This is exciting news. I had wanted to do the same after Wikipedia kept censoring MGTOW as a topic, citing the lack of objective sources (such as books) on the subject. But I never wrote it because I didn't think I had a good enough handle on the origins, history, and central players who created the movement. As far as I know, Meikyo and Ragnar started it, then brought in JadedGuy, some guy named Johan, and later a core group started including Zenpriest, Maus, Type5, Laboratory Mike, and others. But some of these guys are notoriously difficult to get in touch with, while others are ultra concerned about not revealing their identities. So it's tough to write about the philosophy of MGTOW, without having all this information. If you can pull it off, my hat is off to you.

Would you please write your chapter first? I think such a book, to be successful, needs direction from its prime mover. An example would go a long way for the rest of us. And yes, that includes me. I'd like to write a chapter, if that's okay.

Do a search on Mancoat forum, you will find an almost complete MGTOW book there.

This is exciting news.

Absolutely right John, I am glad to see that MGTOW is growing and getting that message out there. As one of the founding Brothers of MGTOW..

christianj
Member
Member Group: MGTOW Brother
Joined: 28-March 06

For those unbelievers...

No-one would have anticipated that this movement would have achieved this amount of attention. It is really great to see.

As much as I would like to be included, I must confess that my writing abilities is somewhat limited and therefore am quite happy to promote anyone to be able to have input into this growing and practical way for men to view and live their lives without having to cow-tow to the subservient excistance that women expect men to participate in...

Great news all round...

I encourage everyone to be involved..

MAUS is up for it.

I will start writing an article for it tonight.

A review and editing of the one in progress at Mancoat is a good idea. We may already have something to offer.

With the successfull publishing of another fact and analysis based book, the posibility of novels and fiction based on the philosophy then opens.

Quote from John Dias

Would you please write your chapter first? I think such a book, to be successful, needs direction from its prime mover. An example would go a long way for the rest of us. And yes, that includes me. I'd like to write a chapter, if that's okay.

Welcome aboard John, I'm happy to have you. You make a good point, and so I will endeavor to have what will hopefully be the opening chapter of the book (maybe the preface,) up sometime within the next two weeks.

Quote from MAUS

MAUS is up for it.

I will start writing an article for it tonight.

A review and editing of the one in progress at Mancoat is a good idea. We may already have something to offer.

With the successfull publishing of another fact and analysis based book, the posibility of novels and fiction based on the philosophy then opens.

MAUS same to you, welcome. I don't seem to have access to that forum at the moment, but I will look into it when I get time.

Congrats ACLAF for taking the initiative in beginning this much overdue project.

With the collaboration of the talented writers here, mancoat, and beyond, the condensed philosophy of MGTOW could be positively realized in paperback form - for the curious consumption of a wider mostly 'unawakened' audience.

On publication, I could envisage a growing number of men being very receptive to it's contents. There's not really anything like it on the bookshelves.

First things first, the thing needs to be written before anything else.

Quote from Ragnar

Do a search on Mancoat forum, you will find an almost complete MGTOW book there.

YUP. They've been working on it for at least a year.

Originally Posted by Ragnar

Do a search on Mancoat forum, you will find an almost complete MGTOW book there.

Quote from KellyMac

YUP. They've been working on it for at least a year.

Given the abundance of MGTOW material that already exists, I don't think this project is as daunting as some may assume.

A chunk of the book already exists in scattered form over at mancoat, here, and elsewhere. It requires a person/s to collate that information and ascertain what will be used or not.

Good luck great project!You have our support

Quote from Celtic Druid

Given the abundance of MGTOW material that already exists, I don't think this project is as daunting as some may assume.

A chunk of the book already exists in scattered form over at mancoat, here, and elsewhere. It requires a person/s to collate that information and ascertain what will be used or not.

Don't get me wrong.

I'd love to see someone make this book - it will be a bestseller, provided it's made right.

In the spirit of MGTOW anyone can write anything and make money on it. That's simply a part of MGTOW, we don't organise that much, but go our own way!

You have my full support. looking forward to buy my own copy.

As requested, here is the sort of tone that I'm looking for. I may put this into the book.



In my last discussion on the philosophy of MGTOW, I discussed how it was impossible to reason with feminism, and therefore why it is so important for men to recapture the discourse. I wish now to elaborate on this theme by demonstrating how feminists have come to dominate the issue of rape, and how feminists are now using this dominance to systematically silence and destroy men.

This isn't meant to excuse genuine cases of rape. Rape continues to be a crime, and our goal is not to change this; we are not seeking to un-check barbarism. We cannot however continue sit idly by while feminists abuse their status as the undisputed over-ladies of the issue of rape and sexual assault.

As the evidence clearly demonstrates, a number of feminist myths have been propagated about rape for no other reason that the destruction of men. Feminist have of course become so loud in their constant protestations most of these myths, perhaps all of them have come to be widely believed as the truth. Of course, the tendency to obliterate the truth to try to score political points is what has allowed the MRM to build such a strong case against feminist lies. By so successfully convincing us that their side is the only truth two things inevitably occur; evidence emerges that contradicts feminist dogma, and that damning, scandalous evidence is proclaimed loud and wide because as we know, controversy sells many newspapers.

Myth 1 - Rape and sexual assault are exclusively a crime that men commit against women.

In fact, the top Google search when I was researching this article was, "Yet another female teacher charged with sexual assault." I encourage the reader to try it for themselves. Go to www.google.com, and type the words "teacher sexual assault."

My results were as follows: The very first page listed ten total hits. Of those, three dealt with male teachers having sexual relations with students, five dealt with female teachers having sex with students, and two were neutral or unrelated.

Clearly, women are entirely capable of rape, whether or not it is cloaked in the euphemism of sexual assault.

Myth 2 - Women do make false rape accusations, but only a statistically insignificant number, and therefore we should not be concerned about false rape accusations.

This is absolutely untrue. Many rape accusations are entirely false.

"Home Office research undertaken two years ago at six different referral centres found that a sixth of the complaints that were dropped by police were classed as false allegations. A quarter were dropped because of insufficient or no evidence." (Source "Justice? No, a violation of Common Sense," Camillia Cavendish, Times Online, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...cle2963335.ece)

"...perhaps the most prudent summary statement that is appropriate from these data is that false rape accusations are not uncommon." (Source: http://christianparty.net/kanin.htm, originally from study published; Kanin, Eugene J. "Archives of Sexual Behavior," Vol. 23, No. 1, 1994, pages 81-90)

This is rather alarming, given how important the rape issue is to what can only be called feminist mythology. I term it mythology because it is clear that the facts do not correspond to the theory.

Normally, a rape accusation, once made is only treated as false if both the accuser withdraws the complaint voluntarily, and there is a lack of evidence.

Try this simple mathematical exercise for perspective. Assume that half of the quarter listed in the source above of rape accusations are dropped for absolutely no evidence, the other half has some evidence. That's 1 in 8 rape accusations are not taken to trial by police because there is no evidence, or 12.5%. These might be false allegations, but if the accuser never withdraws her accusation, they may only be classified as having insufficient evidence, and not part of the 1 in 6 figure. Since 1 in 6 rape accusations or 16.6% are are classed as false, that means that actual rate of false rape accusations in Britain has soared to somewhere on the order of 29.1%! That's almost 1 in 3!

Two percent indeed! Multiply that number by fifteen and you have something a little closer to the truth. To be fair, I've put my own interpretation onto the numbers, but even without my interpretation, 1 in 6, still equals 16.6%, a number fully 8 times higher than the figure routinely cited by feminists, and far too rarely questioned by us.

But where exactly did the 2% number come from? Normally, people cite this figure as having come from Susan Brownmiller's Against Our Will. Immediately this should have caused everyone to question this feminist piece of pseudo-scholarship. But as the adage goes, if the lie is repeated often enough, people will begin to believe it.

According to Wendy McElroy, "legal scholar Michelle Anderson of Villanova University Law School reported in 2004, "no study has ever been published which sets forth an evidentiary basis for the two percent false rape complaint thesis."" Indeed Brownmiller seems to have conjured the number out of thin air! Years after the fact, she states that this figure apparently came from a rather vague statement in a speech by Lawrence H. Cooke. According to Edward Greer, in "The Truth Behind the Legal Dominance Feminism's "Two Percent False Rape" Claim figure," Greer explains that "These Judicial remarks do not suffice to determine whether or not there was any underlying report, although the locution used is suggestive of being based on a quotation from a newspaper article rather than a formally written text." It can only stands to reason at this point that this figure so often cited, is at best only tenuous proof of the mythology, at worst, a completely unsupported claim.

As a parting thought, I think Wendy McElroy evaluates the facts with honesty, and I believe that she perhaps puts it best:

"Although Kanin offers solid research, I would need to see more studies with different populations before accepting the figure of 50 percent as prevalent; to me, the figure seems high."

Agreed. This phenomena definitely merits more study. The 50 percent figure listed by Kanin may be an aberration, since the scope of his study was admittedly, only one city.

"But even a skeptic like me must credit a DNA exclusion rate of 20 percent that remained constant over several years when conducted by FBI labs. This is especially true when 20 percent more were found to be questionable.
False accusations are not rare. They are common."

All evidence available indicates that the feminist claim is simply false, and utterly false. Yet the figure is repeatedly cited to justify a complete destruction of any sort of jurisprudence, or presumption of innocence for men accused of rape.
Myth 4 - Rape is the vehicle by which all men keep all women subjugated.

This feminist myth of course implies that all men are rapists, while not explicitly stating this. Once again, Wendy McElroy in her paper, "The New Mythology of Rape," (source: http://www.zetetics.com/mac/rape.htm) does an excellent job of refuting radical feminist pseudo-scholarship in this area. In her paper, McElroy establishes that Susan Brownmiller has in effect made three interconnect claims, which are also myths about rape, that it is part of the patriarchy, that men have created a mass psychology, and that rape is part of 'normal life.'

This first claim naturally establishes much of the feminist ground-work for future assumptions and allegations about rape, but is of course, largely unprovable. In order to demonstrate that this is so, feminists must first prove the existence of the patriarchy, and then demonstrate how it serves the patriarchy. Assuming that we accept the patriarchy at face value, a concession which is far too generous, we must somehow demonstrate that the promotion of rape serves the patriarchy.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

It stands to reason of course that the patriarchy must be, to some degree in control of society for it to even exist. Patriarchy is supposed to be the rule of society.

This presents a problem however, because rape does not serve the patriarchy at all; it undermines it. In McElroy's work, cites Camile Paglia who argues that society does not promote rape, indeed it is women's protection from rape. Since patriarchy can really only thrive in a relatively stable social climate, rape only serves as a destabilizing factor, especially in light of the multitude of false allegations that modern western society. There are several reasons why rape undermines the patriarchy. Indeed, it would actually benefit the patriarchy to eliminate rape.

• Rape costs tremendous amount of resources, both public and private. The state deals with a large number of rape accusations every day, and the cost of the investigation, prosecution, and if necessary, punishment of a rapist, must be borne entirely by the taxpayer, the vast majority of which are men. While it is certainly true that the wealthy can insulate themselves to some degree from this burden, most of a country's population cannot. In addition to this, many western countries have public women's shelters, and sexual violence awareness campaigns which further add to the cost of rape. If a man accused of rape cannot afford a lawyer, this cost must also be funded by the state. And a man who can afford a lawyer, must pay for that service. Rape accusations, whether valid or no, consume a great deal of resources for all involved.
• Rape accusations, true or false ruin men's lives. It is certainly not unheard of for previously productive members of society to commit suicide after having been accused of rape. Aside from this, a man might loose his job over the accusation alone, might need to relocate over the accusation alone, might even be threatened with death, assaulted or even killed as a result of an accusation alone which, incidentally will cos the state even more resources to investigate these new crimes. If the accusation is false, those who once contributed to society in a positive manner may find themselves unable, or unwilling to do so again, for the stigma alone.
• False rape accusations directly harm women, both by creating criminals out of women, and by opening them up to retaliation if the ruse is ever discovered.
• Associates of a man accused of rape can expect to either immediately loose a friend, causing broken relationships and chaos, or they can expect to experience a degree of guilt by association.

In short, nobody actually benefits from rape, and so neither does the patriarchy. As such, the MRM does not condone rape as a viable strategy to accomplish its goals. The burden of proof therefore rests with feminists to demonstrate how the patriarchy uses a tool to subjugate women which confers absolutely no benefit.

Brownmiller's second myth, that men have created a mass-psychology of rape also makes no sense. As McElroy points out, even assuming a one-to-one ratio for the 25% statistic, that can only mean that 75% of men are not rapists. If 75% of men are not rapists, then how can men have created a mass-psychology for something that most of them will never do?

Of course, for this to become true, feminists would need to demonstrate that all men are at least potential rapists. Of course, this is entirely unprovable. The only "proof" for this outrageous claim that feminism is able to offer is that because some men are guilty of rape, all men must be potential rapists. Absurd! Shall we now conclude that because some women are guilty of rape, that all women are likewise, potential rapists? Why do we accept one myth and the reasoning behind it, but not another which shares identical reasoning?

It shouldn't even be necessary to demonstrate that Brownmiller's third and final myth is just that, but this is the result of allowing feminist domination of the discourse. That rape is somehow part of 'normal' life is absolutely absurd. Since we can conclude that 75% of women will not be raped, how can we conclude that rape is anything but an aberration? It is largely accepted that the rate of violent crime in the western world has been steadily decreasing every year since the 1960's, how then can an assertion that rape is somehow normative be at all valid? It is just another feminist absurdity about rape; rape is not a part of "normal" life. Rape is only a part of "normal" life under perhaps one circumstance: prison, and then in nearly all cases it is male-on-male, not male-on-female. Otherwise, rape is hardly "normal" for men, in fact it is feminism, and not men which have made rape into something "normal."

The very definition of rape has been so distorted that it has become almost unrecognizable. Even the infamous 1-in-4 statistic so often quoted by feminists may be entirely mythical. According Allison Kasic, the original research for the 1-in-4 statistic derived from a survey of college women done in 1982. (Source http://www.iwf.org/inkwell/show/17178.html). In the research cited, Kasic claims that of the 25% of women who qualified as having been raped by the researchers, only 25% of those women believed they had been raped! But rather than report the statistic as is, feminists simply changed the definition of rape to criminalize more men! By repeatedly citing the 1 in 4 statistic until it became the de facto truth, feminists have been able to systematically criminalize large numbers of men, in cases as absurd as when consensual sex is later regretted! Alcohol and drug use is being put forward routinely as excuses for women who simply do not want to take responsibility for their own actions, and would rather ruin a man's life than face the fact that they made a bad decision.

Myth 5 - Most rapes go unreported

Again, absurd.

"A recent survey by two Carleton University sociologists -- financed by a $236,000 government grant -- revealed that 81% of female students at Canadian universities and colleges had suffered sexual abuse. Their survey descended into a maelstrom of controversy when it became known that the researchers included taunts and insults during quarrels within their definition of abuse.

The definition of sexual violence has been expanded to include what used to be called bad manners." (Source: http://www.zetetics.com/mac/rape.htm)

Given all of this, how can we trust anything that feminists say, or any feminist scholarship? MGTOW is clear, we as men and scholars must reclaim the discourse. We will no longer allow feminist lies to carry on unchecked and unchallenged.

I see a lot of refutations of feminist dogma in your example, but how does this promote the idea of men going their own way?

Quote from John Dias

I see a lot of refutations of feminist dogma in your example, but how does this promote the idea of men going their own way?

Needs some polish does it? Sorry, it was late.

I will be expanding on this considerably; I wanted you to have an idea of the sort of tone. In the next few days, I will link what I've done to MGTOW.

As requested. MGTOW and rape.




Meditations on MGTOW: Rape

In my last discussion on the philosophy of MGTOW, I discussed how it was impossible to reason with feminism, and therefore why it is so important for men to recapture the discourse. I wish now to elaborate on this theme by demonstrating how feminists have come to dominate the issue of rape, and how feminists are now using this dominance to systematically silence and destroy men.

This isn't meant to excuse genuine cases of rape. Rape continues to be a crime, and our goal is not to change this; we are not seeking to un-check barbarism. We cannot however continue sit idly by while feminists abuse their status as the undisputed over-ladies of the issue of rape and sexual assault.

As the evidence clearly demonstrates, a number of feminist myths have been propagated about rape for no other reason that the destruction of men. Feminist have of course become so loud in their constant protestations most of these myths, perhaps all of them have come to be widely believed as the truth. Of course, the tendency to obliterate the truth to try to score political points is what has allowed the MRM to build such a strong case against feminist lies. By so successfully convincing us that their side is the only truth two things inevitably occur; evidence emerges that contradicts feminist dogma, and that damning, scandalous evidence is proclaimed loud and wide because as we know, controversy sells many newspapers.

Myth 1 - Rape and sexual assault are exclusively a crime that men commit against women.

In fact, the top Google search when I was researching this article was, "Yet another female teacher charged with sexual assault." I encourage the reader to try it for themselves. Go to www.google.com, and type the words "teacher sexual assault."

My results were as follows: The very first page listed ten total hits. Of those, three dealt with male teachers having sexual relations with students, five dealt with female teachers having sex with students, and two were neutral or unrelated.

Clearly, women are entirely capable of rape, whether or not it is cloaked in the euphemism of sexual assault.

Myth 2 - Women do make false rape accusations, but only a statistically insignificant number, and therefore we should not be concerned about false rape accusations.

This is absolutely untrue. Many rape accusations are entirely false.

"Home Office research undertaken two years ago at six different referral centres found that a sixth of the complaints that were dropped by police were classed as false allegations. A quarter were dropped because of insufficient or no evidence." (Source "Justice? No, a violation of Common Sense," Camillia Cavendish, Times Online, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...cle2963335.ece)

"...perhaps the most prudent summary statement that is appropriate from these data is that false rape accusations are not uncommon." (Source: http://christianparty.net/kanin.htm, originally from study published; Kanin, Eugene J. "Archives of Sexual Behavior," Vol. 23, No. 1, 1994, pages 81-90)

This is rather alarming, given how important the rape issue is to what can only be called feminist mythology. I term it mythology because it is clear that the facts do not correspond to the theory.

Normally, a rape accusation, once made is only treated as false if both the accuser withdraws the complaint voluntarily, and there is a lack of evidence.

Try this simple mathematical exercise for perspective. Assume that half of the quarter listed in the source above of rape accusations are dropped for absolutely no evidence, the other half has some evidence. That's 1 in 8 rape accusations are not taken to trial by police because there is no evidence, or 12.5%. These might be false allegations, but if the accuser never withdraws her accusation, they may only be classified as having insufficient evidence, and not part of the 1 in 6 figure. Since 1 in 6 rape accusations or 16.6% are are classed as false, that means that actual rate of false rape accusations in Britain has soared to somewhere on the order of 29.1%! That's almost 1 in 3!

Two percent indeed! Multiply that number by fifteen and you have something a little closer to the truth. To be fair, I've put my own interpretation onto the numbers, but even without my interpretation, 1 in 6, still equals 16.6%, a number fully 8 times higher than the figure routinely cited by feminists, and far too rarely questioned by us.

But where exactly did the 2% number come from? Normally, people cite this figure as having come from Susan Brownmiller's Against Our Will. Immediately this should have caused everyone to question this feminist piece of pseudo-scholarship. But as the adage goes, if the lie is repeated often enough, people will begin to believe it.

According to Wendy McElroy, "legal scholar Michelle Anderson of Villanova University Law School reported in 2004, "no study has ever been published which sets forth an evidentiary basis for the two percent false rape complaint thesis."" Indeed Brownmiller seems to have conjured the number out of thin air! Years after the fact, she states that this figure apparently came from a rather vague statement in a speech by Lawrence H. Cooke. According to Edward Greer, in "The Truth Behind the Legal Dominance Feminism's "Two Percent False Rape" Claim figure," Greer explains that "These Judicial remarks do not suffice to determine whether or not there was any underlying report, although the locution used is suggestive of being based on a quotation from a newspaper article rather than a formally written text." It can only stands to reason at this point that this figure so often cited, is at best only tenuous proof of the mythology, at worst, a completely unsupported claim.

As a parting thought, I think Wendy McElroy evaluates the facts with honesty, and I believe that she perhaps puts it best:

"Although Kanin offers solid research, I would need to see more studies with different populations before accepting the figure of 50 percent as prevalent; to me, the figure seems high."

Agreed. This phenomena definitely merits more study. The 50 percent figure listed by Kanin may be an aberration, since the scope of his study was admittedly, only one city.

"But even a skeptic like me must credit a DNA exclusion rate of 20 percent that remained constant over several years when conducted by FBI labs. This is especially true when 20 percent more were found to be questionable.
False accusations are not rare. They are common."

All evidence available indicates that the feminist claim is simply false, and utterly false. Yet the figure is repeatedly cited to justify a complete destruction of any sort of jurisprudence, or presumption of innocence for men accused of rape.
Myth 4 - Rape is the vehicle by which all men keep all women subjugated.

This feminist myth of course implies that all men are rapists, while not explicitly stating this. Once again, Wendy McElroy in her paper, "The New Mythology of Rape," (source: http://www.zetetics.com/mac/rape.htm) does an excellent job of refuting radical feminist pseudo-scholarship in this area. In her paper, McElroy establishes that Susan Brownmiller has in effect made three interconnect claims, which are also myths about rape, that it is part of the patriarchy, that men have created a mass psychology, and that rape is part of 'normal life.'

This first claim naturally establishes much of the feminist ground-work for future assumptions and allegations about rape, but is of course, largely unprovable. In order to demonstrate that this is so, feminists must first prove the existence of the patriarchy, and then demonstrate how it serves the patriarchy. Assuming that we accept the patriarchy at face value, a concession which is far too generous, we must somehow demonstrate that the promotion of rape serves the patriarchy.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

It stands to reason of course that the patriarchy must be, to some degree in control of society for it to even exist. Patriarchy is supposed to be the rule of society.

This presents a problem however, because rape does not serve the patriarchy at all; it undermines it. In McElroy's work, cites Camile Paglia who argues that society does not promote rape, indeed it is women's protection from rape. Since patriarchy can really only thrive in a relatively stable social climate, rape only serves as a destabilizing factor, especially in light of the multitude of false allegations that modern western society. There are several reasons why rape undermines the patriarchy. Indeed, it would actually benefit the patriarchy to eliminate rape.

• Rape costs tremendous amount of resources, both public and private. The state deals with a large number of rape accusations every day, and the cost of the investigation, prosecution, and if necessary, punishment of a rapist, must be borne entirely by the taxpayer, the vast majority of which are men. While it is certainly true that the wealthy can insulate themselves to some degree from this burden, most of a country's population cannot. In addition to this, many western countries have public women's shelters, and sexual violence awareness campaigns which further add to the cost of rape. If a man accused of rape cannot afford a lawyer, this cost must also be funded by the state. And a man who can afford a lawyer, must pay for that service. Rape accusations, whether valid or no, consume a great deal of resources for all involved.
• Rape accusations, true or false ruin men's lives. It is certainly not unheard of for previously productive members of society to commit suicide after having been accused of rape. Aside from this, a man might loose his job over the accusation alone, might need to relocate over the accusation alone, might even be threatened with death, assaulted or even killed as a result of an accusation alone which, incidentally will cos the state even more resources to investigate these new crimes. If the accusation is false, those who once contributed to society in a positive manner may find themselves unable, or unwilling to do so again, for the stigma alone.
• False rape accusations directly harm women, both by creating criminals out of women, and by opening them up to retaliation if the ruse is ever discovered.
• Associates of a man accused of rape can expect to either immediately loose a friend, causing broken relationships and chaos, or they can expect to experience a degree of guilt by association.

In short, nobody actually benefits from rape, and so neither does the patriarchy. As such, the MRM does not condone rape as a viable strategy to accomplish its goals. The burden of proof therefore rests with feminists to demonstrate how the patriarchy uses a tool to subjugate women which confers absolutely no benefit.

Brownmiller's second myth, that men have created a mass-psychology of rape also makes no sense. As McElroy points out, even assuming a one-to-one ratio for the 25% statistic, that can only mean that 75% of men are not rapists. If 75% of men are not rapists, then how can men have created a mass-psychology for something that most of them will never do?

Of course, for this to become true, feminists would need to demonstrate that all men are at least potential rapists. Of course, this is entirely unprovable. The only "proof" for this outrageous claim that feminism is able to offer is that because some men are guilty of rape, all men must be potential rapists. Absurd! Shall we now conclude that because some women are guilty of rape, that all women are likewise, potential rapists? Why do we accept one myth and the reasoning behind it, but not another which shares identical reasoning?

It shouldn't even be necessary to demonstrate that Brownmiller's third and final myth is just that, but this is the result of allowing feminist domination of the discourse. That rape is somehow part of 'normal' life is absolutely absurd. Since we can conclude that 75% of women will not be raped, how can we conclude that rape is anything but an aberration? It is largely accepted that the rate of violent crime in the western world has been steadily decreasing every year since the 1960's, how then can an assertion that rape is somehow normative be at all valid? It is just another feminist absurdity about rape; rape is not a part of "normal" life. Rape is only a part of "normal" life under perhaps one circumstance: prison, and then in nearly all cases it is male-on-male, not male-on-female. Otherwise, rape is hardly "normal" for men, in fact it is feminism, and not men which have made rape into something "normal."

The very definition of rape has been so distorted that it has become almost unrecognizable. Even the infamous 1-in-4 statistic so often quoted by feminists may be entirely mythical. According Allison Kasic, the original research for the 1-in-4 statistic derived from a survey of college women done in 1982. (Source http://www.iwf.org/inkwell/show/17178.html). In the research cited, Kasic claims that of the 25% of women who qualified as having been raped by the researchers, only 25% of those women believed they had been raped! But rather than report the statistic as is, feminists simply changed the definition of rape to criminalize more men! By repeatedly citing the 1 in 4 statistic until it became the de facto truth, feminists have been able to systematically criminalize large numbers of men, in cases as absurd as when consensual sex is later regretted! Alcohol and drug use is being put forward routinely as excuses for women who simply do not want to take responsibility for their own actions, and would rather ruin a man's life than face the fact that they made a bad decision.

Myth 5 - Most rapes go unreported

Actually, this one has some degree of truth, but the implications are much broader.

For starters consider this,

"A recent survey by two Carleton University sociologists -- financed by a $236,000 government grant -- revealed that 81% of female students at Canadian universities and colleges had suffered sexual abuse. Their survey descended into a maelstrom of controversy when it became known that the researchers included taunts and insults during quarrels within their definition of abuse.

The definition of sexual violence has been expanded to include what used to be called bad manners." (Source: http://www.zetetics.com/mac/rape.htm)

Furthermore, the commonly cited statistic is that between 6% and 8% of sexual crimes (including rapes) are reported to the police; 13%-15% of rapes or attempted rapes are reported to the police. This statistic, at least in part, stems from the Statistics Canada Violence Against Women survey of 1993. As feminists are all too keen to point out, most of sexual crimes against women are committed by someone who is known to the woman, and not a stranger, hence, date-rape. What feminists are very interested in keeping absolutely quiet, is that just over half of the incidents go unreported because the victim regarded the incident as being too minor to involve the police. The final piece of relevant evidence is that further research has demonstrated that women are far more likely to report the incident to the police as rape, if, and only if the incident resulted in physical injury, or harm, and if the perpetrator was a stranger. (source: http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/reprint/162/5/659.pdf).

The conclusion to this is inescapable.

The logical mind can only conclude that victims of sexual crimes perpetrated by someone who is familiar to the victim, date rape, are far less likely to result in physical harm or injury. Perhaps there is some conception among women that forcible or coerced sex by non-strangers is not a serious crime, and even less serious if there is little harm or physical injury. This in no way meant to diminish the serious nature of these crimes, except to point out that the victims themselves consider such crimes to be considerably less serious than other violent crimes, and thus often do not consider themselves to have been victimized. Since feminists unanimously maintain that most sexual crimes are not committed by strangers, but by people known to women, giving rise to the date-rape phenomena, the only logical conclusion is not that men are violently raping women, or that there is a rape epidemic as feminists claim. This is not to say that date-rape cannot be traumatic, this is to say that the vast majority of date-rapes, and thus the vast majority of rapes, are not sufficiently traumatic as to cause the victim to adopt a victim mentality sufficient to motivate them to feel violated, and to seek justice. Heretofore, feminist scholarship has failed to explain this phenomena, and it seems that no amount of funding, or awareness programs will succeed at changing this reality.

The implication is therefore not, as feminism would have us believe that men are raping women as a matter of course, but that men and women engaged in sexual relationships, but that through some error, omission or feminist meddling, the communication skills and self-control that people need to exist within the complex realm of human sexual relationships, simply are not present. All of this indicates that if we seek to improve our society, it is absolutely imperative that we accomplish two things; first, we must re-evaluate the issue of date-rape, because it is clearly not the same phenomena as what people traditionally think of when someone mentions rape, and second and more importantly, men and women must re-evaluate sexual relationships and develop the necessary tools to handle the possibility of date-rape.

Sadly, feminists, under the auspicious of "liberation" have demanded that women always be considered as having the prevailing interest, indeed the only interest in all sexual matters, and thus crushed any hope of consideration under the present misandrist climate. Like it or not, men are no longer entitled to any rights in sexual matters; an unfortunate reality all too often punctuated by the lamentations of men victimized by a corrupt and out of control "family" court system.

This intolerable situation, spearheaded by feminist interest is one of the prime reasons for the development of Men Going Their Own Way. Since feminism has decided that all men are rapists, so long as feminism continues to dominate the discourse, there will be no resolution to the date rape issue; Men Going Their Own Way will not enter into any dialog on sexual relationships while on feminist terms, since those terms are not a negotiation at all, but an endless stream of accusation. MGTOW does not pander to rape-hysteria extortionists. This is the reason why MGTOW wishes to instill femininity in women and masculinity in men; because while both genders should be free to dialog on their own terms, there can be no dialog so long as one gender is determined to hate the other. There is no room in relationships for feminism.

And therefore, so long as women refuse to abandon feminism, the vast majority of the members of MGTOW want nothing to do with most women, and rightly so.

Fortunately, millions of men and women are starting to realize so many of the myths that feminism has been using to railroad men into oblivion, and are no longer submitting themselves to the minefield that is the modern relationship. People are beginning to realize that we're quickly becoming isolated from one another on gender-lines, and that feminism is responsible for it. Thus, men and women are turning away from feminism in droves. Sadly, it may already be too late.

One of the key strategies for MGTOW has been the marriage strike. A concerted effort by many like-minded men has denied as many women the opportunity to benefit from men's labor. Unfortunately, while effective, this is a scorched-earth policy. It can only work so long as most men, refuse to marry most women, and the only benefits to this activism serve to minimize the damage. The damage inflicted by this policy is compounded by the tendency for women to choose to marry later. MGTOW therefore does not gain the benefit of women's prime fertility, and thus the marriage strike claims as many men as it does women. It isn't that the policy is ineffective, but since feminism has largely achieved undisputed control of academia, feminists benefit from women's younger years. Thus, by the time women are prepared to abandon feminism and come to an equitable agreement with men, they are already passed the point of being effective.

And that is why it is so important for MGTOW to reclaim control of the discourse. The adage "you can't teach an old dog new tricks" is particularly apt in this case. The older a person is, the more likely they are to resist change, and we cannot afford the vast amounts of energy to overcome the inertia of age. Ultimately, the battle is over the minds of the idealists; the younger generation. So long as feminism dominates the discourse, they will never stop poisoning the minds of our sisters and our daughters. So long as the situation continues, we cannot hope to save women from the destructive hateful ideology that has penetrated every aspect of modern culture