MGTOW - good or bad for women?

There are three phrases that strike fear into the hearts of modern marriage-minded women.
'Marriage on the decline', 'MGTOW' (Men going their own way), 'Marriage strike'.

A woman's greatest fear is abandonment. Or worse, never to have been approached in the first place.
Feminism encourages women to hide this fear.
Some do it well.
But here-in lies the problem: a fear will always remain as a fear unless it is resolved.

A quirk of Nature results in the following observations:
A man does not need a woman. He is capable of being a solitary entity his whole life, and he won't care.
His work/passion/hobby is his primary focus.

A woman needs people around her. The most efficient way to increase the entourage who share her DNA is to team up with a man. So technically, a woman needs a man.

A man's greatest physical need is sexual fulfilment (according to Dr Kevin Lehman). A man's greatest social need is his freedom.
These two needs are in direct conflict with each other. Marriage (read: a woman) satisfies one at the expense of the other.
But in the old days, men often chose marriage and hoped for the best with the other need. Sometimes it worked out well.
Other times it did not.

Then feminism separated 'woman' from 'marriage'.

All of a sudden, a man could eat his cake and have it too. A win-win situation!
Being a logical being, he did.

A woman's natural reaction to MGTOW would be something like this:
"Oh no, don't go! Stay!"

Because MGTOW reduces the number of men in her 'parade'.
Because she is a good communicator and needs people around her to communicate with.
But it is a counterproductive reaction.

Because MGTOW is a natural part of manhood. It is a form of 'Initiation'.

In some cultures in the world, initiation practices are still encouraged. Men have their obligatory journey into the forest and women have their preparation rites for womanhood.
There are still remnants of the original deal in modern culture, but usually in a religious context, such as 'Bar Mitzvah' and 'Bat Mitzvah' and 'Confirmation'.

But in the real deal, a boy on the cusp of manhood  would be forcibly taken literally from his bed at night and dumped into dangerous terrain, usually by older men from the same village.

His mother and sisters would cry out, "Oh no, don't take him away" but to no avail.

Because the village elders knew that a man who had not been initiated was not a man.
He posed a risk to the whole village if he did not possess the skills of manhood. He might as well be one of the women, but without her function, either. So this man was useful to all concerned.

The women would protest, of course. But they knew thay had to let the boy go. Because, assuming he survived the rigors of initiation, he would come back a fully-fledged man, a useful member of society.
If he never came back, they would miss him. But he had not made the cut. It was a stigma for that family. They were better off in the long run without him.

There are many false imitations of initiation in today's society. Inner city gangs are a prime example.

Under feminism, many men lost their male 'elders'. Because he was taken away from them by a dominant matriarch. There was no-one to raid their homes in the middle of the night and yank them from their beds into the terrifying unknown, so necessary for the development of their sense of masculine self.

MGTOW might be one of the natural retorts to this male crisis: the lack of initiation.

The motivation for MGTOW in this present clime is certainly not for the purposes of benefiting women.

But in a roundabout way, it could be the best thing a man can do.
It could be the best demonstration of 'inner Game'.

Let the initiation begin.

The heroes will return to the village, with a lot to offer the village.
The women and children and of course the elders will be there to welcome them back to the fold.

The others will not come back.

Women only want heroes on their parade.