[PrometheanFlame]

@Ralf

I’ve found your recent post here most insightful. I agree with much of what you said. For a father to force his daughter to marry someone she doesn’t love or desire to marry is abusive and cowardly. If he is noble, he will do everything in his power to assist his daughter in finding the most suitable mate. It starts with being the type of man and father his daughter will genuinely love and respect. If his daughter does not respect him, she will not value his council, advice or seek him for approval. She will neither seek his permission or blessing to marry. The quickest way to lose respect is abuse. If the father is noble and worthy of the respect he desires from his daughter, she will give it naturally and willingly. She will marry a man she knows her father will be proud of and happy for her about, because she loves and respects him in return.

Any man who feels the need to abuse any woman for any reason is simply a coward, and an absolute failure of a man. If a father abuses his daughter and loses her respect, it’s his own fault she doesn’t care what he thinks anymore. At that point, once love and respect has been lost, there is little that can be done in most cases, unfortunately. The more the father tries to control and abuse her, the more she will resist and fight back. She’ll do as she pleases, perhaps even acting out and doing things she knows will make him angry just to spite him, just for vengeance against him, to punish the father. This can be an especially dangerous path for a young woman to embark upon, leading to self-destruction and hurting of innocent parties. Here we see how vital it is for the father to be noble and loving toward his daughter.

You pointed out one hypothesis about why women choose men like their fathers, even if they were abusive. It makes sense to me, but I have another hypothesis as well. They seek abusive partnerships in an unconscious attempt to resolve the conflict and win the love they never received from the father via the partner. If she can get her abusive partner to stop abusing her and finally love her, she can heal her relationship with her father internally. It’s a roundabout way of trying to heal the traumatic relationship with the father.

This is why counseling, self-reflection, journaling and meditation are so important. When we engage with our inner world and allow it to speak to/through us, we can uncover unconscious blockages to our own success and happiness in life. How many women in such relationships are consciously aware of why they continue to put themselves in such abusive, tragic scenarios? Anyone living on repeat with a similar pattern has unconscious, unresolved trauma of some kind. The good news is that healing is possible when we become willing to change and discover more about ourselves, no matter how painful or dark it is.

[Anonymous]

@Hunter

You tend to make some good points, but there are some flaws within your reasoning.

The problem with limiting a woman’s choice of a partner to ones that her father approves of is that this assumes the father to be both a good man, and a good judge of other men’s character.

If he is lacking in one or both of these departments – if he can’t tell the good from the bad, or if he is an abusive father, then his choice of a woman’s potential partners will necessarily be a bad one.

He will not select a quality man if he can’t judge quality, and he will certainly not pick a man who opposes the way in which the father abuse(d/s) his daughter.

Here we can see a problem with authoritarian/centralized systems of decision-making – that they may lead to stagnation, as in this case a bad father will always choose bad husbands, and this cycle will continue forever…

(On the other hand, a more libertarian/decentralized decision-making process may result in destruction of the currently (at least somewhat) functioning social order, which may be good or bad, depending on the merits of the current order…)

Moving on to another one of your claims – it is usually not required for a father to have been “good” to his daughter – the (presumably) biological instinct of seeking a man akin to her father as the ideal mate is common among all women, and the same is true for men and their mothers.

The hypothesis as to why this is, is that their parents were successful at reproduction by definition, and thus the children seek to reproduce this success by emulating the pattern set by their parents (even when the relationship between the two was objectively unhealthy).

And this is why some women tend to have fantasies about being abused by their partners as you mentioned – that they have an instinct to replicate the relationship their abusive fathers had with their mothers – for which, if I remember rightly, a correlation was found in a study analyzing the family environment of women who read “50 Shades or Grey”,

Also, in general, people don’t have any desire to have sex with their parents – that’s Freudian nonsense.

[Hunter]

It seems to be the way of the world that women desire being completely enslaved by one man despite what they might ‘say’… just read any popular romance written for women. By the way, this ‘enslavement’ used to be called MARRIAGE. Women lust after the most ‘superior’ slaver she can find. This is why women love fantasy rape and ‘Alpha’ men. However, almost any man becomes ‘Alpha’ when the law states that a woman must be ‘owned’ by a man. For a woman, submitting to her man is the ultimate feminine pleasure. The problem is, that women are not good at choosing good men. Men are good at choosing good men. Thus, the father, or if he is not around, the next closest and eldest male relative, should select a number of men (ideally from among his friends) and present them to the single female. She is given choice, but curated choice. Feminists are poison to their own true desires. The feminist despises the White man firstly, since he was so kind to her (women’s ‘liberation’ and ‘equality’) that he became cruel. For a female, her ideal man is her father (if he was ‘good’ for her) thus they seek a substitute father-figure that they can also sexually submit to without the social upheaval that seducing her real father would bring. White men are cruel to White feminists since we do not oppress them as they desire to be oppressed. Put positively, this ‘oppression’ is guardianship, protection, fulfillment. Much has been said against private slavery, but in the end, it is more humane than the collective slavery of (neo)communism. For the White subspecies to survive and eugenically thrive, we must seize the means of reproduction.

[Anonymous]

By employing the phrase “female sexual enslavement,” I’m employing communist / feminist terminology. Allow me to clarify. Slavery is compelling people to become disempowered. It’s not that “females should lack agency” and that “males should not lack agency.” Rather, it’s that “female agency should be exercised in a manner that voluntarily disempowers females as a function of their own inherent Sklavenmoral”, and that “male agency should be exercised in a manner that prevents males from disempowering themselves, so as to promote Herrenmoral among males.

Hence, “agency” is not a proxy for “the desire to maximize power”, inasmuch as agency can be expressed in a way that does not “repudiate agency,” but which, rather, “subordinates the influence of female agents to male agents.” Hence, enslavement isn’t a proxy for “denying people agency.” Females and males should have agency, but their agency should conduce, both in males and in females, to the sexual disempowerment of females and the sexual empowerment of males. If their agency is exercised to the detriment of society, then it’s exercised in a way that violates patriarchy, and installs feminism in its place, to the detriment of everyone.

As such, women shouldn’t be “sexual slaves” of males. Rather, women should use their agency to promote rightism, and so should males. Ergo, leftists should be oppressed by male and female rightists, but rightists should never be oppressed by male or female leftists. As long as females and males can agree that women should be sexually disempowered, while males should not, then females can agree to their own supersedure by male agents without that arrangement being one of “female sexual enslavement.”

If women value being the property of males, and males also value that outcome, then their agency as males and females should bring about that outcome, which is for the betterment of society. If the opposite happens as a result of female and male agency, then the left oppresses the right, and everything turns to sewage.

Hence, whereas females should be able to exert no sexual empowerment, that should be their choice, as a function of their own agency. If their agency produces a different outcome, then they should be oppressed, and denied agency, not because they’re female, but because they’re leftists. By corollary, whereas males should not be able to allow females the remit of sexual empowerment, that should be their choice, as a function of their own agency. If their agency produces a different outcome, then they should be oppressed, and denied agency, not because they’re male, but because they’re leftists.

In other words, it’s not females who should be denied agency, but leftists, most of whom are necessarily female. So most females and some males should be denied agency, so that females can be sexually disempowered, and so that males should be sexually empowered, whereas most males and some females should be unable to be denied agency, so that females can be sexually disempowered, and so that males should be sexually empowered.

Sexual slavery has nothing to do with it; oppressing the right people has everything to do with it, and that doesn’t mean oppressing all women, nor rejecting the oppression of every individual man. But that’s not to say that “slavery has nothing to do with it.” Leftists should be enslaved by rightists; rightists should not be enslaved by leftists. Female sexual subordination is not the same thing as “female sexual slavery.”

That’s why we shouldn’t employ imposturous leftist (communist / feminist) premises and viewpoints, which promulgate notions like “female sexual enslavement.” Slavery isn’t bad, but female sexual enslavement is, but female sexual subordination isn’t. I don’t want a female sex slave; I just want females to entirely lack sexual agency, and to love it that way, as they should, and as men should. There’s a big difference.

[Anonymous]

I pity anyone, male or female, who values female choice, and who excoriates female sexual slavery. Female sexual slavery is known in the literature as “mate guarding,” which is synonymous with pair bonding, paternity certainty, effective monogamy, patriarchy, and coverture. Female choice replaces monogamy with polygyny, which is evil. Coverture (female sexual slavery) is the only evolved system that ensures that females can’t wreck society with their evil unconstrained choices. Patriarchy protects society from the stupid and evil choices that women make when they can achieve agency. Only feminists dislike that.

My elderly friend Susan wholly agrees with complete female sexual slavery because she knows that patriarchy is all that can protect monogamy from female choice. She wants females to be locked in bowers so that they can’t ruin society by escaping from female sexual slavery. She’s a smart woman, and doesn’t presume, inadvisedly, that there’s anything wrong with the sexual enslavement of females. She doesn’t agree with the preposterous supposition that “marital rape” is a bad thing. Women’s mating choices are meant to be made by their male family members.

Female sexual agency destroys everything, and has led to the rapid eradication of the European race. If it’s not female sexual slavery, then it’s not good. Patriarchal Susan and male choice for the win; feminist Mary and female choice for the loss. Men earn the ambit to sexually enslave a female when they become men. Only a simpleton or a miscreant would deny them their birthright. If, as a female, you’re not a willing sex slave to a male mate guard, or if you oppose female sexual slavery, then you’re part of the problem. Males are meant to wholly own females. Females are just property. Susan knows that. She doesn’t have a problem with it. Only evil women and evil men do. When hard times return, females will revert to the status of property. Hard times for the win.

[Ida]

You could be right and there could be a few infiltrators whose main goal is to scare women here away or otherwise stir up trouble.

[Ida]

I’ve read a couple profiles of men talking like that but the loud-mouthed hater type always gets the most attention.

I think allowing men to seek women when the men are married or not yet legally divorced is a bad sign. It could also potentially cheat a single man out of a potential mate.

But, as with anything, you have to move around the trouble and get back on your path. Nothing is perfect. I am sure that the Christians here would love to see the atheists, agnostics, and pagans go away, so….

[AeonKnight]

@MaryBloody

@Ralf did no such thing (and was even overly-apologetic), he only explained how extremely short profiles give the impression that the person is not really invested in the endeavour; so given the blatant misapprehension, I’m gonna take a wild guess that your other stated experiences are also exaggerated, if not outright dishonest, as is often the case with anecdotes.

[Dude]

As an aside question here – my understanding is that women tend to be higher in trait agreeableness, which is in part a desire to maintain a homeostasis in the social environment. To keep the waters smooth as it were. My observation is that people high in trait agreeableness tend to take a point of disagreement more personally. Perhaps the term ‘personally’ isn’t quite the right characterization. However, I have seen points of disagreement be interpreted as an argument by individuals who seem higher in trait agreeableness…

I generally don’t have an issue diving into most subjects, even ones about or relating to myself. I’m curious though, if women are higher in trait agreeableness, and you @MaryBloody are a women, are you taking this conversation very personally? To that effect, I don’t read Ralf’s comments the same way you seem to be, @MaryBloody. How do you perceive them?

I can’t comment as to what people privately message, only to what has been publicly posted here.

Also – Happy New Years to everyone!

• This reply was modified 1 year, 7 months ago by Dude.

[Anonymous]

Ralf insinuated that I’m not a valuable girl because I don’t intend to expose my life online. another guy in private said that I’m a pretty girl and that’s why I must be someone problematic to be single. Another commented privately that I’m fickle because I didn’t respond in the middle of the New Year. and so on. I have the impression that they try very hard to ensure that no women are left here.

[JSmurf]

I don’t think her profile looks low effort or anything. She sounds like she would make a great wife/mother. I like to keep it simple on the online profiles. If people want to know more they can message. No need to write your life story in the bio.

[Anonymous]

To be clear, my post above was not intended to be a direct criticism of Mary, but rather a general analysis of behaviors within our society and ways to address them.

@MaryBloody

However, I did want to address you directly as well, since you have asked the question on why traditional family men are so hard to find these days.

At this point I would like to echo the point raised by Roerick, as well as add to it to some extent.

Before I begin however, I want to make it clear that my intention is to assist you by giving you a new perspective on this matter, not to demean you or otherwise put you down.

That said, let’s begin:

Looking at your profile, it consists of a grand total of 4 sentences describing yourself, your situation and your interests.

This gives a hypothetical high quality man almost no information on whether you are of good character, a good future mother, and most importantly what you have to offer in exchange for his love, attention, resources and commitment – this being just a subsection of the information he needs to make the decision to spend his time approaching you.

Although you are inadvertently giving some additional information to him through this, as the inference from your behavior of providing such little information could lead such a man to conclude that you are either not particularly interested in finding a man, due to what appears to be your low effort in ‘advertising yourself’ to one, or that the effort you put into your relationships matches this low effort in your profile – thus potentially leading him to conclude that messaging you is not worth the time spent.

In my own personal experience for example, I found one of these two options to generally hold true, which is why I myself don’t tend to message women with short profiles.

Going back to your situation – I know it can be tough to receive criticism like this, but I want to reiterate that my intent here is to provide a helpful perspective, and not to degrade you in any way.

There is a reason why I emphasized self-improvement so much in my previous post – which is that a lot of us (myself included) are in this sort of situation where we are not aware of something, and we don’t even know what we might be missing – and there is no shame in that as it is simply the fact of the matter.

But if we then blame others for our shortcomings, we can never succeed in our objectives as we’re looking in entirely the wrong place, and at this point we are to blame for the situation we find ourselves in.

In any case however, I wish you the best of luck in the future.

And of course – just as before – if any of you think I am incorrect in what I stated, feel free to point it out.

[Anonymous]

PrometheanFlame and AeonKnight gave an outstanding analysis of the situation – well done, gentlemen.

Having said that, I would like to add one point – that being that I want to caution against the act of pointing blame to the other sex and lamenting about the current state of society.
Instead I would encourage self-work and improvement in this regard.

While it is certainly true that we are in dire straits in this day and age, I do think that focusing on the problem, rather than potential solutions is less than helpful, as it will only serve to demoralize people further.

At this point I would like to remind everyone that every word that you say, and every action you perform will make the society around you either a tiny bit better or a tiny bit worse.

For example, if you get frustrated and let it out on someone else, or on the flip side, if you offer help to someone in need of it, your act will have an impact on this person’s perception on what his/her own behavior should be in such a situation.

And I would argue that merely lamenting about the quality of X doesn’t add anything positive here, thus falling into the category of the first example.

There is a reason why the old saying goes:
“Treat others how you would like to be treated.”
and not
“Treat others how you are treated by them.”

Because it is always easier to focus exclusively on yourself and ignore the people around you, and if this is what people choose to do, we end up with the race to the bottom we currently find ourselves in.

And this is a vicious cycle since the worse society becomes, and consequently the worse people are treated by others as a whole, the more people are corrupted by it and abandon their formerly better character and associated good behavior.

Which is why society needs people who are willing to make the sacrifice and be a positive influence whenever possible, regardless of what everyone else is doing.

Of course that doesn’t mean to be polite to everyone, including those who consistently drag our people down – but rather to distinguish between redeemable genuine error and irredeemable malice (or grave errors), and respond accordingly.

As for how what an individual can do – I think continuous self-work is most important, as the way we view the world and our approach to the challenges we’re facing is the only thing in life we have direct control over – everything else can be taken away from us through force or fraud.
We cannot control other members of society, but we can control ourselves – and whether we meet someone else who matches us is up to lady luck.

Having had the misfortune of dealing with both men and women who are completely stuck in their own heads, and refuse to consider the thoughts and desires of other people, I think that looking to improve yourself first, followed by encouraging others to do the same is a good approach – as there are many people around on both sides who think of themselves as high quality, when in fact they’re anything but that.

I myself try to be helpful to those who appear to be good people, to praise people when they have done something good to remind them that their efforts are not in vain, and to be respectful and considerate with those I interact with, as well as solicit feedback in order to improve my understanding of other people’s perspectives.

Naturally, I come across a lot of people who do not appreciate my efforts, or who wish to take advantage of my kindness, but that doesn’t change the fact that I believe raising societal standards to be the right and honorable thing to do.

Though I invite anyone who disagrees with me on this to point out any flaws in my reasoning.

[Ted]

I see very little support for degeneracy in the White Date forums.

[A_Spartan_Speaks]

Honestly, I’ve never had trouble getting high quality women, and most of my relationships and experiences with women have been very positive. So, I’ve never had any sympathy for, nor been able to relate to the incel/mgtow losers.

[PrometheanFlame]

MaryBloody,

Are you suggesting a female version of mgtow will emerge? It’s already happened with feminism: they have been convinced that they don’t need a man, are independent and can do everything a man can do. They’ve traded men for the illusion of independence and a surrogate father/husband via the state and employer. Of course we all know this is a lie, and even the staunchest of feminists aren’t truly convinced of their rhetoric. Deep down, below the programming they know it’s false and so spend all their time desperately trying to convince themselves, creating echo chambers to cheer women on while drowning out criticism with megaphones and numbers. It’s mob mentality. I’m not sure how things are in Argentina, but am curious if it’s comparable to conditions in the West.

Concerning return to tradition: once it’s lost and connection has been severed culturally, it’s very difficult to return at a societal level for various reasons. What I’m seeing start to happen is men reclaiming their masculinity and embracing the warrior within them. In it’s healthiest manifestation, this connects men back to their instincts and causes them to do great things, and become the type of man other men want to be: heroic in the classical sense. The unhealthy expression you’ve experienced with dominator-type men is a misfiring of instincts and cultural decay that supports and feeds such misfiring. Again, healthy relating isn’t about control: who is the master or who is the slave. At it’s foundation, a healthy relationship connected to instinct between a man in a woman is love, pure and simple; and love is something that cannot be forced or demanded, it must be given freely and shared freely as one chooses with whom they choose. Men desiring to dominate women as he would a slave is a frustrated and misaligned response to the Adlerian power principle, which has also been the driving force of feminism: power. Power has nothing to do with love, they are two separate principles.

I was actually raised in Catholic schools (not actually Catholic myself, however) and personally know several large, white families. One of them has 9 children! In all cases, the father is a doctor (one a neurosurgeon). So does that mean Catholicism is the answer for our race to thrive? I don’t think so, but it can provide the framework and social support structure for those who desire large, Catholic families. Then again, white folk were fruitful and thriving long before the Catholic church showed up.

It’s difficult for me to agree that the men who criticize modern women are as modern as they are because: would a “modern” man ever criticize a woman? No, because modern men have been trained and conditioned to never criticize or question women. The ones doing the criticizing are outliers and rebels, they are not the norm, and stand in direct opposition of modernity’s zeitgeist.

Why do you feel you must choose between abusive Islamist, abusive westerner or being alone?

[JSmurf]

Hi Mary,

Could you be more specific about your experience here? Have you gone on a date with a man? How many have chatted with?

I’m sure all of what you say is true. A quick scroll of the men’s profiles confirms.

There is this meme that goes ‘You are very warm in person but your ideas are harsh and severe’. It’s to do with meeting your internet mutuals irl. I would bet very many of the men you’re talking about are pretty normal irl and just want a woman to settle down with.

[Anonymous]

Mary,

Here’s my perspective: I believe White men in these times should not be seeking to make women into housewives chained to the stove, nor should they have to endure women who believe in some sort of matriarchy or ridiculous modern feminism ideology. The best way forward for us is to form strong partnerships built on mutual understanding, family values, respect for each other, and a love for our people, our culture, our history, and other things like shared faith and what have you when applicable. That’s the only way we can overcome what is being done to our peoples and nations by our enemies and the only way we can build communities in our nations and raise the future generations who will have to carry on this fight. If we don’t come to this conclusion and start changing the way we think about this struggle, our people will fade away.

Just my perspective, I’d love to hear what you think.

[AeonKnight]

@PrometheanFlame

Everything PrometheanFlame has stated is correct, I’ll just add to it:

MGTOW as a movement IS a psy-op and anti-natalist death cult, which at best aims at passport-bro-ing miscegenation in Asia/South America, but marriage today is by every definition an “unconscionable contract”, legally speaking (look it up). You are signing an agreement which the other party is incentivised to break, at zero risk and 100% guarantee of reward.

Even on sites for “awakened” people like this one, men are expected to take all of the risk, initiate all conversations and pay for the memberships, which is how it should be, but women miss it entirely.

While I do agree that men are at fault, it is because only men have agency in society, while women, as much as they might knee-jerkingly disagree, actively reject it. Society is now at a catch-22 situation, while women try to civilisationally test their men by stating the opposite of what they want (patriarchy, authority, etc.) and men not having the legal power to enforce it. They demand something that is impossible for men to provide without forcefully taking back power — and that’s correct on the part of women, but men are still confused because they are trained from birth by those exact same women to be feminised: THAT is the test they unconsciously want men to fail, in order to see who’s a poser and who’s actually masculine. It’s simply a selective/biological imperative for women. They say they’ll not submit to inferior men, and men misunderstand that as “oh, but the system doesn’t ALLOW me to take back power!” — that is the test that men fail. The rub, though, is that no individual man can be more alpha than the state, so marriage stability is still in the hands of the woman, and sooner or later they all smell weakness and blood in the water from their husbands: hypergamy simply doesn’t care, which again is how it should be, but people don’t take the time to understand the why and how.

Islam doesn’t work because while it does provide marriage security for men, it’s highly dysgenic since their solution is to remove hypergamy and female selection entirely, which is half of the driving force for evolution. It is good for men as indivduals, but not for their racial organism. Either gender fulfilling 100% of their reproductive strategies without compromise with the other leads to collapse eventually.

The TradCath meme is also not a solution, since is just goes back to a state where women are still de facto in charge. It asks men to wilfully ignore evolutionary biology/psychology and fall into a provider-only frame with SOME authority, *wife permitting. If you want a traditional man without being a traditional woman, you’ll only ever find men who are willing to fill that pathetic role, i.e.: men you’ll never be attracted to and can never respect. I see the word “slavery” being thrown around a lot, as if chaining your wife to the kitchen or beating her with impunity was ever the norm in European history apart from what our enemies want to portray — men are also “slaves” to their family, since they are bound to provide for and protect everyone and be expendable for the sake of everyone else’s lives, but before ZOG it at least came with the authority which is necessary for men to even be able to fulfill that role in the first place. It is physicaly impossible to be responsible for something over which you have no authority: having all of the responsibility and none of the authority, which is overwhelmingly the case for men globally today, is the actual slavery.

[Anonymous]

Hello MaryBloody! You only filled the “Base” section of your profile. I am sure that the men on this site – myself included – would be most interested in reading what you have to say in the “Looking for,” “Lifestyle,” and “Physical” sections.

[Anonymous]

I’ve came across a handful of coomers when I was on WASP date three years ago, ghosted twice for setting my boundary of no sex before marriage. What can I say? We are in Satan’s little season. Weimar social conditions create Weimar people. Just because a guy subscribes to a certain ideology or says certain things you like, doesn’t mean he isn’t weak willed and undisciplined to plagues of the modern world. This is why it’s so important for men and women of our race to get off the Internet and be held accountable by real life people for the choices they make. Many are scared of being discovered so they remain atomized from the rest of us as they spiral down deeper into their degeneracy/coping habits.

[Anonymous]

PrometheanFlame,
You said some good points. However, these men who criticize modern women are as modern as they are. I don’t think the reaction to feminism is reverse feminism for men, but a return to tradition.

There are real examples today, see large Catholic families (which exist in some Western country yet). none of them are mgtows or part of any of these urban tribes and vandalized worldly philosophies… otherwise, if this is not the case, good white women will prefer to be alone, and the race ends. As I said, between an Islamist and someone Western who thinks like Islamists, it is better not to be subject to either.

[Anonymous]

Genuinely sorry to hear about that.I truly am.Slighly ashamed as well that women experience it in this community.

I think though that traditional men as you said are dying out and are going to make the way for something else.Such a path requires constant self-discipline now to maintain and even more if you are starting from nowhere

[PrometheanFlame]

Mary,

While there is degeneracy within the “mgtow” community as a whole, let’s not forget that a group is only as good as it’s members. Today, any man can claim to be mgtow and create mgtow content. There are no set standards for joining; therefore, degenerates of every variety can claim to be mgtow and it negatively reflects the group as a whole. Then again, mgtow isn’t really a group, but a philosophy. Let’s also not forget that there are our enemies who infiltrate popular groups such as mgtow in order to spread their propaganda, push their agenda and lead men back to the plantation.

That being said, mgtow can mean many things depending on who you ask. Many men are mgtow because they feel they have no other choice than to be alone. Others are frustrated with the absolute state of women, are tired of the unbridled hypergamy and being seen as a tradable commodity, opening up to a woman intimately and establishing an emotional bond only to be monkeybranched, divorced only to lose everything they’ve worked their entire life for (including access to their children) etc.. For a man to focus on himself, pursue what makes him happy and develop mastery in the various areas of his life is the best advice I could give a man today. If that’s “mgtow” then so be it. Of course you have a lot of bitter, angry and resentful men in the mgtow community as a whole, but can you blame them? Personally, I advocate healthy relating between men and women and so avoid the blame game because we can all do better. Prostitutes and porn are not the answer, either.

Of course the outrage from women is to be expected as men wise up to the ruse and go their own way. This happens when entitled women who believe that the primary focus of a man’s life should be them. The good, self-respecting men get tired of their selfish behavior and worldview and decide to simply focus on themselves and work towards self-mastery, which are things a man should be doing anyway. Let’s not forget that the whole reason for a man to acquire resources, become financially successful and provide a stable environment is for the future generation of his children and grandchildren. Women make the mistake of thinking it’s all for them when it’s not. This is part of the problem.

Men are becoming more and more fed up with modern women and dating, and the risks associated with marriage for a man are astronomical. It’s not the same for women. They take little risk while enjoying all the benefits a man can provide. Then again, modern women have been convinced by malicious propaganda that “I don’t need a man” and end up alone because of their own choices. If you’re here on this site already, then you’re probably already at least somewhat aware of this.

I’m also aware of the degeneracy and hatred of women in the ns/white groups as well. This is to be resisted and avoided. Seeking a woman who will “submit to my authority” and treating her as a slave (such as we see in Islamic countries) is a violent reaction to losing control and is not the answer. Relationships should not be about who is “in control” of the other, as this is unhealthy and dysfunctional relating. The goal should be healthy relating connected to instinct, not determining who is the master and who is the slave.

Women are wired at an instinctual level to anticipate a man who is strong, self-determined, ambitious, aggressive (in a healthy manner) and able to make critical decisions as a leader. Being a leader is not the same as being a slave-master, and I am sorry if you have been exposed to or had experiences with such men. I can affirm that they do unfortunately exist in the white groups and are more common than one might think, so your caution in dating from these pools is justified. Just because someone is part of a white nationalist or traditionalist movement doesn’t make them a good person. Again, I know from direct involvement in some of these groups which I no longer associate with due to some of the reasons you’ve mentioned. We have to be discerning, intuitive and apply critical thinking wherever we go in order to safeguard ourselves from harmful influences, ideas, people, etc..

All that being said, I wish you luck in your endeavor to find a suitable partner.

[Anonymous]

Kyle, I think no decent woman will want to have a relationship with a porn consumer. Most of the time they descend into the worst bestialities of this addiction, that is, pedophilia, zoophilia, homosexuality (or lesbianism), etc., etc. I also noticed that once exposed to this it seems that they hardly return to being normal, secure, confident, masculine, gentleman, chaste men, etc.

about mgtow, some of them are in favor of cheating on women, going out with prostitutes, they are promiscuous, etc. they don’t even see women as human beings and the same race anymore. but a separate and antagonistic class that must be fought. I was surprised to see that these ideas arrived in media that speak in favor of children or marriage.

so its one of many reasons for the lack of good women in this environment. they will not carry the genes of any bad man in their belly for nothing. So I somewhat understand the explosion of childfree white women.

[Anonymous]

I’ve noticed this as well. IMO it seems to be limited to the Anglo-sphere, most nationalists I know from places like Spain, Germany, Latin America, etc are more on the level. White Americans have been hit the hardest with Jewish brainwashing and societal poisoning, so it’ll likely take a few generations for it to wear off. Luckily I had a more European-style upbringing in Miami, so defending polygamy or being a MGTOW loser was never a thing for me, I always wanted a stay-at-home wife and kids since I was like 5 lol.

To speak in their defense though, and I’m not saying those men are in the right, but American women are largely insane and are essentially raised from birth to view men as the enemy, thus some men turn to MGTOW, porn, etc as a response towards female hostility. I’m not saying it’s justified, but that’s the way it plays out from my perspective. I’ve mostly given up on dating women from the US unless they’re a nationalist or had a similar cultural upbringing as I did.

[Adam]

I see the exact same thing of women, pix with non whites, onlyfans, thirst trapping – women are far more prone to latch onto liberal democratic theorems.

I have come close to marriage and kids more times than I am comfortable admitting to.
As I get older I see this as less and less a possibility, I can see I am a minority out in public, in my way of thinking, it is incredibly difficult to stay white pilled.

Both men and women need to change into better versions of ourselves or we will become extinct, there will not be white reservations like the american indians.

[Anonymous]

I have noticed, reading comments, a lot of degeneracy on the part of men, not just on this site but any so-called white nationalist environment; practicing pornography, gender conflict (mgtow), defending polygamy… I feel that these men are as involved in what they claim to be fighting, as any modernist and liberal person. and then I’m afraid to start any relationship.

The risk of being betrayed, of being attacked, of being treated like a sex slave, is practically the same here as having a relationship with an Islamic man from Arabia or a black man from Ethiopia.

I feel that I born in the wrong time, lol… i would like to find a traditional and oldschool man, who really like woman, marriage, family life. Why appear so rare today? My grandfather were one of these men.

[Author]

Posts