MGTOW

Women already outnumber men so that shit won't work.
You are expecting women to think logically like you.
You are expecting them to say since there aren't a lot of men then I will take any man I can get.
That is not how it is going to happen. All the women will fight for one or two men in that pool and continue ignoring the others.

they also wouldn't have the welfare state to take care of them, if this happened

I think it might be better for the male to female ratio to remain in its current state. Females slightly outnumber males by making up about 50.6% of the population. If men outnumbered females, which they are not even close to doing, most cucks would only white knight to a greater extreme. If women outnumbered men, that is, even more than they do, things would be much worse, and, as you mentioned, there would be more women in authority. And men having a bigger selection would not make up for these problems they would face.

this is going to sound like white knighting, but it isn't. I want to see the female role taken over by technology.
It isn't 3DPD, 3DPD can't do much if not allowed, and helped by men, betas will cuck for 3DPD, give them power, attack the men who don't want to be under the boot of 3DPD, and protect them, because they think by doing this 3DPD will fuck them, this comes from there being men being 50% of a population get worse as that number goes up
3DPD wouldn't have more power, just because there are more of them,

JEWS GO THEIR OWN WAY

In my opinion, there is no point in replacing one for a digital version. Why would females be any different by being, as it were, digitally remastered? And why wouldn't 3DPD have more power by becoming an even larger portion of the population?

men don't want 3DPD for what they are, they want the illusion of what a 3DPD can give; a loving, caring, loyal partner, this isn't what 3DPD is. The difference between a sexbot and a 3DPD is that the sexbot doesn't have any motive.
sexbots won't be hypergamous, and pass a certain level of sophistication they will be better in all ways then a 3DPD
they are weak, stupid, and depend on men for survival. Their dependence isn't as apparent now, because the government is big enough to take money from men, and give it to 3DPD, effectively making men collectively provide for 3DPD.
with men only being 25% of the population, there won't be enough money, and 3DPD will have to go back to trying to be provided for the old way.

I can see your point. This makes sense, but it doesn't take into account all that can go wrong with a reduction of males. For example, there would be a greater amount of incompetency that would, sooner or later, jeopardize the male population.

not if you don't let the incompetence into places where their inability can do harm, but I do see a problem with not enough males willing to jobs that are necessary to the survival of civilization, and 3DPD won't be able to do it because they are useless

Why don't you tell us how you want all men to be turned into little boys?

that is just a fetish

I'll take a vaccine so that this never happens to me.

males aren't actually disposable, anyone who really thinks they are is scum.

it is a simple matter of numbers

...

...

Vaccines are for viruses, not bacteria, you dingus.

Male disposability doesn't refer to them actually being disposable. Only feminists think that, and they won't admit it. Male disposability is referring to the fact that society treats men as disposable, and values their lives far, far less than the lives of females.

Exactly. But this is part of the incompetence that I'm talking about. If the majority of jobs and positions were to end up occupied by 3DPD, the end of civilization will be inevitable.

How would DNA be modified through a bacterial infection?

the future might be fun

whoops

No. The problem is laws are biased against men. So it just means if your ideal concept happened you still have 4x the amount to get divorce raped and taken to the cleaners.

MGTOW IS FUNDED BY THE GAY COMMUNITY

Daily reminder.

DO YOU MEAN DAILY REMINDER THAT CUCKS WILL SAY ANYTHING WHEN THEY HAVE NO REAL ARGUMENT AGAINST SOMETHING?

laws voted for and put in place by 3DPD, allowed and protected by betas looking for sex, with men being only 25%, the betas wouldn't have lick 3DPD's assholes anymore to get sex maybe

thats pathetic user

Because designer babies certainly are gonna be 100% percent of the population.

Whoops.

only the best should mate. only the smartest, strongest, fastest, most beautiful, most healthy, most flexible, and so on and so on should ever mate. everyone else should just stop. that is how you fix everything.

...

this is why none of my children will be born in this shithole of a country which will only get worse (uk).

i have no ambition of never having kids or a job or real friends or a future of political correctness or living in a country like that.

if europe doesn't smash this AI im going to find somewhere it can't get me, bad people are controlling it.

you can break yourself free and serve the people.

What does any of this have to do with MGTOW?

I just don't get why you guys are so damn vocal about this shit. I mean if you're going your own way then what's the purpose of bitching about the society you left behind? It's not like you're men's rights activists because they don't go their own way. They fight for the rights of their identity in the mainstream or the "mainway".

Why would someone think that in the first place? First for what purpose are they disposable, breeding? If that's the case then yeah I guess but women will be too soon enough. There's really not much else that men are disposable for. Keep in mind that by disposable I don't mean not needed at all, just barely needed.

and kikes love it for the goyim

Calm down m'am.

I am a proud wizard, not a memegtow

They are mad because now only stupid people are breeding.

it is going to work on adult too

Even if this happened, I still would avoid 3DPD.
I know too much about them, to ever think I could love one of them.

take that up with civilization, not me

Keep telling yourself that degenerate!

it will be harder sure, but if start with making yourself ageless, then you have all the time you need

have we finally killed our desires to preserve our genes or are you guys just fucking stupid

Sounds legit to me.

Men who believe they have to get involved in relationships only to satisfy women probably shouldn't be getting into relationships anyway, since those are the ones who end up raising beta cucks and sluts, thanks to single motherhood, or their own cuck nature.

Women are merely participants who serve for nothing more than helping you to ensure your kid is protected and has everything they need while you're away earning the kid's future.

If you're in a relationship for any reason other than to raise strong white children, you probably shouldn't even be in a relationship at all, since you still have a lot of learning to do, before you claim you know "the truth" about relationships.

Let me break it down to you: MGTOW has nothing to do with race, or even breeding, for that matter. It's about men realizing they have everything to lose by pursuing modern women, and everything to gain by divorcing themselves from them.
I'm not sure what society you live in, but this is not the one in which most MGTOWs reside.

This is what a right-wing feminist looks like

You don't need to be in a relationship to impregnate. Why are people suddenly pretending that you do?

The game is rigged. The closest you can get to winning is to not play.

females can only reproduce once every 9 months, in that 9 months a man could maybe cum 5 times every day, in that ejaculate would be millions of sperm which could each theoretically inseminate a female.

so men are infinitesimally less important to society, to the point where they are approximately worthless (with regards to reproduction at least). thats why its "women and children first", thats why men go to war, not because of what the white knights believe - heroics or chivalry - but because they are surplus to requirement with regards to sustaining a "society".

the problems isnt numbers, the problem is attitudes towards masculinity. men as fathers (patriarchs), lovers, leaders are being demonised by feminism in their quest to rid the world of the patriarchy. men are literally patriarchs if they are fathers. men are natural born leaders because they make decisions based on logic and not with emotion. thats why there are literal patriarchs in roles of power. will to power to some sense is a masculine trait, men dominate while women tend to be more submissive, so ofcourse people who occupy positions of power will tend to be men.

consider that within 4 generations, your average relatedness to your descendent would be 6.25%. its is theoretically possible by unfavourable meiosis that number could be significantly smaller, if not 0. the small percentage of genes you may pass on would in no way have to be favourable. you could give your great great grandchild a gene that gives them cancer and nothing else. for this reasons for anyone to think their genes being better than anyone elses for passing on takes a certain level of egotism / solipsism.

anyone who believes that their genes are better for passing on simply because their genes are theirs is begging the question and would need to provide a better rationale for why it is so important that their genes persist.

by that logic it would make sense to have some aryan bull to inseminate all the white women and you could be a cuck to her. this is where the Holla Forums logic demonstrates their cuckoldry. having kids with degenerate feminist women creates degenerate bastard feminist kids makes them cucks to a feminist society.

perhaps the preoccupation in society with passing on ones genes has been deliberately contrived to keep people under control for the reasons i will address below

anti-feminism =/= male feminism

in the same way that

water =/= liquid fire

medicine =/= a healing form of disease

anyone who is anti-anti-feminism is a feminist

although not explicitly stated in this instance, this sentiment is usually expressed as

this is reductionist existential nihlism and therefore degenerate and doesnt even have logical scientific basis as i demonstrated in this post

And the majority of men would not fall into that category. You're just re-iterating the necessity of MGTOW.

feminism
feminism
feminism
feminism
feminism
feminism is a product of culture, culture comes from economics, and that comes from biology. I agree with you that feminism is a tumor, best removed, but it isn't the source of the cancer. The reason traditional roles are being eroded now are because the roles men once used to make up for his disposability are being taken by technology, thus making an environment where 3DPD have less use of a man, so they can get away treating men like utilities and nothing else.
A tumor is a problem, but the cancer (biology) is a bigger problem. You can remove all the tumors you want, but the patient will still die.
My plan effects biology, which will effect the economics, thus effects culture.
This doesn't end forever in bringing back traditional roles. The answer to gynocentrism isn't in culture, it is either in economics (sexbots) or biology (changing it so either 3DPD are as disposable men, or making men as valuable as 3DPD)

you've understood me wrong, if you want to be evolutionarily successful you need to reproduce, that's literally the only way.
when you produce, you'll have to make sure your genes keep on living and also manage to reproduce
the best way to ensure your genes further themselves is by good raising of your offspring (handing them your knowledge) and making sure they stay alive
raising kids the right way means that you need both parents for a good/solid family base (assertion, but there is actual evidence for this, look it up)
having both parents means a relationship between the two generally
therefore, to be successful evolutionarily, you need relationships to make sure they have this base and receive your knowledge

MGTOW is a conspiracy to reduce the size of the white population worldwide over time. It's not a coincidence that only white men seem to be the proponents of the movement. The sad thing is it is working spectacularly as evidenced by threads like this.

I think it is precisely this that makes men superior in reproduction. They are more capable of creating life than the female who, in my opinion, is more expendable in procreation. But overall, I strongly agree with your post, especially your view on genes, and also your view on anti-feminism having nothing to do with male feminism.

YOU COULD HAVE STOPPED IT. YOU HAD TO PUT FLORIDE IN DA WATTA. YOU HAD TO MAKE DA FROGS GHEY

you got me there

interesting view point that probably holds some truth

the problem is you are neglecting that there could be a contrived agenda, a political one

women are being turned into degenerates to turn men into cucks to degenerate women

it links into reasons why things like the personnel department at workplaces turned into "human resources" people have been reduced to being nothing more than a utility for the simple reason of making them more productive and easily to manipulate

consider that the original feminist cause was suffrage, which is a political issue, which your model neglected to address. voting is masculine, it is better done by men because men are logical and dont typically vote emotively. traditionally voting wasnt seen as a right, it was seen as a burden, a responsibility. women were then convinced that suffrage was something that they should have, when in reality it stripped them of their femininity making them more degenerate. the reason why this was done is because women are more easily to manipulate because they vote emotively. it also had the effect of devaluing men because their burden was turned into a commodity. and this theme repeats in all tenants of feminism. for eg women going to work, a masculine trait, degrades femininity made men literally redundant, makes everyones living standards more shitty as pay decreased because of supply and demand, this was done to make more people available to be wage slaves and for them to be able to be paid less.

its not technology thats making men redundant, its politicised feminism

Good goy, don't reproduce. There's too many whites already anyway, diversity is our strength.

when did darwinism become a "how to guide" for life?

a biological theory regarding minute changes over millions of years, involving millions of organisms reproducing millions of times become a template for how to live one life over the course of less than 100 years.

genes are selfish, evolution is the by product of a game they play, we are simply the survival machines the replicators made to increase their rate of survival. you are just one survival machine that a gene will occupy, you dont own those genes, you are just some vehicle for them, they existed long before you and will carry on existing long after you are gone whether you reproduce or not. you are not a special snow flake, any particular combination of genes that come together to make up one survival machine is all but arbitrary from their point of view. genes are programmed, once you are formed whether you fuck or not is out of their control, they rolled the dice and gave you the best possible chance that they could to let them replicate again but their bets are almost certainly not riding with just you as your copies of them will almost certainly not be the only copies. your life to them is the equivalent of being card in a game of cards, you are one chance they have out of many, once you are finished your use you get thrown on the discard pile. their point of view is from that of one genes frequency in a population.

your point of view on the other hand is one particular combination of genes with a frequency in the population of 1 in 7billion. if you manged to reproduce once, youd make another set of your genes. youd now have 1.5 sets of your genes. but as i have stated here in 4 generations your relatedness would be on average about 0.06 to a grandchild, youd be dead so your big 1 for you would be gone. so within the space of about maybe 200-300 years, a fart in the life time of genes and evolution. your combination of genes would all but ceased to exist. within a thousand years your combinations non existence would almost be certain. your contribution to evolution is utterly meaningless. anyone who would be preoccupied with using evolution for life plan has compulsions based on delusions.

as you have rightly pointed out though, the only thing a man can hope to pass on are his memes, his wisdom, his traditions (such as religion), his name that can live on down the ages. thats the world human beings live in, that is our zoom level and thats where our society exists. if a man wants to fuck a white woman, raise white kids, and teach them that fucking monekys is a moral then that is his legacy that could be passed on down the ages long after he is dead.

but this is where feminism and modern degeneracy fuck us up. women will divorce your ass, you wont get custody of the kids, you get to see them every other saturday whilst she keeps the up all night fucking tyrone and telling you what pathetic loser you are. theyl probably growing up being degenerate atheists.

celibacy is one of the most powerful memes because it frees up an individual to spend more time spreading and cultivating his memes becasue he isnt tied down by parenting. if your kids arent going to inherit your memes because their degenerate feminist mother and politicised feminist society is stopping them then your time and energy is better off invested elsewhere. hence mgtow is born. yes mgtow is anti feminism in one sense. but it is also an ESS with regards to meme replication. mgtow typically begins with moving the focus of a persons life away from women and reproduction and then it moves onto sharing of information and ideas

and its worth pointing out again this is where Holla Forums fuck up. theyd want to have degenerate kids to degenerate women who they cant imprint their memes onto. then they have to go out and be good little subservient wage slave goyim to pay for child support, taking up all their time they could spend cultivating and spreading their memes, their legacy.

think about it, for every kid you bring into the world who grows up to be a degenerate blue pilled feminist. not only are you spending energy trying support them through child support. but you have created something that stands for and negates any values you stand for, unless you are degenerate feminists like Holla Forums. inb4 nawalt. all occidental women believe they should have the right to vote and go to work, therefore all women are feminists, therefore all women are degenerate therefore there is no such thing as a nawalt

Yep. The jews won.

Maybe normalfags should have thought a bit harder about whether or not Hitler actually did anything wrong.

already shown how this logic is false and leads to cuckoldry to feminist system in the post you quoted and now also in >>7321075

unless you want to construct a counter argument rather just relying on doubling down / contradiction you can be dismissed as either retarded or a troll, either way you are a feminist cuck

just a little reminder Holla Forums that you arent in your little feminist propaganda distributing hugbox here

trolling and asking for bans isnt going stand in place of argument against anti-feminism here

i do think it a little ironic that Holla Forums has better discourse and better balance than Holla Forums

the ideal life for a /po/tard

...

...

I don't think the papercraft and origami board is going to judge people for their terrible life decisions

3DPD are being more degenerate now because there are no consequences social or biological besides the odd STD.
I group political into culture since it is subject to economics

the only thing that has changed in the last 500 years was technology, and the prosperity it brought.

I love teasing and arousing girls and then not acting on it.
Some even end up addicted to it and they keep coming back to be teased some more.
To be honest, MGTOW has one flaw: not being an expert in the matter of relationships makes you vulnerable to deceit.

How can it do this if you don't trust anybody to begin with?

i propose you have described the how and not the why

not all culture and policies come from economics

art doesnt come from technology, dreams dont come from technology, policies concerning social matters or even crime dont always stem from technology eg whether a murder should be given the death penalty for killing someone with their bare hands has nothing to with technology. sexuality has very little to do with technology (which is wholy relevant to our discussion) eg whether faggotry is a moral has nothing to do with technology.

philosophy has changed

or suppose philosophy is a by product of technology and not the other way around?

il help you out, philosophy begets the sciences which begets technology, philosophy has more of a bearing on culture than technology does, not to play down the importance of technology.

technology is a tool of society. you dont have religions based around your toaster, religion being one of the biggest domains of human culture, encompassing art, music, morality, etc, etc. if your home was the realm of the human experience, technology would be the spanner in your shed, your entire home life isnt based around that spanner and you cant explain all the actions you make within that home based on that spanner.

memes are constantly evolving, memes existed before technology and can evolve completely independently of technology in the human psyche

regardless, your comments are contradictory, suffrage is a social political issue that is independent of technology, i described a mechanism for this and all you could do was make a statement that is absolute with no evidence to support it ie [citation needed]. your comment didnt beg for me to offer examples to the contrary of your claim because you didnt provide your own evidence for your claims

why do these sorts of arguments pop up so often?

this kind of reductionist thinking is pretty degenerate because it reduces the whole of human experience to on line of thinking.

is this what universities do to people? im guessing not all the people who adopt these narrow reality tunnels are graduates / drop outs but perhaps academia has an agenda to compartmentalize human thought.

this user is winning at life

both biology and environment play a part in shaping "the human experience" and we are talking groups, not a person

...

Why are you people so obsessed with male virginity? Are you so stupid as to think there's a skill in busting a nut in a vagina?

literally what?

a significant amount of discourse in the mgtow sphere is people who have been married / been in relationships and had kids etc passing on their negative experiences to warn people

calling mgtow a philosophy of virgins would be like calling combat veterans warning people about the brutality of war, civilians who are lying about their service

which leads into another point

even if virgins want to talk about how bad women are that isnt particularly redundant or reprehensible

you dont have to contract aids to understand that its not a particularly pleasant experience and to be able to discuss taking precautions to prevent exposure.

and worth a reminder that anti-anti-feminism is feminism. if you are telling men that they can only find worth when they are imbibing from the holy grail (ie the vagina). then you are attacking masculinity, a typical endeavour of feminism

also its worth point out that

this is SJW "logic" that leads into ides such as the progressive stack

funny how being a virgin in this scenario would actually be a position of privilege. Implying that men actually lose something when they prostrate themselves before venus. i guess when phrased like this it is a truism.

embed somewhat related

...

prevention is better than cure

I can't wait for this

...

birth control is one of the biggest reasons why 3DPD are the way they are now, plus with the Internet made the world much bigger to her, so she can be a slut
technology freed 3DPD to be whores
that is just wrong
the industrial revolution had a far more pronounced effect then any philosophy ever had
yeah, because before language was a thing it shared all the dank memes
when I say technology I don't mean one thing, I mean collected human knowledge and attributes.
what do you think provided the environment where 3DPD got into their small brain to start demanding voting rights?
feminism is your patriarchy, and while I do agree it would be best it were removed, it isn't gong to solve problems

nice misrepresentation of an argument boio
i never said it was the whole of the human experience.
all I said that it's also important to spread your genes. biological fact.
you can misrepresent me all you want but this is just retarded man.
try actually tackling my arguments next time ;)

How have you not killed yourself yet?

lack of balls, and I am not sure if technology is going to make life great or not

Why wouldn't it?

it could be used to control people, AI could kill as all, we could become something akin to the brog.
It is a good thing, and the only way the future is going to get better, but are many things that could go wrong, also I don't know if this kind of tech is going to happening in my lifetime, by 30 I should have a good idea of where I am in relation to the singularity, and if it looks like I am not going to see it, then I'll kill myself

How old are you? I suspect the tech is here but is being avoided for reasons unknown. Maybe it's due to others who share your feelings on this.

20
it takes money, reason, skill to put things together.
People like me know the benefits far outweigh the risks
also there are just things we need to find a way around.
processors are getting to the size of a few atoms

I'm not much older. I think we will witness a dramatic transformation in each of our lifetime. But in order for this take place, people need to quit resisting such ideas and learn to accept them as the only hope for mankind.

I don't think we can, most people just want a new iPhone 500
I mean shit, the only thing that driven technological progress has been capitalism, and that will stop when 80% of people of are out of work due a robot.

at this point im convinced your either retarded or a troll, either way this my last reply to you

my argument

and went on to illustrate that point

your argument

backed up only with a claim that begs citation and / or with no supporting reasoning

your "argument" is therefore contradictory in nature

your non argument is clear enough by the reasoning above but i would just like to highlight the retardation of your position.

i posit and provide an argument that philosophy gives birth to and encompasses technology, you then contradict this and claim that technology is greater than philosophy

than would be like me saying that the universe gave birth to the solar system and the solar system is within the universe and you saying that, no, the solar system is greater than the universe

you had your own interpretation of the word "technology" that is unique from its commonly accepted use and expected me to instantly understand it, when it only exists in your own mind. this shows a massive lack of empathy and a level off solipsism that is consistent with autism

condescending fuck

perhaps it would be better to say that the types of argument are quick to place reasoning on considerations that are either wholly unrelated or put over emphasis on them.

mgotw is but not exclusively a financial, emotional, societal, gender, spiritual endeavour. if you say that

i would say that

i would also say that genetics is logically one of the least of a persons concerns

i have discussed why this is wrong elsewhere in the thread i cba to link them but they are links from replies to the post that this conversation is referencing

why dont you try actually tackling my arguments next time

just because you are such a special rude degenerate fuck, il include a quote for you anyway

>we were built as genes machines, created to pass on our genes. but this aspect of us will be forgotten in three generations. you child, even your grandchild, may bear a resemblance to you, perhaps in facial features, in talent for music, in the colour of her hair. but as each generation passes the contributions of your genes is halved. it does not take long to reach negligible proportions. our genes may be immortal but the collection of genes that is any one of us is bound to crumble away. Elizabeth II is a direct descendant of william the conqueror. yet it is quite probable that she bears not as single one of the old kings genes. we should not seek immortality in reproduction

dawkins - the selfish gene

it begs consideration as to why this belief you hold is so pervasive. perhaps we are actually being farmed like cattle and people have been brainwashed into believing this falsity to make them a more productive human resource

This is very true. But I have always believed it was capitalism that is the greatest hindrance to the arrival of the singularity. At first glance it appears to inspire technology, but in the long run it holds it back because people get satisfied to easily before any dramatic change can take place. The good news is that people are as capable of changing as technology, and pessimism will only hold us back. Also, it will be robots that will make it possible to arrive at the singularity.

K. I hope you kill feminism, and learn this isn't a matter of philosophy but a matter of biology interacting with an environment it didn't evolve in, made possible with technological prowess.

Maybe, I don't really know anything, I am just hopeful about this topic.

I agreed with that user perfectly on his view on philosophy. The problem is your idea of philosophy is probably childish Nietzsche type stuff, in which case you would be correct that technology would be vastly superior. But in modern times much of philosophy has branched out into science oriented analysis and could be used to inspire technology. Technology by itself, at least at the current time, is incapable of visualizing science the same way men are. You should think things out a bit further before denouncing people as retarded. Also, the word "troll" is a meaningless word that is generally used on people with conflicting views

Wait sorry, user. I just realized we're actually in agreement, and I was mixing up anons with my post here

That user is, in fact, retarded and probably a troll. My apologies!

wut

It's probably not that important. I'm in complete agreement with you on your view of philosophy and its impact on technology, but I got mixed up for a second. However, I was probably wrong to call him retarded. I agree with his views on feminism, and I feel he's just uninformed on this matter.

dude I don't give a shit what he calls me.

I didn't think you did. Overall, I think you're probably pretty smart, judging by your assessment of feminism - which is the greatest cancer on Earth at the present.
I completely agree with this part. Feminism isn't a philosophy in the first place, and the same technology that gave power to it should have been used to promote the natural order. It should have been used to strengthen men. However, I think you underestimate the role of philosophy in technology.

test

ah fuck it, I'll do this tomorrow.

Do what tomorrow? Why are you so obsessed with these memes?

dig in to your theory that the precise philosophy behind a piece of technology generally revolves around making a particular action easier, less time consuming, as well as to extend attributes of humans, so the philosophy of the iron maiden was to punish the wicked, a calculator to making the calculating for big numbers easier, that kind of thing and if the kinds of philosophies that are meant to be used by groups of people as a way to govern themselves are in correlation. or even causation
I don't doubt that the human philosophy to use technology to shape their environment to better suit humans didn't contribute to men becoming weaker, as well as to make it possible for 3DPD to live a pretty easy life with out the need of man, exacerbating his disposability, causing gynocentrism, and concentrated versions of it, like feminism
anyway I don't really want to get into this right now, I just want to practice drawing and relax.
it is like roulette of fetishes I have, I guess

This user's got a point

Yes, go do that. I have to go somewhere right now anyways. We can discuss this later.
It should have been used for the opposite, as I've already mentioned. Men need a new philosophy, because the technology they created is being used against them. Anyways, we'll discuss later.

Also, I'd be interested, tomorrow, to talk about your idea, last week, of modifying bacteria to alter the dna of both genders.

How can they be cucks if they're not even in relationships with women outside of sex?

but you just only pick my gene thing to counter.
there's also the upbringing of a child which has been proven to be better with both biological parents.
also, if all smart people realise that women suck and stop having kids, it will have a larger effect that isn't confined to a single lineage.
we've come to where we are by spreading genes and survival of the fittest, but all we are doing now is dumping everything that got us to where we are.
we've already gotten rid of survival of the fittest and now the smart people are also starting to refuse to have kids.
you don't see this as an issue?

(I'll try to be more respectful from now on, I saw how much of a disrespecting post it was, but I do feel as though you tend to cherry pick what you counter.)

okay, what about it?

How would it be done? Also, I'm still uncertain as to the motive.

watch

Feminists are already open about hating the idea because they're afraid robowaifus will take away their pussy power and instead of betas orbiting them and giving them everything they want with no work, the betas will just get robowaifus instead.

I have a thread up right now that's discussing robowaifus and how we should shill for them.

kill yourself

isnt this a sensible approach to a discussion, im not even going to admit this is what i even did.

in your own summation of your argument the only point you make is about preserving your genes which i have coutnered and shown to be logically unsound.

you mention something about stop getting kids and women "win?"

yes, thats the idea of mgtow, you failed to make an argument, its not my job to create an argument for you

no one is denying this, to some extent you are strawmaning mgtow

mgtow arent the ones saying that the nuclear family is a bad thing

mgtow are saying that feminism is preventing the nuclear family from being a fair deal for men, and are preventing men from being fathers to their children

we live in a feminist society, all women are feminists (all women believe they should have the right to vote and go to work, these being tenants of feminism), feminism is concerned with bringing down the patriarchy

patriarch - The male head of a family or tribe

you are moving the goal posts

your original argument was about lineage

it has now morphed into a discussion about survival of the fittest

i have already written a post on both these topics

lineage is about an individual being able to pass on his own particular set of genes. the frequency of an individual is 1 surprisingly enough, in his lifetime it might go up to 1.5 if he has a child, maybe even 2 if he has two children. but after him and his children are dead it will almost certainly be less than one, and it can only head it one direction, which is annihilation.

survival of the fittest is something genes do, not us, we are just survival machines for the replicators (genes). any particular genes frequency could be many orders of magnitude, survival of the fittest describes the fluctuations in that frequency, which could in theory increase until it is 100% prevalent. survival of the fittest is a "natural" process.

what you are proposing isnt even survival of the fittest. it is some form of eugenics whereby humans "artificially" control who should be having offspring.

cont.

mgtow is concerned with social and political problems, its not concerned with natural phenomena. you could just as easily make a claim that relationships cause global warming for eg you could say that people in relationships are more productive and therefore create more greenhouse gases. in that case you should be mgtow to save the planet. but of course, no one individual is going to save the planet from global warming by being mgtow as much as anyone not being mgtow is going to save human race from the effects of some malady of natural selection which your evidence for is spurious at best. the only way to logically to "remedy" your "problem" would be a planet wide eugenics program. as mgtow is essentially anti-feminism, and feminism isnt concerned with eugenics, it seems unreasonable that you burden it with some mission to save the human race that it never set out to achieve.

natural selection hasnt stopped. have you ever considered that stupid people might actually be better adapted to modern society? perhaps theres an ESS of a minority of intelligent people to majority of stupid people. not everyone needs to be a rocket scientist for the human race to survive. the more time goes by the better living standards improve, the more stupid people can persist. if there was a decrease in average iq then this could be considered degeneracy. degeneracy is the cancer of modern society. but its feminism thats wrecking the family unit, not mgtow, mgtow is a resposne to that degeneracy. tbf this does lend some evidence to technology anons argument that i have spent much time in countering but as i have already alluded to here and here, perhaps its not that you guys are wrong, more that you put an over emphasis on matters that dont warrant it and perhaps the feminist degeneracy is independent of the degeneracy caused by technology. technology causes more people to survive, feminism causes more stupid people to be born or to be raised stupid. actually when worded like that it does sound like technology does sustain the degeneracy of feminism, but that doesnt necessarily mean technology caused feminism.

also consider that stupid people in towns and cities breeding like rabbits isnt a particularly modern thing and predates the industrial revolution. the wise old sage who lives in the hills and who is celibate, the monastery of monks who are the only people in a region who can read or write. wise people who do not give into carnal pleasures, who forgo having children in an attempt to cultivate and expand human understanding isnt a novel concept. as i described here celibacy is perhaps one of the most important memes and so the frontiers of human understanding may not be as expansive if it werent for the endeavours of celibate intellectuals down through the ages.

edit:

should have been

although this is implied by the former, i feel it important to show that maybe the bell curve of iq isnt just being stretched up, but the survival cut off has shifted along

edit: unintentional double negative