Happy New Years fellow closed-minded extremists and vitriolic toxic basement dwellers alike! Today we kick off what will likely be yet another cancerous year (not trying to be pessimistic, just following the pattern here) by having a nice refresher of the basics (well, some of them). This semi-refresher comes to us courtesy of some incredible galaxy-brained blogger who has pulled out some agitprop, fresh from the oven (less than a week old), on the subject of WAATGM itself.
For reference: https://archive.is/8GCCg
Now I'd like to preface this by saying two things. One, someone mentioned they'd enjoy if I analyzed this, which is why this is here, but to be frank: I don't think this requires it. The whole insufferable vomit pile linked above is rife with all the clichees and deflections and strawmen you've seen a thousand times and have been highlighted and explained a thousand times more. However, I'll do this anyhow for the sake of edutainment, as it were. Never know how many new bright and twinkly-eyed lads are finding their way out of the Matrix, so it always is nice to plant some signposts. Two, I'd like to grant perspective by saying that the author of this article, a male, has also written another article explaining how important it is to take a stand against "No Simp September." Bounce around the site looking at nothing but headlines and you immediately know exactly the sort of "man" this person is. I don't say that as an ad hominem (arguments are forthcoming), I just want you to brace yourself for maximum shaming-language limp-wristed spineless white knighting that is about to occur. He's an 11/10 on the ally-meter.
I would like to simply pick out the juicy bits here and there and save myself time but the truth is I really should respond to all that requires a response in here. This may take some time (more of mine than yours, for sure) so grab a sandwich if you're interested in continuing. Or demand that your woman make and bring you one, you evil woman-hater, you.
Inside the Forum Obsessed With Proving That Women’s Standards Are Too High
Shaming language. I'm not going to expound on examples like the above, someone else can explain what and why shaming language is so often used by females (and effeminate, feminist-friendly or feminine-thinking males) for manipulation and deflection. My point is that when these pop up I will only point them out as shaming language and then move on. This should communicate to you that the author is attempting to vilify something by using implications and pejoratives rather than explain objections on relatively objective grounds. As per above, "obsessed" is shaming language (and also a pretty stupid charge; you could easily say all subs are "obsessed" with their subject matter, that's the point of a sub; the author is a moron).
But some straight men, frustrated by their options, decide that only women do this.
Misrepresentation. No, not only women do this. Women do, however, absolutely do this at a far greater frequency than men. This is for several reasons. One: a woman is constantly seeking to obtain a mate who is at or above her "level." As a general rule, women do not "date down." If she perceives a man as beneath her, she doesn't consider him. Two: social propagation of the idea in modernity that females are amazing princesses that deserve to have their cakes and eat them too. One oft-quoted example, so as not to lend credence to the idea that aforementioned claim is some spurious mysogynist myth, is Sheryl Sandberg, who advocated in her book that women do just that. Three: social media has absolutely warped women's innate sense of importance. Online, your average male gets virtually no attention. Your average female can get orders of magnitude more by posting alluring images of herself. This artificially inflates her ego in a system comprised of near limitless feedback, and it does nothing to his (correction: makes him more depressed, most likely). This isn't inherently the "fault" of anyone but the cogs in the instinct machine; however, evolution never developed our psychology to deal with the social dynamism of the internet.
Whatever, we're not going down that road, it's been what, two sentences? And I'm already writing a dissertation. Someone stop me.
To agents of the manosphere, however, this kind of thing is deadly serious, and there’s a whole wing of the subculture built around the idea that it’s not a limited phenomenon but the devastating norm.
Whether it's a "norm" is debatable. I suppose that would depend on your definition of norm. It most certainly is, beyond a doubt, very widespread on anything social media related, and for the last reason mentioned above, far worse now than it has ever been in history. Now if "norm" means >51% of women genuinely think like this, there isn't any easy way to prove that one way or another. I will, however, point out the classic OKCupid graph of all women believing that 80% of men are average or below. Do all or most women have absolutely insane standards? Probably not, maybe, who knows. Do all or most women have standards greater than their actual value relative to the same standards by men of the same value? Yes.
where guys mock women for using the apps to seek out partners of decent pedigree
He's contradicting himself. Not that you needed another nail in the coffin of someone who's clearly intellectually dishonest with his own axe to grind, but nonetheless: he literally says in the preceding sentence that WAATGM thinks women with insane standards are "the norm," and then claims in the next one that WAATGM is mocking women who only seek reasonable partners. Pick a lane, Miles. You're an embarrassment.
calling them gold diggers, entitled princesses and trashy, used-up sluts
We'll skip the obvious subtext that you think we say this about all women everywhere for all occasions and get to a better question: are you going to say that such women as described above don't exist? Because if I were using your style of argumentation and rhetoric, that's what I would say about you. Miles thinks all women everywhere are perfect angels who never seek to exploit men. Die by the sword, as they say.
WAATGM blends a few strands of manosphere lore to construct a mythical narrative.
Yes, our narrative is mythical, but yours isn't. And you know this, how, exactly? The strength of your belief? You view WAATGM as a cultish indoctrination center, and you think your little ideological bubble hasn't molded you like soft clay in exactly the same fashion? Of course, you're educated and enlightened, Miles, and we're the close minded rubes whose viewpoints you need to misrepresent in order to strengthen your claims.
This, according to the subreddit, is when those women will turn to apps like Tinder and ask, “Where are all the good men?” The forum is obsessed with this turn in the narrative — a promised comeuppance and humiliation for anyone who rejected them in the past.
Shaming language. Moving past that, no, there is no "promised" comeuppance. The sub exists for the merriment of those who enjoy seeing said comeuppance happen to those it does. He's putting the cart before the horse here. There are consequences for all actions; some will escape those consequences and many will not. WAATGM exists to post the results of those who have been in denial of the consequences of their actions a long time coming. If you repeatedly reject everyone "beneath" you and keep choosing very poor relationship material, things generally are not going to work out for you in the long run, and WAATGM documents that. Never mind that plenty of our own members have personally experienced women in their lives, who previously rejected them, circling back around after a decade or two.
Outside this spiteful community, most of us understand that men without washboard abs and six-figure salaries get along fine in the dating pool
Shaming language and also another strawman. For an average man, "getting along fine" means a fraction of the number of relationships/encounters that an average woman will have. It is likely that this has been the case for most of human history, but it's especially true now with a very wide gap in disparity. How would you know whether men are "getting along fine," Miles?
otherwise there would be far fewer couples.
That's your metric? Guess what, Miles? There ARE fewer couples! Where have you been? Were you not around a year ago when the spree of articles got confetti'd by media outlets about the "lack of marriageable men"? Marriage rates declining, fertility dropping, men withdrawing from relationships (or in some cases, society) altogether when they're unable to find someone? Or are you going to doubt your fellow leftists? Here:
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/where-have-all-the-marria_b_6077814
https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2014/09/24/record-share-of-americans-have-never-married/
https://pairedlife.com/dating/Why-Women-are-Frustrated-and-Confused-about-Men-and-Dating
Undoubtedly there's some dungheap in Salon or Vox somewhere on the same subject but I'm not scraping through those to find more of the same, you get the idea. And hey, remember when Henry Cavill, a solid 10/10 gentlemanly Chad, said he was leery of even flirting with anyone and that bothered a whole lot of women?
https://bestlifeonline.com/henry-cavill-dating-controversy/
Guess why that triggered so many ladies. It's because he's a prime example of the man they want, and even such a man was "nope"ing his way out of things. Yes, Miles, there are fewer couples, and fewer kids being born, and fewer risks being taken to flirt with new prospects, and a whole list of other things that indicate dating as a whole is circling the drain compared to the good ol' days. And to really drive the point home, this guy has a hilarious video with further sources:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QKH-YLAvXBc
Please do note that said video, with over 400k views, is chock full of all the sort of "dangerous" evil nonsense you purport WAATGM to be full of, some of them with 1-2 thousand likes. This isn't some "mythical narrative," Miles, and it's not very allyship-ish of you to doubt your fellow progressives' articles.
What makes WAATGM so damaging is that it takes a handful of profiles as evidence of intrinsic female greed, promiscuity, narcissism and haughtiness.
Shaming language again. Also, a handful? When's the last time you booted up one of the apps, Miles? Credibility is already flaky here, but yes, such things are indeed evidence of "intrinsic" female qualities. They're certainly not extrinsic, and if the semantics of your words aren't matching your syntax, then perhaps attempting to write professionally isn't a worthy aspiration for you.
Meanwhile, these guys attack real women for much less, like the temerity to use Bumble while raising a family or having the wrong sort of body.
Strawman again. That alone is not enough; she must be as described and have unreasonable expectations/desires relative to what she brings to the relationship. One does not wind up on WAATGM through a single criterion, but let's not pretend this guy cares about honesty.
but her mere existence and desire for affection isn’t a sign that all women are consistently aiming out of their league
No, it isn't. It's strange that this dude will get fairly close to an accurate description of things in a few spots, and in other spots he's got nothing but one misrepresentation after another. Guess it's hard to sell lies without nuggets of truth.
presents a clear pipeline from general dissatisfaction with dating apps to misogynist extremism.
Shaming language. Someone start keeping a tally, I'm getting tired.
Also, no, it's not dissatisfaction from dating apps, you imbecile, it's dissatisfaction that society lies to men constantly about what women want and what men should do in order to court them and be great, desirable partners. Men follow this terrible advice, get terrible or no results, and then get frustrated. Dissatisfaction stems from the enormous gulf between what women say they want and what they actually respond to.
but soon you’re exposed to vicious commentary that lays all the blame for this on women, as if men have no unreasonable standards or flaws of their own.
This is so flat-out moronic I don't even need to explain why. Actually, I think the sub's own sidebar does it for me somewhere, but hey, he's a blogger, not a journalist. Haha, just kidding, New Year's joke! Those are the same thing.
The page even smuggles in a racist trope here and there
It has nothing to do with "racism." If you date a woman who has a child, and that child's skin color isn't remotely close to yours, everyone will know it isn't your child. For many men, that's further baggage and silent judgment they simply won't wish to deal with, and it does nothing but further highlight how such a man is coming in "second place." A man will be even more unwilling to enter a relationship with a woman when he can't even pass off the kid as his own to strangers, which makes demands or requests for bailouts by such mothers even more anathema. Everyone will know the child isn't his. Miles is correct about one thing: the pressure to provide for a child that isn't his absolutely does exist for any single mother looking for commitment. That should be obvious.
None of this contempt and ridicule can mask the misery of the 87,000 men who subscribe to WAATGM.
Shaming language. Put it on the board, Johnny. (yawn)
They tell themselves they’re reveling in the joy of seeing women brought low, but they are the ones desperately scouring the web for anyone whose circumstances will make them feel superior — and that’s about as low as you can get.
Hahaha, what a quote. No sir, I certainly couldn't use this little gem in any sort of applicable use against the exact kind of people like Miles, could I? Nope, I've whipped out my metal detector and it has picked up absolutely no trace of irony whatsoever. You're in the clear, buddy! No hypocrisy or projection here, I assure you. (as an aside, you really don't need to "scour" -- as we established, dating apps are rife with these examples)
What can you hope to gain by sharing yet another tweet from a “thot” who says she prefers guys over six feet tall?
You gain understanding. When you begin to stack up so many examples of the same thing that separate what women say and what women do, it explains why so many men have failed in getting what they want out of relationships, and hopefully, allows men to fix that by making a choice: becoming attractive to women, or opting out altogether. The conventional wisdom of how to approach relationships was misguided in decades prior, but now with mainstream information and the Overton window dictated by the feminine imperative and its zombies like Miles, it's woefully, atrociously inaccurate. You begin to search for real answers about what women actually want and respond to, and begin to understand what needs to happen in order to actually become desirable and get what they desire, themselves. For some men, this is achievable, and they set about doing it. For others, it's achievable and simply not worth the effort relative to the benefits. For some, it isn't achievable, and after some time coming to terms with the anger of society having lied to them their entire lives, they accept it and decide to simply not date or marry, going with either prostitutes, sex dolls, or nothing at all.
Here's the bottom line: there is reality, and then there is your perception of it. The farther away your perception of reality gets from what reality actually IS, the worse things are going to be for you, unless someone or something insulates you from the consequences of your incorrect perception. WAATGM does two things simultaneously: takes the piss out of women whose perceptions have been out of whack for so long that reality catching up is wildly amusing, and exposing reality to men whose perceptions have been distorted by society so that they can make corrections.
This applies in all areas of life: dealing with wildlife, social policy, international relations, physics, etc. People go to places like WAATGM and MGTOW because their perceptions of reality aren't matching reality and they get frustrated with being unable to understand why that is. People like Miles take another tack and desperately wish more and more severely as time goes on that reality is the way they believe it to be, withdrawing and retreating into sympathetic echo chambers that assure them that things are indeed this way. Miles has his own "mythical narrative" in his head about what people like us are like, what we think and believe, why we are this way, stuck in our bubble; he doesn't have the self awareness or wherewithal to understand that he is exactly the same as what he thinks we all are. Perhaps one day, his reality will catch up to his perception.
OwenWentFullMGTOW 2y ago
The try-hard simping is quite strong in that article. Once the writer finally squeezed himself into his skinny jeans, he must have spent... minutes... searching for a word to summarize his impotent rage before finally landing on "toxic".
I find his straw man approach interesting, however. It's always telling when someone snidely dismisses the other side's arguments rather than taking the time to answer them rationally. We've shown our work, sourced our arguments and compared them to our own irl experiences. Everything we say is wide open to falsification. So, why doesn't that writer try?
He does hit upon something tho near the end. He refers to us as "spiteful". Bro, there aren't enough hours in the day for me to unload every bit of spite and venom I have saved up. My spite is a big reason why I flaunt my success to impoverished, middle aged single moms. I have what they so desperately want, and I'm not sharing. At least, not with them. A tiny bit for their younger, childless "sisters". But not much.
The level of spite I have defies words and the universe doesn't have enough time left for me to pour it all out.
So, kudos to him on that one point, the ninny.
TravelingStationery 2y ago
Aren’t most mods literally troons?
Typo-MAGAshiv Mod 2y ago
on the rest of reddit? Probably.
Here? LOL no.
waveformcollapse 2y ago
This is hilarious because she basically admits that we're all right xD
mlachrymarum 2y ago
So are they choosing men beneath them or only dating men beneath them, thus receiving their karmic retribution?
shrinkshooter 2y ago
Neither? I'm not sure I follow your question, would you like to rephrase?
The whole point is essentially to simply laugh at women attempting to date with quite unreasonable standards, meaning they believe far more men are (or were) "beneath them" than is/was actually the case.
[deleted] 2y ago
Hey, WAATGM is famous!
The thing I find interesting is the article whines and complains about 'These are just cherry-picked examples, it's not true!' Yet, the author doesn't provide a single example of a "normal" profile to back up his claim.
[deleted] 2y ago
What is most amusing is that she complains about the evidence for the wall only being anecdotal and uses her OWN anecdotal evidence in rebuttal. Amazing...
[deleted] 2y ago
[removed]
[deleted] 2y ago
Removed, banned, and reported to reddit admins.
[deleted] 2y ago
[removed]
[deleted] 2y ago
This isn't criticism and this isn't a debate sub. Go debate somewhere else.
Reported to reddit admins for harassment.
shrinkshooter 2y ago
Lol. "You guys are nuts" is not an argument against anything that's been said.
Still, your lack of empathy and understanding means you have my sympathy and pity. Hopefully time will help you in those areas. Best of luck.
[deleted] 2y ago
[removed]
shrinkshooter 2y ago
I'm going to stop here because you clearly haven't read anything in the post. You're attacking a stereotypical caricature of the people you think we are. You're doing exactly the same thing that the author of this piece did. You're also incredibly hypocritical, because in so doing this, you're doing precisely what you claim I am doing: painting with a broad brush.
You don't seek to understand or listen, you seek to hate based on a fabricated mental zeitgeist of who and what we are. You obviously are not here in good faith, and every one of your "objections" has been addressed a million times over the years. Until you start genuinely questioning hows and whys, you will be permanently stuck in this emotional spot.
Again, you have my pity, but unfortunately this will not go anywhere.
[deleted] 2y ago
Shrink:
Remember not to debate these pieces of shit.
Typo-MAGAshiv Mod 2y ago
That was an excellent rebuttal, however.
Did you check the modmail? That idiot says he's reporting us for harassment. LOL!
Bob_and_Virginia 2y ago
Typo-MAGAshiv Mod 2y ago
Naw, this dude was straight.
[deleted] 2y ago
I wasn't going to comment, but:
This is Miles Klee, the author of said hit piece.. You all can draw your own conclusions.
Bob_and_Virginia 2y ago
Oh my! How come there are no pictures of him with any woman? Like.....at all?
Typo-MAGAshiv Mod 2y ago
I think it's more a matter of this particular white knight not being a fan of the ladies. You know. Sexually.
cryptothrow2 2y ago
He's not even a token gay friend? I have pictures with friends on my Social Media but not of people I date
NoonTimeHoopsMVP 2y ago
He is angry because deep down he knows that we are right. The system is beyond broken. An average guy can't marry the average girl because she is out there preferring to share Chad with 100 other women.
All we have left to do is laugh or burn the system down. All the Miles in the world should prefer the former.
V_M 2y ago
A quote from the hit piece:
"A lot of the popular posts aren’t actual Tinder screenshots; they’re memes and comics that project these negative qualities onto the gender as a whole."
That seems fair given that almost all the pictures except two in the original linked article were from facebook or rando memes, never seen on reddit. You'd think a hit piece about a subreddit Might include at least one screencap of actual content from the subreddit that its slandering.
I'm genuinely kind of offended because none of my best work showed up in the hit piece because there's no actual content from reddit in the hit piece.
Typo-MAGAshiv Mod 2y ago
This moron doesn't even realize that we're pointing and laughing, engaging in righteous mockery, and teaching younger men what to watch out for (the only part that's remotely serious).
Not mythical at all.
Hah.
I've said many times, that I'd rather drink a six-pack than have a six-pack, and my wife and I combined never cracked 6 figures until the last 2 years, but I did just fine. When I was a junior enlisted Soldier living in the barracks, I did great. It was my experiences with a wide variety of women, including my wife, that led me to find the Red Pill and realize that it was accurate.
Criticism is not hatred. Did Roger Ebert hate movies?
A) many of us are quite happy.
B) a significant number of our subscribers and participants are women. Look for any pink flair on the main sub.
I don't even use dating apps, and I stumble across stuff to post. This shit is way more common than this retard wants to let on.
Back when the internet was at its best, around 1999-2003, Something Awful was one of the best websites. The forums were fun, too. Anyway, idiots like Miles and the other detractors who think they're so clever for saying "where are all the good men? They certainly aren't on that sub! Hurr dee durr!" remind me of all the morons who sent in the hate mail that Lowtax used to publish who thought they were so clever for saying "your website certainly is Something Awful. LOL."
Sheesh. This moron obviously thinks women are just magical creatures of pure goodness who fart rainbows and shit diamonds.
If he ever manages to get with one, he'll learn(edit: he's gay).Subtle_Demise 2y ago
Lowtax is still doing Gaming Garbage on YouTube once in a while. No Schmorky anymore, but thank Christ for that. I loved Something Awful but never wanted to pay to be on the forums, but I like the rules. My favorite is "If you're going to be racist, it better be funny, or else you're getting banned" lol.
SnuSnuClownWorld 2y ago
Haha. Something awful and stile project.
Those who know, know!
Typo-MAGAshiv Mod 2y ago
Let's not forget Newgrounds!
BigCountryExpat 2y ago
'member Ogreish? I think that was the spelling? Lots of blood n' guts there...
Typo-MAGAshiv Mod 2y ago
Ogrish, and I wasn't a fan of that one.
Royal-Owl-353 2y ago
Good post
Blogginginvicecity 2y ago
I can see how he could think this if he only considers the comments full of schadenfreude and spite. May people also see that this sub is like any that exposes bad behavior. Some people come here to talk shit and feel superior. Others come here because it makes them feel understood. It feels nice knowing I'm not the only one bothered by the ignorance found in day to day society: that showcased by many WAATGM profiles.
kidruhil 2y ago
Bravo
polishknightusa 2y ago
My observation regarding this hypothesis:
"For an average man, "getting along fine" means a fraction of the number of relationships/encounters that an average woman will have. It is likely that this has been the case for most of human history, but it's especially true now with a very wide gap in disparity."
Prior to about, say 200 years ago (or less), particularly prior to the 1960's, the concept of women using sexual extortion to demand validation and goodies from men through their 20's to settle down later wasn't an option. Pre-marital sex wasn't possible without becoming a single mother and then it would be game over for her to secure a marriage even with a beta-bucks.
Consider: In the Jesus birth story, it required a literal angel of God himself to convince a man to marry a single mother.
Families, usually headed by the patriarchs, decided with whom the daughter would marry either via bride price or a dowry to a well off suitor. A typical woman would only have a single sexual partner her entire life absent widows.
On the other hand, again, about a century ago or so in the west, brothels were available to those men unable, or not yet ready, to settle down where he could sow his proverbial oats. Note that just as women were gaining the right to vote did all the brothels shut down and other shaming ploys to deny men sexual options absent a sexual marketplace where women could demand courtship rituals for marriage which start out as a form of caveman prostitution (food for a chance at sex.)
Just as there are career women today, such as Betty White, RIP, who didn't want a conventional family life in their youth, many men in the past as well as now don't want to be biological fathers and so legalized brothels offered them the option to be contributing members of society and still enjoy a sex life.
It's fascinating that what we define as "traditional dating" and courtship today is a tiny sliver of history, from a single culture, between say 1920 to 1980 and yet modern American people think these are universal, not just human, values.
Blogginginvicecity 2y ago
I was perusing some of the links around the web OP mentioned, and had a simple 2¢ about 2 of them.
^^^Any article that veers into "men just have it too easy and chill with relationships and sex," gets the ol' chuckle and toss.
First, my goodness, Helen Price is such a destructive, arrogant, uncompassionate, self righteous individual with her quoted tweets in that article.
2nd, this article and the first one I quoted make for a beautiful baby: together they showcase why WAATGM is a thing. WAATGM is a thing because of clown shit. Wanting more power with less responsibility is clown shit.
This bestlifeonline article notes we are moving away from 'chasing' because it's a non-ideal standard (The OP of the Mel article understands this too of course because the Mel authors 'aren't even sure anymore what it means to be a man.') The thing is that this means women have to do more of the pursuing now. Guess what! Lots of women don't like that, and the pairedlife article from above specifically rants about this! The ol' "I want it classic AND progressive, with 0 accountability for choosing or consequences." Perfect drama set up. It's made for media, and that includes this sub! We find some good laughs on this sub because not only do some ladies not pick up the slack when it comes to chasing men, they push people away and then whine about the lack of interest! Absolute clown shit! It's amazing to see, especially as the clowns aren't even aware of the action!
In an age where women have more power when it comes to engaging with and choosing their partner, they also have correspondingly MORE RESPONSIBILITY. However, some aren't handling this well when it comes to their lonely heart dilemmas, and would rather blame Men Inc. than look on the inside SO THEY GET 'WRECKED' in the commentary here!!
"Where are all the good men?" she asks as she
--doesn't know how to identify a good partner for herself, and thus has "eternally super bad luck"
--conflates her SMV with her RMV/MMV
-- is obviously perfect with no reason to adapt herself in any way for anyone ("I AM THE TABLE.")
--is unpleasant to be around (Men don't go to prison for the romantic atmosphere!!!!!)
--pays little mind to what men like in a partner, and projects in this regard.
--isnt willing to take responsibility for her physical, spiritual, and mental life, meaning she's more than happy to point the finger at everyone other than herself when trouble inevitably arrives.
Shit's rediculous! We would love for them to not be like this. Everyone wins with a healthier community! Instead, we bang on a portal of the internet, and instead of a knock, it's HONK HONK HONK HONK HONK HONK!
LordGraygem 2y ago
So early in the new year, and you've already managed to offend me! I'll have you know that I am an open-minded extremist, because in [CURRENT YEAR], it is the height of intolerance and inequality to confine my hate to just a few protected classes. I'm proud of the fact that I'm willing to hate people regardless of race, color, creed, religion, sexuality, gender, or any other factor.
Further more, the term "basement dweller" is not only a discriminatory classist assumption that I (and others) can afford to live in a place with such an architectural feature, it totally erases the vitriolic and/or toxic contributions made by anyone living in ground floor (or higher) accommodations.
polishknightusa 2y ago
If you've ever seen the old All in the Family shows, it's interesting how the Archie Bunker strawman was groomed by the progressive handlers from the beginning of the series to its height and how even then, Archie Bunker was a nuanced, sympathetic character despite the writers' worst intentions.
For the first year or two, Archie was a sort of copy of The Honeymooners who expressed his working class frustrations. As he decayed into becoming a 'hateful bigot, he nonetheless was driven not by being a monster for its own sake but rather a product of a hard life mocked by a pseudo-intellectual bum son-in-law and others who criticized him while doing nothing to help him. Some of his points, even as they were strawmanned into weakness, were nonetheless often insightful if only because the show had to be funny back then rather than the polite, obligatory SNL laughter that's now on that pathetic show.
LordGraygem 2y ago
Interesting reply. Not sure how it applies to my comment (did you mean it for someone else?), but interesting nonetheless.
Also, happy cake day.
polishknightusa 2y ago
You triggered Archie Bunker with me in regards to being an equal opportunity "bigot". He really did hate nearly everyone including other white people (he referred to his bum woke son-in-law via an anti-Polish slur.)
It was doubly amusing for Polish-Americans who watched the show because I personally knew Polish-Americans who thought and lived EXACTLY like "meathead" on the show.
In discussions I have with foreigners from around the globe, they are amused when I point out to them that American culture engaged in discrimination against different European ethnicities.
Flashy_Glove6208 2y ago
Love the mgtow meme.
All character traits listed there are right on the money reflection of OLD females.
It's a cesspool. Pump and dump and protect yourself from STDs.
It will take generations of broken, old women and social security system bankruptcy to realise the obvious:
Protect yourselves guys & your finances, get your popcorn and watch it burn.
FiftyWaysOfRape 2y ago
Exactly, enjoy the decline they say
junior95207 2y ago
Forced monogamy.
Flashy_Glove6208 2y ago
Highly promoted monogamy and socially applauded as the preferred model.
There will be always alternative lifestyle fringes.
It's Sodom and Gomorrah now. It will crash and burn.
CarpAndTunnel 2y ago
One thing that stands out to me is they call our theories of female nature as crazy; what are their theories? What are their explanations? All I hear are crickets & that women are above reproach
nicethingyoucanthave 2y ago
Mainstream society is fundamentally feminist, and the feminist narrative is:
blank slate - that is, men and women start out the same in terms of behavioral propensity.
cultural construct - that is, observed differences in behaviors between men and women are all a result of culture.
So, if you pick a random woman and follow her as she navigates the dating market, she'll encounter several problems, which mainstream society will explain as follows:
she's promiscuous, hooking up with lots of men, but not being treated especially well by any of them. Explanation: it's good that she's promiscuous! She is in charge of her sexuality! The patriarchy tries to slut-shame her but she's fighting back! Men aren't treating her well because of toxic masculinity, which is part of patriarchy.
she catches feelings/gets her heart broken by a guy who never intended to commit because he has a dozen other girls just like her in a line around the block waiting to bang him. Explanation: men are so entitled and privileged because that's the culture that patriarchy has set up!
she has a kid and fewer men want to date her. Explanation: look at how our patriarchal culture mistreats mothers! This would never happen to men! Society would never abandon men, just push them out on the street like trash!
Typo-MAGAshiv Mod 2y ago
Good shit.
[deleted] 2y ago
[deleted]
Goldmansachs3030 2y ago
A good rabbit has 3 holes.
CarpAndTunnel 2y ago
Every bad thing women do is a human failing; every bad thing men do is a gendered issue
Frosty_League 2y ago
“Women want men who are kind to them!”
LMAO. Anytime I see this it’s automatically discredited in my mind. At least put a preface that says “women want men who are already: confident, charming, charismatic, handsome, successful etc, to be ‘kind’”
[deleted] 2y ago
[deleted]
InevitableOwl1 2y ago
As someone who is much closer to the second of those two guys than the first (especially in what want and how I treat people) - don’t I know it
Illustrious_Fly681 2y ago
I would like make you aware that this is incorrect.
81% of men were deemed below average, 12% were average and only 7% above average.
Edit: the graph had 7 columns rating least attractive to most attractive from left to right.
Starting on the lefthand side (least attractive) the results were: column 1(least attractive), 27%. Column 2, 31%. Column 3, 23% Column 4 (average), 12% Column 5, 5% Column 6, 2% Column 7 (most attractive), 0%
[deleted] 2y ago
These woman are crazier than I thought
To think no man is truly hot
Not enough by their measure
Really is a pointless endeavor
So i say stay away from them
They'll shame and nag you yet again
Ignore them as the shaming grows
They're mad, they're scared, they're filled with woe.
[deleted] 2y ago
[deleted]
ThatGuyNicho 2y ago
Here's a radical suggestion, how about we keep it meaning the exact same thing it's meant for the last billion years, how about that?
[deleted] 2y ago
This online zine, MEL Magazine, has a regular feature called "Dispatches from the Manosphere" in which it acts like a little watchdog (toy poodle or chihuahua) reporting on "toxic masculinity, violence, misogyny, and extremism".
lurkerhasarisen Mod 2y ago
LOL. They're worried about extremism and they're wasting their time watching US?
askmrcia 2y ago
Six days late and well said.
I'll add, what I find absolutely fascinating about when people bash the manosphere is that they have absolutely no problem when the manosphere calls guys out for being beta, losers, addicted to porn, cucks, simps, pookie and Ray Ray, Chads, broke men, ect....
Oh everyone is fine and love the manosphere when they are talking about guys in a negative way. But call women thots, hoes and call them out for being single mothers getting knocked up by their hand picked loser baby daddies (funny how it's never the doctors, lawyers and guys with high stable jobs dipping and dashing women) then it's going too far.
Then people like the author of that article calls out this sub because we are pointing out the bs that men deal with when it comes to dating. But ofcourse the Tinder sub, incel tears, niceguys, ect... Are free game to bash men. But it's a problem to do the same to women.
If that doesn't tell people what the issue is then I don't know what does. We coddle women so much and yet they say they want to be treated equally as adults. We do that, as in call their bs out the same way we do men and it's a problem?
Part of being an adult is accepting accountability. The crazy thing is I'm completely fine if we want to blame men for the problems in the dating market. I'm fine with it if that's where we want to be.
But I'm not fine with men having to be the main ones having to FIX these issues themselves.
Because again if women are adults while refusing to take accountability for the way things are, then they can at least be the ones that will find a solution. Plus what are men supposed to do? Force women to not pick losers to knock them up? Force women to date men with stable jobs and will make good fathers? We tried that and women weren't happy.
Women can't even come up with a solution. Instead they rather complain.
Final point, this sub literally takes screen shots of women complaining about THEIR OWN CHOICES.
NoonTimeHoopsMVP 2y ago
How can you write about males if you don't what being a male means?
Right there that renders the publication meaningless.
InevitableOwl1 2y ago
It’s their catch all to try and capture trans-men, non binary types, maybe even transwomen as they were born men and still biologically are
So - useless. And indeed trying to dilute and move focus away from being male focused as that would likely be considered “toxic”
[deleted] 2y ago
[deleted]
InevitableOwl1 2y ago
It certainly explains a lot. Not having to deal with attempting to find and then navigate romantic relationships with women would certainly give you a different perspective
I imagine he is also treated very different than straight men by potential female friends. The absence of any sexual interest from him will make them feel immediately at ease and not be constantly on their guard
He really had no place commenting on this sub
cautionTomorrow555 2y ago
I wish I could be gay so many nice gay guys who politely hit on me and none of my gay friends struggle with dating, but all the lesbian friends constantly complain about women I wonder what all that means.
InevitableOwl1 2y ago
You also don’t often hear gay men referring to men as toxic or indeed picking toxic men in the first place
I’m sure it does happen but it doesn’t seem anywhere near as frequent as it is with women
Not that they don’t fall into the “ooh he’s hawt” trap. Indeed I first read about the theory behind not using condoms with people you think are more attractive (combo of assuming hot = clean and fear they might bounce if forced to rubber up) when reading into why famous gay men were still catching HIV in the late 2010s - decades after the original crisis
cautionTomorrow555 2y ago
Isn't anal more likely to transfer an STD than vaginal sex? I remember reading about that ages ago.
Goldmansachs3030 2y ago
Yeah and all the other shit they show.Anal to "insert-any-other-place".
kidruhil 2y ago
I've noticed the exact same things about my gay/les friends and coworkers.
Typo-MAGAshiv Mod 2y ago
It means it's still all men's fault! Because patriarchy!
InevitableOwl1 2y ago
Or “internalised misogyny” would be what they claim. That is an increasingly common was women explain away other women who are awful
Snoid_ 2y ago
Same. I worked at a porn store for 5.5 years while I went to college, and there were a lot of gay guys that would frequent the place. I've been hit on more by gay men than I have women. I just don't swing that way. And you're right, most of the gay male couples I know have been pretty good, with a few bad eggs. I don't know of ANY lesbian couple that has lasted, or didn't have extreme drama.
cautionTomorrow555 2y ago
Lesbians have the highest rate of domestic violence and twice the divorce rate of gay marriages. Makes it really damn obvious the problem is women.
Land_of_the_Losers Mod 2y ago
I dunno. Is she fat, ugly, short and stupid as well? Because, if so, that actually sounds kind of funny.
panzer22222 2y ago
Actually I wouldnt put myself into the 'chad' category but I have A+ game so never went short of females.
I enjoy this forum as I see so many posts that could be my younger female relatives who continually dump the average nice guy that wants a long term relation for the broke abusive noob with a string of kids to multiple women.
InevitableOwl1 2y ago
I was talking to a woman today who was moaning about how her ex didn’t have a job and she often had to pay for everything and they couldn’t do as many things together
I mean after a while you just have to shake your head
cautionTomorrow555 2y ago
Half of the STEM and blue collar guys I know have not been in a relationship in 5+ years.
Maybe you women should stop being so picky and stop treating men so badly and they won't become angry misogynists? Of course that would require giving up Chad dick and not being a bitch who only cares about herself so that is never going to happen.
We stopped being good when we realized being good just gets you mistreated and used for your money and kindness. We also saw the bad guys who women lusted for even after he punched her in the face repeatedly.
manfrom-nantucket 2y ago
A good man is hard to find for the simple reason there are no good women.
InevitableOwl1 2y ago
Don’t I know it. Yesterday I got straight up stood up by a woman who had :
Day of she ignored my message to confirm and I watched on my whatsapp and could see the moment she blocked my phone number - 5 minutes after we were due to meet
So she knew exactly what she was doing
Sure it might just be a particularly bad egg. But this is how women treat people. And they can be so good at manipulating. I had no way of seeing that coming up to the day of the meeting
I was stunned. Usually there is some de-escalation as it gets closer combined with it being particularly tricky to get them to both agree to meeting and then getting them to agree to a time. None of that this time
It really is a shit show out there
Talk about a great start to the year. At least things can’t get much worse in the “dating” sphere I suppose (in theory at least. I’m trying to be more of an optimist)
pale_taco 2y ago
Was it a new profile? Often I match with a newcomer right away but soon their DMs flood. You gotta be quick cause the competition is fierce. I try to meet up ASAP and work my magic. Still doesn't always work.
If it's a profile that I've seen off & on, I know they passed me up at first and been out getting p&d and stood up... Now is my turn? No thanks. I'm especially unreceptive if we matched before and they ghosted.
Let's not pretend that women aren't glued to their phones, especially the attention they receive from dating apps. If you had a conversation after matching, consider anything beyond 48 hours of no contact ghosting.
InevitableOwl1 2y ago
I have no idea if it was new. Given it was close to new year we arranged to meet pretty much as soon as possible. It was 2nd Jan. And she asked to meet me.
And it was OKC which is basically pointless outside London in the U.K. I commented to her how unusual it was to find a user relatively close to me which she echoed. So it wasn’t exactly the tinder tidal wave
Me being unreceptive to re-matches is kind of irrelevant as I have to initiate everything anyway so the girl will have no idea that is what I am doing. And likely has no idea we matched before. It is very rare anyway
I do see the same girls reappearing - sometimes every week (or less). Which is clearly a case of them not matching with the chads they want and having another go round and hoping those guys swipe right when given another chance. That’s my assumption at least. Not sure if anyone has any other theories as to why they constantly reboot profiles
But those kinds of girls who do that don’t really match with me anyway. So there isn’t scope for me to get precious about them ghosting me. Because it doesn’t even get that far !
And quick meets are obviously the aim but when you aren’t close by in a major city people tend to avoid work nights . And there is only so much weekend time available - for them and me
pale_taco 2y ago
Your fourth paragraph down... As I said, I think this heavily ties into the online dating dynamic. Most of the women I've met irl claim that I'm one of the first guys they even messaged online. Others say they get tons of messages to come over and fuck but it's a turn off (we know, you're not "that" kinda girl
InevitableOwl1 2y ago
My fourth para was about girls deleting and recreating profiles? Not sure your reply here talks about that or am I just not following ?
The “date or two” dance before sex certainly explains why even when a date seems to go ok there is no second one - happens to me nearly every time.
Because it may have gone “ok” (as in wasn’t objectively awful) but the woman has decided she won’t be sleeping with you and knows a second date would be far too encouraging of that .
pale_taco 2y ago
Right, there's two types of CC rider's. Those that have been on for a while and those just jumping on after college breakup divorce, etc.
I have better luck with fresh Tinderellas but ya gotta be quick or else you miss out.
I don't care about matches if it's the same skanky ones I didn't match with last time I downloaded the ap.
Subtle_Demise 2y ago
Chad probably sent her a message and she had to jump on it.
askmrcia 2y ago
Most likely. I had women actually admit it to me off rip.
Let me see if I can find examples from my archive of screenshots.
Edit: found one
https://imgur.com/a/mu79FgF
InevitableOwl1 2y ago
Oh I’m almost certain. Either that day or the night before
It really is the only explanation that fully explains everything - notably the lack of the usual “I’ve realised I’m not ready to date right now” or “I’ve been thinking and I don’t think we have any chemistry/spark” (which they can apparently work out without ever having met you)
Subtle_Demise 2y ago
Happened to me once, but during the date. The guy she was talking to before me started texting her again. Sure enough the date ended pretty quickly. Weird thing though, the guy ended up dying a few months later
dosgratis 2y ago
This is common. And you can bet when she told it to her friends she was the victim in the story
InevitableOwl1 2y ago
I’d be fascinated to learn how such a thing could possibly be spun as her being the victim !
dosgratis 2y ago
Oh it’s easy. She could say she felt you made her feel uncomfortable. “Can you believe he pressured her into choosing where to go to eat? That man indecisive. Red flag.” slash can you believe he pressured her into going to his choice of restaurant, is this man domineering? red flag. He said he’ll pick her up in an Uber? What he doesn’t have his own car? Red flag. Slash he uses Uber? But they’re run by men and don’t hire enough women. Red flag. Slash he asked her to meet him at the date spot and didn’t offer to pick her up? … …
[deleted] 2y ago
The pigeon that literally shat on my head this morning had no ill intentions. I think the same applies here.
Go out there and expose yourself to more pain, it's like hitting the gym, you only get stronger.
Goldmansachs3030 2y ago
Pigeons never have that.They just follow what Nike says and fly away.
manfrom-nantucket 2y ago
Sorry man. On the bright side, it is likely your saved yourself the aggravation of dealing with a nutbag.
Typo-MAGAshiv Mod 2y ago
They exist. They're just incredibly hard to find, and the onus to prove they're good is on them.
lamarjeff 2y ago
For real. I’ve never heard any men saying where are all the good women
ThatGuyNicho 2y ago
This seems like as good a place to ask this question as any, and I've been thinking about it for a long time now: Does anyone know what the mirror equivilent for subs like this, TRP, and MGTOW (god rest its soul) would be? The "enemy camp", so to speak?
The only ones I know of that even come close are FemaleDatingStrategy and possibly NiceGuys, but they don't seem to translate as nearly. As far as I know, there is no "Where have all the good women gone?" subreddit.
Why do I want to know? Because it's my belief that you need to look at what your enemies actually say about you, and are planning to do to/about you. You can't gather intelligence if you stay inside your fortress.
If anyone knows where the other side are actually talking about the same things the manosphere does, I'd be very intrigued to know.
mistralol 2y ago
Thats caused its normally discussed as "commitment issues"
manfrom-nantucket 2y ago
because we realize that about 10% of the female population is wife material. Avoid the rest
waveformcollapse 2y ago
It is a sad state for men these days.
I think part of the problem is that we can't unite and use the government to pass laws the same way that women do. Women aren't afraid to cry to the government to get free things and preferential treatment.
cautionTomorrow555 2y ago
Among women below 30 I found around 70% of them attractive enough to date, but personality wise it was more around 20% that means around 14% of women are good enough to date and almost all of that 14% is already taken.
kidruhil 2y ago
The competition for those is fierce. Structure your life accordingly or make peace with a life lf solitude.
cautionTomorrow555 2y ago
It gets even worse when you are older I now only find about 20% of women attractive enough because women do not take care of themselves in their 20s thinking it will last forever and 20% * 20% = 4%. I made peace with a life of solitude because of this.
InevitableOwl1 2y ago
This. I’m always extremely wary when I read women’s profile where they admit to “never” using the gym
If they are in their 30s then it means they look terrible right now.
If they are in their 20s it means they will look terrible. But not only that they are likely the sort of women who naturally look good and thus have a lot of entitlement. And this doesn’t go away even when they lose their figures
cautionTomorrow555 2y ago
One of my ex girlfriends is like this when she was younger when we were dating she hot around an 8 to 9, but now that she is in her 40s she has put on 80 pounds because she enjoys food and refused to workout. This is the same one who messaged me apologizing for how she treated me saying things like I didn't deserve to be treated that way and acted like she wanted to get back together now that I have money. You did everything in your power to take the biggest dump on my heart back then and are now 80 pounds heavier and expect me to take you back? I was polite about it, but no fucking way in hell even I have more backbone and self-respect than that.
kidruhil 2y ago
I'm 31, 32 just a few weeks from now.
I'm meeting young 19-24 year old girls at church right now and loving it. Way better than the shit i used to date
cautionTomorrow555 2y ago
Make sure they go to the gym and help them watch what they eat/drink otherwise they will wind up looking like the busted 30s women I see. I would also say to avoid having kids because that really causes them to age rapidly, but if they are attending church that is unlikely to happen.
kidruhil 2y ago
Already have full custody of 2 and want more.
Mormon culture used to be extremely controlling so there'd be lots of girls there that didn't really want to be trad wives but these days, all those chicks just go to school away from home so them willingly being in the building is a pretty good sign already. Knock on wood of course and I'm still screening like a MFer for red flags.
But ya I've been absolutely shocked by the responses I've gotten when I share that I have kids and full custody of them. Haven't seen 1 girl balk or start looking for excuses to bounce. If anything they get more curious and interested about how im doing it. Admittedly, I'm in the best shape of my life, I'm making over 6 figures now, and my military status are all helping me out a shit ton but still, I never expected to be in this position. 2022 is looking up. Keep your heads up, Kings.
moorekom Mod 2y ago
A minor correction about the purpose of the sub: WAATGM primarily exists to point and laugh. It is a humor sub. On that front, it is no different to hundreds of other subs in reddit. Unlike these other subs, like trashy for an example, our focus is limited. Secondary to that, we want men (and the few women who lurk and the even fewer amount who contribute) to learn from the mistakes of others. We do not want the shaming to shift to men, as it always does in other places. This is why we have the "No shaming men" rule in place.
We do not care if the women (whose profiles get posted to WAATGM) get their "comeuppance" or not. We will point and laugh, hope to learn a thing or two and we will move on. We don't plan to open a club or start a movement. Anyone with a different opinion can always comment here, as long as they stay respectful, present their argument logically and do not devolve into using shaming language. We are not against discussions, but we do not tolerate debates. The difference between the two is marked by civility, respect, a willingness to hear the other side and to learn from it.
The agenda of the original article and its writer should be very clear by now. This is not an article written to understand why people subscribe to such an opinion or why such a sub would exist in the first place. This is a hit piece aimed at the sub and all the members in it (including the few women members) simply because the author finds it iffy that we don't subscribe to his beliefs and hold it sacrosanct as he does. If he had chosen to come to our comment section and tried to clarify his questions respectfully, many people would have had a discussion with him and informed him why they hold a certain opinion. He could have respectfully presented his counter-opinion and both parties could have learned a thing or two and come out with improved and nuanced opinions. Instead, he chose to write this hit-piece and he pretends to be better than what he claims we are doing.
SnuSnuClownWorld 2y ago
He really dug for some great memes. Mind you for how much he bitched about the profile posting, maybe he should've posted a few more grabs of those. But that might counter his preordained narrative
InevitableOwl1 2y ago
The profile grabs are not shared because they absolutely don’t fit a narrative. They are much harder to dispute or counter
Sure the odd one you get seems far too outlandish but most are legit how women represent themselves. Notably the list of demands with no mention of what they offer in return
They run the scale on level of outrageousness but they are very much real.
Articles can often contain hyperbole and some have the potential to be written by people who are not what they seem. Especially on more obscure sites / blogs. And as for Reddit posts - there have been more than one that read very much like they are written by men to try and see if the internet thinks their partner’s actions are outrageous.
Or some where there is likely a guy swapping the genders in order to get ACTUAL relationship advice from Reddit rather than getting shamed and called insecure when questioning the behaviour of their other half
(As per Rule 3 I have no real proof other than gut feeling and am not referring to any article in specific. And in some cases I am talking about articles discussed on YouTube channels like Ribby and Strong Success Male - don’t listen to the latter anymore. He seemed to fall into the trap of articles that really didn’t seem real)
But dating profiles are generally real. It is really not uncommon to see a profile of 4/10 (at best) 34 year old woman who doesn’t look in shape at all despite exercise claims (so clearly eats too much) who:
And wants a man with:
I list this as this is one that has appeared on my feed who I can see has “liked” my profile. This is on the “mild” end and not likely worthy of it’s own post here. But still illustrates the point. Actual evidence of someone asking for an awful lot whilst not listing ANYTHING in return. And that’s not including any criteria not listed
This is my very long winded way of saying that profiles are pretty much the gold standard of “evidence” for this sub in my view because women get to write them and put them out in the world and honestly think they are appropriate. Putting screengrabs in this hit piece would undermine it and the author knows it
polishknightusa 2y ago
Aside from him twisting the narrative, he unintentionally provided some great exposure.
Typo-MAGAshiv Mod 2y ago
Maybe, if that site didn't have such a tiny audience.
That's why I laugh whenever our detractors whine about us in other subs, though; they send the curious with open minds our way.
handemande1 2y ago
A good writeup without going misogynist. Nice job