Herbivore men, MGTOW or MGTOWWW

Herbivore men, MGTOW or MGTOWWW, which way must it be?  The discussion of who may and who may not be properly designating himself MGTOW (one of the Men Going Their Own Way), often becomes heated.  That is because men who wish to consider themselves MGTOW run the whole spectrum of intersexual relations.  This explores some of the circumstances in the absence of firm laws for the subject.

Here is a link to the MGTOW manifesto (apparently published originally at menforjustice.net/ — that website no longer exists) : https://exposingfeminism.wordpress.com/mgtow-manifesto/

Nothing in there states that married men cannot be MGTOW.

A somewhat more recent version of the MGTOW manifesto was published at http://www.mgtowhistory.com/ but that version says nothing about married men not being able to be MGTOW.

It appears to be clear that the intent was to create MGTOW, not MGTOWWW (Men Going Their Own Way Without Women)

The West is somewhat lagging with any of those developments. Japan has had for quite some years a strong movement (first popularized in 2008 – 2009) of MGTOWWW that attracted, and now even much more so, a large and growing fraction of men. The Japanese labelled such men Herbivores or Grass Eaters, at about the same time someone thought of the MGTOW label in the West, where the phenomenon did not attract as much attention, although it had been prevailing and growing there as well.
More: http://huntergatherer.com/rise-of-the-22grass-eaters222c-fall-of-japan/

A Google search for “Herbivore men” produces 397,000 results, while one for “MGTOW” produces 421,000 results.  Keep in mind that those are results for English-language searches. A Google search for 草食(系)男子 (Herbivore men) produces 580,000 results.

That sparks the question of whether MGTOW and MGTOWWW who want to force the West to its knees want to be outdone by a few Japanese. It appears that Herbivore men in Japan are a force to be reckoned with, while MGTOW and MGTOWWW have a long way to go before they make their first splash in the mainstream media.

Men’s rights, MGTOW, Herbivore Men, and Women’s rights, revisited (2018 03 20)

Three years forward, and a new look at the relative prospects of men’s rights, MGTOW, 草食(系)男子and women’s rights (using Google Trends, 2018 03 20) indicates something different.  The “gender” rights landscape and its vistas are changing.  That will, of course, be seen as a threat to the welfare of professional feminists, who all along had been constructing their careers by promoting what they called women’s rights (and earned copious incomes from doing so).

If I were a professional feminist, I would worry about some real competition that seems poised to break the feminist monopoly on social engineering.  Take a look at this:

“Gender” rights are fine, from the perspective of individual “genders”. Feminism has not been kind to more socially constructive orientations, namely the fortunes and fates of heterosexual families (a.k.a. the traditional nuclear family).

There is no indication that MGTOW and herbivore men (a.k.a. 草食(系)男子) will do any less harm to the traditional nuclear family than feminism did during the last 50 years. It would not even be fair to blame the decline of the traditional nuclear family entirely on feminism, although feminism was most certainly the primary driving force that brought about the accelerating decline of the traditional nuclear family.

Families are far more important than men’s rights, MGTOW, herbivore men, and women’s rights combined. Families are the basic building blocks of society. Without families, societies, nations and civilizations die. So, how concerned have people been about family rights during the last 13 years or so?  How did their interest in family rights fare?  Let’s add family rights to the set of trends.

Well! That is interesting!  The public’s interest in families is in decline and considerably less than the public’s interest in women’s rights and in MGTOW.  Each of the latter two is considerably more of a social force than is the general and declining interest in the most important issue of all, the one thing that will keep civilization alive and well.

When we have no more families (or when we have an insufficient number of healthy, thriving, productive and constructive families), there won’t be much of a civilization anymore.  Curiously, within a generation or so after that, there won’t be all that many men and women (it won’t matter at all of which sexual or social orientation they’ll claim to prefer) who will fight over their respective equitable shares of the ruins and rubble of civilization.

Those will be interesting times, and I am certainly most happy that my wife and I won’t live long enough to observe how that will all work out.

That is just one of the possible scenarios.  It is the default scenario, when things will proceed the way we want them to go.  It won’t go that way.  The general decline in the number of  traditional nuclear families that will no longer suffice to keep our civilization alive does not matter when we import sufficient Islamic immigrants.  That will keep things going and alive, but only if we hurry up with bringing in enough of them, so that there will still be some people left who will convert to Islam.

Bringing feminism into the picture (2018 03 21)

When you contemplate how much the public’s interest in MGTOW has grown in the last few years, and if you are a man who considers himself MGTOW, you must feel good and encouraged.  Still, we must look at feminism, too, because feminism dominates and controls everything.  So, let’s look at the trends for Men’s rights, Women’s rights, Family rights, MGTOW, and Feminism.  Good, solid family rights that dominate all other interests and ideologies will keep our Western culture and civilization alive.

Things don’t look so good, according to that comparison. To re-cap,

  • Feminism dominates everything and has done so for at least the last 50 years.  Feminism’s primary objective is to abrogate the traditional, nuclear family.  It does so because it considers the institution of the traditional, nuclear family (called, true to feminism’s Marxist roots, terminology and traditions, the ‘patriarchal family’)  to be the root of all evil, wherefore
  • Women’s rights were in steady decline all along, as feminism is not as much about women’s rights as it is about demonizing the role of women as mothers in traditional nuclear families, wherefore
  • Men’s rights were long at the bottom of society’s priority list (look for the blue line, right at the bottom of the graph). Men’s rights were of course down-rated all along, because that needed to be done to make fathers the weakest link in the family, a prerequisite for expediting the systematic deconstruction of the institution of the family, wherefore
  • The men’s movement emerged, in which at first fathers’ rights activists dominated but could not prevail against the tsunami of feminism that inundated everything (aside from the precipitous decline in the demand for fathers, to be replaced with payers of child support, a tax on men who dared to father children), upon which MGTOW emerged and became the leading faction in the men’s movement, more occupied with the idea that the removal of foreskins is a gross human rights violation (which is of course correct), and that men need to be liberated from slaving for families and children, than that men should have the right to propagate within the context of orderly, productive and constructive families, not so much catering to the fundamental right of children to have fathers in their lives, therefore
  • Family rights continued their inexorable decline (seen in the yellow line in the graph), which will eventually cause families to vanish altogether or at best to become an oddity, a social abnormality and curiosity.

That leaves the unavoidable conclusion and prediction that the disappearance of the prevalence of the traditional nuclear family will bring about the outcome desired by the proponents of world-wide population control (the real elephant in the living room), who have been doing all along their best to initiate and put into motion the reduction of the world population down to about a billion people or less by about the year 2300, to bring once and for all an end to the spreading cancer of humanity on the face of Gaea, Mother Earth.

It could be said that UNICEF, UNFPA, USAID, the IMF and the World Bank are the riders of the apocalypse of human civilization.

Links of Interest

This entry was posted in Family, Islamic migration, Men's Issues, Social-Destruction Enterprise, The New World Order. Bookmark the permalink.