Shed Your Ego

Best Gore Forums Societally Relevant Gender Studies Shed Your Ego


Viewing 0 reply threads
  • Author
    • #133019

      What I am about to propose here will challenge the very foundation of the MGTOW philosophy.But that’s not a problem because MGTOW is a philosophy aimed at the greater understanding of gender dynamics for the purpose of liberating men. And for that reason, must be a self critical philosophy never relying on dogma. And so with that in mind, here is my proposal:

      What if the gender empathy gap is not a manifestation of gynocentrism?

      You see, it has long been held in MGTOW philosophy that us men face a fundamental disadvantage to women. We call it gynocentrism. Gynocentrism, in MGTOW theory, is a biological tendency for women to favor the interests and well being of women over men, and for men to favor the interests and well being of women over men; it is a biological drive to assign greater consideration for females in society. When people ask for an example of this gynocentrism, we point to the gender empathy gap, and then we use many socio-political arguments to prove the existence of the gender empathy gap.

      The words “Gender Empathy Gap” might as well be a synonym for the word “gynocentrism”.

      For the sake of my argument, let’s just assume that the reader is convinced of a very real gender empathy gap. What if a biological preference for female consideration was not the culprit? It would be a sledge hammer to the foundation of modern MGTOW theory.

      Well brothers, forgive me for my transgressions, but I am going to rock the foundation of MGTOW today.

      The Gender Empathy Gap may not be rooted in biologically driven gynocentrism; but instead male ego.

      This occurred to me when I was watching a man on YouTube completely deny that men are disadvantaged to women that gender equality is only something that can be described as lacking for women. He did give MRA’s credit that the court system was bias against men, and he gave the MRA’s credit for another point, but then brushed it all aside because the judges that behave this way are men, and the men who get raped, are raped by men, and the men drafted into war are drafted by male governments, and the soldiers that they are drafted to kill are male, and so it’s all a male created problem.

      It was his tone of voice, his giggle, his smirk, and his insistence that all injustices men face are male created. It was that, that gave it away. I now understood what I was looking at when I watched this man’s video.

      He was not a pussy beggar trying to kiss up to women. He wasn’t even being a stereotypical social justice warrior. He was in denial. His denial was based on fear. His fear was that men could be victims. His smirk and over all demeanor was like whistling while walking past a grave yard. It was fear driven.

      Men are afraid to be victims of women.

      How many times have we seen it, a male, be it a full grown man, or a little boy, becomes victimized, and we take away his man card.

      If a boy is beat up on the play ground by a girl, we don’t scream for justice, we don’t insist that the girl be punished. Instead we laugh at the boy, we mock him, we tell him “ha ha, you got beat up by a girl”.

      We deny him his victimhood. We do not give him sympathy for his bloody nose, or his swollen eye; we give him mockery. We will shame and humiliate him so bad, that if another girl ever beat him up, he’d rather proclaim that he was beaten up by some unknown bully, or that he fell down. Even he will deny his own victimhood after the teasing.

      And the same is true with an adult man. If a man is assaulted by his wife, he can expect no one to believe him, or worse, to be mocked for getting beat up by his wife. He can expect to be called faggot, sissy, pussy, or other words meaning “not a true and proper man”.

      In some countries, when a man is raped by a man, he is no longer considered a man, and that is very telling of the problem.

      We can either acknowledge a man’s victimhood by removing the title “man” from him, or we can allow him to maintain the title of “man” but we refuse to acknowledge he was victimized.

      But where does this tendency come from?

      It comes from the male ego.

      Men view themselves as superior to women.

      Let’s look at the traits most people will associate with masculine and feminine genders.

      Here are the traits associated with masculinity:












      If masculinity and femininity are opposites, then what are the opposites of those traits? In order they are:




      Passive / submissive.








      Now let’s look at how the traits of femininity effect men.

      Women cannot do harm because they are weak.

      Women must be protected from harm because they are fragile.

      Men must do things for women because women are incapable.

      Men are a threat to women because men are aggressive, and women are passive and submissive. Also, being passive and submissive means she cannot be at fault for her actions or inaction.

      Care and consideration must be given to women because they are emotionally and physically vulnerable. That is to say, they require a special protection status.

      Any wrongful actions committed by a woman are not her fault because she is a creature who is controlled by another.

      A woman is victim by virtue of being female.

      A woman is oppressed merely by virtue of being female. So when a woman says “I am oppressed because…” or “I am a victim because…” we can ignore everything after the word “because”, and the reason being, she’s right. No matter how silly it sounds, no matter what her reason, she is a victim because a victim is what makes a woman feminine. She is oppressed and dominated, those are the virtues of her sex. If a woman were not victimized, oppressed, dominated, submissive, we wouldn’t call her lady-like. In fact, if she were the opposite of those things, we might call her butch, or a ball buster.

      It’s never a woman’s fault because she is ruled, because she is under someone’s control, she can’t fight back because she is submissive, her crimes were merely an act of her following orders, that evil man made her do it.

      The qualities of the masculine dictate the qualities of the feminine and visa versa. These are the traditional gender roles. You’ll often hear the TradCon cry about the feminists and progressives blurring those gender lines. The tradcon (or we could just say the non-MGTOW, the non-enlightened man) holds these classic gender roles as sacred.

      And so we must ask why?

      Well, as you can see, a woman’s weakness is her strength. The weaker women are, the less they can be held responsible for their crimes, the more they must be protected from men, and the more men must do for them.

      But the TradCon does not see this. He believes his masculine strength is strength, and a woman’s weakness is weakness. He does not see how his alleged strength puts him under the command of women, or how the weakness of women commands and obligates men.

      Also, to blur the gender lines, is to slowly erase manhood, and that is like emasculation or castration. A man will subconsciously hold his crotch in anxious fear that the gender lines are being blurred. So when you hear a man say “they’re trying to take away our masculinity” this is equal to him holding his crotch and saying “they’re going to castrate us”. A man also fears and detests other mens sexuality, and so when he looks at a woman, he doesn’t want to see a drop of maleness in her. So he wants big thick gender lines.

      Warren Farrell let the cat out of the bag when he said “Men’s greatest weakness is their facade of strength, and women’s greatest strength is their facade of weakness”.

      Before Warren Farrell, Friedrich Nietzsche had a few similar things to say, here is one example from Nietzsche “And finally, woman! One-half of mankind is weak, chronically sick, changeable, shifty – woman requires . . . a religion of the weak which glorifies weakness, love and modesty as divine: or better still, she makes the strong weak – she succeeds in overcoming the strong. Woman has always conspired with decadent types – the priests, for instance – against the “mighty,” against the “strong,” against men. Women avail themselves of children for the cult of piety”.

      Women put on a facade of weakness. Remember, frail, weak, vulnerable, victim, these are synonyms for feminine.

      We have William Shakespeare who said “frailty, thy name is woman”.

      Frailty, weakness, victim, this is what it means to be feminine.

      When a woman says “I am a victim”, what she is really saying is “I am a woman”.

      When a man says “I am a victim” he is saying “I am a woman”.

      This is why if a man proclaims to be a victim, we take away his man-card, we strip him of the name “man” and call him words meaning woman, such as: pussy, sissy, faggot, bitch.

      In our minds, a man is masculine, and that means he dominates, victimizes, oppresses, others. A woman is feminine, that means she gets dominated, victimized, and oppressed.

      The classical perception of man and woman was all that was needed for female supremacy. So long as men cling to the notion that he is the stronger sex, the superior sex, he has removed from his mind that he can be the victim of a woman. For a man to say “a woman has victimized me” is to say “the victim has victimized the victimizer, the oppressed has oppressed the oppressor”.

      We cannot give a man the status of victim while continuing to call him a man, to do so is to proclaim him a 3 sided square or a four sided triangle.

      victimhood, the synonym of femininity, is the traditional role of woman. If a man is partaking in victimhood, he is being feminine.

      And so when this man on YouTube laughed at the notion of men being victims of women, it was an act of self defense. If this man could accept that men, as a whole, are being victimized by women, than he is accepting that he as a man, has been emasculated, reduced to womanhood.

      Men laugh at the notion that men can be victims of women, for the same reason a coward trying to chase away his panic, whistles while walking past the cemetery.

      What appears to be a gender empathy gap, may not be based on the lacking of any actual empathy, but instead fearful males defending their fragile male ego by denying the male sex is capable of being victimized by the “weaker sex”.

      It is a man’s boastful male superiority that shackles him to a role of masculinity, and denies him femininity. And as stated, masculinity means the strong, the dominant, the oppressor. Femininity means the frail, the dominated, the oppressed.

      And so long as this is what masculine and feminine mean, then society cannot conceive of the weak, helpless, inferior females, harming the strong, invulnerable, superior males.

      I say let us take a sledge hammer to the fragile statues of the masculine and the feminine. These gender roles, and their meanings, must be destroyed.

      How many men even in the manosphere who use the term MGTOW or MRA to describe themselves, put down other men in the manosphere by saying “you just want to be a victim”?

      I know we have all heard that many times. These men are no better, or at least not much better, than the man who smirks and snickers at the concept of men’s rights, the concept that men can be victims.

      But where did these gender roles come from? Well, somewhere between biological drives, particularly the mating drive to which we owe most human nature, and environmental constraints, over time, created exaggerations of man and woman.

      Without going too much into sexual psychology, I will try to go into more detail.

      Men are 15 to 20 percent bigger than women. This slight to moderate size difference is all it takes to get the ball rolling, casting us into two distinct roles, the strong male and the weak female.

      Men fear the strength and predatory nature of men, we down right fear the sexuality of other men, and thus seek the opposite of manly traits in women. So women exaggerate their weakness. This produces a symbiosis, men trying to act stronger than they are and women trying to act weaker than they are, both sexes exaggerating both physically and emotionally their size difference. The mating preference then comes into play, a woman has the highest mate value when she is least like a man, and men have the greatest mate value when he is least like a woman. And so that’s when social shaming comes in, a woman is to be as weak as she can possibly be (also referred to as feminine) and a man is to be as strong as he can possibly be (also called masculine).

      Slowly but surely cultures get centered around this. It becomes the foundational core. And really, why wouldn’t culture be centered on the dynamics between men and women, especially when you take into consideration we are alive because of the reproductive dynamics of men and women. Once our culture is cemented, our gender roles carved in stone, the conservative mind who wants to maintain tradition, will defend these roles.

      The male mind is filled with sexual shame, he takes up a superiority complex to compensate for his feelings of weakness and vulnerability that women arouse in him. Males must strive to be masculine, and nothing is more of a threat to his masculinity than being a victim.

      Men walk tall with the massive inflated ego that screams out “I am man hear me roar, I have built all the great societies, invented every worthwhile thing, I keep the nation running, and I stand a thousand foot tall, looking down at the weak and inferior female who envies my height, my strength, my masculinity”.

      Telling this fragile man that he is not a thousand feet tall, and that he is not superior to women, will shatter his ego. He can’t allow that, he is far too tender and frail. He will defend his thousand foot tall ego, he will deny victimhood, and he will deny other men their victimhood.

      And I want to make it clear, men are not superior to women. If men are the stronger sex, it is a reference to muscle mass only.

      The power of a woman’s beauty will set men to kill other men, rob, cheat, steal, lie, and even kill himself for failing to live up to women’s demands. That is merely a taste of the power women have over men. And you can proclaim that men are superior because they don’t cry as easily. Well consider this, when women cry, it manipulates men to act on their behalf, like their tears are remote controls and you are the Television. You are thoroughly under their control.

      You, as a man, have spent your life in pursuit of women’s approval, hating your self, hating your fellow man, and even hating them, when you have not gotten their approval.

      You may have more muscle, and better math skills than women, but your life, your reality, self esteem, and sense of self, is derived from women.

      It’s really tough to make a case that men are hands down superior.

      I don’t know if men and women are equal but different, or if women are superior, but men sure as hell aren’t the superior sex. If you think you are, that’s ego, that’s an emotional defense mechanism to cover weakness and fear, it’s a mask, and women will use that mask against you. Shed your ego.

      The Gender Empathy Gap may not be a direct manifestation of a biologically driven instinct to give consideration to women over men; it may very well be an ego driven denial of victimhood.

      Men seek out, as mates, those that do not threaten his shameful, bashful, sexuality. Women seek out, as mates, those who can complete her. And when I say “complete her” I am referring to completing her masculine self she has to hide away.

      A man throws a punch while standing in the spotlight for the whole world to see. A woman attacks from the shadows in secret.

      A man passes gas loudly and boastfully in public, a woman leaves the room to do it in private. Both men and women have this body function, in fact, both men and women are equally flatulent, but women have been conditioned to be discrete with this offensive body function.

      Women have even conditioned themselves to sneeze more gentle and submissive.

      Think about small children, both boys and girls have loud raspy sneezes often producing mucus discharge, which is the purpose of the sneeze reflex. When boys grow up they condition themselves to produce less mucus discharge, but the loud grizzly bear roaring is still there in fully grown men. But fully grown women have conditioned this involuntary reflex of theirs to sound cute, meek, passive, gentle, feminine.

      When you stop to realize the amazing power of the human brain to slowly rewire its nervous reflexes, you’ll stand in awe at how well we can train our outward social actions to conform to the gender role we are pressured to live out.

      Women are almost as masculine and strong as men, but male sexual insecurity pressures women to conform to a submissive role. A woman’s power is her seductive force, so that which men find seductive becomes hoops she must jump through in life to maximize her power and survival. Women cannot compete one on one with men physically, so they submit and rule him sexually. A man is so ruled sexually, he over compensates with pride in his physical strength and the psychological virtues derived from that strength (those virtues being named under the traits of masculinity).

      So men have set the role for women, and women have in turn set the rules for men. Women live vicariously through men. A woman is masculine through the attainment of a masculine man.

      This is the birth of the gender role: men take pride in their strength, women take pride in their beauty that commands men’s strength. A man seeks out the most beautiful woman to lend his strength to, and a woman seeks the strongest man to lend her beauty to. A man is beautiful vicariously through his woman, a woman is strong vicariously through her man.

      I believe the birth of sexual differences in humans is size difference, which is where our behavioral differences artificially manifest as a response to the other, and then get even more exaggerated when we learn those differences have now become mating preferences, and then get even more exaggerated due to cultural reinforcement. Behavioral differences between men have largely been enforced by external pressures. We are humans split into halves, only able to complete ourselves through the other. The more alike men and women, the less dependency men and women have on each other. I even suspect a certain level of heightened male libido is a reaction to shame that men feel. I believe we are literally trying to fuck away our shame.

      Ego is the mask of shame, the facade of strength. Let us shed our ego.

      I want to mention, I claimed that shame and envy may be responsible for male heightened libido, I want to make it clear, if my theory is right, it is only partially responsible. I believe the bulk of it has to do with the prostate and hormonal system.

      I also said I would rock the foundation of MGTOW philosophy. Have I destroyed gynocentric theory? I don’t believe I have. While the empathy gap can be explained by the male identity being synonymous with invulnerability, and femininity basically being a euphemism for “victim”, I must confess that gender roles are the manifestation of our sexual differences, and those differences being a product of evolution. And while I don’t care to speculate at the evolutionary roots to how those differences may have come about, it is important to note that men and women have physiological differences that are going to manifest in our sense of self, how we relate to the opposite sex internally, and how we relate to the opposite sex outwardly. If gynocentrism is really just “that which favors women” then I don’t believe I have made a case against gynocentrism. And if gynocentrism in MGTOW philosophy is a biologically driven favoritism for women, than I don’t think I have erased the biology aspect from the equation either. But the standard view of gynocentrism is that female preferential treatment is the direct manifestation of safeguarding women because they are the limiting factor in reproduction. I have actually challenged that. And while I may not have disprove it, I have offered an alternative view of its mechanics and biological origins. Perhaps female favoritism stemming from the need to protect women for the purposes of procreation still plays a role, but at least with this alternative view, we understand, it may not be the only role.

      I am not convinced that Gender is so hard wired as to not be changed. Albeit I don’t believe gender will ever disappear completely, as I said, sexual differences will manifest into gender differences. I believe it is time for society to let go of gender roles. Gender will always be there, but there is no need to twist people’s arms into conformity.

      The more different men and women are, the more we will need each other to complete ourselves and be fully human. And that may sound like some sort of poetic glorification of symbiosis to some people, but we must understand, due to our current environment, brought about by technology, the differences between the sexes benefit women at the expense of men. The more we can erase the gender differences, the more complete men can be without women. And the less men see themselves as invulnerable rulers, the more easy it will be for men to see themselves and their fellow male as a victim. And men cannot hope to have justice if they deny their victimhood. And men are denying their victimhood because they don’t want to be castrated. Men fear castration, emasculation, the removal of manhood from himself. To call a man a victim is to call a man a fagot, or a unic, the castrated former male. His insecurity demands an arrogant bravado, a swollen ego, self glorification. But then this obligates the man to live up to his own ego. What better way to live up to his massive ego than to white knight for the weaker sex?

      Consider this: if a man disguises his shame and insecurity with bravado, the facade of strength, culminating into a massive male pride ego, what better way to stroke that ego and reaffirm his position as the superior dominant sex, than to white knight for the weaker sex?

      We say that white knighting is a mating strategy, or even part of the blanket term gynocentrism, and while this may be completely true, true in some cases, or just partially true, here is another possibility, white knighting is a stroking of the male ego. Men have got to remind themselves and their fellow man, that we males are the superior sex, and that women are the inferior sex.

      So I want you to picture a man who is afraid that acknowledging male victimhood is like castrating men, and on top of that he feels the need to reaffirm his manliness by white knighting for the weaker sex. And how do you think he would react when you tell him men are being victimized by women? He would snicker, smirk, laugh, deny it, and proceed to list a million and one reasons why women are the weaker sex, the victim sex, and why men need to stand up for them.

      Insecurity and shame are masked by bravado, the ego grows, the ego needs to be reaffirmed, male victimhood is denied, women are white knighted for, the ego is stroked.

      I say the ego is the disease, a suit of armor that has gone from protectively encapsulating us, to imprisoning us and restricting our movement.

      MGTOW, let us shed the ego, step out of our armor and expose the withered body hidden beneath, let’s take off the mask, look into the mirror and know ourselves, the face we have kept hidden, and show the world what we are. We will step out of our armor, and into the sunlight for the whole world to see us as we truly are. We are not thousand foot tall giants, we are not super heroes, we are not invulnerable or immortal, we are very mortal indeed. We are weak, we are frail, we are human, and we deserve to be treated as human – RBK

Viewing 0 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.