Abortion, and the Myth of Pure Evil

Comments (40)
  1. Paul M says:

    “The sanctity of life is a human universal across all cultures and ethnic groups”

    This is simply not true. Prior to industraliastion, every culture and ethnic group had a caste of slaves to do the agricultural and household labour. Or, they might have been called different things, their legal status might not have been that of outright chattels; but there has always been a class of people whose lives basically did not matter.

    And, of course, many cultures have genocidal attitudes towards other cultures. And religion – don’t get me started. Read the Bible – God thought nothing of drowning every living thing on earth, babies and pregnant women included. Read the story of the ten plagues of Egypt.

    The idea that all human life in and of itself is sacred is a new one.

    1. CS MGTOW says:

      I don’t follow, owning slaves does not suggest that the slaveowner did not value human life, these are not the same thing. It suggests that human empathy might have not extended to ‘outsiders’ who are seen as barbaric and therefore deserving no better than slavery, at least in part.

      People routinely seek to exterminate ‘outsiders’ but the lives of those within one’s own tribe would often be off limits.

  2. Martin says:

    Agree with the article and dont really have anything to add right now

  3. Thir Ands says:

    Barring a few spelling errors, this is a brilliant article. CS, I think you should turn this article into a video as well because I think that the ideas contained in this article needs to be spread more throughout the MGTOW community.


    1. CS MGTOW says:

      Sorry for,the typos, I may turn this into a video, I,wasn’t sure how this article,would,be received but I wanted to put something out to counter the unscientific, ‘women are evil’ meme

      1. Niko Choski says:

        Told you, you should have turned it into a video! Brilliant fucking article

        1. SuperBETAVIRGIN says:

          I am responding to Niko’s post here because I want his medical opinion (confirmation) on CS’s below paragraph given he has already mentioned in his hangouts with bar bar that a woman has to be incredibly reckless to get knocked-up given various birth control options it is a one in a million case:

          “Furthermore, within MGTOW to be logically consistent we can not criticise single motherhood and also condemn abortion rates, since one of the reasons for abortions is an unwillingness to be a single mother.”

          Considering Niko’s statement – it should be logically consistent for MGTOW to criticise both single mothers and women who perform abortions (the latter for being irresponsible and not using safe sex practices which got them pregnant in the first place).

          Correct me if I am wrong – I am 17 years old so maybe missing things about female biology.

        2. CS MGTOW says:

          :-) thanks brother, I will make a video of it

  4. Pellaeon says:

    Thanks CS, that was very informative and seemed very well reasoned.

    Paul M does make a very good point though – historically, there has always been a class that was exploited, whose lives were not valued.

    On this vein, over thing particularly did out to me when I read a biography of Gandhi. He apparently started his civil rights campaign working against apartheid in south Africa… That is working against how apartheid affected Indians in South Africa. He did little to nothing to help blacks living there, and declared his campaign a victory once he won more rights for Indians there.

  5. Pellaeon says:

    *one thing particularly stood out to me when I read a biography of Gandhi.

    My apologies, posting from my phone

  6. Tim says:

    The Disposable Male, by Spetsnaz


    The patriarchy didn’t oppress women. If you look carefully and beyond the gynocentric, feminist BS brainwashing, the patriarchy has always oppressed men in favor of women. This is why feminists, gynocentrists and captain-save-a-hos are so eager to demonize the patriarchy – they don’t want you to wake up to this horrifically controversial, deeply inconvenient, gynocracy damaging truth. If you were to recognize this truth – you’d gain the psychological and moral high ground – which is why the evil, women oppressing patriarchy is the central ingredient of the feminist shtick.

    Gynocentrists and white knights use social conditioning and brainwashing to exploit men for the benefit and advantage of women. For example – women being exempt from the draft and men being expected to provide for women financially and to protect women with their lives are topics feminists find non-relavant to the oppression olympics. Men being oppressed and exploited – with their very lives – is perfectly fine from the feminist and mangina point of view. Men being forced to pay for children they never wanted while women are given a free pass to abort said life – with no rights for the father – is equality and empowerment from a feminist’s point of view.

    Was reading a site earlier with groups of men writing how sickened they’d be if their daughters were expected to register for the draft like their sons. The “man up” and “cowardly men” rhetoric was thick. Reminded me of what makes men marriageable – money. My father was a drill sergeant in the Marines. I served in the Navy on an aircraft carrier. My life is as significant as any woman’s life. Can’t wait until men that think so little of other men are dead and buried.

    Women want to have abortions? Fine by me. Just don’t expect me to financially support you if I’d prefer otherwise. Women have options – men should too.

  7. Tim says:

    Posted this ditty on a couple of conservative and progressive web sites two days ago as RealistSavant. I know – this is manliness 101 for the crew here. Nevertheless, I hope you enjoy it:

    For all the disdain and contempt I feel towards feminists and their entourage of captain-save-a-hos, feminists have done quite a bit for men. What was the women’s movement all about? The women’s movement: (1) The destruction of the patriarchy, (2) freeing women from the slavery of marriage and (3) the sexual liberation of women.

    When I look back at my childhood, I see a father that was dumped by my gold digging mother for a wealthier man (hypergamy) and a step father and several siblings that were destroyed by my mother’s insatiable addiction to all that glittered.

    In all “advanced nations” – those in which simple gynocentrism has progressed to hypergynocentrism (feminism) – the marriage rate is tanking or has already tanked. It has gotten to the point where governments – through desperation – have already – or have in the works – plans to force marriage upon cohabiting men after X number of months of cohabitation (for the UK – see the ‘Cohabitation Rights Bill’). In Australia – men don’t even have to cohabit with a woman for her to legally force him to financially support her. The same is happening to men in Switzerland. In Sweden, the vast majority are unmarried and the vast majority of births are to single mothers. The reason forced de facto marriage is being enshrined into law by so many nations is because the white knights of the patriarchy believe that women get the short end of the stick when their boyfriends break up with them. Men are being forced into marriage by the state.

    The patriarchy didn’t oppress women. If you look carefully and beyond the feminist BS brainwashing, the patriarchy has always oppressed men in favor of women. This is why feminists are so eager to demonize the patriarchy – they don’t want you to wake up to this most disparaging and cowardly aspect of womanhood. If you recognize this truth – women lose their psychological advantage – which is why the evil, women oppressing patriarchy is such a central part of the feminist shtick.

    The legislation for no-fault divorce was written by the National Association of Women Lawyers for the express purpose of making it easy for women to divorce their husbands while simultaneously allowing women to keep their husbands assets, current and future income. After being enacted in California by white knight Ronald Reagan, the divorce rate went up to and stayed at 75% for decades. California, after many reporting periods of a 75% divorce rate, in 1996, stopped reporting their stats to the government – as did four other states in which no-fault divorce was passed. Still – to this day – 95%+ of alimony and child support goes from men to women. Women call this empowerment.

    Women have a love/hate relationship with men and marriage. The women’s movement was really about (1) The forced transfer of wealth and power from men to women, (2) allowing women to use marriage as a legal sledge hammer to make that forced transfer of wealth happen and (3) forcing men to legally finance “women’s children” while simultaneously allowing women to legally remove men from their children’s lives.

    Feminism is for men, too. In the past 50+ years, in the US alone, tens upon tens of millions of men’s lives have been destroyed through marriage. In that same time, tens upon tens of thousands of men have taken their own lives. Feminism taught men that marriage is a tool used by women to strip a man of all his wealth and dignity. Women call this empowerment.

    I’ve been single, in long term relationships, married and am now divorced. Feminism taught me that being a single man is the best way for a man to go through life. No wife = blissfully happy life. Without feminism, I would never have recognized my father and stepfather for the gynocentric, mangina-morons they were and would likely have become one myself. Instead, I’m now wealthy and living a life of leisure, peace and contentment – and I have feminism to thank for all of it.

    Gynocentrists and white knights use social conditioning and brainwashing to exploit men for the benefit and advantage of women. For more examples, see the bottom of my post.

    The internet – which abounds with countless other examples – will be the liberator of men from oppressive gynocentric power and control. Simply google ‘misandry’, ‘false rape’, ‘anti-male’, ‘feminist hate’ and other such terms and poof – there it is.

    The most damaging of all the brainwashing is that a man is worthless unless he can attract and secure a woman – when the exact opposite is the real truth. A man free from a woman’s legal, psychological, emotional, physical, spiritual and financial power is the luckiest man alive. Unbeknownst to men that women find unattractive, they’re the truly lucky ones. I’m a man that women have found attractive since the age of 11. Hindsight being 20/20 – I now wish I’d never been. Relationships with women only brought to my life loss and regret.

    The old adage remains true: Be careful what you wish for – you just might get it. Recognizing the truths I’ve written and internalizing those truths has brought me great peace, significant wealth and a life free of women’s exploitative powers. I wish to share this knowledge with other men so that they may too live the good life.

    Men have been brainwashed by gynocentrists and white knights into being their own worst enemies. Countless millions of men’s lives, in the US alone, have been destroyed as a result. My life goal is to reverse this most horrific and exploitative method of using and disposing of men for women’s personal gain and advantage.

    Men, women are not a prize. Women are not sugar, spice or everything nice. Women are your competitors and adversaries. Women don’t care about men – women care about what men can provide to women; hence the supposed lack of “marriageable men” and the calls for men to “man up”. What makes a man marriageable to a woman? Money. Internalize all that I’ve written and you’ll live a very good life. Fall for the gynocentric illusions and enchantments and your life will likely be destroyed. Either way – if you’ve read this – you can’t say you weren’t warned.

    Great Video:

    The Disposable Male, by Spetsnaz

    Great Books:

    The Myth of Male Power
    Stand by Your Manhood
    Women First, Men Last
    The Manipulated Man

    1. CS MGTOW says:

      Excellent comment, I agree with you especially here “Men, women are not a prize. Women are not sugar, spice or everything nice. Women are your competitors and adversaries. ” Its about time men started recognising that women are not here to be ‘cherished’ but to be competed with fiercely

      1. Mike Brown says:

        To be fair, the “women are not a prize” concept is from Bar Bar a few years ago, but as with most things, the truth always bears repeating. It is difficult to come up with any virgin notions within the manosphere but these things are organic. Eventually stringing together a few oft repeated themes will lead to new concepts. Same way music advances.

    2. Hedon says:

      Terrific post.

  8. Tim says:

    It has long been a misandric, oppressive dictate that men give their lives up for women and women’s children.

    Me personally? I say it’s time women and children die en masse for men.

    1. Wise Fox says:

      The misandry is first and foremost rooted in the competition of men to get access to vagina.

      We don’t need any mass massacre to solve this problem, we only need some rules to limit the violence of the competition. May be in the same way as sport is some kind of civilized war.

      If you think that women and children need to die en masse, please start with the women and children of your own family.

  9. HorkSupreme says:

    A thought come into my mind just before I started reading, what if I looked at this issue of humans and abortions just like I do when I watch an animal documentary? Lions killing the young not sired by them, well that’s just nature. We make an exception of ourselves, I suppose partly because we think ourselves better than animals or impose an obtainable yet somewhat unrealistic moral system and so we try to reject our nature without understanding it.

  10. Geezmgtow says:

    A false equivocation that moves into a Myriad of lost tense . Then summation out of the blue with . “So gentlemen women are not evil, they are capable of terrifying destructiveness, however resorting to the term evil to describe half of the human species dis-empowers MGTOW ” . yes yes ! You nailed it . (si)
    Is that what you wanted to say from the beginning , didn’t need to do the haystack . You sure white knitted ( upps) the fuck out of that one. Man I hate this new brand of Pussy begging mgtows . Look at all the fanboys clapping like little girls , Makes me sick .
    Ok the question was never about being Evil or not . That focuses on women . You beggars . The question is about men protecting themselves with an adequate defense mechanism . So what if they use the term Evil your the censoring party . Ask yourself who is safer from risk the guy that tells himself they are Evil or the guy that pussy begging .
    Please answer the question , don’t draw a new one .

    1. CS MGTOW says:

      Just so I understand this correctly, if I say that women highly destructive and should be avoided but they are not evil, this makes me a ‘white knight pussy begging’ MGTOW? How so? Because I don’t display a visceral hatred of one-half of the human species, because I do not offer unearned hate? the vast majority of women have not fucked me over, my wife and mother certainly both have, while I do not offer a moral blank cheque to women, I refuse to condemn them as the pure personification of evil

    2. Niko Choski says:

      Are those the two options? Evil or pussy begging? Your arguments display so far more about you than anything I could say to you ever could. The fact that you consider your thoughts to be so weak so as to be so binary in their nature, evokes a deeper concern about the people who are actually watching MGTOW content. A concern that I and many other content producers have phrased multiple times. It is not pussy begging to be able to phrase truth out loud. It is not pussy begging to be able to understand concepts beyond the binary mindset of an infant. Unfortunately whether some people are able to grasp it or not, the truth is not going to come from the morality that you apply to the world but by simply searching for it from an independent and highly unbiased eye. Now because we have a penis and testicles it might be difficult to assume that our eyes will be as highly unbiased, but we do what we can, before we open them and yap them out.

      If I was to assume that you are all retarded, and I have often contemplated that much, then perhaps I would assume the position that you are holding. However, I still maintain a level of hope, that you guys are not the retards that I meet every day on the street. However, it is very difficult to see how this is not the case at times when I read comments like this one.

      Oh well. Perhaps if I add another beer every night to my drinking, things just won’t be as bad when I wake up in the morning.

      1. Niko Choski says:

        *before we open our mouths and yap them to the world*

        God I hate waking up

  11. Tim says:

    The patriarchy: Men must go to war to die for women and women’s children.
    The matriarchy: Men must go to war to die for women and women’s children.

    Most of you male morons (let me emphasize massive idiots – yes you) have zero clue as to how damaging this mindset is for men. I hate you so much I want you dead – patriarchy – but my reach as an individual doesn’t let me cut your life short – with explosives or otherwise. If it did – I’d gladly hack you and your family to death – over and over – along with your neighbors, coworkers and friends.

    The patriarchy is the savior of women, powerful men, men that kiss the ass of powerful women and powerful men and the demonetization of men. The patriarchy says that it’s OK for men to die horrific lives so long as women, the white knights, the manginas and the gynocracy can continue to go shopping.

    I will see to it that each of you die as painful and humiliating a death as those you duped into dying for you in the first place.

  12. Tim says:

    Men – Let’s stop pretending women care about men. Women don’t care about men. Women care about what men can provide to women. Women are narcissistic sociopaths.

    Women aren’t “evil”. Women just want to go shopping – even if that means lots of men have to die.

    Women are not sugar, spice or anything nice, peeps. Women are the most sociopathic and psychopathic of beings that ever existed – period.

    Many a man with a daughter will refute my claims. Kill him.

  13. Tim says:

    I support the brutal beheading and instant hanging of the families that most supported the sending of non-privileged men to the battlefields to die on women’s and wealthy families behalf.

  14. David says:

    I think it is important to consider the fact that the concept of evil, as it is defined, might have gynocentric leanings in a way that makes its manifestation in women more difficult to identify. If considered as a concept with gradation which includes immoral acts that we consider minor to ones that are considered to be abhorrent, evil can be defined as the will to act in ways, or acting in ways that exploit the person and property of others. Weather or not this is due to apathy or sadistic pleasure does not matter. Ultimately in both cases, the moral sentiments of compassion and fairness are violated. It seems to me that in most instances, the evil that ordinary men can do is usually a result of the provocation of their instincts to protect their in group to degrees that blind them to the humanity of others. This in turn shuts off their compassion and fairness. Since men will enact evil, mostly under a banner of protection of who they deem good, they will be explicit or even celebratory in their practice. This is why it may appear as if all men are actually sadistic but when in fact it is not the joy of committing evil acts that is satisfactory but triumphing over a perceived threat to self and possibly others. This is the reason why I think the formulation of evil that is within the text is gynocentric, it is biased towards identifying stereotypically masculine manifestations of evil. Women enact evil based on their instinctive dehumanization of men into resources. When women hurt men, it is not to overcome a threat, it is not the killing of an enemy, it is simply throwing out or using up the last remaining vestiges of utility that can be extracted from a man. Thus they seldom, if ever revel in it. It does not include elements of triumph, it is based on apathy. Also, since society cannot function if men were dehumanized explicitly womens dehumanization of men can never be explicit, or rather be morally exatled explicitly, which gives them no moral grounds to be celebratory about their evil deeds. In most instances, they can only deflect responsibility, which they do by portraying themselves as victims, or rather pure victims.This is not to say that women as a class of people are incapable of being victimized. But falsely portraying themselves as victims does seem to be their primary way of concealing their evil deeds. Although they were dysfuntional in many ways, traditional assertions about men and women did have very sharp insights within them. The same goes for morality, it may be oversimplified, it may have been used incorrectly or subversively but ultimately there is a very sharp insight in the concept of evil, that namely some people prefer to exploit instead of cooperate. As in most behaviors, men and women vary on their iterations of the same thematic behavior. Men exploit explicitly, mostly with force and intent, women do so insidiously, with guile and apathy. Mgtow have asked very deep and I would say, flaying questions that the answers of which can leave the identity of a man bare without an ego to shield him from the piercing cold of the truth. However, we must go even deeper and entertain the possibility that as we have been swindled by the notions of male and female exactitude and complimentarity, we might have also been beguiled into dismissing that some acts, within certain contexts, can be accurately characterized as evil based on their relation to certain principles.

  15. Tim says:

    Men have been manipulated and exploited by women for centuries. Women expect men to bring more to the table than women do financially and physically – or they’re not “marriageable”; hence the provider and protector role with which men have been sadistically saddled.

    “Traditional”, in the context of relationships between men and women, is a term used to describe the financial, legal, physical, spiritual and psychological exploitation of men by women.

    “Chivalry” is the social manipulation of men’s ego and sense of worth for purposes of encouraging men to sacrifice for women – even if the sacrifice means men’s deaths. Chivalry is gynocentrism and a women first mindset – AKA male disposability.

    Fortunately, marriage rates are dropping the globe over and women are having to learn to fend for themselves. For every woman that opts out of marriage, another man is saved from the life destruction of divorce. To counter men’s escape from this most misandric of institutions, many nations are now enabling de facto marriage – which essentially forces marriage upon men after X number of months of cohabitation and gives girlfriends the rights to alimony and asset division should their boyfriends dump them.

    Rape culture is the latest of the hypergynocentric (feminist) inventions. Both progressives and conservatives can get behind ‘affirmative consent’ because it demonizes men and stops hookup culture – all with the foundation of deeply fraudulent, almost entirely made up rape statistics.

    Affirmative consent is a very simple concept – yet people seem to want to make it complicated. It was never intended to stop rape. It was intended to stop hookup culture and give women the power to destroy the lives of men when women don’t get their way. Affirmative consent means that if you can’t definitively prove she said yes throughout the sexual encounter – then if she accuses you of rape or sexual assault – you get expelled and your future as a man is destroyed. Major backers have even admitted that AC was intended to make men fear sex with women. Hypergynocentrists (feminists) have been pushing to have ‘Yes Means Yes’ made a part of VAWA or a facsimile thereof ever since mattress girl and the Rolling Stone UVA rape hoax.

    Ever notice that adult women go after adolescent boys when they rape? Know why? Because young boys are weaker, less powerful, naive and are not yet able to counter adult women in sexual situations. Ever wonder what would happen if society drilled into these boys’ heads that these women are rapists in the same way they drill into women’s heads that drunken regret sex is rape? What happens instead? Women are given probation – not prison like men – and the boys are taught that they were lucky. As always, hypocrisy and double standards are the hallmarks of hypergynocentrism.

    Ever since white-knight Ronald Reagan enacted no-fault divorce (the divorce rape of men), marriage and committed relationships have become anti-male. There is no worse decision you can make as a man than give a woman the ring of power – or any power for that matter.

    How is it empowerment for women to eschew marriage and traditional roles but weakness and misogyny if men act in kind? How did women imagine that they’d walk away from their traditional roles and not expect men to do the same? How is it that men suffering 98% of workplace deaths and deaths related to national defense isn’t cause for a gender based national outcry – but rape is considered the most horrific of crimes? Hypocrisy and double standards – that’s how. Between suicides, workplace and national defense deaths, tens upon tens of thousands of men, in the US alone die every year. Know why there’s no national campaign to stop this horrific exploitation of men? I think we all know why.

    It’s important to remember that women demand all of the special treatment and exploitation of men listed above – but it is other men that enact the policies and legislation that enforces male disposability, hypergynocentrism (feminism) and destroy men by the hundreds of thousands in divorce court every single year.

    When it comes to femsplaining and toxic-femininity, the hypocrisy and double standards are usually thick enough to choke a horse. You can find examples of femsplaining, toxic-femininity, hypocrisy and double standards all throughout this thread. The best way to stop this campus rape would be to have men and women only colleges – yet women demand more and more coed dorms and fraternities. Know why? Women can’t control men’s speech in male-only spaces, nor can they manipulate, exploit and/or destroy men’s lives without close proximity to their targets. This is why women are fine with women-only gyms but protest male-only fraternities.

    1. Ghost in the MGTOW says:

      We won’t follow you in your firestorm phase Tim.

      I don’t hate women like you do. I only blame myself for my past naiveness and lack of self respect.

      I don’t want to be freed from women to be slave of my anger.

      1. Tim says:

        Shut it – moron.

        1. Tim says:

          You’re so naive. Poor soul.

  16. Tim says:

    Since the dawn of time – women have fought for power over men. It is unwise to give women power over men. Why? Why did women marry men of wealth as opposed to earning their own wealth?

    Ever see a non-wealthy fool lose everything he had to divorce? Nope. Know why? “Ladies” don’t marry poor men. They marry wealthy fools.

    Ladies marry men that can buy their va-jay-jays.

    Women don’t care about men. Women care about what men can provide to women.

  17. Tim says:

    Ghost in the MGTOW – you’re a fool. You’re the quintessential white knight and captain-save-a-ho. What you write destroys male power and opens men up to destruction and misandry. You don’t understand how things work – which is the hallmark of naivete.

    Ghost in the MGTOW – You’re the death of men.

  18. Tim says:

    The Women’s Movement’s Goals:

    1) The destruction of the patriarchy.
    2) The sexual liberation of women.
    3) The freedom of women from the slavery of marriage.

    MGTOW Life Goals:

    1) The destruction of the patriarchy.
    2) The sexual liberation of women.
    3) The freedom of women from the slaver of marriage.

  19. Tim says:

    What is a man worth in marriage? What he can provide to a woman financially, right? What can a “man” provide to a “woman”?

    What is a woman worth in marriage? Certainly not what she can provide financially – but rather -sexually?

    A women that can’t provide? Poor victimized woman.

    A man that can’t provide? Deadbeat father.

    Throughout time, women’s unscrupulous nature has gone unnoticed. For the first time, we’re seeing women’s obvious unscrupulous nature here. Prior to our expose, women have been counted as the nurturing and caring type. Following this expose, women won’t be seen in the same light. In fact – women will be seen in a far darker light.

    Women – Sugar and spice and everything nice. Obviously, nothing could be further from the truth. Women will gladly murder a child six months old if it means a breast enlargement for herself and freedom from the responsibility of being a mother and a wife.

    Don’t believe me? Examine your local abortion laws. Want to see at what month children are aborted by women? Women can take the life of their unborn children without fear of consequence at any particular point in time. Let’s name and shame them. They do it to supposed sexual predators. Let’s do the same with abortionists.

  20. Jimmy Bowyer says:

    “Furthermore, within MGTOW to be logically consistent we can not criticise single motherhood and also condemn abortion rates, since one of the reasons for abortions is an unwillingness to be a single mother. An unwillingness to raise a child without a male is one of the top three reasons in fact for abortions ”

    On the surface, agreement with this would seem logically consistent, yet in both cases women have conceived by unwilling or incapable fathers. Further to this, the term ‘abortion’ is the exclusive, sole right of the female. And even further, the phrase ‘single motherhood’ implies just that, single motherhood without assistance, when we are all keenly aware this is most definitely never the case.

    And finally conception is the sole responsibility of the female, and irresponsible use of it is entirely the fault of females. It’s black and white. Men cannot conceive.

    Both single motherhood and abortion can be justifiably criticized by men until the end of time, because primarily because men have no domain over pregnancy; because men do not have termination rights, and finally, because women consistently obtain financial assistance from the government which is funded by men.

    To say that abortion is a solution to single motherhood, therefore shouldn’t be criticized, OR vice-versa, that single motherhood is the solution to abortion so should be celebrated is ignoring the real problem. The problem is irresponsible women, and toying with the notion of tolerating one over the other (abortion vs single motherhood) is fighting with shadows. When you realize this, it becomes apparent that the only argument left is that it takes both a male and a female to conceive. So this is how they will try to shift the blame to men. But 100% of all willing single mothers and baby killers did so with men who did not want to be fathers, or were fully aware at some point very close to conception, that the father did not have the capacity to have a child, allowed themselves to be ploughed bareback anyway. Either that, or the pregnant female was not ready to have a child, so terminated it perhaps against the wishes of the father, once again making irresponsible use of her capacity to conceive. There is no getting around it. It’s the fault of women who are toying with life.

    We are very, very far from having ANY impact on women’s misuse of young children, especially so when we are discussing the idea of accepting either abortion or single motherhood. That’s galaxies away from what we should really be scrutinizing as the cause of the problem.

    The argument that male contraceptive devices such as condoms, being neglected and resulting in a pregnant female is a WEAK argument for any male responsibility whatsoever. Because remember, these are ALWAYS undesired children, by undesirable fathers. That the women in question STILL choose to give no fucks about a childs life with. In no way should any other person be forced to fund, and thereby encourage this behavior. Women who support this shit and happily fund it, are ENGAGING in this behaviour. Women who do not, who actually have some mental faculties and respect for anything other than themselves intact should not support it. And that leaves very little left.

    This road is long, hard, and thankless. Do not withhold your judgement and criticism of women, even if you must do it silently.

  21. tim.oppenheimer says:

    “once the child is born the mans genetic legacy is deemed secure”

    With all due respect, CS, I think that many men want to share their lives with their children. Your reasoning would suggest that the primary beef between men and the Family Courts would be that men pay too much in child support. In reality, men want to see their children. The idea that men would be happy with no relationships with their children may describe a few (myself, potentially), but few other men. It’s mostly just a mean stereotype about men, perpetuated by women and the family courts.

    The other week, on the train, I saw a man with his child and all the usual paraphernalia involved in looking after a young one (the boy was ~6). That father looked a bit harried, but I wouldn’t assume for a *second* that he’d rather be at work.

    And what of yourself? Would you really be happy paying nothing for your children but never seeing them?

    In Chad Kultgen’s “The Lie”, Kultgen portrays a rich asshole named “Brett” who jerks off at a fertility center every few weeks as he imagines the children and women who will be cut off from him and his money. The man is meant to be a monster, and although many readers find his thought process amusing, I think it serves more as a caricature and an exception who proves the general rule: men want to have a place in their children’s lives, and most people know this when faced with the monster they claim men would be, if given the chance.

    As an aside, I think you should check out Chad Kultgen.

    If more men admit their vulnerability, their shouts for the rebirth of a father-role will deafen the hateful anti-male slant in the media.

  22. Feline_Elijah says:

    I’m not going to argue any of your points, CS, except for one. Abortion is not murder. And I am not saying this out of some misguided white knight’ish attempt to “protect the right of women to their bodies”. All I am saying is: a fetus is not, by any stretch of imagination, a human being.
    Moreover, despite that fact that abortion benefits women (some may argue, primarily) and the well being of men is usually not considered in relation to abortion, I would argue that the existence of abortion and its availability directly benefit men, due to the fact that it is sometimes the only thing that prevents a man from being dragged into financial slavery by a woman and the state.
    The issue here is not abortion itself but rather the fact that women have complete power over it. Men should have a say in this matter. But this has been discussed in the manosphere so many times I’m sure I can add nothing else of any significance.

  23. M.G. How says:

    Great piece!

    After reading the article, I tried to go and look up abortion rates and infanticide / neonaticide rates online via CANSIM from Statscan, just for my own knowledge.

    There’s only one table for abortion that only a doctor could make sense of. Seems convoluted to me. Every other table on abortion has been terminated or discontinued.

    Statistics Canada. Table 102-0535 – Deaths, by cause, Chapter XV: Pregnancy, childbirth and the puerperium (O00 to O99), age group and sex, Canada, annual (number), CANSIM (database).

    I found a table for infanticide, but the rate in Canada is literally zero for the last two years. It never peaked past 5 incidents in a year.

    Statistics Canada. Table 252-0051 – Incident-based crime statistics, by detailed violations, annual (number unless otherwise noted), CANSIM (database).

    I found a weird trend in the last table, unrelated to the article.
    Apparently the total sexual violations incidents against children has been skyrocketing since 2003. Like 55 cases a year to 4452 case per year.

    I really like this table because it distinguishes between incidents and charges.
    (So you can calculate a rate for false-reports. Only about a quarter of those incidents against children resulted in charges.)

  24. MikeTO says:

    “Furthermore, within MGTOW to be logically consistent we can not criticise single motherhood and also condemn abortion rates, since one of the reasons for abortions is an unwillingness to be a single mother.”

    Sure we can there is no excuse to get for a woman to get pregnant. How many birth control options does a woman have? Also if you look at the black single mothers you can see they just sleep with any man recklessly, why should the child pay the price of a mother’s mistake or evil act? I have had sex in 15 years, no joke. One of the reason is that I don’t want any children and that’s a guarantee. If I can do it women can do it and keep their legs closed.

    I will always be against abortion and I will criticize single mothers unless their spouse died or have some serious issue. Doesn’t a man pay the price if a woman get pregnant and she wants child support? So how come there is no high standards for women? If I was a woman I wouldn’t have sex unless I was married or in a long term relationship.

  25. Mike Brown says:

    Look, women are evil and useless. More willing to abort a fetus than raise it. The only thing that keeps them from aborting is social sanctions which they call patriarchy. the same social sanctions that force men to die in wars or die sooner but bitches call it oppression of women. because at their very core they are narcissistic attention whores.

    So i guess you cannot fault them for their nature, if it is actually a case of nature rather than choice. I think they choose to be that way just as they have chosen to abandon child bearing in favor of working to acquire material goods, or chosen to abort rather than raise a child, or chosen to end a marriage, or chosen to stand by while affirmative consent brands only men as rapists, or made any number of other choices. Because unlike feminists, I believe women are capable of making choices, including the one to be evil.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *