And I realise now that it coincides beautifully with another thought that has been on my mind a lot recently.
Amen.
True confession: this Lent has been a poor one for me. I just couldn't 'settle' into the spirit of Lent as I usually do.
But it seems I peaked sharply in the last week or so.
Better late than never :-)
Tonight, the 'night of impending death' as I like to call it, otherwise known as 'Maundy' or 'Holy' Thursday, my thoughts turn to ... death.
Many years ago, on this night, Our Lord was pacing up and down the Garden of Olives, otherwise known as the Garden of Gethsemane, thinking about his impending death. He had just had a meal, washed the feet of a few of his closest friends...knowing one of them was going to condemn him to death, death by a kiss, the kiss of betrayal. He was imploring his friends to stay with him, watch with him, pray with him.
They were falling asleep, human as they were :-)
Death.
Some of my most introspective moments came at moments where I witnessed impending death. I have witnessed a few.
A number of them stick in my mind like a sore thumb.
It strikes me that the reason I have such vivid memories of these impending death situations is that they are moments of great honesty.
It all hangs out.
No holding back.
It is both beautiful and ugly.
It is both fascinating and frightening.
It is both strong and vulnerable.
A few months ago, I was chatting to an 89 year old man. I won't go into details, but he was near death. He knew it. I knew it.
With this particular man, the hilarious thing about his feelings about his illness/impending death was that it would interfere with his routine. It bothered him that the set-up he had carefully laid out all his life was about to be disrupted - not so much death itself but the bothersome illness and the 'caring' that would be foisted upon him against his will. It is not an exaggeration to state that he was more than a little peeved by it all. His attitude was only hilarious because it appeared that others cared more for his life than he did.
But I know different. At least now I do.
Thanks to my understanding of the MGTOW movement and its nuances, I am more open-minded than ever on the variations of life.
This man was a never-married man. He had a few siblings but his favourite of all was his 85 year old little sister who had several children and grandchildren. One of these grandchildren was a young man in his 20s with whom he was particularly close. This young man was his. He was his lad.
Of all his relatives, this was the one he felt the closest to. As he told me about this young guy, his eyes lit up and he was as animated as you could ever see an 89 year old be.
I remember distinctly the moment he told me he was a single man. He expected me to somehow show surprise that he had never married. I know this because he told me so.
It seems he had had a certain response (especially from women) all his life. He was used to it. He expected it so much that when I didn't react in this way, he felt the need to tell me.
He, of course was not to know that I had, um, had a 'special' education in this subject over the last few years, by way of strangers on the internet, lol.
He almost became apologetic. "I love my own company too much", he said to me by way of explanation. An explanation I really didn't need, but he wasn't to know this.
"I never felt close to any woman throughout my life. I was happy without one all these years. I had my garden, I like to read, potter about, you know..."
I knew.
"But there was always this pressure to find a wife and settle down."
Sigh.
"I was happy on my own, this is what no-one understands. I could have made some woman miserable."
Um, well, who knows...
"I have never felt lonely. I have loved my life. Now I am ill, they will force someone on me to 'care' for me. That is my worst nightmare."
I really understand this sentiment. This really is the introvert's worst nightmare.
"I have my lad. He comes round to see me. He is like a son to me. He is enough".
Good lad.
It is inexplicably important to me that I did not 'judge' this man in his last days...
So, John Lord B3, whilst I would not choose this man's lifetime solitude, I get why he chose his. And I bet he loved every minute of it.
There are people who do not choose a life of solitude - it is foisted upon them against their will, but they adapt to it.
Others have their own reasons for choosing what they choose.
I have thought and thought about the MGTOW movement since the moment I first heard of it. It has fascinated me and I have indulged my unquenchable curiosity ad nauseum.
But it takes someone's moment of impending death for me to see the humanity involved. So when you ask if I have a personal view of MGTOW, this is it.
A dying man's honest description of how he lived it.
I am not sure it can get any personal than that.
I have similar stories of two women who also lived the GTOW life until death. The nuances of their stories differ slightly, but there we are.
In the end, life will be lived. With or without our consent the moment we are born kicking and screaming into an unforgiving world.
The details of said life?
The devil is in the detail, as they say.
And with that, I bid everyone the holiest and happiest Easter ever.
The ultimate MGHOW?
Addendum 19/04/2014:
23 comments:
With the state of the world today we are going to see a lot more people GTOW. Both men and women.
Ceer,
For sure!
But I wonder, will there be positives out of that?
Right now, I can't see it, but can you? I am afraid all I can see are the negatives of this future for mankind, especially on a personal level for individuals, but I am sure there MUST be some sort of positive somewhere.
The man in the post had a great life that he enjoyed - that's a positive.
I know you delight in positives, but realistically it seems much more likely to result in more broken homes, and therefore more poverty, misery, and strife than we see currently.
If that DOES happen women will eventually teach men to become the strong men they desire, even if it means only assholes reproduce.
Recently I was reminded by someone I knew growing up about the choices women make: https://www.facebook.com/kcsmolak?fref=ts
Obviously damaged by her contact with alphas, yet she can't get enough. She's from a good family. Parents stayed together. Shacked up with different men to produce her children. Did she figure this would happen? Probably not.
Learning this now is painful. Seeing mannosphere theory play out on strangers is one thing. Having such a stark reminder close to home is quite another.
That theory says the only ways this can end for me is to either go my own way, learn to be the alpha women crave, or let one chew me up in divorce court...
There may be a fourth option. Have faith beyond all reason that things will turn out well. File this under irrational self confidence game. Have complete faith in ones moral code. Women can either learn to like it, or buzz off. Don't give commitment to unworthy women. Given enough swagger, this might just work.
Happy Easter, ST
Happy Easter too, Ceer!
I too see all of those negatives you see for the future.
But... and this is where you and I diverge because of our different 'brain programming' because you are a man and I am a woman...I HAVE to believe that I am wrong about these negatives. You are perhaps more prone to 'call it as you see it', so to speak. I allow myself to make the evidence 'fit' to whatever I believe, LOL. The hamster can be my friend or my enemy...
One of the curses of womanhood is that we have to have more hope than you men :-)
Otherwise, you and us both die.
I bear this cross willingly :-)
And with that, Ceer, I have to say that I like Option 4 the best :-)
But you could already predict, couldn't you, that I would like it the best of all the options you presented.
I am digging the display of masculinity here, Ceer.
You know it is difficult in this SMP, much more difficult than it was for your father or grandfather. But you know you COULD get what you want. At least you CONSIDER the possibility of the existence of Option 4.
How I wish many more men would at least CONSIDER that there may be an Option 4...
And you are right - it HAS to be a worthy woman. Makes the difference between heaven and hell. Quite literally.
How I wish many more men would at least CONSIDER that there may be an Option 4...
No. The only two options are:
MGTOW and/or
Friends With Benefits
COMPLETE and total freedom.
Live Free or Die!
These old single men are not so rare where I live. Of course there's that omnipresent "pressure" to settle down when you're young, etc., but who cares. One thing these men have in common is that they're happy and by not having that burden of being a "provider", they also seem healthier. One of these old men I know, enjoys riding bicycle and often goes fishing. Drama/nagging free life. :-)
"There may be a fourth option. Have faith beyond all reason that things will turn out well. File this under irrational self confidence game. Have complete faith in ones moral code. Women can either learn to like it, or buzz off. Don't give commitment to unworthy women. Given enough swagger, this might just work."
For that sole purpose, there are many deities in the sky that you can sacrifice a goat or a cat if you want. :) It would be much more effective, IMO. At least there's a very good chance you'll end up with some "blues" song material afterwards.
My baby's NAWALT as they come,
An' I don't care 'bout laws no more.
I placed my faith in my baby an' boy was I wrong.
Baby went from NAWALT to AWALT as soon as the ring went on,
An' now I'm stuck with alimony, child support an' no place to call home. :-)
Ceer,
Don't listen to cynical LFOD and Metak :-)
In all seriousness, you guys are pulling my leg, no?
Sure, there are many people (especially men) who are very happy with the care-free life, but not everyone can live like that.
NC once mentioned the idea of 'Together apart' - which sounds very much like eating your cake and having it :-) i.e. being with someone but spending a lot of time apart nonetheless. Perhaps this is a happy medium? Is this Option 5, LFOD? Is this an acceptable option for you? So instead of 'friend with benefits', why not 'wife with benefits'? That way, no social or moral code is broken, and hopefully, everyone is happy...
:-)
I think that rounds up all the options available...
:-)
NC once mentioned the idea of 'Together apart' - which sounds very much like eating your cake and having it :-) i.e. being with someone but spending a lot of time apart nonetheless. Perhaps this is a happy medium? Is this Option 5, LFOD? Is this an acceptable option for you? So instead of 'friend with benefits', why not 'wife with benefits'?
No. Why would I want the government involved in my relationships?
Marriage is prison.
In all seriousness, you guys are pulling my leg, no?
No.
Live Free or Die is exactly how I live my life.
No obligations to anyone or anything.
Live Free or Die!
LFOD,
I never mentioned the government...
You mentioned "wife with benefits."
If you are married, the government is automatically involved in your relationship.
Unless you met "wife" in a non-literal sense.
LFOD,
"If you are married, the government is automatically involved in your relationship."
I inherently disagree with this statement.
I think it is possible to disengage the government from a marriage once the legalities of marriage have been completed on or by the wedding date itself.
Basically, unless one is getting divorced, there is no need for the government to have any more interference in the marriage.
In the same way as the government doesn't feed you, raise your kids for you or put a roof over your head, the government need not poke its nose into your business. But I admit that for a marriage to be legal, it has to be in line with the 'State', but that should be as far as government intervention goes.
Is this naïve of me?
I suspect not, but I await your counter-argument :-)
Spacetraveller,
I'm not sure what country you are in, but in the US, you are held responsible for your partner's debts. This includes debts that your partner racked up before you got married and ones they racked up while married. Student loans don't disappear when you declare bankruptcy in the US.
Then there is the issue where one partner could screw over the other partner by not deciding to work. What do you do then? You can't kick them out because you both own the place together since you are married. So you either put up with a leech or get divorced. Then if you get divorced, THEN you really invite the government into your life where you'll have to pay alimony to the "lesser earning" spouse so that they can maintain their lifestyle.
The government is also involved in your relationships for tax purposes.
LFOD,
Thanks - nothing you say is untrue of course. I just make a point that the obstacles can be overcome if individuals are honourable, no matter how corrupt the laws. The countries that apply to me are the UK and Switzerland, and I suspect that the laws in both are similar to the US, but I must admit, I am not an expert, so consider me a novice in this area.
What I meant by 'the government not poking its nose in' is something different from 'there should be no laws yoking one spouse to another' which is, (I think), what you seem to be pushing for. Now, if you are divorced and have been unfairly treated by the court system, then you have every sympathy from me. Several of (male) family members of mine have been there, and I know how frustratingly maddening it is.
But their problems mostly came about when they had their divorces. I know for sure that the government WILL poke its nose in when there is a divorce, especially where there are children involved.
Where a divorce is not one's choosing, then, again, difficult situation. The government pokes its nose in through the divorce proceedings, even if you would have preferred not to be divorced in the first place! Horrible place to be!
And what about marriage itself?
Let's put down our weapons just for a minute and consider what a marriage is about: a marriage is a covenant between a man and a woman which encompasses raising of children, establishment of families, dynasties, what have you.
You may hate me for saying this but I believe that couples SHOULD be yoked financially. Afterall, in a marriage, the spouses share their lives, house(s), their bodies, why not their finances?
If I had it my way, it should NOT be the state that enforces this, however. A man and a woman pool their resources for the betterment of both their lives and those of their children in the fairest way possible (however they themselves define 'fair').
But being corrupt beings, we are prone to fiddle the system, so a ruling body has to intervene to ensure that the vulnerable are not edged out.
Now, the government has become increasingly 'fem-centric', so I do not trust its ability to be fair to men these days, so I agree again that the government is useless as a bias-free body fit to adjudicate.
But the principle of sharing family resources is sound. That, I hope you and I both agree on.
This all requires careful vetting of a marriage partner, yes. I was unaware of the student loan thing you point out. Indeed, it would be unwise to take on a spouse with a huge student loan these days, agreed.
But given that most graduates nowadays are coming out of university with large debts, that means that unless these people all find fantastic well-paying jobs, they are unmarriageable. That's crazy.
But there we are...
About the 'deciding not to work' thing, I have a suspicion where your thoughts are heading on this issue :-)
Are you referring to women who take time out after having children?
I suspect my thoughts on that would be the polar opposite of yours, so let's not go there :-)
I think it is fair to say that women have a difficult position here (and this wasn't so much of a problem in the days before feminism, so indeed these problems are 'self-induced', granted. If we agree that the best place for a woman who has just had a child is with that child until that child is fairly independent of her with respect to feeding needs, attachment issues, etc., then I don't see that such a woman is 'dodging' work. She actually must be doing the work that childcare/homecare involves, however, rather than slacking off. In the absence of homecare or childcare, I think women should work in other capacities, yes, which includes paid work outside the home, especially if it is in the best interests of everyone involved. Hey ho, again I am not an expert, but I think the above is a fair arrangement if the 'covenant' is to be respected.
But I hear you. For sure, if you really mean lazy people who refuse to pull their weight, then yes, the other spouse has a real problem on their hands. Back to the vetting issue...
In short, I think all this boils down to two people of sound mind and good intentions making a conscious effort to be decent and fair to each other. The laws are there and always have been. Yes, these days they have gone crazy, but within this crazy framework, two people who want to, can get themselves out of the clutches of the government just by being decent human beings. But this of course requires that they BOTH cooperate. Back to the vetting thing...
It doesn't seem easy, this, but surely it can be done. In fact, some do manage this. So I know it is possible.
And as a deterrent for the abusers of the system, there should be stringent punishment. But I imagine that would be too much of a noble idea for corrupt governments to entertain...
Now, if you are divorced and have been unfairly treated by the court system, then you have every sympathy from me. Several of (male) family members of mine have been there, and I know how frustratingly maddening it is.
Spacetraveller,
I haven't been screwed over by women at all. I've never been and don't want to be married or have kids and I've gotten along with females just fine. I've had lots of hotties interested in me (I'm no player or anything and not trying to brag, just trying to give you a sense of where I'm coming from).
It is just that I don't get lonely and am happy doing my own thing.
Therefore since I don't get lonely and don't want kids, I therefore don't have to compromise on anything and can do (legally) whatever I want whenever I want.
Hence my username of Live Free or Die!
You'll say "What about sex?" Well I can get that without marriage or cohabiting. You'll say "What about cuddling?" I'll say I can get that without marriage or cohabiting. I have friends and family that care about me, so I don't need marriage or cohabitation for that either.
Anything else has to do with the "being alone" stuff, in which case I don't get lonely.
As for your partner staying home question....I wasn't talking about a couple that has a kid and them deciding that the wife staying home taking care of the kid was a leech. I was talking about anyone of any gender just deciding out of the blue to give up and let the other partner do all the work.
LFOD,
Ah, understood!
That's good, that you have a life-plan that you are happy with. No argument there. You are like the man in the post, then, happy with what you have. That's probably in a better place than 99% of the population :-)
OK, I stop teasing you about the wife thing now.
Case closed. I just figured I'd try and squeeze in a little pro-marriage propaganda in a post where I extol the virtues of a MGHOW...
Hey, I never said I was logical!
:-)
It's all good, LFOD.
Hm, I think we've reached stalemate, fellas. I don't like Ceer's Options 1-3 (for sure I don't like hearing about men going through Option 3 - it's getting painful!), you don't like Ceer's Option 4 and my Option 5...
Hm I wonder if there is an Option 6?
Hahahahahahahahahaha!
Yep, running out of viable options...
At the risk of thread necromancy, I have to agree with the idea that the government is involved in every marriage. Part of the point of the divorce culture is to create a threatpoint for use in negotiations that automatically gives an upper hand to the least invested party.
Whether or not it's used isn't the point. Even happily married couples have the specter of this threat tactic looming over them. In my country, there are even TV and radio commercials advertising divorce.
Ceer,
Much as I don't want to believe it, I guess you and LFOD are right about the govt being involved in marriages whether we like it or not.
I have seen some of the ads you refer to.
They make me nauseous every time.
:-(
In a healthy culture where women felt their hypergamy satisfied such commercials would act as a mild shit test for women...provoking only the least suitable out of marriage.
Ceer,
Taking my hat off to you...
What a clever observation!
Sweet spacetraveller,
Rare is it that I visit. Few indeed are the women that I will read. You however don't merely write, you create. I am MGTOW but you are one of the few individuals for whom being female is a virtue. It is like breathing fresh air to feel your thoughts.Refreshing indeed to be reminded of what a woman could be if she tried.
Some of us have become MGTOW through events or circumstances thrust upon them This is the main image. The real problem for worthy women like you, and I think you see it, is those other men like me, young enough to have chosen this path from the beginning declining all.
Desirable men, filled with masculine, yet never their hand turned toward womankind. I wish you well.
Ps.
You can have all the "little boy issues" you like, it's charming. For a man who would do nothing but protect them, little girls are likewise sparkles that endlessly fascinate with the possibilities of that they will become.
Thank you ..
Anonymous,
Wow, this is high praise indeed! Thank you for validating me in this charming manner. You made my day.
I was thinking if you validate women like this in real life, you would have very happy women round you!
"Some of us have become MGTOW through events or circumstances thrust upon them."
Absolutely. I understand this very well now.
Even when it is a choice, I am beginning to understand that perhaps circumstances beyond our control sometimes drive our choices in life. Rare indeed that person (like the old man in the OP) who really wants a life of solitude. Even introverts want occasional company other than their own.
Whilst I get that most men do not NEED marriage, many want female company, and the best way to guarantee female company in civilised society is some form of marriage. But in this milieu where, as you say, desirable men must stay away from women for reasons of self-preservation, marriage is no longer the best option, which is quite sad :-(
Re little boy issues, LOL. I am pleased to hear your views on little girls. They also make me laugh out loud sometimes, when I see how skilled they are at 'femine wiles'. It is indeed fascinating to witness.
My latest 'little boy issues' come from the 6 year old son of a friend. He is now at the stage where he is impressing me with his physical strength. He has taken to lifting one of my legs whenever I see him, forcing me to have to hop around on one leg until he feels like letting go of my leg, LOL. His parents are always apologising to me when he does this, but I encourage this, because I know that he wants to show me how strong he is getting. He is being a man. One day, he'll stop doing this, and I shall miss that! I can already picture him as a strong adult man, and it's a beautiful image in my mind.
I so get it when you talk of the possibilities of what little girls will become. Time flies. Before you know it, that wee girl with the plats is a young woman with a rack :-) And you think, where did the time go?
Post a Comment