Why isn't there a Wikipedia page for MGTOW?

[MIKETOWParticipant 757]

There are articles on wikipedia about feminism, radical feminism, the MRM, and other gender issues. Yet none about MGTOW. If I was a good writer I would create an article on MGTOW. Why hasn’t it been done yet?

[FullMetalExoParticipant 2383]

You can search for threads here, In short It was removed. Also, more here:
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Talk:MGTOW

In the end, it’s not crucial, as this website ALREADY defines what MGTOW is and it gets more traffic instead of Wiki for MGTOW term.

So it’s even beneficial. And I would NOT push for wiki entry really.

-----------

[RoyDalParticipant]

Tim Patten is working on one. Here’s the thread he started: /forums/topic/wikipedia-definition-of-mgtow/

Society asks MGTOWs: Why are you not making more tax-slaves?

[IGMOW (I Go My Own Way)Participant 2572]

MGTOW isn’t a label you can use on YouTube either. MGTOW is flying under the radar. You don’t have too many critics of it either. It is mainly things men are doing quietly. Unlike MRA/MRM, MGTOWs aren’t engaging with feminists, and creating scenes. MGTOW now is addressed in a dismissive tone. And also the impact on society now is minimal. Men are MGTOW without even using the label. It is also had been heavily a Canadian thing for awhile.

You see the social impact of Herbivores in Japan doing things, so here is an entry on them in Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbivore_men

I would also add that, historically, single men have been invisible in society, just seen as men who haven’t married yet, so that is another factor.

There is a LOT of room for growth for the MGTOW label.

"I am my own thang. Any questions?" - Davis S Pumpkins.

[Mango IngawayParticipant 2264]

Well, we have this website, which surely does a better job at describing mgtow than wikipedia would anyway.

It is a common failing of childhood to think that if one makes a hero out of a demon the demon will be satisfied.

[RennieParticipant]

It would probably get vandalized pretty often.

[John Woods 13Participant 2855]

It’s in nobody’s interest to promote MGTOW.

1) MGTOW want to be left alone generally, and will use sites like this one to offer support and encouragement to others who want to become MGTOW, but will not actively try to “recruit” new men to “the cause”. There is no cause and this is not an ideology. It’s just a logical course of action given the current circumstances.
2) Feminists and women in general prefer to stay silent about it because they have nothing to attack. All their talking points become mute when it comes to MGTOW.

3) Society in general relies on men being at least somewhat forced to produce. As a husband and/or a father, you have to accept lower wages, or s~~~tier jobs because you need to feed the family. Even a company owner has to accept the bulls~~~ of the government or of his employees, otherwise his family suffers. But as a MGHOW, you will have disposable income and savings, which will allow you to accept only the job you want, close a business down if you are p~~~ed of etc. You get by on your savings, move to another town or country, and start fresh. Nobody wants to deal with a man with that much power and flexibility.

So… both us and them care little for publicity. We spread by word of mouth and spontaneous awakenings.

The answer is NO. “I could but I won’t”. Memini murum!

[VoidraitheParticipant 477]

Wikipedia is s~~~. “Editors” with an agenda fill their agenda in their editing and it takes an act of god to remove biased editors. I personally would not want a MGTOW article on Wikipedia, as Rennie points out it would get vandalized a lot.

[FrankOneParticipant 1435]

Wikipedia is great… for anything factual — history or science. It is awful for anything controversial.

[Author]

Posts