Addressing Dogmatism and Ideology in MGTOW

Addressing Dogmatism and Ideology in MGTOW

48 thoughts on “Addressing Dogmatism and Ideology in MGTOW

  1. On the subject of is someone elses nature is evil or bad or is nature evil, I think the neutral point of view: "it's just nature it isn't good or bad" it's too simplistic. You can say from an on-lookers point of view that a tornado killing a bunch of people is doing some pretty evil stuff. Same goes for people whether they are aware of their nature or not, if they choose to act badly, you can just argue that the reason isn't the person choosing to act that way but the reason is their nature which isn't good or bad, which in my opinion is making excuses. Both genders have some really bad/evil or just stupid traits/survival behaviors or basic operating manners if you look at them hard enough and are open to the idea of all of us are humans and have flaws. It is the easier way to label and generalize one gender or another to be the evil one.
    What is dogmatic though is the worship of modern women, I'd not be surprised if in 10k year, some future archaeologist digs up some stuff about todays women and concludes that societies worshiped some sort of female goddess called Feminism at this time period.

  2. Good point, the reason why anti-feminist men accuse us as being "the same as feminists" is because they're interested in breeding and raising children, and can't understand that MGTOW don't give a shit about either of those things. I talk to and befriend women all of the time, but the information about the nature of women, gives us the tools we need to avoid the worst behaviors of women.

    The dumbest thing about our detractors in and out of the manosphere is that the make this false comparison between us and feminists.

  3. I'm really a mgtow, in the strictist way. Some of the things some mgtow say (like all women are evil) make me not want to idenitfy as mgtow though.

  4. I watch Sargon, ArmoredSceptic, skeptorr, tldr and you among others to get a different perspective. I'm prejudiced against feminists, but conscious of it and make sure to hear out their reasoning. You might not enjoy the commentary to the discussion, but I for one would enjoy watching.

  5. MGTOW, by definition would HAVE to mean different things to different people, since Men going their "own" way would imply that not all men would choose the "same" way.

  6. And to think I first heard about you was on the mass effect 3 MP forums, your advice and videos/guides were always useful.
    And now, after all this time.. I'm here.. watching/listening to the same guy who told me his preferred build for the Krogan Adept.. talk about dogmatism and ideology in MGTOW. I'm not sure if there's anything meaningful behind this but uh, at any rate, keep doing your thing Stardusk. O7

  7. A good word to use for Youtube commentators is "intellectually hasty". There have been many times I've said something, been called out, then changed my mind because I realized I had been hasty/ lazy in what I've said.

  8. Sargon is a completely different approach. Can't see any reason why these two men should do a show together. Pointless. They both contribute in their own manner. Very little overlaps to initiate an interesting, productive discussion, imo.

  9. I'll continue to listen further, but I want to note that it isn't necessarily low-minded to suggest MGTOW is male Feminism, depending on where you're coming from socially/politically. We on the "conservative" side have an actual critique. It's fine and necessary to understand Human drives, but MGTOW absolutely does represent a withdrawal from that "game" which represents the gradual degradation of the ways we have kept Humanity alive. What about that meme "tradcon" that not only described the past 1,000 years of dysfunctional family structure, but any kind of family structure in pre-Christian past?

  10. Hey Stardusk,
    I want you on my Internet Marketing MGTOWNaught team.

    If you want to talk about WHY I want you on that team? I am peternolan9 on skype. I am [email protected]

    Best Regards


  11. The fact that there are Mgtow that even say its "wrong" to even talk to a woman shows the kind extremist views this "movement" attracts . some anti-depressants may be in order

  12. 18:16 Some rich single men can. If you live in a big city you can find a sugar daddy whose sweet green paper is much better than anything the government would ever provide you with. Eh, I guess it's conditional though.

  13. When will people realize that any ideology, including a men's rights ideology, is subject to bias and corruption?

  14. "Problematic" is a perfect example of how feminists manipulate, hijack words and language – and it has served them VERY well. At some point anti-feminists are going to have to stop scoffing at the study of humanities and language and recognize that much of the power that 'progressives" (another fine example of word meaning manipulation) wield was gained through language and literature. They've been allowed to define words and concepts according to their agenda and been unchallenged in academia. English majors and poly-sci majors sometimes become lawyers, and legislators were/are almost always lawyers. So STOP underestimating the power of a liberal arts education. These people control LANGUAGE and MEDIA, and ultimately POLICY.

    Let STARDUSK's use of "problematic" be an example of REASON taking LANGUAGE back from the progressive's TOWER OF BABEL. No one gave them the right to determine the meaning of words, or to make those meanings conveniently amorphous- and that is EXACTLY what "Political Correctness" IS. We MUST STOP underestimating the POWER OF LANGUAGE.

  15. one point of information…kant, who asked the question what is enlightenment, certainly acknowledged profound sex differences. great vid otherwise

  16. come on star dusk if a fat beta feminist like kevin logan will have a discussion with sargon why do you think your views being discussed fluidly in conversation wouldn't be able to stand on its own merit?

  17. The argument associated with the vote and social welfare is fundamentally flawed due to being overly simplistic. AFDC in 1935 was a federal successor to State programs that had come into existence during the 19th century. Pretending it appeared out of thin air associated with women gaining the vote is demonstrably a False Cause scenario. Indeed I find it difficult to posit how you would even make such a claim parse with the 1935 adoption date of the AFDC, or the reforms to the AFDC associated with its replacement with TANF.

    The actual trend is more along the lines of people have contributed disproportionate funds towards helping and supporting women since pretty much the dawn of recorded history, with attempts to constrain women's access to those funds tending to be loosened over time. AFDC and similar program represent a shift associated with the scale of pre-existing efforts outrunning the ability of the States to manage, hence leading to them appealing to the Federal government to effectively consolidate the existing state programs.

    The change in the trend tracks more with scale of populations and resource availability than anything else. This is all laid out in detail in Martin van Creveld's "The Privileged Sex" with more thorough analysis than you're currently using. Please read the existing research, instead of trying to become a case in the Dunning-Kruger effect.

  18. I have the feeling that most of the people calling MGTOW dogmatic don't really know what dogmatic means, including Sargon. Dogma is a strong set of principles set authoritatively, usually unquestioned. When using this word to bash others' ideas, it usually has an emphasis on "unquestioned". MGTOW is anything but unquestioned. I can see how someone might think Bar Bar and StarDusk are some kind of "authorities" on MGTOW, but nothing they say is laid down as unquestionable rules, neither by them, nor is it taken as such by the people hearing it. I like Sargon, but when he said it he was shamelessly trying to turn a criticism done by StarDusk into a "blind faith thing", as if StarDusk was using an unquestionable principle (dogma) as the basis of his criticism, when in fact he used data and logic to do so.

  19. Seems to be that the attempt to make mgtow taboo is seeing success, Oh well I am all ready addicted to rationohol, it's too late for me.

  20. I didn't feel as if Sargon's video was an attack of MGTOW or an accusation of dogmatism. He started by calling out "bias". What's too bad in his video as well as this one is that nobody really cared about presenting specifics. He called "bias" without stating which precise biases he was calling out, and in this video there are no specifics either.

    I find much interest and quite some wisdom in the mgtow movement and especially Stardusk's approach (though I perceived more acrimony towards women in recent weeks) but I disagree with some views ("awalt" in particular which is based on circular reasoning). And I'd rather see quantitative data as the basis of discussions.

  21. I find it problematic when people compare mgtow to feminism.

    Feminist beliefs are easily debunked by research. While mgtow actually use research to draw conclusions.

    Feminism has a massive influence over government and politics while mgtow has absolutely zero influence over any government or ruling body.

    Feminism brings in untold millions of dollars in support from both organizations, governments and individuals. How many millions do mgtow bring in?

    Feminist regularly participate in rallies and protests. mgtow have never done this?

    Media in entrenched with feminist ideas and propaganda. One cannot watch a movie or tv show without some display of gynocentrism and female superiority. Finding male-centric mgtow related ideals in a movie/tv show is like unicorn spotting.

    Feminist regularly call for laws which to disadvangage men as much as possible. Which laws are mgtows pushing for?

    Wheres the quote of that prominent mgtow who called for female genocide?

    Where can i find the Ministry of MGTOW?

    How can i contact the national organization for MGTOW?

    Tell me again all about how mgtow are basically the same as feminist.

  22. Just wanted to throw in some philosophical insights here. I would say that 99.9% of people are dogmatists. The remaining 0.1% are Pyrrhonists. The term dogmatist and skeptic in common usage today are far removed from the originating concepts. There are two qualities on which one can be a skeptic or dogmatist. The first is ontology and the second is epistemology. If you are an ontological dogmatist then you believe that certain objects of the world exist; realism being a dogmatic position of an external world. Ontological skeptics do not make a claim as to what exists or if anything exists. Then you have epistemological dogmatism which states that knowledge is possible. The epistemological skeptic does not make a claim for or against the possibility of knowledge. Now, the only pure skeptic is the Pyrrhonists who is both an ontological and epistemological skeptic. Everyone else is dogmatic for one thing or another. The simplest example is an ontological skeptic of morality; this skeptic does not assert whether or not absolute moral values ontologically obtain. An example of a dogmatist is someone who believes evolution ontologically obtains. He is also epistemologically dogmatic if he believes knowledge of evolution is possible.

  23. wait, you WHAT? HERESY, /unsub… nah, im not one of those guys. usually I could care less who anyone decides to associate themselves with. hell, even if you told me "Before WW1 (yes I know he was the big bad guy of 2, but he was around for 1) I was drinkin buddies with Hitler." I still wouldn't care.

  24. On one side you have those people using the word "problematic" in a twisted way. I think its kinda like poisoning the well. And people are really starting to use other words because the old ones are already poisoned or voided of meaning. I think its wrong to use the same words as them(SJW) and not paying attention because the people who dont really follow these things will always get the wrong idea. Meaning. SJW's use those words with one meaning only while the rest uses them in the real sense.

    And really. Words have power … for those who believe in words.

    I always try to think before believing.

  25. GirlWritesWhat is by far one of the best activists I have ever seen. She is is also the only woman I have ever come across who understands men. Yes Alison Tieman, Erin Pizzy etc have good understanding of men as well but Karen seems to have a deeper understanding that the vast majority of women are simply incapable of. Karen is really one of my favourites to listen to and she's also very educational. I always look forward to her new videos just as I do with yours.

  26. The majority of people seem to be incapable of changing their views on the world according to new information, and would rather name-call whoever presents them with evidence that contradicts whatever they were taught to believe. Don't worry about what others believe, all you can really do is explore the world on your own terms. The masses will never think for themselves.

  27. What I really want to know is this: Goddamn, why I'm enjoying these instant potatoes so friggin much?

  28. I think it is just easier for these anti-feminists to blame everything on feminism without diving deeper. I think Sargon seeks a scapegoat when he labels MGTOW in the way he does because he doesn't want to admit there is more to this puzzle than just feminist ideology.

  29. ive noticed that egalitarians tend to be the worst when it comes to females. they genuinely believe that treating everyone the same will work out. even feminist accept that isn't possible.

  30. Warning! Topic not related to the video. I stumbled upon transgender videos on Youtube and I was listening to their testimonials on estrogen intake/injections and its effects on their minds+bodies. They all experienced similar changes since they started hormonal therapy/injection or whatever they call it. Here are the some takeaways:

    Physical and mental changes:

    Diminished sex drive
    Changes in thought patterns
    – Less racing thoughts.
    -They became calmer.
    -Increased bouts of depression.
    – Unexplained mood swings.
    – Loss of muscle, growth of bewbs, decreased body hair, softer skin, and onset of a neotenous face.
    – Started shitting rainbows.

    Societal interactions:

    -More people were willing to help them even with smallest of chores.
    -Free entry to most paid nightlife venues.
    -Get admiration just for existing (getting compliments on a daily basis).
    -More conscious about their physical appearance.
    Less societal anxiety/pressure compared to being a dude i.e. almost impossible for them to offend anyone, can act like a guy or girl with a rotten attitude and still won't get shit for it.
    -Strangers respond to them more politely compared to when they where dudes.
    -Not taken seriously at work (for the ones working in a technical profession).
    – Their dads' or their extended family members don't understand this new age shit and disowned them.

    In conclusion, men and women are totally the same.

  31. Sargon gets really pissy when he's called out on something, and will gleefully point to his grand Youtube audience of dittoheads as proof of his moral and intellectual superiority. He recently made a 45 minute long rant directed at some guy he disagreed with who, according to Sargon, only had 500 followers so was an inconsequential idiot (only worthy of an almost hour long tirade from Lord Sargon). Awhile back he made a response to WoolyBumblebee in which he insulted her looks repeatedly like some petulant school boy. WoolyBumblebee's an idiot, but she doesn't deserve that.

    Beneath Sargon's affable exterior he's a bully who really doesn't like being told he's wrong. In his response to you, focusing on your use of a word feminists overuse rather than addressing your argument fairly was, frankly, pathetic. Then he abruptly softened up and went on to misrepresent your stance, alleging that you actually agreed with him…. It was bizarre.

  32. I think you may have shot yourself in the foot by saying that Sargon is unwilling to look at the data that you and other MYGTOW that you agree with are providing. Multiple times, he has analyzed what the other side have said, be it creationists, feminists. atheists and other what not and has addressed them in turn.

    Personally, I agree that there are notable differences between males and females and that nature, of it in itself, is completely neutral in considering how we'll act in a certain way. However, the difference is that Sargon nowadays focuses more on the social impact of what the truly dogmatic side of Feminism, Religion, and the occasional Atheist and the possible implications of what it will hold for everyone in the long run while your conversations and editorials are more oriented towards individual impacts and the biological/historical reasons behind them.

    I do find that you saying you are completely indifferent to what happens as a result of the absolutely insane uber-progressive BS as it doesn't pertain to you is frankly skewed as these same people and groups are actively targeting free-speech itself. It what is happening is allowed to happen, it won't matter what you think because you won't be allowed to say it under the guise of "security for the oppressed".

    Now, for the fans asking you to debate with Sargon, I don't really think theres anything TO debate as you both come from different camps. But, it would be interesting to say the least if you had a discussion as to the social-historical context of how this … mess … got started and escalated. You're both well versed in it and I'd love to hear and see where such a conversation would lead. Dumb fanboys aside, I hope you'd consider it.

  33. yeah, im really sick of hearing "stop saying 'problematic', that's a word feminists use", dude…. ive been using it for over a decade, for technical issues. just because the feminist lexicon finally found an English Dictionary, doesn't mean you need to abandon language.

  34. There are different types of MGTOW. Knowing that clears up most confusion.

  35. lol i knew this video would happen after that guy from saargon's video said you preached too much

  36. I have been observing SJWs for entertainment (or is it masochism?), so I knew these blue pill babies were going to latch on to that word to try and discredit what you were trying to say the moment I heard you say it.

    Meh. Fuck 'em, bro'. Sure, clarify your position if you feel the need, but don't even waste your time on idiots intent on misunderstanding and misrepresenting your position. You can't fix stupid.

  37. 'Problematic' is a new aspersion which is fast approaching the end its quick shelf life. The cultural apparatus is always cycling through labels which impose liability. When the utility of 'problematic' dries up, it will be followed by another label which functions in the same manner.

  38. You say we are in this "mess" because of giving women what they want. Men are the original thinkers so even though recent laws favoured women I am not sure women originated these laws. I am guessing that the proponents of these laws know very well what the effect will be. By design I think the purpose is to push up wealth in housing, transfer that wealth to women and keep men working virtually until they are dead. This mess is exactly what the politicians wanted. They might want a lower rate of single motherhood but they do not care about unfair outcomes for men.

  39. 1. Hire a 20-something hardbody.
    2. Make her a youtube channel and let her recite MGTOW material that you've written.
    (2a – optional – name her Somnia or something like that for maximum trolling)
    3. Watch her get to a million subscribers.
    4. ?????
    5. Profit!

  40. Evil Subhuman White Heterosexual Cis-Gendered Male Who Should Check His Privilege And Live In Shame says:

    I don't disagree with most of your evaluation Stardusk, but I really do think Sargon would hear you out and be reasonably open minded in a "face to face" discussion. Even if he isn't convinced, certainly a good portion of his audience will be, because many are fairly intelligent and the validity of your arguments will speak for itself to them. Even if your arguments only get through to 5% of Sargon's listeners, that will be a significant enough number of men and boys exposed to the truth, who perhaps never heard such arguments before, and who might be saved from self-destruction through blue pill interactions with females. That possibility alone makes it a worthwhile endeavor to engage Sargon, does it not? In fact, I would go so far as to say it's a certainty that you'll get through to some number of men and boys who are listening.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *