(Disclaimer: In the second installment of this multipart series Kolinahr continues to give his opinion on the popular mgtow youtuber sandman, the opinions expressed here are not necessarily that of my own, but in the spirit of compiling as many expressions of mgtow thought here i will post it)
I have spent a fair amount of time looking for notable developments in the MGTOW Sphere this last week. Finally I settled on Sandman’s video “The Monks of MGTOW” Mar 21, 2015.
What made this Sandman video so interesting? Sandman’s “The Monks of MGTOW” video has to be one of the worst most offensive MGTOW videos Sandman have ever made. This was not simply more of “Oh this is just more Sandman going off on a wild speculation and pushing the envelope.”
Lets go over the text of Sandman’s video. This will be a long haul. Another cup of coffee might be in order. If Sandman’s video is still fresh in your mind you might skip the lengthy excerpts and go directly to my parsing.
I would ask the reader to carefully visualize the image that the video requester and Sandman are painting of celibate/non-dating, minimalist, and yes even poor MGTOW here:
–EXCERPTS FROM SANDMAN’S VIDEO “THE MONKS OF MGTOW”–
@0:06 Sandman quotes the text of the sender of the video request, “Here is what he has to say:
[Video requester speaking] ‘Sandman, I keep hearing that to become a true MGTOW, you not only have to give up cohabitation and marriage, but you also have to go as far as giving up many of the other things that I often times find worth living for. I refuse to listen to anyone that I can’t be a MGTOW and drive a BMW, wear an Armani suit, or work out, because those things are attractive to women, and therefore I am supposedly catering to what women want. Where does this idea come from that a man cannot be a self-actualized MGTOW if he continues to buy into the hype of consumer culture, or if he goes out with women period. Can’t a man be enlightened and enjoy the finer things in life, without constantly worrying that he is only doing these things for women and not himself. I don’t want to live like a hermit or a prepper to gain validation from other guys going their own way. How can a man balance between being fully aware of feminism and gynocentrism, without being paranoid that every action he takes will attract a woman if he ever betters himself? …’ “
@1:12 Sandman answers the above questions,
[Sandman speaking] “… I agree with you that men going their own way, shouldn’t be modern day MONKS. There are some MGTOWs out there choose this type of lifestyle and they have every right to do so and go their own way while doing it. But when they go so far as to tell other men that they can’t drive an expensive vehicle, buy themselves expensive toys, make lots of money, work out or live a healthy life style, because it makes them less of a MGTOW, then this is snobby elitism. And needs to be stopped, or at the very least pointed out. … the men out there that don’t want other men to have nice things are full of envy and you know the old saying, ‘misery loves company. And have you ever noticed that the same people criticizing other men for so-called materialism are often very poor themselves. Sometimes it is easier to give up on life, instead of trying to better your position in it. … but like I said there are guys out there that choose to be MGTOW losers or envy the successful ones. This all seems to be an excuse for personal inadequacies. I see this in a lot of the MGTOW community and I have kept my mouth shut about it for a very long time now. …
Now we hear many MGTOWs complaining about their oppression by women but also complaining about their oppression by other men. So many MGTOW out there never get full validation from either men or women. So they are now going about their business ensuring that they don’t validate the experiences of other men. It is like they have been burned by both males and females in our society. So they continue to blame others for their own hurt feelings. They seek to treat others cruelly, because their own lives did not turn out the way that they wanted. So …, you need to understand that many of these so-called “MONK MGTOW’s” are most likely trying to provoke a negative reaction from you, because they feed off your negativity. So the best thing I can tell you to do is avoid the negative feelings from men that have decided to make their lives about as much suffering as possible. … Just because these “MONK-MGTOWs” have intentionally taken a vow of poverty, and made a vow to stay away from women, doesn’t mean that you have to. Guys like this are toxic for your soul if they are putting you down and making you feel bad, and I would suggest not listening to them anymore. … but some MGTOWs out there have this obsessive avoidance of women. These are guys that are secretly obsessed with women or dealing with repressed feelings, because they pretend to be completely over women, while at the same time they aren’t. … they need to listen to the Mark Twain quote that goes something like this, ‘It aint what ya don’t know that gets ya into trouble. It’s what ya know fur sure, when it just ain’t.’ So, many of the MONKS of MGTOW project to the others, that they have completely gotten over their biological impulses and imperatives, but at the same time they are usually miserable talking about it. Most of them are in complete denial about being attracted to women, and that is why I used the thumbnail I did in this particular video, to show that men that say they are completely over women, … are usually lying to themselves, and everyone else.
… I often wonder how many have experienced a woman using a man’s love for her as a way to control him … this is very low and if a man is genuinely a good person, and he realizes a woman is doing this to him, it will make him question the very nature of his good feelings and emotions and his self esteem. He will question his heart, his morality, and his character, I think that is the damage that causes the damage that causes the MONKS of MGTOW to go their own way. Guys that avoid women completely … do it because of the memory of the pain caused by the emotional damage – caused by women. … a man that has his heart damaged needs a lot of therapy to feel right about what happened to him in the past. … Even the TFL founder … found a girl-friend … you could see a marked improvement in his mood. He no longer acts like a MONK.
… What I come across over and over again is that the celibate MGTOW’s have some kind of emotional traumas they don’t know how to deal with. They are unable to be around women or spend time with them because they have been hurt so badly and deeply in the past, they can never forgive what happened to them. Some blame ALL WOMEN for the damage from just one or two of them. … that wound is almost impossible to heal. Apparently the only way to deal with it is for some men to completely abstain … either that or stop being cowards, and move past their anger and their pain. … The way I got over my pain was not by pretending I was beyond women and that they were inferior, or petty, but instead I did the actual work talking out my problems, night after night, here on You Tube, and over timer my anger subsided. But at the same time my hypervigilance remains, when interacting with women. I am smart enough to recognize female nature and protect myself from it. …
What do you guys think about my theory about the HERMITS of MGTOW or the MONKS of MGTOW that shun all contact with women, because they were incredibly hurt by them while they were younger. So instead of dealing with their emotional traumas and moving on, they often WALLOW IN THEIR OWN FILTH AND MISERY, instead of getting over it, and taking the next step forward in life.
Don’t be shy. Share your comments below.
Luimarco … don’t let the haters and the critics get to you. – 9:27
–END of EXCERPTS FROM SANDMAN’S VIDEO “THE MONKS OF MGTOW”
•••START OF KOLINAHR’S PARSING OF VIDEO EXCERPTS•••
“I keep hearing…”
“Where does this idea come from…”
What the video requester is saying is absurd. The video requester does NOT “keep hearing” what he relates in the video. He is cherry picking the comments of loose cannons, and saying he “keeps hearing”. No substantive number of MGTOW are shaming financially successful MGTOW for having money. Any denizen of the MGTOW forums knows this.
Yes, this is a Stardusk snipe at Sandman, and his respective cheering section, may have repeated it, but only relative to Sandman. Overall there is no SUBSTANTIAL shaming by petty envious MGTOW of other MGTOW over their material success. And for you political junkies out there it is glaringly obvious this is right out of the playbook of mainstream politics CLASS WARFARE. Now someone is trying to inject it into MGTOW. How sweet.
And even then the Stardusk cheering section mostly echoes the quality of the videos aspect of the argument. The video requester’s text looks very much like a CONTRIVED VEHICLE for Sandman to strike back against those (and they are a minority) that criticize him for so monetizing his content, and mysteriously the text seems very specifically tailored to Stardusk’s criticisms.
The video requester’s text sounds contrived or cherry-picked, like a straight-man set-up for Sandman’s upcoming arguments to defend himself against these criticisms and to paint himself as just another victim of the many other MGTOW out there that are harassed and “shamed” for their hard work and success in life by envious lazy MGTOW losers, that excuse their deserved poverty by assuming a monk like persona that allows themselves the illusion that their poor circumstances are the result of a noble choice in life.
Does this not invite Marxian class warfare division within MGTOW?
“men going their own way, shouldn’t be modern day MONKS.”
Why not? What is wrong with that?
From here on out, Sandman you seem to gleefully enjoy mixing the idea of “celibacy” with that of “monastacism” which is inextricably linked with religion. You are an atheist Sandman. Nothing wrong with that, but when you bring the rabid contempt for religious people so commonly found in the Internet neo-atheist community into MGTOW – that is not fine. You play fast and loose with the 3,000 year old tradition of monasticism. And no, don’t try to slip a trad-con argument into it.
So, Sandman has an out here. Sandman would say, “Oh, ‘monk’ is just a casual metaphor for celibacy and poverty.” Well in the whole context of the video, I think Sandman’s metaphor here is an implication that celibate MGTOW and religious people are BOTH emotional cripples and partakers of delusion. Your characterization of celibate MGTOW and the stereotype of the religious as self deluded bigots play back and forth on each other here – as your term MGTOW Monks and your characterization of celibacy as “obsessively avoiding women” and your choice of words about broke loser MGTOW “taking vows of poverty” play off of each other.
“There are some MGTOWs out there choose this type of lifestyle and they have every right to do so and go their own way while doing it.”
Nope Sandman, this is just a perfunctory hedge to give you an out later in your video. In any careful listening of your video, you are definitely going after celibacy – with a vengeance. You have managed to alienate a huge portion of the MGTOW community and unnecessarily complicated the MGTOW philosophy.
Any careful listener will note the painstaking characterization of celibate MGTOW going on above. This is not your “theory” Sandman. This is a hatchet job, this is a hit piece on celibate MGTOW, especially one certain celibate MGTOW that has the word “Star” in his screen name.
And the, “Oh, I was only talking about SOME MGTOW.” isn’t going to work here either. You would be doing an Aaron Clarey or a Stone. Playing games with the word “some” by not clearly qualifying it further, is what the Feminists, Libs, and Social Justice Warriors do.
“The way I got over my pain was not by pretending I was beyond women and that they were inferior, or petty, but instead I did the actual work talking out my problems.”
I know, not all celibate MGTOW are like that. You were only talking about the emotionally-crippled celibate MGTOW. Those celibate MGTOW too lazy or weak to “work though” their bad experiences with women that causes them to “generalize women”. They need to do what the big strong Sandman did, and overcome the psychopathy or sociopathy of celibacy (which implies fearful reclusiveness) so they can resume “healthy behavior”. What is “healthy behavior”? Why resuming relationships with women – silly. So they can come out of their monkish basement cells and shave off their neck beards.
In the most bizarre reversal, MGTOW, according to Sandman, PROMOTES RELATIONSHIPS WITH WOMEN as the only HEALTHY form of MGTOW. You see, as long as a man does not marry and maintains “hyper-vigilance”, having relationships with women is the RECOMMENDED MGTOW way. Celibates (MGTOW who “don’t date”) must have the courage (or be “cowards”) to “work though” their damaged state and leave their inferior, fearful, reclusive ways, in order to reach the SUPERIOR and HEALTHY LEVEL of MGTOW, which is evidenced by having relationships with women.
This truly boggles the mind.
A year and a half of studying MGTOW philosophy and lecturing on the nature of woman, and Sandman has learned nothing. Is the cylinder of the Russian Roulette revolver half full or half empty? Well Monks of MGTOW, with our “hypervigilance” from MGTOW knowledge we have minimized the number of bullets in the cylinder to just one. What are you afraid of?
“But when they go so far as to tell other men that they can’t drive an expensive vehicle, buy themselves expensive toys, make lots of money, work out or live a healthy life style, because it makes them less of a MGTOW, then this is snobby elitism … men out there that don’t want other men to have nice things”
This is crazy. This class of MGTOW is utterly fabricated. You have another propaganda trick going on here – like the mass media uses. The find rare extreme case examples and blow them up as common enough to be an issue.
“the same people criticizing other men for so-called materialism are often very poor themselves”
Now what notable celibate minimalist MGTOW out there, might be accusing what notable non-celibate MGTOW out there of materialism? Sandman fabricates a problem, an enemy within the ranks, then vilifies them.
“very poor themselves. … give up on life, instead of trying to better your position in it. … guys out there that choose to be MGTOW losers or envy the successful ones. … an excuse for personal inadequacies.”
“I see this in a lot of the MGTOW community”
OK, Sandman sees this “in a lot of the MGTOW community”? I challenge the MGTOW community to re-read that list above of traits and visualize such an absolutely pathetic human being – and ask yourself, is the MGTOW community riddled with these pathetic creatures “a lot”?
“many MGTOW out there never get full validation from either men or women.”
Many? And is this rate higher in MGTOW than the regular population?
“blame others for their own hurt feelings. They seek to treat others cruelly, … you need to understand that many of these so-called “MONK MGTOW’s” are most likely trying to provoke a negative reaction from you, because they feed off your negativity.”
Holy cow! These MONK MGTOWs sound horrible. And they are in our midst? How does one identify them? What characteristics should we look for? Oh yes, they are celibate and eschew materialism.
“… these ‘MONK-MGTOWs have intentionally taken a vow of poverty, and made a vow to stay away from women … Guys like this are toxic for your soul … putting you down and making you feel bad”
“Vows”? “Soul”? Am I the only one to see how strained and contrived these religious metaphors are. MGTOW taking vows? That is absurd and strained even as a metaphor. Again Sandman wants to bounce the religious fanaticism stereotype and not dating, off of each other, until an association is formed.
Religious metaphor this strained and consistent must have an agenda.
“secretly obsessed with women or dealing with repressed feelings”
This is the nature of MGTOW men that don’t date. Secret obsessions. Repressed feelings. In a Hollywood movie maybe.
Men within the community “secretly obsessed” with women?
Secrecy? Obsessions? Sound the alarm we have a secret cabal within MGTOW! They intend to form an hierarchy!
“many of the Monks of MGTOW project to the others, that they have completely gotten over their biological impulses and imperatives, but at the same time they are usually miserable talking about it. Most of them are in complete denial about being attracted to women … men that say they are completely over women, … are usually lying to themselves, and everyone else.”
Monks of MGTOW = celibate MGTOW = not dating women
“biological impulses and imperatives”
“in complete denial”
“lying to themselves”
“lying to everyone else”
“that is the damage that causes the damage that causes the MONKS of MGTOW to go their own way.”
Again, damaged men are the men that become celibate men. Celibate men are damaged men.
“Guys that avoid women completely … do it because of the memory of the pain caused by the emotional damage – caused by women”
MGTOW who don’t date are emotionally damaged.
“heart damaged needs a lot of therapy”
If you don’t date you need therapy, until you do date. It is not the nature of woman at fault. You were just unlucky at love. Once you learn that Not All Women Are Like That, you will be cured of your celibacy.
“Even the TFL founder … found a girl-friend … you could see a marked improvement in his mood. He no longer acts like a MONK.”
OK, you non-dating men out there. You are moody. The cure is finding a girl-friend. In MGTOW not-dating is something to escape. Acting like a monk (religious or otherwise) is bad. Get a girl friend and you too can quit acting and feeling unhappy and emotionally damaged like a MONKS.
Let’s repeat something just stated above. Per Sandman:
In MGTOW not-dating is something to escape, if you don’t want to be unhappy.
This is an inversion of reality worthy of the Soviet Union.
“What I come across over and over again is that the celibate MGTOW’s have some kind of emotional traumas”
Sandman encounters this “over and over again”.
Celibate = emotional trauma.
“They are unable to be around women”
Suppose this statement was “unable to be around people”. That would indicate mental illness and phobia. The not-dating, or celibate (including the religious celibate) = mentally ill and phobic.
“Some blame ALL WOMEN for the damage from just one or two of them.”
Quit generalizing women!? Not All Women Are Like That!?
Sandman, is this a joke?
“… that wound is almost impossible to heal. Apparently the only way to deal with it is for some men to completely abstain from as much female interaction as possible, either that or stop being cowards”
Here Sandman goes Blue-Pill. Note here, it is not the fault of women. Right back on the plantation we go, where one way or another it is always the man’s fault. Celibate non-dating men must be pathologically harboring resentment and pain, and they overgeneralizing onto all women. After all, Not All Women Are Like That! [btw the entire video is of smiling couples having fun]
Sandman, I hear the voice of a woman speaking through you.
And worse, I hear manipulation.
“and move past their anger and their pain.”
What! What! What! Did you just tell celibate non-dating men to “man up”!
“The way I got over my pain was not by pretending I was beyond women and that they were inferior, or petty, but instead I did the actual work”
Women not “inferior”? Well, that would then necessarily mean women are the EQUALS of men. Now wouldn’t it? Either that or women are superior. Pedestal anyone?
So Sandman “did the actual work” to escape his resistance to relations with women? So, celibacy is lazy? Not dating is lazy? [done in a contemptuous Aaron Clarey voice] Celibacy is the easy way out?
Sandman! The iron will you must exhibit as you bop your current girl friend, is a true inspiration to MGTOW everywhere. We MGTOW that don’t date are awed. Is your current relationship the one that supplied that “one blow-job away” blow job?
“HERMITS of MGTOW or the MONKS of MGTOW that shun all contact with women … So instead of dealing with their emotional traumas and moving on, they often WALLOW IN THEIR OWN FILTH AND MISERY, instead of getting over it, and taking the next step forward in life.”
MGTOW celibates wallow in their own filth and misery?! What horrible people non-dating MGTOW celibates must be! And oh my Gosh, MGTOW attracts them! Do we really want them in our community?
The “wallow in their own filth and misery” statement by Sandman is going to go down in MGTOW history.
“instead of dealing with their emotional traumas and moving on … instead of getting over it, and taking the next step forward in life.”
Man up you non-dating MGTOW! MGTOW philosophy teaches that getting a girl-friend, is “the next step forward in life.”
•••END OF KOHNINAR’S PARSING OF VIDEO EXCERPTS•••
Sandman’s “Monk” thing, did a smear job on both celibates and monastics. With 3,000 years of men going their own way in various philosophies and religions – the monastic parallels with MGTOW cannot be ignored. Now a true community of disciplined MGTOW living in community will forever be a Sandman joke.
Again the defense is going to be, “I was just using a metaphor.” But the entire smearing of celibates carries over to monasticism. The video plays out like there is something seriously wrong with celibacy/not-dating which must carry over to real monks. Now we are to see celibacy and monasticism as a mental disorder. Well this mental disorder has worked for 3,000 years. It is obvious there are lessons to be learned from this tradition by celibate MGTOW – religious or not. Now, here on out, any attempt at discussion of learning from the tradition has been poisoned by Sandman’s image of pathetic, judgmental, sociopathic “MGTOW Monks”. And again, I think Sandman has an atheist angle to it.
Hey, why invoke the image of Friar Tuck when we can have the scowling pudgy faced, mean, neck-bearded minions of Torquemada, tormenting Luimarco.
MRM and MGTOW once got along. They each stayed in their respective lanes, as Bar Bar said. Then some criticism and claims started flying back and forth. Then some infighting, now we have a huge schism.
Now where before a division was never even thought of, we now have MGTOW divided into two camps. One camp is emotionally “healed” and demonstrates their mental health and happy disposition by the presence of a girl friend. The other camp is extremely suspect and full of judgmental, TFL, self-deluded sociopaths, that need to get a girl friend.
Non-dating MGTOW need to get laid, Sandman?
Sandman says: Oh, not all non-dating MGTOW are like that. I’m just talking about the bad MGTOW. Way to pull an Aaron Clarey, Sandman! Well, Sandman virtually every response you made in the comments section under your video, and you made an unusual number of them, mentions Luimarco. Yet, these evil celibate MGTOW that shame those that date and so required a video response by you just happen to be virtually invisible in the main MGTOW YouTube forums. You keep deflecting back to Luimarco. Well Sandman we don’t buy it. Luimarco was a cover to go after non-dating MGTOW and monastics and promote relationships with women as the only healthy MGTOW. Your smearing of celibate MGTOW as social cripples, must apply (by definition) to religious monks as well.
As this writing goes to press, so to speak, here is a excerpt of one of Sandman’s forum replies to Gregory Becker:
Sandman says to Gregory:
“I wasn’t saying that men that choose not to date are cowards. I was referring to men that didn’t face their own emotions head on and were shaming other men for dating were cowards. That’s what I wanted to say and I should have thought about it longer but I was emotional about the whole Luimarco thing.”
To provide full context, here are Sandman’s words @7:20:
“I have also been trying to figure out more of the male side of MGTOW and why some of us choose to date and while others take vows of celibacy and the one thing I come across over and over again is that the celibate MGTOWs have some kind of emotional traumas, they don’t know how to deal with. They are unable to be around women or spend time with them because they have been hurt so badly and deeply in the past, they can never forgive what happened to them. And some of them blame all women for the damage of just one or two of them. I know it is hard trusting someone with your resources and wealth especially your financial future, but it is even more difficult being vulnerable and open with someone if you have basically been badly hurt in the past and that wound is almost impossible to heal. Apparently the only way to deal with it is for some men to completely abstain from as much female interaction as possible; either that or stop being cowards and figure out how to move past their anger and their pain.” 8:16
Above, Sandman is saying that those men that don’t face their own emotions head on, as a result, then choose celibacy (non-dating) and they either “move past their anger and their pain” – which is ONLY evidenced by relationships with women (by the definitions above it cannot be any other way)” or are “cowards” because they have chosen celibacy rather than facing their own emotions head on.
So your reply to Gregory Becker that you were only referring to shaming MGTOW celibates, doesn’t add up.
Note that Sandman starts this section of the video saying he is figuring out “the male side of MGTOW”. He is talking about non-dating MGTOW at large.
Now we have to worry about another schism, this time thanks to Sandman – within MGTOW itself.
What happened to Sandman? Something about this video is seriously out of tune, something seriously off key; and it isn’t about the tribulations of Luimarco.
Did Sandman feel betrayed by his religious faith at about the same time he discovered the betrayal of his faith in women and society’s betrayal, with it’s false and damaging illusions of woman? Are bad MGTOW (men separating themselves from women totally) and bad religious people (men separating themselves from women as monks) somehow fused in his mind?
At ~365 videos a year, the backlash to “The Monks of MGTOW” may simply be buried in the data sediment of the Internet and forgotten or we may have the beginnings of more infighting and another schism.