Why not do the obvious... in regards to marriage

[Meister]

2 hours ago, meetjoeblack said:

There was a wall of text and your response portrayed your inability to compete both in the free market and dating market. I blame low testosterone.

Your posts are gibberish. I blame brain damage.

[Gavitor]

5 hours ago, Dylan Lawrence Moore said:

My point, as I mentioned before, is that a woman worth marrying won't take you seriously.

Again I'll make a business analogy to emphasize the point. If someone ever says, "You can trust me to pay you, we don't need a contract", run away. If a woman worth marrying hears, "You can trust me to stay with you, we don't need to get married", she'll probably be smart enough to run away.

Why do I need to have a contract to stay with someone I want to be with? This makes no sense. If they want to be with me I don't need them to sign a piece of paper saying so.

contracts are for lack of trust. Also if both parties can leave without consequence then it means you are more willing to behave if you want to keep them. The issue with marriage is that women can leave without consequence and men cannot, it's one sided.

For marriage to be fair either you have to actually stay together forever or remove marriage in its entirety which is basically what no fault divorce does.

Marriage today is just another state program, Marriage is no longer about commitment.

I don't need the governments permission to have a committed relationship with someone. However as long as the government is involved I will not be.

[RichardY]

You can have a verbal contract with a person, doesn't have to be written. Contracts are because you trust someone and have contracted them to do something. The emphasis of a written contract is on the formality and communal aspect.

There was something in the past called "Fleet Marriages" marriages taking place at a prison, why? It's not like London doesn't have its fair share of chapels and churches. Marriages of men to minors. Hence the Marriage Act 1753, requiring witnesses and a license from a church.

[violet]

14 hours ago, Gavitor said:

contracts are for lack of trust. Also if both parties can leave without consequence then it means you are more willing to behave if you want to keep them. The issue with marriage is that women can leave without consequence and men cannot, it's one sided.

For marriage to be fair either you have to actually stay together forever or remove marriage in its entirety which is basically what no fault divorce does.

I agree that no-fault divorce laws give women power over men in marriage. Also, as usual, power causes corruption: women can leave good men that are committed to them and suffer no consequences, and that's unfair. The promise of unconditional love forever is completely empty if there are no consequences for breaking the vow. So yes, there's no true marriage any more, as you say.

I'm just trying to imagine what the system used to be. Is there a functional way to set it up? I suppose in the traditional system, the man has most of the power. If the woman is interested in taking care of children etc. then she can't be competitive in a free market system. As a result, she becomes dependent on her husband, financially speaking anyway. In this situation, the man has the power, and I imagine it would corrupt some.

Perhaps the difference in the past was that people lived within a framework of community, family, religion, and a man that mistreated his wife would be shamed and shunned. There would presumably be social consequences for cheating on or mistreating your wife. I'm not sure we have that framework any more, so a woman might be at the mercy of her husband.

What does a fair system look like?

[meetjoeblack]

22 hours ago, Meister said:

Your posts are gibberish. I blame brain damage.

Low test. Wont compete. Classic lol

[meetjoeblack]

19 hours ago, Gavitor said:

Why do I need to have a contract to stay with someone I want to be with? This makes no sense. If they want to be with me I don't need them to sign a piece of paper saying so.

contracts are for lack of trust. Also if both parties can leave without consequence then it means you are more willing to behave if you want to keep them. The issue with marriage is that women can leave without consequence and men cannot, it's one sided.

For marriage to be fair either you have to actually stay together forever or remove marriage in its entirety which is basically what no fault divorce does.

Marriage today is just another state program, Marriage is no longer about commitment.

I don't need the governments permission to have a committed relationship with someone. However as long as the government is involved I will not be.

While I agree with you, I think his point is that, for the women who have won the genetic lottery, they have orbiters, cucks, and betas as well as a harem of alphas sniffing about. Your not willing to marry means nothing when she has outrageous amounts of options of males at her beck and call. During top form SMV, men will just buy her whatever the F she desires, and once she is nearing that precipice of SMV cratering, she is looking for the marriage contract to parachute away on. It wont matter she has been running through alpha male proteins. Some cuck/beta/white knight will throw away all his resources to acquire access temporary.

I've heard of pathetic stories of rich males who get cut off by their nagging wives  from sex, their friends, hobbies, and the things they love.

[Gavitor]

55 minutes ago, meetjoeblack said:

While I agree with you, I think his point is that, for the women who have won the genetic lottery, they have orbiters, cucks, and betas as well as a harem of alphas sniffing about. Your not willing to marry means nothing when she has outrageous amounts of options of males at her beck and call. During top form SMV, men will just buy her whatever the F she desires, and once she is nearing that precipice of SMV cratering, she is looking for the marriage contract to parachute away on. It wont matter she has been running through alpha male proteins. Some cuck/beta/white knight will throw away all his resources to acquire access temporary.

I've heard of pathetic stories of rich males who get cut off by their nagging wives  from sex, their friends, hobbies, and the things they love.

He mentioned women worth marrying, none of the stuff you just mentioned makes that woman worth marrying. Being physically attractive alone is not enough reason for me to marry someone.

A virtuous woman would not be squandering her youth and high SMV riding the carousel for a decade.

As far as having lots of potential suitors goes, well we have access to lots of potential women if we want to lower our standards. Women aren't exactly rare. Finding virtuous women is whats difficult because people tend to not be virtuous and this is true for both genders.

I will continue to speak the truth and be virtuous. If I meet a virtuous woman to be with great, if not oh well. If a woman decides she doesn't want to date me because i don't want to sign a one sided agreement she isn't for me and likely isn't virtuous or understanding in the first place.

 

[Gavitor]

5 hours ago, violet said:

I agree that no-fault divorce laws give women power over men in marriage. Also, as usual, power causes corruption: women can leave good men that are committed to them and suffer no consequences, and that's unfair. The promise of unconditional love forever is completely empty if there are no consequences for breaking the vow. So yes, there's no true marriage any more, as you say.

I'm just trying to imagine what the system used to be. Is there a functional way to set it up? I suppose in the traditional system, the man has most of the power. If the woman is interested in taking care of children etc. then she can't be competitive in a free market system. As a result, she becomes dependent on her husband, financially speaking anyway. In this situation, the man has the power, and I imagine it would corrupt some.

Perhaps the difference in the past was that people lived within a framework of community, family, religion, and a man that mistreated his wife would be shamed and shunned. There would presumably be social consequences for cheating on or mistreating your wife. I'm not sure we have that framework any more, so a woman might be at the mercy of her husband.

What does a fair system look like?

How does the man have power? He needs his wife to take care of the home and children while hes working. Also after the first 2 years the husband can stay at home while the wife works, the only reason the wife has to be there the first 2 years is because the wife has the plumbing needed to breast feed and men dont. Also a lot of men work dangerous jobs and literally risk their lives to provide for their wife and children. The reality is that men and women are a team and both have responsibility in the relationship. Both are vulnerable in different ways. Relationships are voluntary, and if you want to spend the rest of your life and have children with someone you better make damn sure that the person is someone you truly want to be with.

You mention how a man would be shamed for mistreating his wife, the funny thing is for as long as i can remember men have been taught to NEVER hit a woman. As far as cheating goes, men are still chastised for it while the media is trying to normalize the behavior among women. Removing the state from the equation will add back societal and community norms. As long as women can get away with bad behavior they will continue to make poor choices, if men were allowed to they would also make bad choices.

A fair system is no system, relationships should always be 100% voluntary. If you cannot trust the person you are with you should not be with that person.

[meetjoeblack]

4 hours ago, Gavitor said:

He mentioned women worth marrying, none of the stuff you just mentioned makes that woman worth marrying. Being physically attractive alone is not enough reason for me to marry someone.

A virtuous woman would not be squandering her youth and high SMV riding the carousel for a decade.

As far as having lots of potential suitors goes, well we have access to lots of potential women if we want to lower our standards. Women aren't exactly rare. Finding virtuous women is whats difficult because people tend to not be virtuous and this is true for both genders.

I will continue to speak the truth and be virtuous. If I meet a virtuous woman to be with great, if not oh well. If a woman decides she doesn't want to date me because i don't want to sign a one sided agreement she isn't for me and likely isn't virtuous or understanding in the first place.

 

 Very irritating that my message did not go through. I will give you the shorter version.

 

I appreciate the spirited debate. I have learned a lot from Stefan/FRD. I do not agree with everything he says but I am appreciating the hard work put forth, the reason, and evidence is valuable.

On that same token of value, reason, and evidence; divorce initiated by women cannot be mitigated nor can getting cucked.

I disagree with Stefan about "creepy" in reference to dating younger; I will time stamp that when I see it again. I will steal his line and say, it is not an argument. Top form is what I want in respect to SMV. I am not even talking just looks and aesthetics. If she is not genuine in her best days, I don't care for her when she falls off, and lands on her head. The betas can take that route.

I agree, a "virtuous woman" would not do that; be skiing down cawk mountain. But WAIT. A woman age 19, good looking rolled the dice fucking a loser with mental health, a liar, and had a near pregnancy situation if I am not mistaken. This is a recent call in/podcast/youtube vid. This shit is becoming more common. Not less common. This should be alarming.

Quite frankly, this subject fascinates and interests me more then the Trump political cuck fest. I don't care for it. I am hoping Stefan returns back here to Gene Warfare, Genetic Ostracism, and something as a solution. Yes, VET A GOOD WOMAN. The question is HOW?

Stefan has demonized Pickup. Again, what is the alternative. Saying to wait for the state to fall, for daddy government to topple is not an argument. To wait for WWIII (GOD FORBID) or for women to need men again is not an argument nor a solution.

I don't believe in fake mustaches or magic tricks and deceit. Most men wait for a woman to pick him and they go with the flow. Many tied to the bumper of her car and dragged kicking and screaming figuratively. Not literally. More literal when she leaves and divorces taking his children assuming they are his biological children and not to mention absurd amounts of resources. Rape is a terrifying but WTF is child support and alimony? Monthly, a man is getting financially raped, and its on going, nonstop, and the psychological effects are not even being discussed. The courts pander and supplicate to women.

 

One solution I am thinking as I said is YOUTH. Woman must have resources, good job, and the expectation for free dinners/drinks must be absent. In my life, I have only met very few who fit the bill. Quite frankly, I would rather be single, and my genes weeded out of existence having lived at my edge, done everything in my power to acquire a genuine good woman or failed in my feat to try. If she is not genuine, she wont be a good wife or mother.

 

[Gavitor]

4 minutes ago, meetjoeblack said:

 Very irritating that my message did not go through. I will give you the shorter version.

 

I appreciate the spirited debate. I have learned a lot from Stefan/FRD. I do not agree with everything he says but I am appreciating the hard work put forth, the reason, and evidence is valuable.

On that same token of value, reason, and evidence; divorce initiated by women cannot be mitigated nor can getting cucked.

I disagree with Stefan about "creepy" in reference to dating younger; I will time stamp that when I see it again. I will steal his line and say, it is not an argument. Top form is what I want in respect to SMV. I am not even talking just looks and aesthetics. If she is not genuine in her best days, I don't care for her when she falls off, and lands on her head. The betas can take that route.

I agree, a "virtuous woman" would not do that; be skiing down cawk mountain. But WAIT. A woman age 19, good looking rolled the dice fucking a loser with mental health, a liar, and had a near pregnancy situation if I am not mistaken. This is a recent call in/podcast/youtube vid. This shit is becoming more common. Not less common. This should be alarming.

Quite frankly, this subject fascinates and interests me more then the Trump political cuck fest. I don't care for it. I am hoping Stefan returns back here to Gene Warfare, Genetic Ostracism, and something as a solution. Yes, VET A GOOD WOMAN. The question is HOW?

Stefan has demonized Pickup. Again, what is the alternative. Saying to wait for the state to fall, for daddy government to topple is not an argument. To wait for WWIII (GOD FORBID) or for women to need men again is not an argument nor a solution.

I don't believe in fake mustaches or magic tricks and deceit. Most men wait for a woman to pick him and they go with the flow. Many tied to the bumper of her car and dragged kicking and screaming figuratively. Not literally. More literal when she leaves and divorces taking his children assuming they are his biological children and not to mention absurd amounts of resources. Rape is a terrifying but WTF is child support and alimony? Monthly, a man is getting financially raped, and its on going, nonstop, and the psychological effects are not even being discussed. The courts pander and supplicate to women.

 

One solution I am thinking as I said is YOUTH. Woman must have resources, good job, and the expectation for free dinners/drinks must be absent. In my life, I have only met very few who fit the bill. Quite frankly, I would rather be single, and my genes weeded out of existence having lived at my edge, done everything in my power to acquire a genuine good woman or failed in my feat to try. If she is not genuine, she wont be a good wife or mother.

 

The shorter version looks longer than the longer version... try being more concise because you bring up multiple points. Worried about divorce? Don't get married or pick a woman you know will never leave you.

If you want to date younger than date younger, you don't need his permission. Women generally like to date older men anyways.

Regardless men make shitty choices too. I watch it happen regularly. No one is perfect and we all make mistakes. The question is whether or not you learn from those mistakes.

As for how to vet women, Stef shows you in real time with the very caller you mention. Ask them what you want to know. They will tell you, the question is are you paying attention. If you go out with enough women you'll know right away if they are being honest or if they're just bullshitting. Often I've found that women are actually surprisingly honest with important details that if you're not paying attention to will cost you dearly in the long run. Red flags are usually obvious if you're actually paying attention, the problem is a lot of men and women do NOT pay attention nor do they ask the right questions to get the information they're looking for.

Judging by actions is another easy way to vet someone.

Like I said before removing the laws would be the best course of action and is far more doable than removing the state in its entirety. If you don't want to wait then make sure you know exactly what you're looking for in a woman and don't settle for anyone you know would abuse those laws. Alternatively you can move to a country where these laws are not an issue.

Why are you bringing up what most men do? I don't know about you but personally I'm not most men and could care less what most men do. I've already pointed out that the laws are biased towards women so I'm not sure on what you disagree with.

So you want a young career woman who is wealthy and doesn't want a free meal? First of all I don't know many young adults of either gender who are both in a career and wealthy, I also don't get what that has to do with virtue as you can have both of those things and not be virtuous. Also if your intention is to start a family why would you want her to have a career? the 2 really don't go well together because she only has time to do one. You say you've met a few so that's pretty good, at least you are meeting some. You've done everything possible in your power to meet a good woman? well if you fail you'll be single regardless unless you want to pick a not so good woman.

Anything in life worth doing is going to be difficult. That's what separates great men from mediocre men.

 

 

 

[meetjoeblack]

On ‎7‎/‎16‎/‎2017 at 6:02 PM, Gavitor said:

The shorter version looks longer than the longer version... try being more concise because you bring up multiple points. Worried about divorce? Don't get married or pick a woman you know will never leave you.

If you want to date younger than date younger, you don't need his permission. Women generally like to date older men anyways.

Regardless men make shitty choices too. I watch it happen regularly. No one is perfect and we all make mistakes. The question is whether or not you learn from those mistakes.

As for how to vet women, Stef shows you in real time with the very caller you mention. Ask them what you want to know. They will tell you, the question is are you paying attention. If you go out with enough women you'll know right away if they are being honest or if they're just bullshitting. Often I've found that women are actually surprisingly honest with important details that if you're not paying attention to will cost you dearly in the long run. Red flags are usually obvious if you're actually paying attention, the problem is a lot of men and women do NOT pay attention nor do they ask the right questions to get the information they're looking for.

Judging by actions is another easy way to vet someone.

Like I said before removing the laws would be the best course of action and is far more doable than removing the state in its entirety. If you don't want to wait then make sure you know exactly what you're looking for in a woman and don't settle for anyone you know would abuse those laws. Alternatively you can move to a country where these laws are not an issue.

Why are you bringing up what most men do? I don't know about you but personally I'm not most men and could care less what most men do. I've already pointed out that the laws are biased towards women so I'm not sure on what you disagree with.

So you want a young career woman who is wealthy and doesn't want a free meal? First of all I don't know many young adults of either gender who are both in a career and wealthy, I also don't get what that has to do with virtue as you can have both of those things and not be virtuous. Also if your intention is to start a family why would you want her to have a career? the 2 really don't go well together because she only has time to do one. You say you've met a few so that's pretty good, at least you are meeting some. You've done everything possible in your power to meet a good woman? well if you fail you'll be single regardless unless you want to pick a not so good woman.

Anything in life worth doing is going to be difficult. That's what separates great men from mediocre men.

 

 

 

Saying, pick a woman who wont leave you is not reality unless you are going to chain her to you stove. In which case, you should get psychological help ASAP. Women leave and they take the children, your resources, and assets. Even then, they will bitch that it isn't enough. No. Until the laws mitigate this nightmare, it is not something I will participate in. I am not saying, I wont date, I am saying, I will but, this is not something I will participate in. If common law in my state panders the same way, I will find a different state or not live with a woman. Simple.

Date younger I am. Age 22. Age 23. I will let you know how it goes lol

I listened to the phone call. A really good looking woman slept with a loser who is crazy. This is the same old fucking story time and time again. Said woman sounds like she learned. most crater their SMV and they want to victimhood their story. Single mother victimhood is the welfare state.

Your seemingly implying, you are above the process, and that you have a solution. That you have it figured out. Are you married? Do you have children? The relevance being, you would put yourself in the role of leading by example. There are tons of men trying to figure it out. With online dating, it reeks of leftist victimhood and single moms swinging fron dong to dong like Tarzan one a vine. #Gross

I do. date such a woman. Even shared the story with JTO. The career oriented woman is typically a feminist, makes bank, "doesn't need a man" tangent, and is cratering her SMV. Ghosts. Suddenly, blows up the phone when playboy stops calling. Said female is the classic female chameleon. Without experience, without approaching lots, and seeing this patter of behavior in female nature, I know to run. There is no sexy time worth the risk of being cucked and raising bastard children of some other man.

 

Yes, I am meeting some but, I've approached an abundance of women nonstop since the age of 16. If I had not found a few, I would have gone MGTOW already by now but, the reality is that, it is so few and far between in western society. Lets say you approach ten women. How many numbers will you acquire? Of those numbers, how many will you date? How many will flake? Take that into the depth of forever. There is no stop to it. The reality is that, most women are skiing down cawk mountain, are running through bad boys, are cratering SMV, and when hitting the wall, beta male cuck provider is expected to foot the bill.

If I do not acquire genuine, my genes are weeded out of existence but, on my terms. I wont be a meal ticket nor will I allow my resources to be extracted by cratered SMV. Not happening.

Two girls on deck this week. I will post back finding. Definitely not holding my breathe and I will be approaching some more. Again, I disagree with the passive approach to dating. One of the frustrating things with the topic of dating or fighting; every man thinks he knows how to date or pickup girls and he knows how to fight. Give him a pair of boxing gloves or get him to approach a girl. In both endeavors, he crashes and burns. Anomaly is the male who wont he genetic lottery.

[Dylan Lawrence Moore]

On 7/15/2017 at 3:57 PM, Gavitor said:

Why do I need to have a contract to stay with someone I want to be with? This makes no sense. If they want to be with me I don't need them to sign a piece of paper saying so.

I have no idea why you would need to do that. I certainly didn't suggest you do.

On 7/15/2017 at 3:57 PM, Gavitor said:

contracts are for lack of trust. Also if both parties can leave without consequence then it means you are more willing to behave if you want to keep them. The issue with marriage is that women can leave without consequence and men cannot, it's one sided.

For marriage to be fair either you have to actually stay together forever or remove marriage in its entirety which is basically what no fault divorce does.

Marriage today is just another state program, Marriage is no longer about commitment.

Again, go out into the business world and tell people that "contracts are a lack of trust" and see how many people trust you to do business with. If both parties can leave without consequence then nothing would ever get done.

I'm not sure how many times I have to say this, but I'll say it again: yes the current way the marriage system is set up is completely unfair, absolutely one-sided to favor women, and generally allows them to gold-dig men with very little effort. It's horrible and needs to stop. However, despite this, what I'm saying is: good luck finding a good woman who will stay with you without getting married. Regardless of what a mess the marriage system is, a smart women is just going to see lack of marriage as a lack of real commitment, mostly because there would be nothing keeping the man around. Remember, biologically it's more important for the woman to be able to make the man stay in the relationship than the other way around.

On 7/15/2017 at 3:57 PM, Gavitor said:

I don't need the governments permission to have a committed relationship with someone. However as long as the government is involved I will not be.

Of course you don't, and I would never suggest you would.

[meetjoeblack]

5 hours ago, Kathy said:

I think marriage as in an official letting-big-government-know isn't  important or compulsory.

What is important is having the mindset that your relationship is supposed to be life long and stable. The wedding itself doesn't do anything apart from making it official.

As long as people live like husband and wife, I would say marriage isn't very important. 

I agree which is why, until the laws and parade of free resources exists, it is just not a intelligent investment for men to make. The argument for a NAWALT is not worthy of the fallout of a divorce. I find it funny that marriage tied a woman to being a man's property and yet, despite the third wave feminism, women continue to chase their ownership status. More common after hitting the wall. It wont be men that end free resources and these unjust laws. It will be women. Its not something any man with resources, intelligence, and free thinking will do.

[Gavitor]

6 hours ago, Dylan Lawrence Moore said:

Regardless of what a mess the marriage system is, a smart women is just going to see lack of marriage as a lack of real commitment, mostly because there would be nothing keeping the man around. Remember, biologically it's more important for the woman to be able to make the man stay in the relationship than the other way around.

Are you saying the woman is not enough reason for me to stay around? Why would I leave a great woman? I can easily ask the same whats stopping her from leaving? Marriage certainly doesn't stop her.

A smart woman is not necessarily a scrupulous one. If 2 scrupulous people agree to stay together for life, chances are they will.

Do you think the government piece of paper is necessary or is a marriage only involving family and friends enough?

To be clear the fact that she CAN leave and chooses not to means shes staying in the relationship of her own free will and not because I have a gun to her head. I want the woman I choose to be with to be with me because she WANTS to not because of some contract.

[meetjoeblack]

On ‎7‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 2:19 AM, smarterthanone said:

If marriage comes with all sorts of legal issues, why not just not get married? I don't mean not have a relationship or even kids. If you don't get married:

1. No alimony

2. No dividing assets

3. No divorce

Once your assets are protected, your girlfriend is less likely to leave you when she is the one who will have to live on her friends couch or stay at a cheap motel instead of your nice house.

What is so special about marriage? It is just a commitment. How is the filing of government papers important?

I came here because I was seeking a solution to this issue and I crave self knowledge. I have found a ton of value from FDR. Now, I am working on this solution and I am struggling if I am honest. Stefan has declared dating much younger as "Creepy" and also suggested to wait for the government to fail. This is not a solution.

I approach a lot. I date younger. Always younger. I don't listen to biological clock rubbish when SMV has cratered. I don't give a damn. It is not my problem. The last two girls I hooked up with age 22 and 23. If we take Stefan's piece as gospel, that is "creepy." I would like to find this in video so I can time stamp it for when I phone in because I would like to work with him to come up with a solution. Also, I know he gets condescending if you don't have that and bring up something he said.

 

MGTOW is correct in so many ways but, taking your ball and going home is not a solution either. Then again, I would take this argument elsewhere and say, the vast majority of western women are not worthy of marriage. Its skiing down cawk mountain in top form SMV, its running through gang bangs, ONS, FWBs, crashing through playboys, and then, its victimhood when SMV craters.

 

For give me TS if I am mistaken but, I believe we discussed this topic in forum and in message. I agree with a lot of what you are saying in 99% of your points. I disagree with you and side with Stefan with respect to female promiscuity, kill count, and sleeping around. It is self evident in the data provided by Stefan/FDR in the Truth about Sex, the Truth on Single moms, and the Gene Warfare podcasts. During a woman's top form of SMV, at a time when they should seek out a good male, most are swinging from Dongs like Tarzan on a vine. Its when the fallout happens, when the attention drops, when aesthetics, and looks are shot that its baby rabies plus white picket fence marriage time.

 

I am not playing this game. Its just reckless and savage in the west. What I have taken away from FDR is to not date single moms. Promiscuity removes a woman from marriage PERIOD. Contrary to what Stefan declares creepy, I will continue to pursue and date younger. If a woman is not dedicated in her SMV prime when young, thin, and attractive, she is team 'Netflix and chill' material. Not lets play homemaker material.  

[meetjoeblack]

On ‎7‎/‎15‎/‎2017 at 2:56 PM, Meister said:

Your posts are gibberish. I blame brain damage.

Again, low testosterone strikes back. Hard to imagine given the lack of thereof. LOL

[meetjoeblack]

On ‎7‎/‎18‎/‎2017 at 2:16 PM, Gavitor said:

To be clear the fact that she CAN leave and chooses not to means shes staying in the relationship of her own free will and not because I have a gun to her head. I want the woman I choose to be with to be with me because she WANTS to not because of some contract.

Nice points.

 

I am plagued by this problem. I comprehend MGTOW. I understand it but, I do not resonate with taking my ball and going home. I think this would contradict approaching in the first place or maybe it is ambivalence. Contrary to Stefan's "creepy" definition of dating younger, top form SMV is the answer; date younger when she is young, thin, and attractive. When she has options and still chooses you. If she is not loyal at her best, #DO-NOT-WANT!