darkblue

Movie Moments of Men Going Their Own Way

45 posts in this topic

On ‎10‎/‎1‎/‎2017 at 1:41 PM, calvinnme said:

Apparently this problem has been going on a long time if you watch 1967's "Divorce American Style" where the ex husband lives in poverty and at that time the wives continue to live in the large family home, not employed, and everybody seems OK with that.

It's worse now. 

It's weird how many people - even "confirmed bachelors" - keep misconstruing what Men Going Their Own Way is.

It's not hate. It's saying "no".

That's all it is - deciding to keep one's independence and resources and not risking them on a marriage that has less than a 4% chance of lasting.

First marriages, statistically, have a 96.4% chance of failing within 10 years.

And in a system of almost totally feminist law, that percentage is screaming a warning to men. More and more are hearing it - and those who count on the old ball and chain ways are getting pretty upset about that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a guess here calvinnme, but I'll bet your formative years took place within the more "traditional" confines of this vast country of ours, didn't it.

 

Yep, it seemed even as late of the 1980s in those sorts of locations, women who weren't "hitched" by the time of their mid-twenties, and especially in "small town America" within those more "traditional" regions, were considered verging on "ol maid"-hood.

 

(...still though, I'm glad to read your friends have apparently beaten the odds, AND that you were evidently strong enough of mind to have resisted the peer-pressure to marry someone who while it might have satisfied your parents' and friends' feelings to conform to their traditions, might not have been a good choice for a life partner)

 

My parents married at 20 and 21 and 34 years later, they're still married.  My husband and I married at 27 (we're the same age, I'm three months older) and we've been married six years so far without any problems.  I think it more depends on who you're marrying and not how old you are.  These people who are only married for a year and break up, or people who live in these horribly unhappy relationships probably shouldn't have married in the first place.  While I do agree that couples can grow apart, it seems that with these personality issues, that person was probably like that the whole time.  I do think that people are too quick to get married and don't take the time to get to know someone better.  You cannot possibly learn what someone is like by going out on a bunch of dates. You need to live with the person (or at least spend a lot of time with them in non-public places) to see what they're like when they're happy, mad, frustrated, depressed, etc.  Anyone can put on a facade when they're out in public at a restaurant or something.  People are often too quick to be having babies with their fling of the month.  Once kids are involved, you'll never rid yourself of the other person. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a guess here calvinnme, but I'll bet your formative years took place within the more "traditional" confines of this vast country of ours, didn't it.

 

Yep, it seemed even as late of the 1980s in those sorts of locations, women who weren't "hitched" by the time of their mid-twenties, and especially in "small town America" within those more "traditional" regions, were considered verging on "ol maid"-hood.

 

(...still though, I'm glad to read your friends have apparently beaten the odds, AND that you were evidently strong enough of mind to have resisted the peer-pressure to marry someone who while it might have satisfied your parents' and friends' feelings to conform to their traditions, might not have been a good choice for a life partner)

 

Indeed. I spent the first 35 years of my life in the DFW (Dallas/Ft Worth) area of Texas, born into a religiously confused household with a Baptist mother and a Methodist father. They are still happily together after what will be 62 years of marriage if they can both make it to February.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always figured it had something to do with MG owners

who were upset about the unreliability of their vehicles.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's worse now. 

 

It's weird how many people - even "confirmed bachelors" - keep misconstruing what Men Going Their Own Way is.

 

It's not hate. It's saying "no".

 

That's all it is - deciding to keep one's independence and resources and not risking them on a marriage that has less than a 4% chance of lasting.

 

First marriages, statistically, have a 96.4% chance of failing within 10 years.

 

And in a system of almost totally feminist law, that percentage is screaming a warning to men. More and more are hearing it - and those who count on the old ball and chain ways are getting pretty upset about that.

Yeah, okay, so I've chosen to remain single without feeling the need to join some vaguely alt-right political movement that wants to decry feminism. Nor do I feel the need to trumpet what a smart decision I've made over the Internet. Why do you feel this need? i think you need to read some of the language of some of these message boards in your movement before you definitively declare it to be hate-free by every participant.

 

You really think this is a feminist country? Talk to the women in the movie industry (and plenty of other industries) who STILL aren't making the same amount of money for doing the same job as men. In 2017!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎1‎/‎2017 at 9:29 PM, sewhite2000 said:

Yeah, okay, so I've chosen to remain single without feeling the need to join some vaguely alt-right political movement that wants to decry feminism. Nor do I feel the need to trumpet what a smart decision I've made over the Internet. Why do you feel this need? i think you need to read some of the language of some of these message boards in your movement before you definitively declare it to be hate-free by every participant.

It's not a movement. It's just guys who've decided that living with women is way to much risk to their property, freedom, and emotional well-being for a tiny chance of some kind of reciprocal reward.

And guys have been talking about it online because it's the one place that women can't stop them from talking to one another about this stuff. There's no organization. No dues. No contracts. No CEO of MGTOW to harass. No board members to assault with pink paint or pepper spray or protest signs. No physical venues that women can invade. Just guys talking online and encouraging themselves to not get trapped into losing their assets to women.

And fortunately, feminists haven't found a way to picket the internet yet, so guys are getting away with educating one another without feminist repercussions.

Quote

You really think this is a feminist country? 

Yep. I know Canada is - and I believe the U.S. is not far behind us in that regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, what you call "feminist law", I guess I would call "justice" or "equality" or at least some movement toward these concepts. As I say, women still don't get paid as well as men for doing the exact same job, but you don't seem to care about that.  You seem to be nostalgic for a time when women couldn't vote, couldn't own property, couldn't get paid anywhere near what a man could, had little legal or societal recourse if her husband decided to start beating her, etc., etc. Men have always been the oppressors, have spent millennia keeping women down at every possible turn. It's hard for me to work up a lot of sympathy for men just because they may get taken to the cleaners if they get married without a prenup. There's just no moral equivalence between that and all the crap women have suffered at the hands of men.

 

I also don't understand WHY men suddenly need to talk about this issue. They're not aware of it? As has been pointed out, this was a joke in the Dick Van Dyke/Debbie Reynolds movie FIFTY YEARS AGO!

 

You say women haven't found a way to picket the Internet yet, but all the ugly, hateful speech toward women on the imdb message boards because of the new Ghostbusters and because the new Star Wars movies have strong female characters got them shut down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎1‎/‎2017 at 11:36 PM, sewhite2000 said:

I also don't understand WHY men suddenly need to talk about this issue. They're not aware of it? As has been pointed out, this was a joke in the Dick Van Dyke/Debbie Reynolds movie FIFTY YEARS AGO!

Things have changed. They're much worse now. Men have become victims of feminist law and talking about it helps them to cope with that victimization and helps to warn others of the danger inherent in living with women in the present culture.

Quote

You say women haven't found a way to picket the Internet yet, but all the ugly, hateful speech toward women on the imdb message boards because of the new Ghostbusters and because the new Star Wars movies have strong female characters got them shut down.

You actually expect guys to still be talking about Ghostbusters or Star Wars? Dude, all conversations of fleeting movies come to an end - and fairly quickly. Feminists didn't shut the conversation down - it went down because it had shot its wod.

And if feminists did get imdb shut down (I have no idea why anyone would believe that) - do you really think they can shut down every place that men talk online? And are you really for that?

To get guys to stop talking to one another, they'll have to shut down the internet completely. As George Bush Sr. used to say, na ga da.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't speak for now, since the boards don't exist anymore, but the Ghostbusters and Star Wars hate was still very strong on imdb at the time they closed their message boards. New posts were still being made daily. Almost all of them from angry men who thought feminism was ruining the world.

 

And no, I never said feminists got the message boards shut down. I'm saying imdb chose to close down the boards when they realized they were becoming a venue of hate speech that was drawing negative national attention. There was a Time magazine cover story about Internet hate speech that referenced the Ghostbusters backlash not long before the imdb boards closed, for example.

 

The themes continue even if the specific media references come and go. There is virulent anti-woman, anti-minority hate speech all over the Internet, and its proponents have become much bolder since the rise of Trump.

 

I find it curious that you don't respond at all to my assertion that women have suffered terribly from the mistreatment of men for all of human history. This isn't something that concerns you, it appears.

 

Can you give me some concrete examples of this "feminist law" that you so far have only referred to in the vaguest sense? Because while it sounds impressive, other than the financial perils of getting divorced, I have no idea what you're talking about.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎2‎/‎2017 at 12:28 AM, sewhite2000 said:

I can't speak for now, since the boards don't exist anymore, but the Ghostbusters and Star Wars hate was still very strong on imdb at the time they closed their message boards. New posts were still being made daily. Almost all of them from angry men who thought feminism was ruining the world.

I wonder why they would think that.

Did imdb actually say they were shutting down the boards because of men being hateful towards the Ghostbuster remake?

Quote

I find it curious that you don't respond at all to my assertion that women have suffered terribly from the mistreatment of men for all of human history. This isn't something that concerns you, it appears.

From what I understand, everyone has suffered terribly for all of human history. To men's credit, men have taken care of and provided for women throughout the terribleness of human existence.

Quote

Can you give me some concrete examples of this "feminist law" that you so far have only referred to in the vaguest sense? Because while it sounds impressive, other than the financial perils of getting divorced, I have no idea what you're talking about.

I could give you thousands of examples of men being victimized by feminist law - but if you're too lazy to find those thousands of examples for yourself - they're really easy to find, we are living in the information age - I'm not gonna do your educating for you. Search and you will find - or don't and you can go on pretending that men aren't getting a terrible deal in marriage, divorce, parental rights, the courts, the workplace, and the halls of education these days.

What's to be done? Men can go their own way - that's what.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a message that was up on the website for several weeks before the boards closed down that cited a variety of reasons, including the format being obsolete and too difficult to maintain and police. There was also a reference about the tone of some conversations not being reflective of the spirit of the website. I think it was fairly obvious to anyone who visited the message boards frequently that they were referring to the hate speech. No, they didn't reference Ghostbusters specifically, but it was definitely a flashpoint for the hate speech. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"To men's credit, men have taken care of and provided for women throughout the terribleness of human existence."

 

Ha, ha, wow, well I guess if you don't mind all the beating and denying them civil liberties and job opportunities and various other freedoms, then yes, they did take care of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You were there, were you?

You know that all men did all these bad things to women, do you? You saw them all doing it?

Were these women fed by any chance? Clothed? Sheltered? Defended? Did men bring home food for them and the children? Did men invent constantly so as to make life progressively easier and easier for them? Did men work themselves to death providing for their wives and children? Did the men toil the fields, fight the invaders, chop the firewood, build the houses, the roads, the bridges, the sewers - all the things that made life livable for the ever-pregnant women?

However did women manage to survive and even make history (there are many women in our history books influencing many events) under such terrible oppression?

How did feminism even get started with men being such beasts? How is it that all those powerful men let it when all they had to do was beat it down?

Man, you really haven't thought much about your level of feminist indoctrination, have you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎2‎/‎2017 at 1:44 AM, sewhite2000 said:

Okay well trying to have a conversation with you is pointless.

If that means you can't convince me that men going their own way isn't a perfectly understandable approach to life these days, then "pointless" is a good way to describe your efforts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't speak for now, since the boards don't exist anymore, but the Ghostbusters and Star Wars hate was still very strong on imdb at the time they closed their message boards. New posts were still being made daily. Almost all of them from angry men who thought feminism was ruining the world.

 

And no, I never said feminists got the message boards shut down. I'm saying imdb chose to close down the boards when they realized they were becoming a venue of hate speech that was drawing negative national attention. There was a Time magazine cover story about Internet hate speech that referenced the Ghostbusters backlash not long before the imdb boards closed, for example.

 

The themes continue even if the specific media references come and go. There is virulent anti-woman, anti-minority hate speech all over the Internet, and its proponents have become much bolder since the rise of Trump.

 

I find it curious that you don't respond at all to my assertion that women have suffered terribly from the mistreatment of men for all of human history. This isn't something that concerns you, it appears.

 

Can you give me some concrete examples of this "feminist law" that you so far have only referred to in the vaguest sense? Because while it sounds impressive, other than the financial perils of getting divorced, I have no idea what you're talking about.

 

There is the changes made with regards to sexual assaults on campuses where the accused is guilty until proven innocent and the rules of evidence standard was lowered from reasonable-doubt.       

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/30/2017 at 6:31 PM, darkblue said:

Should've looked a little harder. There's a great many people who are threatened by the idea of men keeping their resources to themselves and the anger that that fear produces tends to make those people lash out with a great deal of hate. So, if looking for links to explain what men going their own way represents, you'll see an awful lot of links of condemnation. 

Men Going Their Own Way is a lifestyle - it's not based on hate; it's based on selfishness. 

Men Going Their Own Way is a statement of self-ownership, where the modern man preserves and protects his own sovereignty above all else. It is the manifestation of one word: “No”.

Ejecting silly preconceptions and cultural definitions of what a “man” is. Looking to no one else for social cues. Refusing to bow, serve and kneel for the opportunity to be treated like a disposable utility. And, living according to his own best interests in a world which would rather he didn’t.

While that is exactly what MGTOW is, most people just say it's "misogyny".

All of the movie scenes presented in the original post are of men who go their own way and are not dissuaded from doing so by disapproving women or their white knights.

Personally I have no problem with this, since men who are easily manipulated by women are actually pretty pathetic creatures in my book. What self respecting woman would even want to hang out with such milquetoast type males. I like subgenres in film, so this just takes into account this type of theme and nothing wrong with that I can see.


Being able to address the fact that women as a whole, are not perfect or without issues, seems logical. To not be able to see some are basically irritating harridans masquerading as solid citizens who deserve men's adulation, seems quite astute and without any prejudicial inferences. I need to go back and see what films in particular made this list. I hope, Ayn Rand's "The Fountainhead" did even though the movie was a bit lame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/1/2017 at 3:07 PM, speedracer5 said:

 

My parents married at 20 and 21 and 34 years later, they're still married.  My husband and I married at 27 (we're the same age, I'm three months older) and we've been married six years so far without any problems.  I think it more depends on who you're marrying and not how old you are.  These people who are only married for a year and break up, or people who live in these horribly unhappy relationships probably shouldn't have married in the first place.  While I do agree that couples can grow apart, it seems that with these personality issues, that person was probably like that the whole time.  I do think that people are too quick to get married and don't take the time to get to know someone better.  You cannot possibly learn what someone is like by going out on a bunch of dates. You need to live with the person (or at least spend a lot of time with them in non-public places) to see what they're like when they're happy, mad, frustrated, depressed, etc.  Anyone can put on a facade when they're out in public at a restaurant or something.  People are often too quick to be having babies with their fling of the month.  Once kids are involved, you'll never rid yourself of the other person. 

I agree with everything you say, but with the codicil that in the United States I do think that the courts and just public opinion tends to sway more toward being sympathetic to women when there are divorces and child custody arrangements, that are often unfair to the males. Women en masse are no more moral or better parents than men en masse. To just assume that women are always the better party, seems a bit partisan, but momism rules in the United States I think, along with apple pie and sports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/30/2017 at 9:31 PM, darkblue said:

Women making fools out of men - female nature and its machinations getting them to do things that are very unwise  - is nothing new. 

i-claudius-artwork.jpg

But feminism as the law of the land is.And so, men are responding with a lifestyle - one that was once an extreme minority approach known as confirmed bachelorhood.

And it's now growing wide enough that people are noticing.

Poor Claudius! He was really surrounded by some awful women, that probably would make him want to join the movement. With Messalina as one's wife, who needs enemies? And with a grandmama like Livia, who said in the  BBC production that they should have left Claudius out in the woods at birth with the wolves, when he had one of his stuttering sessions, one can only think that women in his life were a very dangerous entity with which to be involved. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us