MGTOW: Men Going Their Own Way

a reply to: undo
what are you talking about.

the interesting part was that the trickery was obviously due to adam having more information than eve. had she been privy to the info, we have no idea if she would've succumbed or not - all we know is that eve,

eve knew everything adam did about the tree, she even told the serpent,

Gen 3:2-4 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
2 The woman said to the serpent, “From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; 3 but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.’”

this is what God told adam,

Gen: 2:16-17 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
16 The Lord God commanded the man, saying, “From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17 but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not [a]eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.”

she said the same thing to the serpent that God told adam. if you can point where adam knew more than eve from the scriptures please do. actually she even said they couldn't even touch it. so to me that implies she had at least the thought that she shouldn't even touch it, which no where did God tell them that.

a reply to: Realtruth
I know what you mean, and I have nothing but compassion for you guys.

a reply to: SearchLightsInc

You are definitely the queen of the strawman argument.

Yes, feminist have helped women in many ways, albeit at the expense of others may times.

originally posted by: ghostrager


Blaming ills on feminism is not in the slightest being ignorant. I'd encourage you to read my post on page 10 that describes the propaganda vs facts that feminist have pushed.

originally posted by: SearchLightsInc


It's ignorant when it makes absolutely no sense at all. I'd encourage you to look up some history on the feminist movement and perhaps wonder what other factors that have happened in the modern age could have possibly lead to you not feeling like a man?

I'll be happy to reply to this, aside from your shaming tactics. Again, feminist like NOW have worked not just for women, but again't men. Below is just one example. Feel free to research more for yourself.

A reader sent me the below. It’s a resolution from the National Organization for Women’s national conference back in 1996. I may as well reprint it in its entirety.

NOW ACTION ALERT ON "FATHERS' RIGHTS"

WHEREAS organizations advocating "fathers' rights," whose members consist of non-custodial parents, their attorneys and their allies, are a growing force in our country; and

WHEREAS the objectives of these groups are to increase restrictions and limits on custodial parents' rights and to decrease child support obligations of non-custodial parents by using the abuse of power in order to control in the same fashion as do batterers; and

WHEREAS these groups are fulfilling their objectives by forming political alliances with conservative Republican legislators and others and by working for the adoption of legislation such as presumption of joint custody, penalties for "false reporting" of domestic and child abuse and mediation instead of court hearings; and

WHEREAS the success of these groups will be harmful to all women but especially harmful to battered and abused women and children; and

WHEREAS the efforts of well-financed "fathers' rights" groups are expanding from a few states into many more, sharing research and tactics state by state; and WHEREAS many judges and attorneys are still biased against women and fathers are awarded custody 70% of the time when they seek it per the Association of Child Enforcement Support (ACES);

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the National Organization for Women (NOW) begin a national alert to inform members about these "fathers' rights" groups and their objectives through articles in the National Now Times (NNT); and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, as a part of this alert, NOW establish a clearinghouse for related information by sharing with NOW state and local Chapters the available means to challenge such groups, including the current research on custody and support, sample legislation, expert witnesses, and work done by NOW and other groups in states where "fathers' rights" groups have been active; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NOW encourage state and local Chapters to conduct and coordinate divorce/custody court watch projects to facilitate removal of biased judges; and

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that NOW report to the 1997 National Conference on the status and result of this national alert whereupon its continuation or expansion will be considered.


The next time someone tells you that feminists are all about gender equality, remember this resolution. Its frank misandry, utter disregard for the truth and tone of hysteria would be funny if organizations like NOW didn’t wield such power in state legislatures. Put simply, to date no feminist organization anywhere in the world has ever supported a bill to establish a presumption of equal parenting. And in many cases they’ve gone to bat against those bills. Gender equality? Not for dads.

Source: nationalparentsorganization.org...

originally posted by: undo

originally posted by: centhwevir1979

originally posted by: undo


"In the Greece of 200 B.C., for example, the murder of female infants was so common that among 6,000 families living in Delphi no more than 1 percent had two daughters. Among 79 families, nearly as many had one child as two. Among all there were only 28 daughters to 118 sons.

Those are some pretty specific figures from 200 BC. Did they come from the famous Ancient Greek Census Bureau and were carved in stone, to survive the ages?

most likely, since greece kept records.

"Ancient Greece

There are several accounts of ancient Greek and Mesopotamian city states carrying out censuses.[18] The question of which is first is clouded by very different approaches: counting only men, counting a pile of rocks etc. but such censuses took place 1600 BCE and earlier."

en.wikipedia.org...

ancientgreekbattles.net... they are making educated guesses here, not citing stone tablets.

historum.com... here again we see them making calculations based on how many houses could have occupied that much geographical space, and how many people they think could have lived in one of those houses.

Seems like all modern figures for population of ancient Greece are estimations, can you please link me to the stone tablets your numbers came from?

a reply to: Bluesma
I suppose. But what it mostly shows is that what you have there is mice in a box. I mean are they surprised? Or are they just joking? The only parallels shown that if things begin to get up the anti, or if things get to leisurable then extremes are bound to crop up if you are confined into a box. In humans its the socitys they live in, but in this case of these mice it could literally be the box there in.

As for all mice society roles being filled out? WTF does that even mean, are we now the arbiter of mice civilization, hey maybe they should have dressed the male mice in suits and give the female mice nice pink bow-ties. Last I checked mice populations do not number in that concentrated numbers unless there going crazy, or mice mating rituals, or have been infected with a virus, or there is a shortage of food and have spawned in vast numbers so more will likely move on.

If there food-source is not vast they will literally turn on eachother, and if there is more to go around, they will split and move to different territories, but keeping them confined in a box and trying to section them off based on human interpretation of what they think will happen. Most animals especially animals like mice have two basic modes of behavior, one in mass. If there in mass they would act differently then if there by themselves, which is why you do not see them dying off if there somebody pets, or if there in a small group as somebody's pets, in fact they will funk like rabbits as well, or like mice, since you know there mice.

So outside the misconception that numbers in overpopulation triggering decline, which happens but in most cases its roles in said populations being suppressed or subverted which triggers it as well, and numbers really have nothing to do with it, unless a perceived shortage of something is in there head. Its why octopuses die off after they have mated, not when they reach a certain number, there social role in that environment has triggered there evolutionary trigger. Though if they grow in numbers, well then likely more food for predators of the sea, and either way its kept in check, but since some of those buggers are really smart, its probably why you see that in them, and not in a whole lot of other animals. But they have there evolutionary inbuilt death triggers as well.

Even among humans most if not all overpopulation issues is in perceived shortages, not actual shortages and confusion of actual ingrained rolls in said society, and in mice society you will confuse there senses if they have everything they need, but nothing to do or go. So ya! If you dum the mice down they should get along just fine and at a steady population.

So like I said, maybe they should put some steady supply of fluoride in there water, and hey we may even come to some sort of conclusion on that whole conspiracy among humans as well.

But anyways, who knows what you people are thinking or making of it. But its probably wrong, no doupt your seeing the mice groom themself and in your female mind your thinking, OMG the mice is grooming himself, that is so like men today, why are they cleaning themselfs when they should be out providing for a female. Its ridunculous, besides what makes you think that all of these so dubbed beautiful ones mice were all male? But then again why the hell am I asking you, your the one who could not even admit there is a link between females putting on makeup and the attraction of males. I mean jeez! Talk about stubborn, but I suppose its not your fault, females now a day have been so papered and there ego stroked for so long that they expect things to go there way, that they even believe random guys on the internet should agree with every illogical fallacy they make up.

Listen here you. I call shinanigans on your mice society understanding abilities. Oh and nature has a way to solve everything, some very sneaky and complicated ways, most or even I will will never figure it out, because it would literally by like a gear in a crankshaft questioning its existence, ie fish in a bowl. But most times, the way nature deals with things? Well it basically bludgeons things into place. Kind of like "oh you got a cold there and your nose is runny? Here a hammer to the head will cure that" Oh ya! Totally mysterious, nature is. But it works.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie

well read what paul said, and you'll understand my post. he said eve was deceived, but adam was not and did it anyway. not my fault.

a reply to: StoutBroux

Proverbs 19:13 A foolish child is a father's ruin, and a quarrelsome wife is like the constant dripping of a leaky roof.

Proverbs 21:9 Better to live on a corner of the roof than share a house with a quarrelsome wife.

Well. The only thing that I can say to that is...Amen. That stuff makes sense, which a lot of things in the bible do not. Who knew those old ancient farts were not all dittzy, because thats good advice. But not likely to happen to often in life, most especially in any and all relationships....Eventually.

a reply to: centhwevir1979

well clearly i wasn't there, so i can't. but do you recall the story of king david wanting to take a census and god getting mad at him for it? now that was before 200 bc. the ancient egyptians kept track of pretty much everything. i don't think the old world was as dumb as we've been lead to believe.

a reply to: mikegrouchy
Well the guy literally asked for it. But I suppose its synonymous with marriage now a days. Hey they all asked for it. Nut shot, bam. See you in court. Or so the theme seems to be.

Thought its not surprising, majority of females are just little balls of pent-up aggression for some perceived slight by men or cause, and some are so ridiculous you just dont know what to say. And well! There women, I have yet to meet one that did not want to be the boss or in control. There was a vid in the other thread by another guy which was interesting.

Or here this vid.

Its pretty interesting, but at one point, forgot were in that whole thing, but its in there somewere. Anyways she says feminists wanted men they can control and then that there disappointed now that they got it. Which off course we all have our opinions, but that is obviously false and always has been.

Even the girl in the vid though she may think otherwise does not necessarily mean that, and even the most so called independent woman or whatever does not want that. Its more about the contrast in the extremes of the way she was raised and the ones she is talking about not only were raised, but quite literally what its about, and it may and even seriously be genetic. Is that women just not only look but crave somebody they can boss around, even if its in a playfull manner. At some level control in one form or another and it does not necessarily have to be bad, but that is one trait they look for, and the round about ways they go about it are many.

Ever see little kids or little girls playing? I did, my sisters two girls, every-time they play, even with there imaginary friends, they always boss around there little toys around. It's like "you sit here, on no, I didn't tell you to move, then they move the stuffed animal into the time out room or whatever" I seen that not that long ago really, and even in the youngest one, an even the oldest one is doing it. Its sort of hilarious how they always boss around there stuffed animals in there play pretend tea parties.

Now I have yet to see it, or among that degree among little boys. I mean they would play pretend, but I do not think they boss around every toy imaginary or not for the fun of it. So ya! Even when they grow up, well...The commercials have it right, and it may even be a genetic or evolutionary thing that all little girls and all women really need is somebody to boss around, while they play the scenarios they got in there head in said relationships they have.

And considering every piece of programing, and I mean that in a very literal sense, as most shows on the TV or in school or everywhere can and are "programing" if you let them. Well considering that is going on, what it does really is just bring that little part to the foreground, its not something that was magically put there, but something that was massaged and coerced to grow to ridiculous depths, and now you see that bit of that come to the forefront.

Little miss bossy. Now is this vid funny, cute, or just sad? Personally I think its just kids and should not take it to far beyond that. But in any given circumstance the same thing, well it can be all three of those things. But ultimately there just kids, and the habits and behaviors they pick up as young depending on the circumstance and people involved it can be all that and more. But its still all depended on the actual people in question your looking at. But till then kids are kids.



So ya! I disagree with the female who made that video somewhat on that part, and a few other parts. But agree on others, and ultimately the secret to marriage and relationship may just be that females just need to find somebody they can boss around, ie control is and always was a thing in any relationship, though it is not necessarily bad, but it can be when taken to extremes, but so can everything else.

Though like the woman in the vid is saying, not to that degree and they should not be surprised when men just up and dont bother anymore. I mean most females play mental games, in fact it is not only ingrained into them but its so prevalent that they dont even know there doing it, as its just part of the norm. Anything form guessing games to some real actual screaming back and forth is just part of that fact, and part of the fact that it got feed so much that it had nothing to do but grow into what you see today...A habit that is steadily feed, and alowed to grow into something of a dr Jekyll mister Hide thing.

I mean. Is anybody really surprised that this is happening?

But your vid does not show much but that some dude is asking women to kick him in the nuts. If he asked dudes they probably would do it as well, though if he asked men some. Well, they really would dig there shins in there and he may end up in surgery. And I could also post plenty of vids about all kinds of things to make a point, I could even post vids of girls and women getting punched in the boobs by men, though they are not so prevalent as vids of guys getting kicked in the nuts by women or other people or just getting hit in the nuts in general.

But what would be the point of that, and of posting all those boob punch vids?. None what so ever. So I will only post one vid. To make no point whatsoever but that some females also may ask to be punched in private parts for various reasons, though its not considered as funny as a guy getting hit in the nuts or as socially acceptable. On that part you are off course absolutely correct.

a reply to: undo
Ya maybe in sparta at the peek of warring states. But no, most women children were not killed off like you say. It depended on the state, and when you say ancient Greece you got to remember that there was not Greece as a country till modern days, even when the Romans came and took over they were basically all different city states and all had different and peculiar rituals even to the same gods. And also homosexuality was encouraged because it helped cement the war machines of the times, in sparta in fact most males spend a good part of there whole life's among other men and that was encouraged for the same facts.

Though in ancient Greece there was not taboo about gay people and was more then not encouraged as like you said the whole concept of beauty was not placed upon the female gender, but more the male gender and over time it came to embody that in certain aspects of there lifes and respective cultures, but there were major differences among all the city states. So much so and I even remember saying this on some other posts years ago. That in Sparta by the time the Romans came there, the men of Sparta were all better looking then the women, do simply because of the cultural differences and that to is recorded somewhere, even read a book once by a famous roman philosopher I think who commented on it when he visited Sparta, and among other thing.

So ya! It was patriarchy more so then we have today, even to the point were they considered the male form much more beautiful then the female form. But that to like I said depended on the city state you went to, Sparta and Athens had just about in common as they did apart, and there were what a bunch of other city states with basically there own cultures and had there own way of doing things. So no you cant say Greeks back then all did that. Simply because there were no such things as Greeks back then and each adhered to different things. Its also why they got conquered by the romans, because they never had as much in-common with each other to ever band together as one whole united people.

That came much much much latter.

And in India it was part of survival for the family. The male would go work the family fields, or family business or whatever, and it was all physical things, and work and do much more and so was more desirable as a whole purely for the survival of the family as a whole, so ya a boy was looked on more favorably for the family then a girl was, both for purely survival reasons but also yes your right because of cultural reasons, which grew out of survival reasons in mostly harsh times and environments, so it was all a big merry go around.

Females would only have value on what they brought in by marriage, which was not that different for many places in Europe or anywhere at the times. So it was purely based on social standing and social survivability. And also it had to do a lot because of there populations as well. Today, things have not changed a whole lot, but things are not the same either.

a reply to: undo

No its true, it was just not as documented. Even today even in so called patriarchies like the middle east more often then not a grandmother is the head of the family and keeps hands on the purse then a grandad does. Even in Greece it was the same, and they to went through all kids of periods. So really when you say during one year so and so females were aborted, well if you go to another year or a generation back or even in the past, you will see a different number.

And from what I remember of Greece today when I went there fitting my cousins who are not Greek but some are by marriage ties. Well women are far from powerless in the culture today, in fact its not much different then here only they didn't have as many issues, it was much mellow place, in fact the only problems I seen in my time there was the fact that old dudes kept cat calling them when they were out, and by old I mean 60 somethings looking at them and commenting when they walked by in short skirts. And when night hit you would see at least one girl or woman walk around with at least a few guys around here in all the clubs they had around there. But man was it hot over there, I see why they mostly hang out or do things at night or when the suns begins to set, including shopping.

Though now it may be different what with all the political hoopla and machinations and all that has happened in recent years. So really it depends on a bunch of factors.

a reply to: galadofwarthethird

the dowry tradition was the problem in india.

a reply to: hounddoghowlie
Its just stupid story.

If it says anything it says that woman are more easily open to be sold a shoddy product ie that case being the apple from the magic tree of the knowledge of good and evil, which got them kicked out of a pretty swell and set up place ie the garden of eden. Simply based on the opinions of somebody in this case a snake which shows up suddenly out of nowhere and begins promising all these things.

Though as to why such a loving and forgiving god would practically place such a thing directly in there midst is beyond me. Its like telling a fat kid not to eat the pie just fresh out of the oven while mommy and daddy goes to the store. What do you think is going to happen?

It may be the origin of the whole grass is greener on the other side thing. And the snake could be the worlds first snake oil salesman, or the first propagandist. Well at least according to that story. But you know what? Anybody can make any story they so wish. Though I personally would have made a story of Adam and Eve and the heavenly pie of the knowledge of good and evil and all such stupid things, which there not supposed to eat from.

Least they be condemned for all of eternity. Muhhaaaa

The title would be " the pie of doooom....and gloom" And yes it would be an apple pie, not Cherie pie, because for some reason series do not have the same effect of evilness in peoples minds that apples do. Go figure eh.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

Is that the one edited by the state of Texas which tells us that Jesus signed the Declaration of Independence, thus founding the greatest country on Earth, the land that God loves most?

a reply to: galadofwarthethird

well if adam knew but did it anyway, and eve was deceived and did it anyway, i don't think that says women are easily deceived. rather, it suggests the story might have a few gaps in the info. afterall, if it says eve was fully aware and did it anyway, and so was adam, then how could eve be the only one deceived. they both knew, according to hounddoghowl's post, referencing the verses.

where's the deception? it's a logic puzzle.

originally posted by: galadofwarthethird
a reply to: Bluesma

Listen here you. I call shinanigans on your mice society understanding abilities.

I don't feel like responding to your rude and ignorant provocations. It is obvious you did not understand that study and are talking out of your ass.
To people who spent many years of university education and research, whose work is highly respected in the scientific community, what do they care about obese gamers in basements all over america proclaiming their work is meaningless?
It's really not worth paying attention to.

originally posted by: undo
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

well read what paul said, and you'll understand my post. he said eve was deceived, but adam was not and did it anyway. not my fault.

we'll address what paul said or didn't say later, i'm addressing what you said.

here are your words.

he said that eve was fooled, whereas adam was not and still did the deed. so the person who was tricked was not allowed to speak. the interesting part was that the trickery was obviously due to adam having more information than eve. had she been privy to the info, we have no idea if she would've succumbed or not - all we know is that eve, according to paul was innocent (since you can't blame a person who was deceived but rather the deceiver... i mean, logically, anyway), yet he was more than willing to assume her lack of knowledge was reason enough to keep her quiet in church. well doh, if you're worried her lack of knowledge will cause trouble in her teaching in church, just tell her the truth for flip sake. lol

so the way i understand your words, is that she didn't know any better, because she didn't have the info. well i have shown that to be a falsehood, and in fact she believed it so much, that she was even saying they couldn't touch it. she knew everything adam did, and she even told the serpent that.lol. there's no way she could have claimed ignorance of what they were told if she told the serpent that.
your argument that we don't know what the outcome would have been if she had the information is wrong

now this about paul saying that she was innocent, i would like chapter and verse please. here are only places where i can remember paul speaking directly about eve and no where does he say she was innocent. in fact he says the opposite.

2 Corinthians 11 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
3 But I am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ.

1 Timothy 2:13-14New American Standard Bible (NASB)
13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

now if you have a chapter and verse that says differently about it please post it.

i will say this paul was a wierd egg, some times he seems to oppress women, other times he seems to embraces them and praise them.

a reply to: centhwevir1979

please don't be such a joke. nobody yanked the hater chain.

originally posted by: grainofsand
Lots of bitching n whinging in this thread, thanks for the entertainment.

As a happy single male I have chuckled at all the blokes blaming women for their problems. Some women of course, as some men are pricks, but an entire gender? Get a life lads, farm the land you've got and stop looking to blame women for your victim mentality.



...or actually, please do carry on whinging and 'going your own way' if you wish, less competition for the rest of us if you're hiding away at home complaining on the internet lol.

Attention A.T.S Abusive slanderous language on here is not tolerable and will be frowned apon others of buisness statue.

originally posted by: Bluesma

originally posted by: galadofwarthethird

a reply to: Bluesma



Listen here you. I call shinanigans on your mice society understanding abilities.

I don't feel like responding to your rude and ignorant provocations. It is obvious you did not understand that study and are talking out of your ass.

To people who spent many years of university education and research, whose work is highly respected in the scientific community, what do they care about obese gamers in basements all over america proclaiming their work is meaningless?

It's really not worth paying attention to.

Getting out of hand, check it.