Search Results for 'chivalry'

[Prefer Peace to PieceParticipant]

gui wrote:

Chivalry now just makes me feel sick because I can’t help but to see it as a blatant worshipping of women.

gui-

Good point. Chivalry went out the window once I became MGTOW. I try to treat everyone with kindness and respect, but like you, I can’t worship women anymore. I tend to just walk away from them as much as possible.

[guiParticipant]

I agree. Chivalry now just makes me feel sick because I can’t help but to see it as a blatant worshipping of women.

I am nice and polite to people because it part of my personal honor code. My rule is to ask myself the following question: Would I help this person in this situation if it was a fellow man? If the answer is yes then I will help. If not they can be damned for all I care.

I just can’t keep treating women the same special way I did when I was blue pill. Now I give them the equality asked so much for.

It unfortunately to see that my friends keep opening the doors for women and keep preaching about chivalry. Yet the same friends will still not being able to understand why they never get even a little gratitude and why they ladies prefer the chads that do none of those things.

I am not a PUA to preach that you should imitate the chads but seeing that women don’t value chivalry I won’t give them special treatments they don’t deserve or appreciate.

Pity and contempt are siblings. You only feel pity for those you consider weak.

Ok, so I wanted to make a post to explain my belief and definition of patriarchy and gynocentrism. If you have any disagreements or anything you would like to add, please give a reply because I hope this post could be used to lay the groundwork for any future useages of the term.

Now the word patriarchy is a simple one, so I’ll start off with that. It’s a word that is thrown around quite often.

The dictionary definition of a patriarchy is literally “a system of society or government in which the father or eldest male is head of the family and descent is traced through the male line.”

Now, feminists don’t use it in this way, feminists use patriarchy as “a system that benefits men at the expense of women”.

Feminists say we live in a patriarchy but there are many flaws to this argument:
1.) There are numerous areas where women have advantages over men, like gender quotas, selective hiring, more female scholarships, and the gender discrimination of boys in school.
2.) A woman isn’t obligated to take her husband’s name, in fact, she can even choose whether her child takes her name or takes her husband’s name
3.)Women aren’t obligated to marry or produce kids
4.) The discrimination against men in the family or divorce court systems

Taking these four factors, using either the dictionary definition or the “feminist” definition to describe the west as a patriarchy would be completely flawed. You see, and feminists know their definition is flawed, which is why they invented this thing called “patriarchy backfiring”.

The major flaws of patriarchy backfiring is simply this:
Feminists expect me to believe that men have oppressed women since the dawn of time, but somehow, just somehow, men are too incompetent to create a system that completely benefits men at the expense of women? Seems legit.

“Benevolent Sexism”: Because female privilege would be too ironic. Women are more likely see a man as bad or evil if he doesn’t act in a chivalrous fashion. No, both women and men are more likely to precieve a man as a sexist or a villain if he treats women the same as he treats men. This is literally one of the reasons feminism doesn’t make sense to me. They complain about microaggressions and how women don’t want chivalry from men yet the women who they swear they are defending would see a man as a bady guy simply because he doesn’t hold doors for women.

I rememvered another study that showed that 68% of women would reject a man if he said they should split the bill on a first date. So Question: How can feminists call this sexism when women are the ones perpetuating it.

Now another cop out feminism use is called “socialization”, that men socialize women into wanting men with big wallets and wanting chivalrous men:
1.) Why would men make it harder for themselves to earn women if their whole goal is reproduction?
2.) 50% of children are raised by single mothers, and the majority of elementary school and even middle school teachers are women. So who has more control in how children are socially constructed?

so now, since I handled the basic points about patriarchy, let’s move onto gynocentrism. I have seen this word getting tossed around numerous times by both MRAs and MGTOW and I feel that it’s being used poorly in some situations.

For example: Imagine ISIS or a terrorist organization comes takes over a village and they kill all the men but let the women live? Would this be a gynocentric system.

“Well, they’re letting the women live but not the men”, the interest of women is being put above men right?

No. Because more than likely the women are going to be used as sex slaves or raped. This isn’t gynocentrism. Because when looking at the long term view of women, they’re going to be raped. Their views aren’t being put above the interest of men because they are going to go through Hell.

True gynocentrism is the interest or view point of the women being put above men and children. Do we see this in society today?

Well, let’s take child support as a example. Now I know some people will say “well, child support is for the child right? Because…the child” no, it’s not. Child support is only granted when a woman requests it. And there is very little obligation for a woman to use the money on the kids.

Now, I know some people will come out of the wood works and cry these two points:
1.) well if the patriarchy didn’t automatically see women as care givers, then this wouldn’t happen: google tender year doctrine, and National Organization of Women call reform to the child support system anti-women
2.) Women pay child support too: This is what I would call the quantity fallacy, men pay the majority (90%) of child support, so a few women doing something that is done primarily by men doesn’t make it equal. And, how many women v.s. men go to jail due to backed up child support? How many men get their driver license revoked compared to women?

Another example: Throughout history, churches and the state have supported women for just being women. Is this gynocentrism?

It depends? Is it at the expense of men.

You see, women are a resource, they have kids. A man provides sperm but the rest of the process has to be done by women. Simply giving women money isn’t gynocentrism. Because, you need women to reproduce, if women aren’t reproducing, then your society is going to crumble or the village next door is going to enslave your kids in the future, so you need to support women in order to thrive. This isn’t gynocentrism, this is just logic.

Now let’s look at the alimony system. Is that gynocentrism? Yes. You see, think about Bradd Pitt and his current wife who is divorcing him. She’s going to get a large portion of his millions of dollars he made way before even knowing her, she is most likely not going to have more kids so she’s not going to contribute by reproducing. This is benefiting the woman at the expense of a man, this would be gynocentrism because there are no obligations or responsibilities given to the woman aside from gaining money from the man.

Now, this is just two of the many systems, if you look at divorce, the money being thrown at women in college, etc. you can find more example of gynocentrism in society.

So this is my view point of gynocentrism and patriarchy. If you have a counter argument or something that can help me, then please show it.

[KeymasterKeymaster]

The Original Star Wars Trilogy is 6+ hours of movie and 63 seconds of female speaking

—

Of course they think this is blatant “sexism”.

The retards who write about “this issue” as some kind of problem will only ever talk about how female speaking is not present… but THE ENTIRE F~~~ING PLOT OF THE MOVIES IS TO RISK MALE LIVES AND PUT EVERY MAIN MALE CHARACTER IN HARM’S WAY JUST BECAUSE OF A WOMAN.

They don’t complain about that. Flying into the death star and confronting the empire because of some bitch they never even met????

If “chivalry” was written out of it, women would have NO lines in Star Wars.

Women are too stupid to know when they are privileged. If they were smart, they would shut the f~~~ up for REAL — because now women have more lines in Star Wars. But in the process, they have become “the Nerds who can’t get laid” which they used to mock and make fun of. They can’t mock Star Wars fans anymore…. because women are now the “losers who can’t get laid”.

Just listen to their laughter.

It never bothered women that women didn’t speak much in Star Wars. What bothers them now is chivalry is dead. And they aren’t laughing anymore.

If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.

[experiencedParticipant]

Yes, women have ended the age of chivalry.
Yet another example of women fueling the mgtow movement.

"It seems like there's times a body gets struck down so low, there ain't a power on earth that can ever bring him up again. Seems like something inside dies so he don't even want to get up again. But he does."

[Binary LogicParticipant]

I don’t think those were seizures. Clearly her body was reliving the previous moments judo toss over and over again.

With that said, I’d like to know if she ever puts her hand on a man again. It may cross her mind for a moment, but then she may get the chills down her spine, and reconsider. Unfortunately, I think this is going to happen many more times before people, in general, start to get the point. The age of chivalry is over….

My goats, Pandora and Lucifer are being separated from the big bad bull that weighs 200 lbs. (50 more than average) Big motherf~~~er with no horns, he broke a 4X4 post holding up the roof to his section of the pen where the gate “was” hinged. His harem on the other side is in heat. Poor bastard.

It just shows the power of the lizard brain when women flaunt their pussies and cameltoe in skinny tight tights with absolutely no modesty (a virtue that vanished with the days chivalry). Welcome to libtardia’s “HOPE AND CHANGE”.

I guess what I’m saying is that no time before in history have men been exposed to so much temptation to ride the c~~~ carousel and share the women with each other all covered in grease.

Like the bull that now has a red and bleeding head, all because lizard brain couldn’t say no to the aroma of pussy!

How much force does it take to snap a 4×4? WOW! The power of pussy!

I don’t know how to “handle” a bull with no horns??? Usually I grab them by the horns and twist their f~~~ing head! WTF! NO2 (nitrous oxide)???? Sledge hammer to the head??? No body will go in the pen with him in his pussy induced violent hypnotic state.

Do men act this way? I tend to think so only because they weren’t educated by their fathers and warned about this preexisting side effect to testosterone in their systems.
Now we’re always tempted and teased by the way women dress and any leaking testosterone there will be HELL TO PAY!
What do you think? Do MGTOW tame the raging bull inside us? Is fatherhood the link now missing that once tamed the raging bull and made gentlemen?

Comments are appreciated and welcome. I know it sucks to be penned so I left the plantation through a hole in the back fence!

[sidecarParticipant]

Varun wrote:

No, it is.

It might not make any sense to you.

Oh get f~~~ed. Go try that “you just don’t understand my superior thinking” bulls~~~ somewhere else.

But it makes a lot of sense to many people.

Those people are wrong. As are you.

All it takes is one example to completely disprove your theory. These forums are full of examples.

Men do not get off on being controlling… they get off on being dominant…

No they don’t. Not all of them. Not even the majority of them. Certainly not the best of them.

What the f~~~ is wrong with you that you assume that?

The standard operating behavior of men is actually cooperation and mutual reliance, not this dominance bulls~~~ you think it is. Monkey men who tried to play dominance games soon got themselves and everyone with them eaten by sabertooths on the communal hunts. This cooperation ethos is how men build things like cities and giant f~~~ing dams and civilizations. It’s women who play the competitive, dominance games, not men, which is why women haven’t built any of the aforementioned cities, dams, or civilizations etc.

Being dominant doesn’t necessarily mean you need tp be controlling.

Now you’re trying to make a semantics argument? Really? And a weak one at that.

You’d better be able to provide examples to back that up. Good luck.

Not beating women is an act of subtle chivalry, but it’s not white-knighting.

Bulls~~~. Pure bulls~~~.

NOT beating women isn’t chivalry. It’s the f~~~ing default state of mankind.

Because we’re not sacrificing ourselves to NOT beat women.

Really? Seriously?

I have never beaten a woman in my life. Ever. Explain what the f~~~ “sacrifices” I have made to NOT beat women. How the f~~~ would I have benefited by beating a woman? What have I lost by not beating any?

You probably got triggered

got triggered

triggered

“Triggered”? Really?

Ah. I get it now. You’re some social justice reactionary still living in their f~~~ed up world view seeing the world in their f~~~ed up terms.

Triggered. Feh.

I’ve never said that.

You f~~~ing insulted every man here as an incipient woman beater, and you don’t understand why I would have a problem with that? Are you completely retarded?

Oh. Wait. Social Justice Reactionary.

What is wrong with you? If you really don’t give a f~~~, you should have just ignored this thread completely.

Oh now you’re trying the old social justice canard of telling me to go away.

Social justice thinkers do this when they don’t have a f~~~ing leg to stand on.

What’s next? Are you going to call me racist too? That’s another common SJW trick.

The reason you are feeling like this might probably be because somebody shamed you with something like this exactly.

You don’t know me boy. Stop assuming you do.

Again, you insult every man here and you don’t understand why you are getting flack for it.

Pushing the button on this one.

[VarunParticipant]

sidecar wrote:

But it’s not true in any sense, general or otherwise.

Nor is your opinion that NOT beating women is somehow “white knighting”.

Nor is your opinion that all men somehow “get off” on being controlling.

Nor is just about every other opinion and assertion you’ve made in this thread.

Perhaps it would have been more appropriate to say 17000+ women who wouldn’t get their feelingz hurt because a man won’t do as she bids in the relationship.

Women “get their feelings hurt” no matter what men do, either in a relationship or not. They do it intentionally. It’s their way of playing the victim as a form of manipulation. It should be beneath a man’s concern and beneath his contempt.

Hey, even if you disagree with a woman, its considered abuse, isn’t it?

Again, who the f~~~ cares what they “consider a form of abuse”? Faux victims are going to play victim no matter what. It’s what they do. Why the f~~~ should any man pander to that?

Been watching a lot of crime documentaries lately so I apologize how that prme. post came off.

I think it’s time you put down the remote and started watching a little reality.

No, it is.

It might not make any sense to you. But it makes a lot of sense to many people.

I created this thread to see if people shared my views, and quite apparently, they do. If you don’t, then that’s not my problem.

Men do not get off on being controlling… they get off on being dominant… there’s a VAST difference between those two things. Being dominant doesn’t necessarily mean you need tp be controlling.

Not beating women is an act of subtle chivalry, but it’s not white-knighting. Because we’re not sacrificing ourselves to NOT beat women.

You probably got triggered because you thought I was propagating the thought that men are inherently controlling…. I’ve never said that.

What is wrong with you? If you really don’t give a f~~~, you should have just ignored this thread completely.

I’m not saying you would have been a control freak. The reason you are feeling like this might probably be because somebody shamed you with something like this exactly. Whoever that was, you should know that they don’t matter.

Please take a deep breath and relax yourself. You just misunderstood the whole thing.

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

[VarunParticipant]

Keymaster wrote:

I actively stop violence against women every single day. And so does every single man who doesn’t beat women. Where’s our medal?

Quite seriously….. Here is proof that 9 out of 10 random men (in a night club situation!) wouldn’t even hit a woman back.

Right.

This can be inferred as an act of chivalry itself.

For example: if our good old friend mgtower was married, he would already have had smacked his wife left and right. But he isn’t doing that now. So there’s one woman NOT abused.

Statistically speaking, we have successfully saved 17000+ women from either getting beaten or murdered. Tell me that is not a good thing.

Gargamel wrote:

My observation is that men who abuse their women were heavily abused by their mothers during their childhood.

And it is some kind of a scared dog reflex to bite before getting bitten. And an abused boy normally never develops the strength to become a solid personality. He will most likely still depend on the approval of women to define his self worth. So he mingles with women, but abusing them when they get too close or pull things on him that reminds him of his mother’s ways.

Exactly. So do you really think putting those men in jail would solve the problem?

Of course not.

Had they not been abused, they would never have grown up to be abusive. Had they been educated like you and me, they would have known better to just walk away rather than abuse the women in their lives.

Education solves these problems. Creating awareness among parents about negative influences of their actions on their children….treating insecurities as they appear…. that should have been the primary objective of anyone fighting these issues.

And just how many women with clipboards at the mall are aware of this?

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

[KeymasterKeymaster]

Atton wrote:

The Website is dead.

It never existed. It is a faux destination as Varun pointed out at the start, and we just use it as a mythical place to send unwelcome poser “alphas” who like to practice their “game”.

Varun wrote:

Beating women and daughters, molesting step-daughters etc. etc. all these are illustrated as the norm for the ‘monsters known as men’ and that just feeds into the feminist agenda to vilify all men in general.

You don’t have to put up with that.

Recently I was stopped by a woman with a clipboard at the market, who asked if I will “help stop violence against women”. She obviously had no idea who she was speaking to, so I smiled and said “SURE!!! I stop violence against women every time I DON’T beat a woman. You’re welcome!”.

You should have seen the expression on her face.
( Inside I couldn’t stop laughing. She actually had to THINK about it for a few seconds. )

It’s true! I actively stop violence against women every single day. And so does every single man who doesn’t beat women. Where’s our medal?

Quite seriously….. Here is proof that 9 out of 10 random men (in a night club situation!) wouldn’t even hit a woman back if she were throwing repeat punches at him. And people think “violence against women” is a problem in society?? So much so that we need to be stopped on the way to the market for petitions????

NO. F~~~ them.

We don’t need to “stop violence against women”. We need to stop women from initiating violence when men are ALREADY TOTALY IGNORING HER FOR A F~~~ING EXCELLENT REASON.

There is still WAY too much chivalry in the world.

If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.

[RealityBitesParticipant]

MrMe wrote:

I don’t teach you anything when I say: the law favors women in many ways.

Of course alot of non-written laws also favors them such as : ladies first, free drinks for the ladies, the long dead chivalry code still being used by feminists for … equality purpose maybe? Who knows if they understand logic but anyways, thats another story.

We all know what that means, judge will favor women for the custody of the children AND than guess who keep the house?

What solutions could we bring to the actual LAW. I am not only talking about divorce and marriage but also any law that favor women over us that would need a good spanking.

OP – Wishful thinking. Something that the MRA is engaged in. The truth is is that even if it were possible it would never occur within our lifetimes. Instead of railing about it; I suggest to just go full MGTOW and work on your own happiness and health and financial well being. Let women go screw themselves. But while we may not have enough in the way of numbers to change laws; we can reach out to our male friends and coworkers and talk about these things and going MGTOW, and perhaps be able to change a few lives for the better.

[Eric LauderParticipant]

Keymaster wrote:

Eric Lauder wrote:

In this book she wrote that the percentage of men should be reduced an maintaned to 10% humanity.

That’s what it’s from? I heard about that psychotic bitch. I wondered why any man would wear it. Maybe he thought it would get him laid. He was alone and walking 2 dogs.

Manginas would justify even a reduction of percentage of men through designer babies, on the grounds that would mean way more chances of get laid for the remaining men.
There’s no limit how much low can go a mangina.
A woman proposed something similar, some years ago: she was basically mocking feminists, but she was surprised by the support she received from “feminist men”, way more than from feminist women.
Now she’s basically an MRA, her site is quite interesting, she’s way smarter than Paul Elam and his kind, I would put her on the same category as Karen Straugham, Erin Pizzey and Esther Vilar
http://www.femitheist.net/
http://www.femitheist.net/2016/02/chivalry-and-the-law-how-women-get-off.html
http://www.femitheist.net/2016/05/the-cult-of-feminism.html
http://www.femitheist.net/2015/12/the-empathy-gap-in-domestic-violence.html

The man-hater Sally Miller-Gearhart has her own wiki page
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally_Miller_Gearhart

Sally Miller Gearhart (born April 15, 1931) is an American teacher, radical feminist, science fiction writer, and political activist.[1] In 1973 she became the first open lesbian to obtain a tenure-track faculty position when she was hired by San Francisco State University, where she helped establish one of the first women and gender study programs in the country.[2] She later became a nationally known gay rights activist.[2] She has been controversial for her statement that “The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race”, made in her essay “The Future-If There is One-Is Female”.

This “essay” is part of every library of women’s studies and gender studies.
That’s why a man should never have sex with a woman who have a degree in women’s studies: it’s basically teaching women how to scientifically hate men.
It’s akin to nazism in many ways.

Keymaster wrote:

Eric Lauder wrote:

I said that I had a feminist education and that had make me anti-feminist, it wasn’t a joke.

So did former feminist Nancy Levant..before she wrote the book “The Cultural Devastation of American Women – the Strange and Frightening Decline of the American Female, and her lousy timing.”

Yes that’s the real title. Ask for it by name at your local bookstore.
The sales lady will want to kill you too.

Thank you, I’ll check the book.
Mine was an optional course, three months, two hours per week.
Here, during the 90s
http://www.lunduniversity.lu.se/
I have been throwed out from the classroom just only two times in three months 😀

SUPREME LEADER KIM JONG-UN'S FASHION STYLIST - if you want a new look or if you're a very beautiful trans you can call me, phone number +85079255312 / mobile 01921421211. The worth of a man isn't the usefulness that women get from him. Avoiding living with a woman, a man isn't rejecting a lot of sex: he's rejecting sexual starvation. MGTOW IS TACKLING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN COMPLIANCE WITH CONVENTION OF ISTANBUL: http://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/rms/090000168008482e --- Article 4, Section 4 "Special measures that are necessary to prevent and protect women from gender-based violence shall not be considered discrimination under the terms of this Convention". WHAT I LEARNT FROM A GENDER STUDIES CLASS IN LUND, SWEDEN: every time feminists accuses men of doing something, odds are likely either them or persons associated with them are doing the exact same thing but a lot worse. WHO I'M RIGHT NOW https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1okpAj7Fhw Basically my former life have been a conflict between this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yz_RQVkvke4 and this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFIMeyTK-sU That's, more or less, all about me.

I don’t teach you anything when I say: the law favors women in many ways.

Of course alot of non-written laws also favors them such as : ladies first, free drinks for the ladies, the long dead chivalry code still being used by feminists for … equality purpose maybe? Who knows if they understand logic but anyways, thats another story.

The reason I start this topic is to focus mainly on the actual laws that benefit one sex over the other and how we can fix them into making it balanced. I know we come from different countries, it becomes difficult to universaly assess the question but still, an interesting subject to discuss.

I am not a laywer but am curious in knowing more about the laws that protect us, the laws that plays against us and the laws that would need a good old paper shredding treatment with a complete makeover with the help of a 20 years experienced Kim kardashian esthetic surgeon.

Canadian Divorce: “The value of any property that you acquired during your marriage and that you still have when you separate, must be divided equally between spouses. Property that was brought into your marriage is yours to keep, but any increases in the value of this property during the duration of marriage must be shared.”

Does that mean I get to keep half of my future ex-wife’s dress, makeup, jewelry, expensive lotions and s~~~ like that? How does that even work? How the hell do they decide on how to split all what you own?

Canadian Divorce: ”When you separate, both of you may want to stay in the family home. If you cannot agree on who should stay in the family home, you can use lawyers, a mediator or an arbitrator to help you decide, or you may have to go to court to have the judge decide. An order or agreement for exclusive possession allows one spouse to use it, but not the other. It may be that, after the separation, neither of you will be able to afford to stay in your home. If you have children, the person who has custody of the children will most often be the one who stays in the family home with the children. This helps children adjust to their new family situation in a place and neighbourhood that they already know.”

We all know what that means, judge will favor women for the custody of the children AND than guess who keep the house?

What solutions could we bring to the actual LAW. I am not only talking about divorce and mariage but also any law that favor women over us that would need a good spanking.

[TruthspoonParticipant]

Don’t be p~~~ed off. It was a golden victory.

What you did was exercise MGTOW directly in the community.

For all the stupid bitches running around with their titties out for feminism one man telling a self entitled woman that she isn’t a queen and can carry her own damn box is a far greater and more effective statement of gender assertion.

Those girls will be wondering what the f~~~ happened to chivalry….. I wonder if they even have the sense to do the basic maths that if you f~~~ with men 24/7 they will just leave you to carry your own boxes and go their own way……..

[OgreParticipant]

How long does thread have to wait before it reaches top gun status? The members comments have all been gold.

I’ve never hit a woman, but it’s not chivalry. I’ve just never met one dumb enough to hit me first.

I failed to realize in my youth that I was the prize. I was going to work. I was going to earn. Little did I realize that due to feminism, that no longer meant I had to share. Road soon, Desert after.

[KeymasterKeymaster]

Mayor Eric Garcetti can f~~~ off and die. White Knight f~~~~~ piece of s~~~.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/personal/08/26/o.divorce.dreams/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/sex/9126265/Research-finds-women-feel-happy-when-their-husband-or-partner-is-upset.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2111203/Seeing-man-upset-makes-women-happy–shows-relationship-strong.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrvDhSB7GHk

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1251655/Six-brides-used-dirty-tricks-engagement-ring-finger.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ydXbJrQ4jc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtWurY7wtpc

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/videos/drunk-slut-gets-knocked-out-in-south-beach-florida/81407723/

There is clearly WAAAAAY too much chivalry in the world.

“You May Now Hit the Bride” Thanks, but I would rather live in peace, and besides… marriage is for gays. Hitting the bride is still giving her more attention than she deserves. Best to just ignore the c~~~.

If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.

[Anonymous]

Prefer Peace to Piece wrote:

Every girlfriend I ever had wanted help with their credit card debit. Usually when I suggested she stopped spending so much, she left.

When you’re married, you are financially screwed.
I remember increasing my work schedule from 40 hours/wk to 60 hours/wk to pay for her profligate spending.

I remember a few months ago, an old high school girlfriend who lived in a different state called me and wanted me to buy her a car battery and arrange to have it installed. Declining her generous offer really p~~~ed her off. Women really do think we owe them.

Female Entitlement Syndrome really is out of control. I can’t even count the number of times women have expected me to give them money or buy something for them just out of the expectation that I was supposed to do it for them out of chivalry.

[Zuberi TauParticipant]

Chivalry is dead and the ham beast got what she deserved!

I have tried to be MGTOW for a while. And, I have a question.

I really like MGTOW. Nowadays, I am reading about ghosting. It took a time to realize ghosting. But, it is great to be silent against manginas.

I know that feminists want to destroy all civilizations (especially western civilization), and I know that MGTOW is a defense movement to protect men from them. It is like that let them whatever they want to do for themselves because feminism will damage women more than men. Basically, they are falling on their own sword.

But I don’t understand something. What will we happen in next decades? I mean, let’s assume that important part of women agree with MGTOW movement and accept their misandry. What will be the answer of MGTOW?

As I know, MGTOW is also against former man-woman relationship (chivalry, self-sacrifice), and so MGTOW is not a conservative movement. (As I know, because I could misunderstood).

But, what if women give up their misandric behaviors, what will MGTOW do to rebuild western civilization? In which case MGTOW lean towards “marriage”, long term relations”, etc.?

I believe that we, men, are on strike against man-hating society. What if it change, what will be approach of MGTOW?

I hope, I can express myself with my poor English.