But this idea that biological determinism in inexcapable is also toxic. If that were true, than there would not be Mgtow. Men would be MRA’s, Rosh’s “Neo-Masculinists” or “male feminists”. We would be trapped, in the endless pursue of pussy. And although men are “inclined” to make sacrifices for pussy, if that’s all we are, than I would gladly descend into oblivion.

Besides, the articles does the same thing that feminists does. It takes very broad scientific facts (in case of feminism, not even that is required anymore) and use them to justify very narrow minded ideologies. Traditionalism/Neo-Masculinism being the one in this case. In this case it refers to very broad, but true facts (like the one that testosterone is the cause of masculinity) and from there in builds up to very narrow and not so true ideology (like supporting the return of traditionalism, or Neo-Masculinity).

I talked to a male feminist that did the same thing as to justify, using the SAME hormone (testosterone) to justify why women should have more protection and/or are more unlikely to be more violent. Testosterone increases aggressive behavior, therefore men are more aggressive and as such more violent. Here is the kicker though, he failed to give me ANY study that could link aggressiveness to violence. In fact, the study where he “proved” testosterone was linked to violence considered NON CONFRONTATION as a AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR.

So no, Scientific review DOES NOT prove ROK community right.

They only use the same tactics as the feminists do.

You could make the argument that government and societal perspectives should be removed in order to let the biological actions take their course without consequence, but that’s a tall order, and doesn’t necessarily have the best outcomes for men or women, IMO.  There is a reason why humans are the dominant species on the earth, and it’s not biology alone.