Monday, July 23, 2012

Clearing the air.

Alright then, I see I need to clear a few things up.

First, my take on the Manosphere (Mens Movement - yes, they are the same thing), as succinctly as possible.  I will not outline reasons, and DO NOT ASSUME my sympathies to any of these groups.  I will spell that out at the end, to some degree.  If you can't have the decency to refer to my own words when ascertaining my beliefs, then kindly refrain from making a statement at all.

Also, as warning, I'm kinda pissed off while writing this, so those who can't take 'harsh tones' can excuse themselves right now - you've been warned.

The Manosphere (Mens Movement):

Pick Up Artists (PUA)

Second largest group in the Manosphere.  Usual method of induction is through desire to have better results with women romantically.  Most PUAs started out Average Frustrated Chumps mystified by women's behaviours, and their own lack of ability to attract them reliably.  They diverge from MGTOWs primarily in the role female companionship plays in their life, with PUAs disdaining MGTOWs 'inability to get laid', and at times accusing cowardice as regards legal issues men face.

PUAs are practitioners of Game Theory, but that is about all that unites them, since even among PUAs themselves the pursuit of female attentions is assigned wildly divergent importance depending on individual.

Best way to think of them: "the world is going to shit so might as well work the system to make it more enjoyable".  Typically nihilists.  And usually a ton of fun to hang out with.


Game Theorists - those who generate the analysis and theory which PUAs act upon and test.  Typically they view Game as a way of understanding, rather than lifestyle.  Very small in size, but enormously powerful socially.

Men Going Their Own Way

More an after-the-fact descriptor than ideology or philosophy.  Typically consists of men who have independently decided on similar courses of action (or inaction, as the case may be) in response to untenable legal and social positioning.  Awareness of said issues is overwhelmingly through observation, rather than a pain response to personal injustice.

These are men who, for their own reasons, have decided that women as a whole are not worth the caution, energy and time expenditure, and probable results from eventual dissolution of any relationships.  This can be a result of objection to almost insurmountable legal obstacles for men in some instances, it may be a result of simply not possessing enough by way of enticement for the demands of today's career woman, it may be a result of past bad experience, or, as seems most common, it may be a result of simply having too much self respect to abase himself, and submit to such caveats.

In any case, it all boils down to a simple value equation, and 'long term relationships with women' comes out on the losing end.  This is the basis for the ongoing fight between PUAs and MGTOWs...neither believes the other has a healthy attitude towards relationships and women, but MGTOWs hope to see a day when things improve while PUAs depend on the status quo.

best way to think of them: Given the reaction men have given in all things Gender War related - essentially to vacate the battlefield rather than fight those they love - I would say MGTOWs are best thought of as the 'typical male response'.


Men who firmly believe in individual duty to society, who believe men have a duty to uphold the system in place while working to change the flaws.  They tend to be idealists who feel they can reason their way to a better society.

Traditionalists function as a conduit to the Religious Right in terms of spreading awareness of Mens Issues, and provide worthwhile perspective on the value of belief systems, societies, and really the reason we did it all in the first place.

best way to think of them: Traditionalists value society and want to preserve it as best they can, with measured rollbacks of 'personal autonomy'.

The Good Manginas 

Hey, it's my blog, I can be mean...

Basically, feminist men trying to convince the world that masculinity is toxic, that male sexuality is the root of all evil, and that they, and they alone are worthy mating material.

best way to think of them:  Omegas and opportunists trying to leverage the feminist codified hatred of men into money/pussy.


Men who see injustice in current society and can no longer hold their tongue.  An overlapping point of many other aspects of the Manosphere, the motivations for demands for change are amorphous, but the demands themselves, the aims of the collective, define the movement.

There is no name for this aspect of the mens movement because it is more of a shared common interest among members of divergent aspects of the Manosphere than anything concrete in and of itself.

best way to think of them:  Men who fight to remove the injustices making a prosperous and peaceful society impossible.  They never quite mirror the beliefs of any other aspect of the Manosphere because they are held in balance by the competing interests and beliefs of it's members.

The Mens Rights Movement is a sociopolitical virus, the Manosphere its mode of transmission.


This is my 'take' on the consistency and makeup of the Manosphere, and how the parts relate.  I will debate the accuracy of those claims I did make, I will NOT debate the significance of any particular threat or issue.

Now, the personal stuff.

Do I hate Women?

I was a virgin until the age of 18, and stayed in that relationship until the age of  almost 20.  Up until that point I had been convinced I was an unattractive guy..too short, too pale, too smart (no shit, that's one of the reasons).  So, I developed a passive attitude toward attracting women.

My first girlfriend had to ask me her grad...for instance.

After we broke up, I found out VERY quickly that quite a few women had their sights on me, and within a year, my 'notch count' topped 100 women.  I had fuckbuddies coming out of the woodwork.  They would come over in pairs, and they would set appointments.  I'm not shitting you.  As it turned out, I was a total fucking slut.

By the time I got married, the count approached 150.  Women were constantly making it plain they would fuck me in a heartbeat, the Maid of Honor actually offered to blow me, right in front of my new wife, as a wedding present (not at the wedding though, that would be crass).

All this time, I had never once asked out a girl, or even so much as 'chose' one to pursue, I had my hands full as it was.  I got married, in fact, without ever asking a woman out.

I go to bars and women buy me drinks, introduce themselves, compulsively fix my collar or hide a tag, whatever.  Well, not so much now, but not long ago.

Nowadays I walk around with 'Fuck Off' written on my forehead so I can have some peace, and have done so for long enough that I don't know if I still 'have it'...and frankly, I don't care.

I put all of this out there not to brag, but to show my perspective when I say that I am FAR more able to empathize with women who get hit on all the time, than men who need to work just to get a woman to look at him.  I've had WAY more than one girlfriend quit the relationship because she was 'tired of being invisible to the waitress'...and my passive 'strategy' means I almost never experience rejection.

I guess the women around here have low standards or something.  In any case, that's irrelevant.

What I can empathize with is the fear associated with approaching women, and the lack of guidance as to how to pick out a good one.

I have taken the path of a simplified life for the past few years due to all sorts of reasons, financial, emotional, and familial not being the whole list.  I do not personally have anything against relationships with women, I do, however, have a few personal things I would rather attend to while single and see a relationship as an unnecessary complication.

And yes, anything more than casual dating is out of the question in any least while the Law remains as it is.  And my position will ONLY change when legislation does, so object all you like if you feel like it...but do it to your local politician.


  1. Dan,
    How do the FRAs fit in? It does appear that they are the ones with the longest history.. spread across US, CA, UK.. and the ones with real world organizations (Fathers and Families, Canadian FACT, etc). And they seem to maintain a distance from the MRM (whats the history behind this?).

  2. FRAs are a group that 'splintered' from the larger MRM around the time Glenn Sacks closed down his blog. Best thought of as 'single issue MRAs', they rightfully chose to focus on the things that matter to them personally. The 'distance' between the FRAs and the larger MRM is deliberate political choice to be more effective. Essentially letting mRAs take the 'nutbar' rap while they make inroads politically and legally.

    It's a successful strategy to some degree, but the FRM wouldn't get anywhere without the larger MRM to back them up.