Diana_skeptical

Honey, I love you. Let’s get divorced.

I am often asked what led me, a woman, to become a men’s human rights activist (MHRA/MRA). The question doesn’t particularly make sense to me. The answer to the question is that I am a rational, logical person. But aside from that, who I am doesn’t matter. My gender is irrelevant.

The mainstream, feminist culture has a current perception of the men’s human rights movement (MHRM) as some sort of cult that fills vulnerable minds with an “angry white male” world view. Nothing could be further from the truth. I didn’t become an MRA, I was an MRA before I even knew about the movement. It’s the natural result of being a rational human being.

Just as my opinions about feminism, women, men, and mainstream culture have not significantly been altered by discovering the MHRM, my beliefs about marriage have not been affected by my discovery of MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way). I have been a critic of the institution of marriage since the age of 16. When I discovered men were abandoning marriage to women my reaction was “well, duh!”

I do not believe in romantic love, outside of it referring to a strong level of affection. Romantic love is delusion, it is certainly destructive, and may even be pathological. Relationships are a temporary arrangement of mutual benefit. That benefit, for some people, might be superficial but most people seek an emotional gain and are capable of maintaining long term relationships. When the relationship ceases to be beneficial to either participant it should be ended. That does not mean that people should abandon ship at the sign of a single crack. Good relationships are worth working on and can often be repaired. The ‘ship’ can even be renovated into a better state than the original.

But it’s not “love.”

The modern concept of love is mythological. Myths serve a purpose, and are wildly entertaining as well as enlightening, but they are still myths – merely symbolic. As humans, we wish to rise above our mortality by connecting with “eternal” concepts like love and marriage. That “forever” assertion, gives a feeling of stability. It’s not real. We’re all going to die.

I find the social attraction to marriage quite absurd. We are not one half of some mythological ‘whole’ person. Anyone who feels such a thing is not in a state conducive to a healthy relationship. We are social creatures who have sexual impulses. Those urges lead us to intimate encounters and we then try to transform a natural act into a meaningful event, validating us as something more than an animal with no destiny. It’s an act of existential desperation which leads to resentment and harm of our companions.

I am free of such illusions: I am MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way).

That I am female doesn’t bother me when it comes to what acronym I use. There is no value in co-opting the existing phrase to suit my needs. It does, of course, bother some other MGTOWs. Those men who are disgruntled by me are free to go their own way, to disagree and stick to their own definitions, but the important thing to ask is whether or not I am supporting MGTOW in its current meaning. I think the answer to that is clear. Perhaps, for me MGTOW means I am a misanthrope, going my own way.

My appreciation for the subset of the men’s human rights movement calling itself MGTOW is specific and unyielding. Relationships between the sexes can not survive in their current form. Modern relationships are toxic. They are loaded with co-dependency, myth, and outright abuse of our fellow humans.

To me, the debate among MGTOWs whether or not a man can be married and still call himself MGTOW is absurd. Because marriage is absurd. Some people have found themselves waking up to the “red pill” reality of the gynocentric world after they’ve already taken marriage vows and don’t want their relationship status to exclude them from identifying as MGTOW. Tough titties.

It is not your marriage that binds you to another person, it is your personal commitment to that relationship that makes it work. If you have a great relationship, you can look at your spouse and say “Honey, I love you. Let’s get divorced.” If your relationship is that fucking good, you don’t need the marriage. Getting divorced would actually assert to each other the depth of your affection because you trust each other enough to not need a state issued document to show your love.

As I’ve said, I do not believe in love – but I do believe in people.

Though I appear to be a misanthrope, I actually think that people are innately good. Human destructiveness is a socially created problem. We can fix it. It’s not “people” that I dislike, my disdain is the result of the choices I see people make. Those choices are guided by their social conditioning. In the same vein, MRAs are mistakenly viewed as misogynists. We don’t hate women, we hate the choices they make.

Our current culture crafts women into self-indulgent, self-absorbed princesses who seek to find slave partners that will cater to their every whim. That’s what makes them unlikable. At any time, women are free to make better choices. At that point, people will stop hating them.

Until things change, I am a misanthrope, a misogynist, and a mutineer. Those are the labels that mainstream society will pin on me. Unlike social justice warriors, I feel it is my job to educate my detractors and I will do it with patience. Feminists try to cast a shadow on the men’s human rights movement, portraying us as anti-social, but MHRAs actually have more respect for people than the mainstream. We believe society can break free from their illusions and create a better world. What feminists call anger is actually just tough love.

The brand of “equality” and “justice” that feminists promote accelerate the co-dependency and fears that fuel social collapse in the same way it destroys half of all marriages. That MGTOWs argue with each other about whether or not relationships are salvageable and, if so, how to resurrect them, shows more compassion for human relationships than the feminist promotion of gynocentrism.

So, I am MGTOW. And anyone who doesn’t like it can kiss my ass.

20 thoughts on “Honey, I love you. Let’s get divorced.”

  1. The elephant in the room, here, is children. Family. An analysis of love and marriage is not complete unless it grapples with those topics.

    1. I have a child. Children need both parents but they do not need to grow up exposed to co-dependency and false expectations of Disney fairytales. Not only do her father and I get along better since our divorce, our child has not been raised with illusions.

      She’s an adult now, as of this year, and I’ve rarely met such a well adjusted person as she turned out to be.

      1. I think the idea is that it still needs to be discussed. It’s where there is some validation for the involvement of the rest of society (the state). The children are going to grow up to interact with everyone else as a part of a community, so everyone else both has a reason to give support as well as expectations. People naturally organize into communities to take on large projects. It’s not something that can be overlooked, because those who overlook it are out-competed by the larger, more specialized, and more efficient group.

        Also, children are the underlying reason all of romance and dating exist. There would be no myth of love without them. I think it’s important that we be able to recognize marriage as a child-producing contract, and separate it from the emotions of love, etc. Society needs that type of contract to keep investing in the future. That contract needs to be fair for the mother, father, and child(ren).

    2. I agree. Looking back I’ve been a MGTOW since I reached sexual maturity around 30 years ago and it was working fine for me until the elephant appeared in the room.

      Everything changes when you achieve your reason de etre, fatherhood. At this point equality is unsustainable as the bias becomes effective in the very worst way, marriage or no.

      Perhaps I am conditioned to be heterosexual, if so I am content with my conditioning. Perhaps I am conditioned to be a father first, before anything else in my life, I am content with this also. Both these stand on firm foundations of logic and I am content. Unfortunately fatherhood is the point at which they come to get ya and the first time a decent person can’t escape!

      For those of us incapable of being pussy whipped, be warned, they will whip you with the ones you ‘love’ most.

      As an MGTOW MHRA I want one thing first, EQUAL RIGHTS FOR FATHERS.

  2. Great points Diana. Just stumbled upon your site thanks to Mike’s J4MB.

    Just one thing, why do the haters get the privilege of kissing your ass? 😉

    That assertion may be counter productive and I’m not sure John would approve. Go reverse Mary Antoinette on the fools and “Let them eat shit.”

  3. I respect MGTOW. But there is a problem with it in addition to having children. What about other peoples’ children? I mean, how can one be happy to abandon a generation of boys to the feminist meat grinder merely because they are not “yours”?
    PS: I like your COCK btw. Particularly liked the last (Sheehy) post.

  4. What you describe could lead to a world where governments don’t regulate human relationships. Madness!

    But seriously, it would require people to communicate and be somewhat mature. I wonder how many people are up for that.

    I remember reading about how different cultures handle extra marital affairs and how they affected the rate of AIDS transmission. In the West there is a tendency towards serial monogamy and, in cases of infidelity, serial affairs. This results in a slow transmission of the virus. In some Asian societies a married man visiting prostitutes is a more common form of infidelity than in the West so the rate of HIV spread is governed by the safety practices of sex workers and clients and is usually higher (in urbanized Asian nations) than Western ones. Finally, African cultures often see both parties of some marriages having a semi-covert long-term extramarital relationship. This leads to networks of individuals having repeated sexual contact which allows the virus to spread very efficiently. All three cultures have similar levels of extramarital activity but how this plays out greatly affects how vulnerable a population is to such a disease. I wonder how deregulating relationships would affect people’s behaviour–in general, I mean. It may not make people more likely to be non-monogamous but it may mean that people who would be non-monogamous anyway do so in a different manner–for better or worse.

  5. Though I do not agree with many of your points. I admire most of your reasoning. Specially the part of “not becoming and MRA, but you already were”. Meaning it was common sense that both men and women have rights without a biased ideology behind it.

  6. Just found your blog and this is the first article I have read, so far it’s really good. Your take on relationships was very insightful.

  7. I, too, was MGTOW before hearing that phrase. I completely agree with everything you said here. Thanks, Diana, for your great writing and videos!

  8. So you are a woman calling yourself a “man going your own way”, and feel that other men who are married not allowed, even though they are actually men.

  9. I can see here that you agree with plenty of MGTOWs on certain points, and thus it may get said that you strongly agree with many MGTOW philosophies with respect to relationships in general. Thus, I can see why you identify with MGTOWs to a certain extent. But, that said hy do you call yourself MGTOW, instead of WGTOW?

  10. Using WGTOW just creates another marginalized group. I’m not a different group. The M can be for Misanthrope if that helps. Taking people who all subscribe to the same principles and splitting them up into factions is unhelpful to the movement.

    Women are accused of “co-opting” men’s rights all the time. I am insisting here on *not* co-opting it. I like it just the way it is.

    Does that help?

  11. I can see your point about not wanting to split people up. That said, calling yourself a “MGTOW” without clarifying that you’re referring to principles and ideas, does seem like co-option to me to a certain degree of MGTOW… though NOT a co-option of men’s rights.

Join the conversation