison for lack of child support payments. She was adamant that, in Texas divorces at least, a father could sign away his right to the child and with it the legal obligation of child support.

    If she has some Texas law or statute that says so, let her cite it.

    In most jurisdictions, a father waiving or losing his parental rights does not simultaneously relieve him of child support obligations. The law considers the two separate. Indeed, we all know that the courts readily and eagerly enforce child support obligations with ruinous fines and incarceration. Getting the courts to enforce child custody orders in favor of a father is harder than pulling teeth.

    Whether a father never bothered to have contact with his kids or he explicitly disavowed his rights to them, that does not get him off the hook for child support. Even fathers who were involuntarily deprived of their parental rights because they were abusive are still liable for child support. So fathers can be legally cut off from seeing their children, but will still have to pay for them.

    Maybe the mother and father might reach some private agreement whereby he agrees to waive his parental claims and she agrees not to sue him for child support. But I don’t know if that would actually be enforceable. Certainly, a father unilaterally waiving his parental rights does not prevent a mother from suing him for child support. And in a lot of states, when single mothers apply for welfare, the first thing the state demands is the identity of the child’s father so that they can go after him for child support instead of the state paying it. And they’ll do that whether or not the father and mother had some private arrangement about her not seeking support from him.

  134. 7817 says:

    it is false to claim all men who can’t land a perfect faithful wife are “low quality”.

    I didn’t say low quality, I said low value, which is a term referring to social value and your place in the pecking order.

    Not being able to get a wife doesn’t mean that you are worthless as a human being. But it’s important to understand how humans interact with one another, and high value behaviour vs low value behaviour matters in human interaction.

  135. SirHamster says:

    If you’re a man going your own way, you should look more like Roosh

    Note that Roosh has publicly claimed Jesus as his Lord, and retracted his older books on practicing hedonism.

    He is no MGTOW, but a Man Going God’s Way. Much respect.

    Far as I can tell they’re not hurting anyone, they’re just abstaining from a system designed to exploit them. Sure if enough men do this the civilization collapses, but such a civilization deserves to collapse.

    MGTOW is a dead end, chosen by those raised in civilization, but who will not pass on a civilization.

    It is dishonorable to take and not give.

    You don’t have to add on to or submit to the exploitation system, but you should be building an alternative, because men are problem solvers. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it; but if it’s broke, fix or replace it.

  136. Anonymous Reader says:

    Tax Atty
    In Texas a man may voluntarily relinquish his parental rights with the court’s approval.

    iInteresting. Not much like the request from puddleduckpancake in the original article to be sure.

    In Texas a man who is made to believe he is a child’s father can seek termination of his parental rights once he has reason to believe that he is not the child’s father, but he must file to do so within 2 years of finding out.

    Also interesting. Surprising the Molly Ivins school feminists have not reduced the time period down to 30 days, or overturned this entirely.

    Thanks for the input. It would be even better if you could provide links to the relevant online Tx Law Code.

  137. Anonymous Reader says:

    I wrote:
    Lastly, one of Day’s previous MGTOW temper tantrums featured him urging men to murder anti-Family court judges, then kill themselves.

    Il Dep
    Case in point, Anonymous Reader saying Vox urged readers to go on a killing spree and commit suicide afterward.

    Liar. What does your Supreme Dark Lord teach you about lying? Why should any man waste time on a liar like you?

  138. Anonymous Reader says:

    I’ve been advised that the latest Vox Day series of essays on MGTOW started because of comments he received on one of his online live videos. Can anyone confirm or deny?

  139. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    SirHamster: It is dishonorable to take and not give.

    MGTOW men take nothing from women. And women don’t want what we have to give (apart from our money). So I don’t see any dishonor in dropping out of the marriage/sexual marketplaces.

    Nor do I feel obligated to “better myself” for … for what? For whom?

    I’m satisfied with myself. Not overjoyed, but content.

  140. Anonymous Reader says:

    Tax atty
    I’ve been reading through comments here in several posts and I don’t think that has been said, but it needs to be said.

    It very much needs to be said. Tactics such as that are always useful to men caught in the frivorce industry.

    Thanks for providing a useful comment.

  141. Lots of people like to bash Vox Day, but somehow they can never actually debate any of his stances. That screams “He has badthink but we can’t find any way he’s actually wrong!”

    You gotta love the people going “the race trashnationalists!” You know they are either A. Non-americans who want to claim there is no American people and the USA belongs to everyone or B. Whites living in a supermajority white area talking about how they are so multicultural because they have a non-white friend at work, and yes more ‘diversity’ is great as long as it’s not near them.

  142. Jacob says:

    VD is an ungodly disease that’s becoming increasingly hard to treat.

    MGTOW is a dead end as far as having children is concerned, but there are many, many other ways a man can contribute to family and community that are equally valuable and indispensible. We have such a limited view of family in the West. We think it’s just a matter of who has the children. This evo-psych quasi-feminist delusion leaves the majority of men in the gynocentric ‘loser’ frame.

    There are male teachers, healers, pastors, leaders, warriors, priests, poets, intellectuals etc, etc, etc who have contributed as much and often very much more to civilized society and their extended families than merely children. The history books are full of them. The Bible is full of them. It’s absolute nonsense to assert otherwise.

    If any man believes a man who has no wife or children, whether or not he chooses that path for himself, is a loser, he is not a servant of the Risen Lord Jesus. The dead end is on their path.

    May all who bind burdens to men that God does not bind be defeated in their counsel.

  143. 7817 says:

    If any man believes a man who has no wife or children, whether or not he chooses that path for himself, is a loser, he is not a servant of the Risen Lord Jesus. The dead end is on their path

    This is literally retarded theology.

  144. This is delusion on par with women who go “I don’t want to be stuck raising some snot nose kids! I want to matter!” Before going to their 9-5 daily grind at the insurance firm or veterinary office.

    Infertility and sterility were never ever blessings in the Scripture, I don’t know what God you’re praying to.
    “I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore. Your descendants will take possession of the cities of their enemies,”

  145. Another feeble motte and bailey.

    Once again, you’d be flunked out of Business Law 101 at any community college. People incidental to the contract are not parties to the contract.

  146. Jacob says:

    @7817 and artiewfisher

    Your comments show limited Bible comprehension. What theology holds that marriage and children are God’s plan for Gentiles under the new covenant of grace?

  147. Tax atty says:

    @ anonymous reader
    Texas family code section 161.005 termination when parent is petitioner (please understand this is used only when a father is told he’s the daddy but he finds out later he is not.)

    Texas family code section 161.103 affidavit of voluntary termination of parental rights (this is the affidavit used in a parental rights termination suit, so there’s a series of Rules in the Family Code that dictate what the procedure is and how to argue and what evidence to present. Get an attorney)

    Like I said previously, the judge determines whether he or she will grant a termination based on whether it is “in the best interest of the child” that gives the judge lots of leeway in deciding, so know your judge, or better yet: get an attorney that knows your judge. It’s been said in the comments to a different post (published years ago on this. Log) that you may need to move to another county to get a sympathetic judge. Its imperative to get good, local, legal advice.

    As I said earlier though, if the kids are yours, take them with you or don’t let her take them, and don’t let her have access to them while you wait for a court order.

    If you are afraid to play keep away with the kids and think you’ll be judged harshly for keeping the mother from the kids, seek good, local, legal advice.

    A father who is the bio dad can have his rights terminated so he doesn’t have to pay child support and doesn’t have rights to the kids, but without a step parent adoption taking place at the same time this is rare, but it’s been done.

    The information Durasim gave on June 27, 2019 at 4:56 p.m. I would concur with. If you think that information conflicts with what I stated then there is a factual nuance that applies and may/will determine how the law applies to specific facts, and you need to talk to an attorney if you are curious about your specific situation.)

  148. SirHamster says:

    MGTOW men take nothing from women.

    If you didn’t pop out of a vagina, and grew up in a society where you never benefited a single time from a woman, sure.

    For the rest of humanity, you are the fruit of countless generations of women. Babies nursed, child reared, adults supported, generation after generation. Even if you somehow managed to not directly benefit from a woman, your father did.

    Unless you’re a fatherless/motherless mutant. But then you’re not human, or a man.

  149. He is no MGTOW, but a Man Going God’s Way. Much respect.

    There are many ways to live the religious life instead of the married life. Working enough to support yourself and then enjoying the rest of the week for leisure is not one of them.

  150. @Jacob

    That’s literally on par with arguing that technology and playing with musical instruments is immoral.

    This is why Vox Day doesn’t bother making rebuttals against people like you, it would be like debating gun control with Elizabeth Warren.

  151. Frank K says:

    Ted often states that men need to learn to set their sights lower

    Lower? Has he seen what men are settling for these days?

  152. Any many committed to the single religious life in some form is by definition not a MGTOW because he’s probably more engaged with the rest of civilization than most married couples.

  153. 7817 says:

    If any man believes a man who has no wife or children, whether or not he chooses that path for himself, is a loser, he is not a servant of the Risen Lord Jesus. The dead end is on their path

    Your comments show limited Bible comprehension.

    You’re too stupid to argue with.

  154. Jacob says:

    @7817 and artiewfisher

    You prove my point. Christians stand behind Christ of the Bible, not the words of men. Sounds like you’re entranced by a personality cult. Get out while you still can.

  155. Anon says:

    SirHamster,

    For the rest of humanity, you are the fruit of countless generations of women. Babies nursed, child reared, adults supported, generation after generation. Even if you somehow managed to not directly benefit from a woman, your father did.

    Yet you don’t seem to think that all women have a similar obligation to men.

    MGTOWs are a tiny fraction of the population, whereas women who flamboyantly crow about how they don’t need men, or don’t think it is wrong to steal from men, are praised.

    Why on earth do you think your point is any different from the unilateral selfishness that ‘feminists’ spout?

    To the extent that people are selflessly putting non-blood-related people of the other gender above their personal well-being, the men in this group outnumber the women by about 1,000,000:1.

  156. Anonymous Reader says:

    ID
    Once again, you’d be flunked out of Business Law 101 at any community college. People incidental to the contract are not parties to the contract.

    Repeating the same feeble motte and bailey fails. Make your mind up, is marriage within the Christian church part of a community going back thousands of years, as in “mah CHURCH” or is it merely a legal arrangement? If you actually knew anything about the Bible and the churches you wave around, you would perhaps clarify your remarks, or perhaps you would admit error; something other than just doubling down on your trolling for flames, lying and shilling for Vox Day.

    How old are you, again?

  157. Anonymous Reader says:

    Tax atty
    Texas family code section 161.005 t…

    Texas family code section 161.103

    Excellent. Thanks. I’m sure there are men lurking who may be greatly aided by that.

  158. Acksiom says:

    >If you’re a man going your own way, you should look more like Roosh

    Nooo; if *you’re* going to try to advise MGTOW, *you* should first establish your credibility. Currently, that’s nonexistent.

    >Much respect.

    But no value. Your good opinion of others isn’t worth jack crap unless and until you back it up with action.

    >MGTOW is a dead end, chosen by those raised in civilization, but who will not pass on a civilization.

    [shrug] Everything is a dead end, eventually. It’s called ‘entropy’.

    >It is dishonorable to take and not give.

    Do you know what you can do with your reparations nonsense? I’ll give you a little hint — the answer involves origami and one of your orifices.

    >You don’t have to add on to or submit to the exploitation system, but you should be building an alternative, because men are problem solvers.

    And MGTOW actually is a solution. It’s a solution to the problem of “Communities won’t provide what men can increasingly insist on as sufficient compensation for their surplus production.”

    It’s not a solution for you and your community’s problems, but MGTOW aren’t responsible for your and your community.

    It’s really very simple. If you want the MGTOWs to solve you and your community’s problems, then you and your community need to solve the MGTOWs’ problems first. Because the MGTOWs don’t need you and your communities as much as they used to. They’re living better for cheaper. The market for men’s surplus production is changing, and you need to step up your game to compete in it.

    >If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it; but if it’s broke, fix or replace it.

    Oh, by all means, after you.

    Go on, Big Talk; get on out there and show the rest of us how it’s supposed to be done!

  159. Anonymous Reader says:

    SirHamster
    If you’re a man going your own way, you should look more like Roosh

    It’s way too early to tell what RooshV is actually doing.

    But we know what he’s done, and that whole “world wide meetup” thing was a disaster. In fact, any time some immature, overage adolescent pops up with “Organize! We gotta organize and charge the machineguns!” RooshV’s worldwide failure should come to mind. Because the feminist social media machine was a light-year ahead of him. It’s not the 1840’s or the 1960’s, anything that goes up on the net (such as “Meet up this day these places”, duh) is guaranteed to get passed to hostile people.

    Remember, that whole meetup was supposed to be too big to bust, as in “They can’t get us all”. Except RooshV got chased down by little feminist girls in Canada (not the most Patriarchal, Manly of looks, by the way). So “they” didn’t get all the participants, but “they” sure got Roosh. Then he held an unintentionally hilarious “press conference” that almost no one noticed – for good reason – and then he moved back with his parents if I recall correctly. The details blur. The failure is stark.

    Then he either married or shacked up with some woman, still putting up videos that became increasingly disjointed.

    Now, after the very, very sad and untimely death of his sister, he’s gone back to the church of his childhood, the Armenian church. He’s changed the comment rules on one of his sites, he may or may not have demonetized his Bang books, although Amazon banned some in 2018 so that could be moot. “Return of Kings” has been on hiatus since last fall. It’s not clear what he’s going to do next.

    A cynic would note that one way for a man in RooshV’s shoes to make money would be as a traveling exhortational speaker. He could have a road show to churches denouncing “bad men” and “toxic masculinity”. Or he could start up a “life coach” routine for men “ensared” by the PUA life and “toxic masculinity”. Lots of ways he could bank some coin as a “bad boy who saw the light”. Yes, I’m a cynic, because I’ve seen a few things in my time.

    We can’t know. He will tell us with his actions where he’s going, and speculation is dumb.

    Frankly, I wish him well and in my opinion he will do best by fading out of the public scene, doing a version of “monk mode” and stop trying to monetize his life. But that’s just me and my opinion.

  160. SirHamster says:

    Yet you don’t seem to think that all women have a similar obligation to men.

    That is a falsehood. The identification of an obligation that exists for all men, including MGTOWs, is not a statement on the obligation of women. How did you get it so wrong?

    Why on earth do you think your point is any different from the unilateral selfishness that ‘feminists’ spout?

    Why do I care about your shock when you failed reading comprehension and logic?

  161. SirHamster says:

    @Anonymous Reader
    Please note that the sentence you quoted was from Nathan Bruno, not me. My bad for the confusion, I failed to use HTML tags properly.

  162. Anonymous Reader says:

    SirHamster
    Please note that the sentence you quoted was from Nathan Bruno, not me.

    Noted, my apologies for not reading more carefully.

  163. Rudolph says:

    BillyS says:
    June 27, 2019 at 4:38 pm
    Rudolph,

    No saying you are an atheist shows you are stupid. No one can know for certain no god exists anywhere. Thus you have shown your foolishness. Go ahead and believe it, but it is not the same as other things.

    Thank you for making my point.

    I’m fifty years old. I have jobs. I own property. I’m a law abiding citizen. Filled out my selective service registration as a kid. I vote. I pay my taxes. What do I owe anyone?

    No one cares what I have to say about anything because I’m “low value” right? But I’m supposed to care about the rest of you? For what? So you can call me stupid for my belief? Maybe “gamma” or “loser” or “soy.” I’m supposed to care about the future of civilization while a tenant of red pill and the manosphere seems to be climate science isn’t a problem?

    I’m supposed to stand up and fight when the only folks who seem to see the problem don’t seem to be on my side either?

    Feminists to the left. Tradcons to the right. Here I am in the middle with… what is even the middle anymore?

  164. BillyS says:

    Nathan,

    You said that you couldn’t expect better than Job or Hosea. Did I read you incorrectly?

  165. Anon says:

    SirHamster,

    That is a falsehood.

    It is not. You are holding men to an obligation standard towards the other gender that you are not holding women to. It is very obvious.

  166. BillyS says:

    SirHamster,

    I did what I could to help my mom out while she was alive. She refused most things, including moving in with us in the later years of her life.

    The only other woman I owed anything to was a voluntary choice on my part, but a fake choice on hers. I am obligated to some more spousal support (Texas for alimony) but that is only because the legal system is messed up. She chose to leave for no valid reason, especially no valid Christian reason. Though she had lots of church women saying “you go girl!” behind her.

    Tell me again about my obligations, though try to stick with truth instead of idiocy.

    Jacob,

    You are an idiot. What Scriptures support your position? 1st White Knight 2:10?

    Rudolph,

    It doesn’t matter what you do. If you claim omniscience (knowing no God exists) you are an idiot. That is the only thing I was talking about. The other things are a result of weighing risks. Claiming to know everything is foolish of any man. You would have to be god to do that, but you KNOW no such god exists.

  167. BillyS says:

    Frank,

    Lower? Has he seen what men are settling for these days?

    You are supposed to be going to the most poundage! Unless you are a sigma like him of course!

  168. Roger says:

    Prior to the child support model, marriage was the way both men and women resolved the question of involvement by and support from the father. In the past, marriage granted men fatherhood rights they otherwise could not expect to receive. It also granted women the right to support from the father. This way of viewing marriage is absolutely foreign to us now, as marriage is now about the moral primacy of romantic love.

    An essential aspect was that men and woman voluntarily reached a marriage agreement, for the benefit of themselves and the kids. That is part of what marriage meant. The family was more autonomous.

    In today’s child support model, that is all gone. Privileges and obligations are defined by the state, and marriage is irrelevant. It is amazing to me that a marriage model that served for millennia could be discarded without even much debate.

  169. Anon says:

    Roger,

    It is amazing to me that a marriage model that served for millennia could be discarded without even much debate.

    Essential to this were two things :

    i) Cuckservatives are adamant about tirelessly perpetuating the narrative that nothing has changed in how marriage is structured. Dalrock has written about this at length. They pressure young men to marry as though the arrangement is just as attractive and universal as it was a century ago.

    ii) A sufficiently wealthy society can mask and defer the cost of this damage for decades, and multiple decades of female suffrage creates tremendous political gains from catering to base female nature. This, for the most part, is NOT politically profitable in non-democracies, so is not engaged in. The greatest perversions of the natural order by brute government force are found in countries that are a) prosperous, and b) have been democracies for the greatest time period.

  170. American says:

    Dear Chelsea, get a cat. Bye.

  171. FatR says:

    archerwfisher:
    Lots of people like to bash Vox Day, but somehow they can never actually debate any of his stances. That screams “He has badthink but we can’t find any way he’s actually wrong!”

    There is nothing to debate about “back to plantation!”. Indeed when confronted with the fact that modern marriage is a really shit deal and therefore men will just increasingly not take it no matter what anyone says in the comment Vox both admitted that his stance is just “back to plantation!” and said that he is not debating that.

    You gotta love the people going “the race trashnationalists!” You know they are either A. Non-americans who want to claim there is no American people and the USA belongs to everyone or B. Whites living in a supermajority white area talking about how they are so multicultural because they have a non-white friend at work, and yes more ‘diversity’ is great as long as it’s not near them.

    If this is how you do your “debating”, let me tell you, that had I been an unironic racial purity advocate, a mutt like Vox who has no skin in the game and spends half his time shooting Right would be the last person I would’ve listened to.

  172. Jacob says:

    BillyS,

    Must be hard being around so many idiots.

    Proverbs 12:16 comes to mind. And 18:6.

  173. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Il Deplorevolissimo: Any many committed to the single religious life in some form is by definition not a MGTOW because he’s probably more engaged with the rest of civilization than most married couples.

    You got the “definition” wrong. MGTOW men might, or might not, be engaged in society, depending on what “Their Own Way” is. That is the definition of MGTOW. Men Going Their Own Way.

  174. Oscar says:

    @ BillyS

    As to what Vox says, that is plausible deniability. That is the same thing he berates in others, yet her practices it. That is too bad.

    Yeah, he does a lot of that, but neither he, nor his followers, see it.

    It is ironic that he wants to save the civilization he doesn’t live under. I am fine with him doing whatever he does, but commanding others is hypocritical in this area.

    That’s not true. Ted Beale lives in Italy, and says he wants to save Western Civilization, and Italy is both the cradle of the Renaissance, and the seat of the Catholic Church, both of which were central to the development of Western Civilization. He says the USA is beyond saving, which is why he left.

    He may be right, or he may be wrong. We’ll see. I tend to think his prognostication for the European nations is overly optimistic, but I could be wrong.

  175. Jacob says:

    BillyS,

    Or if the swine one day strains out the proverbial pearls you could look up Isa 56:3-5 and Mt 19:12.

  176. Oscar says:

    I forgot to mention that, although I frequently criticize Ted Beale, I recognize that he’s doing a lot more than most. He started a publishing company, Infogalactic, a comic book company, unauthorized.tv, and now he’s talking about producing movies and/or video games (I think).

    He’s doing a whole lot to engage the culture. Perfectly? No. But reasonable people don’t expect perfection. So, let’s give credit where it’s due, and criticism where it’s due.

  177. texinole says:

    @ Tax atty et al

    Thank you very much for the info, especially the relevant codes. I feared my question had been lost in the sperg fest that is this thread.

  178. BillyS says:

    Yes Jacob, you fit those Scriptures well. You misuse the Scriptures to your own end as well, so you are quite evil according to the Apostle Paul.

  179. BillyS says:

    Oscar,

    That’s not true. Ted Beale lives in Italy, and says he wants to save Western Civilization, and Italy is both the cradle of the Renaissance, and the seat of the Catholic Church, both of which were central to the development of Western Civilization. He says the USA is beyond saving, which is why he left.

    Somewhat. I am pretty sure the divorce issue is definitely larger in the US. I have not read much about children’s services taking kids away in Italy, though I may have missed it.

    I also don’t hear him ranting about his friend’s choices either. Homosexuality is just as dangerous to society, yet he hasn’t said a single word against Milo. But everyone who disagrees with him on this is a liar at best. Not quite an even balance.

    Though he would just call me an anklebiter now, even though I read his columns and then posts faithfully for many years. Time will tell as you note, but this is a disgusting direction.

    He is doing a lot to push positive culture. That is one reason this is so appalling. It is like he was manning a machine gun, but suddenly picked it up Rambo-style and started firing on his own side. Something did likely get stuck in his craw and that is likely the root issue.

    Though I would also guess that his refusal to listen to others has made him worse. I know I am right in so many areas, but I don’t go around condemning all who disagree.

  180. BillyS says:

    Jacob,

    You have yet to provide any Scriptures that indicate a modern Christian man is compelled to married or otherwise be in sin. Those aren’t there and you know it, so you continue to spout foolishness. Just like a ring of gold in a pigs snout.

  181. emery says:

    “Though he would just call me an anklebiter now, even though I read his columns and then posts faithfully for many years. Time will tell as you note, but this is a disgusting direction.”

    What a gamma tell. “I’m a loyal customer but….” You clearly don’t read his posts, or your comprehension or memory is terrible. For example:

    “I also don’t hear him ranting about his friend’s choices either. Homosexuality is just as dangerous to society, yet he hasn’t said a single word against Milo. But everyone who disagrees with him on this is a liar at best. Not quite an even balance.”

    Vox has several posts about the culture war, in general not attacking those on your side. In specific he says he tries to praise in public criticize in private in regards to his friends. He’s mentioned that in regards to Milo by name. That point he’s made several times: he and Milo and Owen etc gain nothing from publicly showboating virtue and laying out dirty laundry for all to see, genuine criticism is reserved for personal conversations.

  182. Oscar says:

    @ emery

    Vox has several posts about the culture war, in general not attacking those on your side.

    I’m not convinced that a Christian and an unrepentant homosexual can be on the same side.

  183. Anonymous Reader says:

    He’s doing a whole lot to engage the culture. Perfectly? No. But reasonable people don’t expect perfection. So, let’s give credit where it’s due, and criticism where it’s due.

    Agreed.

  184. SirHamster says:

    @Anon

    It is not. You are holding men to an obligation standard towards the other gender that you are not holding women to. It is very obvious.

    You are emoting like a woman. Women have an obligation just as men do. You are reading things into what I happened not to say, and then you emotionally react to that phantom offense and ignore the point.

    Speak the truth like a man.

    @BillyS

    Tell me again about my obligations, though try to stick with truth instead of idiocy.

    What have I said that is untrue?

    You tried. You acted like a man, you’ve fulfilled your obligations, and I’m sorry for your losses.

    That doesn’t remove the obligation on other men out there who have benefited from civilization, have given up, and try to rationalize their inaction as a lack of obligation.

  185. Jacob says:

    BillyS,

    The lattet two Scriptures I’ve offered speak for themselves. Read the whole chapters.

    It’s obvious you’ve read the Bible to some degree but also that you’ve digested only what suits your tastes. You also keep hurling insults about while expecting others to respond by feeding you. Stop behaving like an angry old coot. It’s not all about you.

  186. BillyS says:

    No Jacob, none of the Scriptures you have posted here indicated a Christian man is compelled to be married. A few talk about being a fool, which you fit the bill for. I suppose that is why you are so familiar with them.

    You also lay charges against others, including those who believe in and follow Jesus, which makes you an accuser of the brethren. Opposing God’s people is not a good idea.

    SirHamster,

    You indicated a man is obligated toward women in general because he was born from a woman. What Scriptures indicate that? Or what else requires a man to care about anyone else other than the woman who raised him, merely because they are a woman?

    Though it seems you are not standing on that. Why is being married so vital then? A man is certainly better planning for the future in my view, but the current system prohibits that in most cases. How about focusing on that first?

    emery,

    What a gamma tell. “I’m a loyal customer but….” You clearly don’t read his posts, or your comprehension or memory is terrible. For example:

    Anything becomes a gamma tell in the eyes of people like you when you want to diss someone. Don’t hurt your arm patting yourself on the back.

    Yes, I am VERY disappointed with VoxDay. I have defended him in the past, but I am getting tired of it after more than 20 years reading a fair bit of what he writes, along with several of his books.

    If that makes me a game, then I am proudly a gamma. Though I am not, I am just disgusted with a lot of this. Even his friend Nate held him to task for not thinking everything through as much as he should, but that was several years ago and I don’t see Nate posting there much now (I no longer read many of the comments however), so you may not be familiar with that.

    Vox is not god and makes a poor replacement.

  187. Anonymous Reader says:

    SirHamster to BillyS
    You tried. You acted like a man, you’ve fulfilled your obligations, and I’m sorry for your losses.

    Is this weakness you are showing towards BillyS approved of by your Supreme Dark Lord?
    Just asking.

  188. SirHamster says:

    You indicated a man is obligated toward women in general because he was born from a woman. What Scriptures indicate that? Or what else requires a man to care about anyone else other than the woman who raised him, merely because they are a woman?

    No, a man is obligated to the civilization he was raised in, which represent the sum efforts of all his forefathers into building up a society for their prosperity.

    It’s falls under honoring your father and mother (and their fathers and mothers, and their fathers and mothers, and …), by valuing the inheritance they gave you. Don’t despise your birthright.

    That’s all I suggested, and complaints about unfair obligations towards women are just a product of your own imagination.

    Is this weakness you are showing towards BillyS approved of by your Supreme Dark Lord?
    Just asking.

    Compassion is not weakness, petty sniper.

  189. Anonymous Reader says:

    I asked
    Is this weakness you are showing towards BillyS approved of by your Supreme Dark Lord?
    Just asking.

    SirHamster
    Compassion is not weakness, petty sniper.

    Really? Sure about that?
    Have you conformed your opinion to that of your Supreme Dark Lord, Hamster?

    Why don’t you go and ask him? Copy paste the question below into comments over there at your Supreme Dark Lord’s blogger site:

    “Supreme Dark Lord, is it weakness to show compassion towards a man who is going his own way as best he can, to follow God, not through his own fault but because his wife frivorced him and his adopted children mostly abandoned him?”

    What do you think your Supreme Dark Lord’s reply would be, Hamster?
    There’s one way to find out…if you have the courage…

  190. Dan says:

    Opting in or out of a childs life is NOT AN OPTION for the biologic father if his identity is known. The blackrobed pirates infesting the Family “Court” (sic) system DON’T CARE about any agreements two adults may arrive at. Those criminals on the bench WILL impose THEIR decisions
    at the point of a gun if necessary. The ONLY viable solution for a man to NOT get raped and destroyed by an criminal playing judge is to NEVER get married and to have a vasectomy to insure they don’t have any biologic offspring…..and even THAT is not a 100% guarantee.

  191. SirHamster says:

    @Anonymous Reader
    You’re disgusting. Treating compassion as weakness, and then thinking it can be used as a weapon.

    if you have the courage…

    Go ask him yourself. He has a regular livestream you can join and ask.

  192. Oscar says:

    Man, all this talk about “obligations”, and here I am with a wife, nine kids, an elderly mother, and a disabled brother who all live with me. I’m up to my eyeballs in obligations, and there are plenty of days when I don’t feel up to the task.

    That’s not a complaint. I chose this life, and wouldn’t choose another, if I could.

    My point is that obligations to a civilization are too big, and abstract for most of us to wrap our minds around, and certainly too big do do anything about. Few of us are the kinds of great men who change the courses of nations.

    I have my hands more than full just trying to keep my family on a good course.

    All I want to do is competently fulfill my obligations to my family, and my immediate neighbors. Anything more than that is too big a problem for me to solve. You gentlemen reading this can do what you want, but I recommend you likewise narrow your focus. Frankly, if we all take care of the people nearest us, civilization will improve anyway. If we don’t, it all goes to hell regardless of what else we do.

  193. @Red Pill Latecomer

    You got the “definition” wrong. MGTOW men might, or might not, be engaged in society, depending on what “Their Own Way” is. That is the definition of MGTOW. Men Going Their Own Way.

    That’s what MGTOWs would have us believe, much like how feminists stridently demand we believe that feminism is just the crazy idea that women are human beings. Stop noticing what MGTOWs and feminists actually say and do. Accept their definitions uncritically!

    There is a reason why Vox Day makes statements like MGTOWs just want to play with their toys while the world burns–it’s true in most cases. Most MGTOWs just want to quit and live for themselves. You see the same pattern emerging here and anywhere else loud and proud MGTOWs get talking.

  194. And again, there are three options for men who want to “go their own way” in the generic since, not like the loud and proud MGTOW:

    1. Be a Christian and get married.
    2. Be a Christian and live some form of the religious life wherein you choose a path that makes you an active contributor to the advancement of the Kingdom of God over a life of leisure.
    3. Not be a Christian and live for yourself and burn in Hell when you die.

  195. SirHamster says:

    My point is that obligations to a civilization are too big, and abstract for most of us to wrap our minds around, and certainly too big do do anything about. Few of us are the kinds of great men who change the courses of nations.

    Jesus preached big, not small. The Kingdom of Heaven is near, so repent.

    You are the product of your father and your father’s father and your father’s father’s father. So honor them by living a life worthy of them. It is a high calling, and it is not too big for any man to bear, for all the men before you bore it as well.

    It is the sum of our efforts that transforms the course of nations. No Great Man works alone, not even Jesus.

    And that is why MGTOW attempts to demoralize individual young men into empty lives is an evil, just as feminist attempts to seduce young women into empty lives is an evil.

  196. Pingback: Saturday Morning Hijinx – v5k2c2.com

  197. Oscar says:

    @ SirHamster

    My point is that obligations to a civilization are too big, and abstract for most of us to wrap our minds around, and certainly too big do do anything about. Few of us are the kinds of great men who change the courses of nations.

    Jesus preached big, not small. The Kingdom of Heaven is near, so repent.

    You are the product of your father and your father’s father and your father’s father’s father. So honor them by living a life worthy of them. It is a high calling, and it is not too big for any man to bear, for all the men before you bore it as well.

    It is the sum of our efforts that transforms the course of nations. No Great Man works alone, not even Jesus.

    Wonderful. And the best way I know how to do any of that is by doing exactly what I said; taking care of my family and my immediate neighbors.

  198. BillyS says:

    Oscar,

    I would trade with you tomorrow. I desperately want family, yet I have almost none. Perhaps some will change if I move nearer to my oldest adoptive son, but we are on different wavelengths for all his attempts to do what he can now. (He is the only one I have any relation with, but he is in the “work your rear off mode to support a family” which makes time together brief.)

    SirHamster,

    Exactly what form does my obligation to my society take and what is the exact reason for that. Why is marrying and having children a requirement.

    AR,

    Thanks for the comments, but I don’t expect much compassion. Sure, I would love a friend or three that had that, but I don’t expect it in general from anyone else, though I am sure Vox would not like me much now and would freely insult me. Fine if that makes him feel good. No skin off my back.

  199. Novaseeker says:

    You are the product of your father and your father’s father and your father’s father’s father. So honor them by living a life worthy of them. It is a high calling, and it is not too big for any man to bear, for all the men before you bore it as well.

    This is just white nationalism cross-dressing as Christianity — utterly heretical and demonic, as the SDL cruelty artist specializes in.

    Christ came to divide families — He said it outright. He also had an utter disregard for the civilization or politics of the age — he advised to obey and pay taxes to Ceasar, which I guarantee you neither you nor Vox would agree with, and if Jesus Christ himself posted a comment to that effect in Vox’s blog today, he would be shouted down and AMOG’d by the so-called “ilk”.

    Stop dressing up your social and political goals in Christianity. It is demonic. It is not what Christ taught. I have my issues with MGTOW as I set out above, but this kind of rhetoric is garbage. Follow Christ. Care for your parents, yes, but follow Christ. That may not mean being married, as Paul himself said, and as the fathers of the Church (not the protestant heresy, never mind Voxianity, which is a product of Vox’s mind and nothing more) attested to over the centuries. White nationalism, preserving Western Civ — have those goals if you like, but don’t dress them up as Christian goals and use the Christian-esque/ese rhetoric to support them.

    Use Voxianity instead, and convert people to the religion of Ted’s mind. Go on, do it.

  200. BillyS says:

    So we should seek to destroy our families instead? That is not the message I find in the Scriptures.

    Yes, families will get destroyed, but we are never told to work toward that. Plenty of things in the Scriptures about proper honor though, even to corrupt rulers in one case. We should never seek destruction, even though that will come as we follow Christ. We should seek to live with peace with all men, as much as it is in our ability.

    That would include seeking a society that supported that, as opposed to what we have now.

  201. BillyS says:

    Any type of people that support a proper, moral , organized society is worth emulated and seeking to apply. It should be color independent and it is definitely not limited to “white nationalism” whatever the claim.

    A major problem today is that many are rejecting the very foundations of rational society merely because it was largely made by white men. Being paranoid of something because of that is not bright.

  202. 7817 says:

    One thing I appreciate about Vox Day is what a polarizing figure he is. Love him or hate him, look how he gets people to say what they really think.

    I never knew your opinions on these things Nova. The clarity is helpful.

  203. Anonymous Reader says:

    SirHamster:
    @Anonymous Reader
    You’re disgusting. Treating compassion as weakness, and then thinking it can be used as a weapon.

    You are confused. It is not I who regard compassion as weakness. It is your Supreme Dark Lord. Here is an example:

    Hamster’s Supreme Dark Lord 6/23/2019 12:34:00 PM:

    This is all I have to say directly to the MGTOW: You quit. You’re out. You’re done. You ran from the battle. So be it. You don’t count anymore. Now go off and die alone, as you’ve chosen.

    Very clearly your Supreme Dark Lord would tell BiilyS to “go off and die alone”. No compassion, just “go off and die alone”.

    Your emotions are not conformed to those of your Supreme Dark Lord, Hamster. What should you do about that?

    I can understand why you don’t want to ask your Supreme Dark Lord about compassion for BillyS or other men who have been pushed into a corner. Here is the question you do not dare ask of your Supreme Dark Lord, Hamster:

    “Supreme Dark Lord, is it weakness to show compassion towards a man who is going his own way as best he can, to follow God, not through his own fault but because his wife frivorced him and his adopted children mostly abandoned him?”

    You are afraid. You lack the courage to question your Supreme Dark Lord on the issue.

    Not my problem, but clearly yours.

  204. Anonymous Reader says:

    Il Dep
    3. Not be a Christian and live for yourself and burn in Hell when you die.

    What does your religion teach about murder? Have you consulted with your Supreme Dark Lord on the topic?

    How about lying? What does your Supreme Dark Lord say on that topic, Il Dep?

    Just asking. Not expecting an answer from you. That would require honesty.

  205. Anonymous Reader says:

    7817
    One thing I appreciate about Vox Day is what a polarizing figure he is. Love him or hate him, look how he gets people to say what they really think.

    That’s just dumb. It’s sophomoric.

  206. 7817 says:

    You are the product of your father and your father’s father and your father’s father’s father. So honor them by living a life worthy of them. It is a high calling, and it is not too big for any man to bear, for all the men before you bore it as well.

    This is true in a spiritual sense as well. Look at the great cloud of witnesses and the faith hall of fame referenced by the writer of Hebrews in chapter 11.

  207. 7817 says:

    I have compassion for men who can’t find a wife, or who are divorced raped, and then no longer pursue a relationship with women.

    MGTOW is something else. It’s a group that whines on the internet and ruins what it touches.

    MGTOW is a root of bitterness.

    MGTOW is cancer.

  208. Oscar says:

    @ BillyS

    I would trade with you tomorrow. I desperately want family, yet I have almost none.

    I know, brother. And I pray for you. I honestly wish I could help. As a fellow adoptive father, I empathize with you.

    Perhaps some will change if I move nearer to my oldest adoptive son, but we are on different wavelengths for all his attempts to do what he can now. (He is the only one I have any relation with, but he is in the “work your rear off mode to support a family” which makes time together brief.)

    I’m in that same mode myself, although I’m much older than your son, because my kids range from 18 down to 2. That’s one reason why it’s so great to have my mom living with us. She’s a great help with the kids, especially the toddlers. I don’t get to spend as much time with her as I’d like, but she gets to spend a lot of time with the kids, and it’s been great for her. Se was really depressed after my dad died, but now that she spends so much time with my toddlers, it’s like she’s come alive again.

    Maybe you should consider moving close to your son. Spending time with his family might do you a lot of good.

    God bless you, brother.

  209. 7817 says:

    most people would be more tolerant of MGTOW if the MGTOW were really going their own way and not acting like a proselytyzing group. It’s the latter element that generates a lot of negativity towards MGTOW. In other words, if most MGTOW just quietly dropped out of the male/female scene, did their own thing with their time, pursued their own interests and so on, it really woudln’t generate a lot of negativity, because it would be largely invisible. However, there is a solid core of MGTOW who don’t do that — rather they are quite aggressive and confrontational with their viewpoints, seeking to convince/convert others to them, or attacking contra viewpoints openly

    This is right on. The vocal core MGTOWs is all anyone sees or hears from. If the vocal ones disappeared as a group, the quiet ones could keep harmlessly doing their thing. The quiet ones aren’t even mgtow in the same way because they don’t spray bitterness everywhere.

    MGTOWs are cancer.

  210. Scott says:

    BillyS (and a legion of others) is why I left the army early. Why I take the risks I do with my blogging and psychology practice. I know I can help.

    No shit.

  211. 7817 says:

    That’s why I included you in the offer Scott. Thanks.

  212. BillyS says:

    Oscar,

    God continues to take care of me, for all my frustrations now. I really wish things were different, but it is outside my control and I will keep pushing forward.

    Scott,

    I pray you have success it helping others.

  213. SirHamster says:

    @Oscar,
    Amen.

    @BillyS

    Exactly what form does my obligation to my society take and what is the exact reason for that. Why is marrying and having children a requirement.

    Look at the parable of the Talents.

    Marrying and having children is not a requirement, but that is what produced you, so whatever you do should be at least as meaningful. What produced us was the last vestiges of a Christian society – so we should be aiming to maintain or reproduce a Christian society.

    Keeping in mind we may be doomed to what looks like failure to the world. Does death on a cross sound appealing to you? Yet that was God’s will for one particular man and for many of his followers.

    @Anonymous Reader

    Very clearly your Supreme Dark Lord would tell BiilyS to “go off and die alone”. No compassion, just “go off and die alone”.

    Reading comprehension, please. “…as you’ve chosen.” He did not choose to divorce, but was divorced against his will by a wayward woman.

    Your emotions are not conformed to those of your Supreme Dark Lord, Hamster. What should you do about that?

    Nothing, you fail reading comprehension and you are a petty guttersnipe throwing shit in the hopes that someone will pay more attention to you.

    Begone, THOT.

  214. SirHamster says:

    @Novaseeker

    This is just white nationalism cross-dressing as Christianity — utterly heretical and demonic, as the SDL cruelty artist specializes in.

    I am not white. What I say applies to all nations, as I support the continued existence of all nations. All nations must eventually bend the knee to the King of Kings.

    Christ came to divide families — He said it outright. He also had an utter disregard for the civilization or politics of the age —

    He does divide. But Christian families do exist, and I am the product of one such. A nation of Christian families creates the soil for grand cathedrals, universities, and the like.

    he advised to obey and pay taxes to Ceasar, which I guarantee you neither you nor Vox would agree with, and if Jesus Christ himself posted a comment to that effect in Vox’s blog today, he would be shouted down and AMOG’d by the so-called “ilk”.

    I obey the law and pay my taxes according to Jesus’s instructions. I am by nature a legalist and an authoritarian, so submitting to a higher authority comes naturally.

    Now pay up for your guarantee or be a liar.

    Stop dressing up your social and political goals in Christianity. It is demonic.

    Strange projection. IIRC, you are Orthodox, and so you are a son of Western Civilization, or at least a close cousin. I am not.

    My father was not born to Christian parents, nor was he born to a Christian society. My heritage includes pagan traditions and rituals that must be redeemed or abandoned for Christ. I say all this because I think I have a clearer view on what a lack of Christianity in a nation looks like, but also the potential if that were to change. Even in my Christian father, I can see elements of the non-Christian culture he started from.

    Europe did not become Christian in a day, but barbarians became Christians and then scholars. Perhaps a similar process will take place for the land of my fathers – and it will not take place through MGTOW ideas or attitudes.

    Orienting myself for a multi-century mission is not demonic. Rejecting futile mindsets is not demonic.

    White nationalism, preserving Western Civ — have those goals if you like, but don’t dress them up as Christian goals and use the Christian-esque/ese rhetoric to support them.

    Christian nationalism is a distinct form of nationalism, and it is overall better than a non-Christian one. Perhaps, since Christ’s kingdom is not of this world, it is not right to make it an explicit goal.

    But if it is better to yoke believers together, and we expect young men and women to marry rather than burn, and it is good to disciple all ages to follow all Christian teachings, then a Christian nation is going to result when the yeast works its way through the flour. As we start to see what a post-Christian society looks like, recognizing that we were passed on a Christian society and that we should in turn pass on a Christian society is not an evil desire.

  215. Anonymous Reader says:

    Novaseeker
    he’s as Christian as Thomas Jefferson was, and likely much less)

    Tom was a Deist. Perhaps Vox is a Day-ist.

  216. Anonymous Reader says:

    A post script for anyone who actually reads this comment thread to the bottom:

    Fact that offends Hamster:
    Very clearly your Supreme Dark Lord would tell BiilyS to “go off and die alone”. No compassion, just “go off and die alone”.

    Hamster:
    Reading comprehension, please. “…as you’ve chosen.” He did not choose to divorce, but was divorced against his will by a wayward woman.

    Hypothetical replies to BillyS:

    Tim Bayly: “You married her!”
    Hamster’s SDL: “As you’ve chosen”.

    No real difference between the aging 70 year old Boomer and your Supreme Dark Lord on this issue. Your emotions are not in harmony with those of your Supreme Dark Lord, Hamster.

    In the real world, there’s a whole lot of men who aren’t frightened, desparing MGTOW but who also can see through the standard aging Boomer / Xr “manUP” cant. Those men should stay far away from the MGTOW crab bucket, and equally far away from the “sacrifice yourself for my ego” TradCons. Those men need to know the dangers, they need to know that probability of divorce, how to manage expectations and many other things. They need Game, too.

    tl;dr
    Men need discernment. As a rule TradCons do not teach that, perhaps because they can’t; MGTOW are too busy engaging in their personal catastrophic LARPing to know what the word means.

    Fear and despair are to be avoided; just as pride and self-righteous arrogance. The MGTOW need to learn the first lesson, TradCon Boomers and Xr’s like your Supreme Dark Lord need to learn the second one.

    Vox Day is not infallible. If that bursts any bubbles, too bad.

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.