Get PJ Media on your Apple

Dr. Helen

Meninists, Twitter and “Going Ghost”

December 18th, 2013 - 9:36 am

I have been trolling around at the Meninist Twitter feed (go take a look, it’s hilarious and very much needed!) and love some of the men’s comments such as “Stop looking at my wallet, my face is up here”. I also noticed guys talking about “going Ghost” and then caught this at JustFourGuys.com:

Indeed, there are an entire shelf of books talking about the hows and whys of Men dropping out, and as far as I’m concerned the best of the lot is “Men on Strike” by Dr. Helen Smith. In it, she identifies four specific areas where increasing numbers of Men are “going on strike” in terms of involvement in American life. It’s an easy, quick yet powerful read, one that I highly recommend, and will revisit in future posts for further discussion, because it is just that important. (It is instructive – and telling – to consider the fact, that for all the yammering about “street harassment” and “creepers” in our time, there has yet to be one book written about it, let alone an entire shelf of same; compare and contrast to the above-mentioned works exhorting Men to “Man Up”…)

It has been estimated by various Manosphere insiders that the MGTOW arm of the ‘sphere is not only the largest segment, but its fastest growing – this, despite the fact that it is also its least organized of the three as well. This comes as no shock to this writer, for it is easy to see how relatively easy and simple it is to drop out, whereas both the MRA and PUA routes require a heck of a lot more work, time and effort, with payoffs not at all being as readily assured, or even worth it in the end. To be sure, I support both these efforts and for many reasons; but in pure cost/benefit terms, and on the individual level, which is where the MGTOW route makes the most sense, it truly does deliver more bang for the proverbial buck than the other two do, all things considered.

How and why do I say that?

Well, for one thing, I say all this as a Black Man, seeing all this from what I refer to as Ground Zero in the ongoing Sexual Politics Wars – Black America. For the past few decades, Black Men have been the shock troops in that war, arguably millions of them “going Ghost” in that time.

“Going Ghost” I assume is very much like going on strike although doing a disappearing act is not as active as going on strike or fighting back, both of which I propose in my book. The men at Twitter who are using the hashtag #MeninistTwitter are certainly actively fighting back as opposed to just disappearing and “going Ghost.” And they are fighting back with humor and mockery–both excellent ways to get the point across that the war on men will no longer be tolerated any longer. Go guys!

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
Going ghost acknowledges the likely reality that the vast, vast, vast majority of women will never cede any ground in the gender war, and just enough male toadies will help them keep building on their pedestal.
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (23)
All Comments   (23)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
To get the full context of what Obsidian is saying, one needs to read back a few posts. In a previous post, he notes that black women overwhelmingly choose 'Mr. Big' to have sex and children with. This is borne out by the difference in venereal disease between black women and black men, a greater difference than in other groups. 'Mr. Big' doesn't put a ring on it, he has many women to choose from and keeps a de-facto harem going.

The decent black worker, not being a bad boy rapper or drug dealer, is invisible to these women. He in turn goes his own way, dropping out of society aside from the minimum interaction necessary. So far, white women have been perfectly happy with playing around with Mr. Big in their younger years, then graciously allowing Joe Normalguy to marry and take care of them until the women decide to divorce him (but not his wallet!). Joe is too nice for his own good, but has been noticing the behavior and is starting to not 'put a ring on it' any more. The blacks were the first, mainstream society is following.
17 weeks ago
17 weeks ago Link To Comment
Black inner city men often go 'leech'. The 'leech' will stay with and have sex with a woman, live in her government-paid-for apartment, eat the food she buys with SNAP benefits, mostly ignore her children, and then move on.* Most of the women are OK with this pattern of living. This is why almost three-quarters of inner city black births are to single mothers. The children have no real fathers, which is devastating for the boys. The men they see don't commit and don't stay around. The cycle continues.

*Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a Democrat senator for NY (who frequently did not vote the party line), predicted and spoke about this problem in the mid-1960s when Congress was debating Johnson's 'Great Society' welfare legislation.
17 weeks ago
17 weeks ago Link To Comment
I think Expat is the one who is confused. No one is saying that a woman cannot make a suitable companion for a man. In fact, most women are very pleasant to be around. The problem comes in when it's time to decide what kind of relationship you want to pursue.

Marriage is out of the question. I for one will never agree to presumptive paternity. She doesn't like it? Well, I don't hear her making an argument for changing the law. So what she thinks, wants, believes is utterly irrelevant to me. She refuses to or is incapable of acknowledging that there are serious problems with the marriage contract. It has transmogrified into a license for betrayal, abandonment and bankruptcy. And any man who cannot see that is a fool.

Men benefit from relationships with women, just as women benefit from relationships with men. It is the nature of the relationship that falls into question.

Feminism has destroyed romance. There really is no point in courting a woman in a culture that constantly denigrates and demeans men. There is no point in entering into a contract that exploits men under a legal system that discriminates against men. You cannot win.

So, the only logical course to pursue is to be self-reliant. I live alone. I do my own grocery shopping, I cook my own food, I clean my own mess, I wash my own clothes, and I'm perfectly happy doing so. I don't need a woman to be my servant.

Yeah, I date women. I enjoy their companionship. And if she wants to have sex, I'm not going to say no. But I go into a sexual relationship knowing that once I do, she is immediately going to start making unreasonable demands on me. And I am not going to put up with that. So I leave.

This is a female problem. It's her attitude that is the problem. What woman doesn't want a man who cooks and cleans? But yet she sees a relationship with that man as some form of oppression. Go figure.

17 weeks ago
17 weeks ago Link To Comment
I don't think anyone got the gist of what I was trying to articulate.
17 weeks ago
17 weeks ago Link To Comment
“Stop looking at my wallet, my face is up here”.

That is an instant classic!!!
17 weeks ago
17 weeks ago Link To Comment
Just to clear up some confusion there is no "meninist" movement, it's a bunch of guys on twitter mocking feminists. If you want to understand where that author, Obsidian, is coming from with regards to black men being the shock troops read some more of his stuff, its very good.

I think there is a difference between "going on strike" and "going ghost". I do think having a woman is, for the vast majority of men, an absolute must in order to lead a happy life, so, I think it would be very wrong to encourage men to give up on women. America is 4% of the world. Women can be great companions, smart, friendly, warm hearted people. Yes, in America, good apples are few and far between, but in the rest of the world there are lots of good apples. Going on strike is refusing to deal with western women and the system. Going ghost is disengaging from any relationships with a woman, which, is a negative.

Going your own way is a good thing! Vowing to never be with a woman because of previous bad experiences is the wrong answer in my opinion. It's a big world and men and women are supposed to complement each other. By becoming a eunuch, in a way the feminazi's win. Their goal is to see men unhappy.
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
Going your own way is a good thing! Vowing to never be with a woman because of previous bad experiences is the wrong answer in my opinion. It's a big world and men and women are supposed to complement each other. By becoming a eunuch, in a way the feminazi's win. Their goal is to see men unhappy.

IMO Ghosting is the inevitable end state of MGTOW. That is, while MGTOW still harbor a hope that they won't be subject to the feminist legal system and its redistributionist bent, a Ghost no longer operates under that naively optimistic assumption.

And why do you assume ghosts are unhappy? I'm as unhappy about not having a woman in my life as I am with not having, say, a Ferrari. That is, from time to time I wonder what it'd be like to have one, and if I'd have a lot of fun. But then I realize that they cost a lot of money to maintain and insure, and I remember to be thankful for what I do have, such as my money, my friends, my free time, and my liberty.
17 weeks ago
17 weeks ago Link To Comment
I do think having a woman is, for the vast majority of men, an absolute must in order to lead a happy life, so, I think it would be very wrong to encourage men to give up on women.

I'm not sure i agree with this. There are plenty of other activities that give life fulfillment. Outdoor sports and travel come to mind. The more I think about it, it seems that your advice is bad. That happiness is based on any kind of "need" or "must" in and of itself makes it less possible for one to find happiness through ones own efforts and choices, thus robbing one of freedom and self-determination. To say that happiness is dependent on the actions of others that one has no control over is to suggest that happiness and freedom are opposites, not compliments of each other. We all know the deleterious results of this world-view.

Going ghost is disengaging from any relationships with a woman, which, is a negative.

To disengage from that which you have no direct control over in order to pursue a life based on what you do have control over, is a positive. It can never be a negative.
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
I said the "vast majority of men". Who says men have "no control" over women? There are plenty of women in traditional relationships who willingly allow their man to have control over them in some way. Of course, there are many examples of celibate men leading fulfilling and exciting lives. But for MOST MEN, having a good relationship(s) with women increases their happiness. For me, I am happiest when I'm in a relationship with an attractive woman and my friends also like women.

It's not mutually exclusive living a life that you have 100% control of and engaging with women. But if your happier without a woman in your life, fine. In my opinion men are biologically attracted to women and preaching to men to be celibate, I don't think that's going to work.
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
"There are plenty of women in traditional relationships who willingly allow their man to have control over them in some way."

"... willingly allow ..."

Spoken like a true supplicant. I don't think you will even understand what I am saying.
17 weeks ago
17 weeks ago Link To Comment
Please try. Unless you rape a woman, to some extent it is her willingness to allow you to penetrate her. I have ended relationships and girls have ended relationships with me. So, in your mind if a girl doesn't agree to go on a date you should just put her on your back and take her home anyway? Cause anything else is just being a supplicant? I guess I'm just a hopeless supplicant then...
17 weeks ago
17 weeks ago Link To Comment
If the woman is "willingly allowing" it, the man does not have control over her in some way. It is just a fiction. She is in control.

I don't want to be a boss over women, but I also don't really need a boss over me. If the woman is really in control - as it is in today's society - then my only alternative, if I want to have some real say over my life - is to not get married, for instance.

So, in conclusion, it doesn't mean that if a girl doesn't agree to a date, I put her on my back and rape her and then kill her. 'Cuz anything else would just be a hopeless supplicant.

But on a side note, you are really a true American hero for chivalrously defending American women. A true hero.
17 weeks ago
17 weeks ago Link To Comment
"If the woman is "willingly allowing" it, the man does not have control over her in some way. It is just a fiction. She is in control."

So, basically, your stance is one person must control the other. How am I to consider you superior to the feminists who want to control men?
17 weeks ago
17 weeks ago Link To Comment
Here comes: "If saving women from rape and death is being a chivalrous supplicant, then I guess call me a chivalrous supplicant" from Expat21.

The older I get, the more sick I get of self-righteous twits who don't really do anything in life, but are intensely proud of themselves.
17 weeks ago
17 weeks ago Link To Comment
I don't like American women...I was talking about women in general. I live in Europe, hence my name EXPAT. Don't really think we disagree.
17 weeks ago
17 weeks ago Link To Comment
Black men are the 'shock troops'? Hardly. Opting out of marriage and fatherhood is one thing. Being a deadbeat dad is another.
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
I don't know what the acronym MGTOW stands for, and I've never heard of "going Ghost," but I assume it's a useful catchphrase for disappearing.

The writer is exactly correct that this is the best route to take in the current environment in terms of a pure cost/benefit analysis. It simply takes too much work, time and effort, not to mention money, to get involved with a modern woman these days, for little or no reward. It's just not worth it.

But the issue goes much deeper than that. In this culture, inundated as it is with denigrating images of masculinity, with this education system, under this legal system, given the attitudes of these women, for a man the mere act of participation is an act of surrender. In other words, to be accepted renouncing and denouncing your manhood is the price of admission.

Better to go your own way. I agree with Abelard Lindsey. It is the only course of action consistent with idividualism, self-determination and self-reliance. I fail to see how sparking a Twitter movement or an Internet revolt will advance this course of action. These really are little more than support groups for encouragement, without any real influence to implement necessary change.

Meninists are basically feminists lite, with no cultural, educational or legal infrastructure to back them up. Most men know that it is pointless to get into a fight they have no chance of winning, so the best option is to withdraw.

A meninist movement that models itself on the feminist movement is doomed to failure. Imitation is the highest form of flattery. It's to surrender the moral high ground and fight an uphill battle that you will never win.

The best way to deal with feminists is to simply ignore them. A successful men's rights movement would focus on electing representatives who will enact laws that support and defend men's rights, that change the education system, that change the court systesm, that change the culture. Anything else is just pissing in the wind.
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
Are Black men going ghost before or after contributing to he 70% black illegetimacy rate?
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
I think that's part of going ghost...sure, you'll sex up a willing lady but your involvement ends there.
17 weeks ago
17 weeks ago Link To Comment
Going one's own way is the only rational response to this issue. Indeed, it is the one course of action that is consistent with the values of individualism, self-determination, and self-reliance. The problem I have with the so-called MRA movement is it seems to be dominated by an "illiberal" world-view (classical Lockean definition) that is actually little different than that espoused by the feminists themselves. Both movements are dominated by an entitlement mentality.
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
Bingo! I had to force myself to finish Farrell's "The Myth of Male Power". It was just a feminist rant with the sex reversed.
17 weeks ago
17 weeks ago Link To Comment
I read a book authored by Warren Farrell and entitled "The Myth of Male Power".

Seeing your description of it makes me wonder if we read the same book.
16 weeks ago
16 weeks ago Link To Comment
Going ghost acknowledges the likely reality that the vast, vast, vast majority of women will never cede any ground in the gender war, and just enough male toadies will help them keep building on their pedestal.
18 weeks ago
18 weeks ago Link To Comment
View All