MGTOW Channels Demonetized on YouTube

[Ruprecht]

The two need not be deemed incompatible, lest you wish to raise a generation of men seeking their "masculinity" in the irrational.

It's not incompatible, just largely unrelated.
Defending the women and children has always been a masculine ideal, whinging about them and "male oppression", not so much.

 

[Rusk]

That's just kids in general. I was thinking more of the Suffragist men.

So you have to go back 100 years back to give me an example of masculine feminist men.

Besides even they were kind of weak chined. Israel Zangwill... lol

 

[Ruprecht]

So you have to go back 100 years back to give me an example of masculine feminist men.

Besides even they were kind of weak chined. Israel Zangwill... lol

Yeah, I wasn't looking at their physiques. That's also pretty effeminate.
Same goes with your example, where he was attacking some woman.

 

[TheGreatA]

It's not incompatible, just largely unrelated.
Defending the women and children has always been a masculine ideal, whinging about them not so much.

I don't know about that.

Rome (before its decline) was what I would call a hyper-masculine construct, and the Emperor stood at the top of the construct. Yet they seemed to take great pleasure in whining about women, on many occasions, complaining about mothers, sisters, wives and their deemed wickedness. Such were also the many monarchs of Europe that followed.

"Speech of the censor Quintus Caecilius Metellus Macedonicus [16] about the law requiring men to marry in order to produce children. According to Livy (Per. 59), in 17 B.C. Augustus read out this speech, which seemed "written for the hour", in the Senate in support of his own legislation encouraging marriage and childbearing (see no. 121).

If we could survive without a wife, citizens of Rome, all of us would do without that nuisance; but since nature has so decreed that we cannot manage comfortably with them, nor live in any way without them, [17]we must plan for our lasting preservation rather than for our temporary pleasure."

Men whining about women has been a staple in all societies. Even Islam's writings, a very patriarchal religion to be sure, are full of men whining about women.

 

[Falsedawn]

In that sense MGTOW raising fake outrage about a "War on Men" is just a practical means of defending their self-interests, just like YouTube has.

Cannot blame them any more than YouTube. I suppose the game is to be hated, not the players.

Man, if they were really "going their own way" they wouldn't have to whip up fake outrage to stay viable in the current day. Their ethos is "Fuck women, i'm gonna blaze my own trail" and then they gather together like a bunch of average frustrated chumps and commiserate like there's no hope on this earth. Give me a break.

It's hard to take them seriously when they wanna be the omega without any of the struggle. If you're gonna go to the pity party instead of getting shit done, at least make it a circlejerk so everyone leaves happy.

 

[Higus]

Yes, I am aware of what the First Amendment is. However, it's not the only element necessary in securing freedom of speech. I think we'll see Facebook and Google either come under heavy regulation about who and when they are allowed to issue bans or they'll be broken up somehow.

Walk me through that scenario. What would have to happen and what would the outcome look like? I'm having trouble imagining any major changes to their censorship policies coming directly from the state.

 

[curryjunkie]

It's the market that set the tone for what it takes to be monetized in the first place. I doubt their videos went so downhill all of a sudden that their entire channel is getting demonetized.

FWIW, you have to have at least 1000 subscribers and 1 million total views in order to get monetized.

better step your game up, theres bills to pay

 

[Rusk]

Yeah, I wasn't looking at their physiques. That's also pretty effeminate.
Same goes with your example, where he was attacking some woman.

that is some stupid Straw man right there... if you gonna play the game play it right

 

[TheGreatA]

Man, if they were really "going their own way" they wouldn't have to whip up fake outrage to stay viable in the current day. Their ethos is "Fuck women, i'm gonna blaze my own trail" and then they gather together like a bunch of average frustrated chumps and commiserate like there's no hope on this earth. Give me a break.

It's hard to take them seriously when they wanna be the omega without any of the struggle. If you're gonna go to the pity party instead of getting shit done, at least make it a circlejerk so everyone leaves happy.

For sure, but as with any social movement that claims to stand for independence of thought, its very nature contradicts its message. You cannot ever truly "go your own way" when you rely on other people's validation for your ideas.

The men who have gone their own way, already have, and have made no great fuss about it, because it has come to them naturally.

This is more so just a gathering for troubled people that share common problems, such as "empowered women" who in reality do not feel all that empowered, and are in many cases, depressed and insecure.

 

[Ruprecht]

I don't know about that.

Rome (before its decline) was what I would call a hyper-masculine construct, and the Emperor stood at the top of the construct. Yet they seemed to take great pleasure in whining about women, on many occasions, complaining about mothers, sisters, wives and their deemed wickedness. Such were also the many monarchs of Europe that followed.

Men whining about women has been a staple in all societies. Even Islam's writings, a very patriarchal religion to be sure, are full of men whining about women.

Not whinging about "male oppression and victimisation" they weren't, for precisely that reason. Even in the classic "battle of the sexes" Lysistrata, they didn't whinge so much and as pathetically.

 

[bad seed]

You are thinking of SJWs and far leftists. MGTOW are nothing more than men that havent handed their balls over to women, a thing you cannot recognize since you have no balls.

 

[Ruprecht]

that is some stupid Straw man right there... if you gonna play the game play it right

It's not a straw man. I was judging their behaviour, your own statement was that you judged them based on their appearance.

 

[Satsui Ryu]

Yes, I am aware of what the First Amendment is. However, it's not the only element necessary in securing freedom of speech. I think we'll see Facebook and Google either come under heavy regulation about who and when they are allowed to issue bans or they'll be broken up somehow.

State governed media. That sounds like a great idea. That's always lead to good things.

 

[TheGreatA]

Not whinging about "male oppression and victimisation" they weren't, for precisely that reason. Even in the classic "battle of the sexes" Lysistrata, they didn't whinge so much and as pathetically.

It would be foolish to think that these men would not have whined in such a manner, if they had lived in a construct such as ours.

Any movement to liberate or expand the role of women, was usually met with violent opposition. All you have to do is look at the arguments made by conservative Islamic preachers. There is a definite sense of "victimhood" in the tone that they use, in regards to the male's relationship with the female, as if the male is considered to be defenseless against the powers of manipulation and beauty of the female, and thus, to be "protected" from those powers, by the patriarchal society.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

State governed media. That sounds like a great idea. That's always lead to good things.

I said nothing of the sort. I specified that I think government regulation will be related to who and when they will be allowed to issue bans, like there are with other utilities.

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

IF you get called a cuck that often, its the truth.

 

[curryjunkie]

 

[MiniCraque]

Actually nevermind the homo stuff, the obsession with cuckolding is what's really weird about these guys.

Is it because cucks by definition have a woman in the first place?

 

[MilesAbove]

incels are lame

It's crazy embarrassing to proclaim this type of living, rather than just living it. The cry for attention is cringeworthy.

 

[Falsedawn]

For sure, but as with any social movement that claims to stand for independence of thought, its very nature contradicts its message. You cannot ever truly "go your own way" when you rely on other people's validation for your ideas.

The men who have gone their own way, already have, and have made no great fuss about it, because it has come to them naturally.

This is more so just a gathering for troubled people that share common problems, such as "empowered women" who in reality do not feel all that empowered, and are in many cases, depressed and insecure.

Well sure, but I think it's a matter of degrees here. Internalizing something vs externalizing it. "Empowered women" claim that status because it gives them a feeling of agency in the grand process we call society, however small. Claiming the trailblazer status means that one should generally aspire to be a trailblazer, the kind of person you describe, that is lauded instead of self-proclaimed. Taking that aspiration and attempting to browbeat people into recognizing it ain't it.

I've long advocated that downtrodden men should immerse themselves in the manosphere with a single caveat, to always remember to respect women. Because there honestly is a lot of good advice: be more personable, make goals, spend your money wisely, take pride in your work. But I include the caveat because some advocate externalizing against women, or society as a whole, and that's problematic. Until the manosphere itself can control those diversive elements, it's never going to be seen as mainstream friendly, and rightfully so.

And for the rest of us that took the lessons and ran with them, we're part of modern society, and thriving (to an extent). I just can't give them my pity here.