Howling Mockery At (Certain) Portions of The Manosphere: Exposing the Truth

There were dust ups that I generally didn't get involved with too much when they occurred.  I did say a basic piece on why I think the detractors of MGTOW were clearly wrong.  But I'm back to break things down again to get to the crux of the matter, and state why they are full of crap.

Note many will point out that MGTOW is a part of the manosphere in a general sense.  I will not split hairs on this issue, but I will be speaking about the alleged "critics" that seem to think it's not a path for men to travel on.  I will discuss those who act as if MGTOW is a cult, a haven for loserdom, or men not living life.

They are wrong.  As usual.

-The most salient point a reader must understand about the barbs thrown at us men is thus: they are rife with hypocrisy from the accuser.  It's demonstrative on more than one level, which I will explain further.

-The other is that there are forces in the manosphere that want to make a quick buck online, and since men are often suspicious of anyone that will exploit them, PUA snail oil brewers and would be gurus are showing their true colors.    Even more so, those same hacks piss on anyone who doesn't fall for their bullshit.  As con artists, they are not very good.  However, they seem to have amassed a following.  It's unfortunate because they will be punished by their own ignorance for siding with the peddlers of bad advice and false hero worship.

-Speaking of that hypocrisy I mentioned, much of the griping I've seen stems from projection.  Projecting their own failures with obtaining affection with women.  The surprising disregard for their own health and well being, including addiction and weight problems.  Several of the men that have come for to make a name for themselves look virtually nothing like the next Chris Hemsworth or Tatum Channing, much less have charisma.   Several MGTOW have been slammed as neckbeards, and when you see the finger pointers, they have fragile ground to stand on.

Does anyone actually believe someone like Matt Forney can pull in a Jessica Biel look-a-like with his own charms?  I would ask you what type of herb you were smoking . . . 

--The grandiose sense of self-importance and self-promotion, rather than focusing on the message and application as paramount.   I realize there are key figures in men's issues and it's actually a good thing that more voices are speaking up, and recognizable ones as well.  It gives a feel of a network of sorts and a personal spin and face on things.  However, there are others that want lap dogs to bow down to their arrogant personas while they bestow nothing of real value to men.  They are ones to avoid, and they will prey on the gullible all the while extolling how "manly" and "alpha" they are.   Which if they have constantly remind everyone of that label, then they are not.

-Dissing incels   I wanted to do a blog post alone on the subject, but I will say this for now----the jeer of "You can't get laid, ha ha" is by origin a feminized one.  Women in our culture have imbalanced power over men through the state and institutions, but it is gradually eroding through many factors (including men waking up and a shoddy economy).  Since women's sexuality has been the biggest attribute they have over men---young men particular---the idea that shaming men in this fashion of the you can't get laid has its root source with women.  Many men are countering with not marrying or denying women relationships and affection back, or using them for just that---sex.   Whether they are "incels" or not, taking back one's personal power is vital to any MGTOW.

When men in the manosphere slam others for not getting regular sex do this, they are stooping to gutter-level Ameriskank tactics.  Period.  (And by the way, this is coming from someone who was considered a womanizer in a proverbial past life, if you will).

-Gravitating towards a more traditional approach and praising the nuclear family versus the PUA lifestyle.  The mansophere "gurus" need to make up their minds on this . . . will you continue to reward skanks with libertine behavior or socially shame them while rewarding loyalty from women?  Several people will claim that "gaming" women can lead to a monogamous and healthy relationship.  I doubt this is a serious component for long term relationships.  

-Wanting to lead men back to the plantation.   Several of the ex-PUA gurus and commentators in the manosphere are proffering ideas about getting back to the antiquated notion of their idea about traditionalism.  This advice is absolutely insidious, and must be fought with at all costs.  Including those who masquerade as "conservative" in nature but are wolves in sheeps' clothing.  The pricks involved must think their women-taming tactics will save them from false accusations or having their life ruined.  It won't.  They are deluded, or they are deliberately leading other men astray.  Paul Elam has been one of several, and that's why AVfM has lost trust with so many men after that debacle.  There exist people who label themselves as MRAs who have zero interest in helping men whatsoever, but would see them get trampled in the process.  

Here's what Zed had to say about going back to uh . . . traditionalism:

Men now must completely destroy marriage. It is too corrupt and too fouled to fix. It is a derelict building which MUST be torn down so that something useful can be built in its place. 

Does this sound like the shift to pre-1960s ways of dealing with women and family?  No.

And yet certain cocksuckers in the manosphere want men to go back to risk everything they have done for themselves and adapting in a misandric culture to throw themselves back into the dangerous maelstorm itself.   Unreal.

MGTOW offers something more---we are waking up to our own individuality, our own worth, our value as men.  It's puzzling that we are dubbed as being just as bad as the feminists, considering that those same lousy detractors engage in similar behavior as those said feminists.  If women couldn't bring us completely back the fold, they will not, either.