MGTOW and Feminism Lead to the Same Godless Place
There were two "bloodbaths" over the weekend.
The victim of the first one was Joe Scarborough. MSNBC's left-wing anti-Trump zealot had a field day mischaracterizing a speech Donald Trump gave at a campaign rally on Saturday.
The Biden White House spun Trump's statement as an authoritarian injunction to incite extreme right-wing white supremacy violence, the typical hyperbolic propaganda that comes from this administration.
When asked to clarify the statement, Trump's senior advisor, Stephen Miller, retorted, "Any reporter that falls for this Biden camp spin is stupid." Color Joe Scarborough stupid. And when you play stupid games, you win stupid prizes. Scarborough is getting roasted relentlessly on social media. Even some liberal pundits took part in the bloodbath of Morning Joe.
The second bloodbath occurred at The Daily Wire studios in Nashville. MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way, pronounced mig-tau) darling Pearl Davis sat down for a debate with DW personality Michael Knowles. Davis wore a pearl bracelet, heels, and a bright red dress. At least she was elegantly clad for the roughly two-and-a-half-hour verbal beatdown she took.
For centuries, society has relied on three guides to help us arrive at the correct conclusion on a given topic: science, reason, and revelation. We would refer to scientific experiments, data sets, models, graphs, charts, and the like. Then, we would take that information to make reasonable hypotheses. Finally, and most importantly, we would refer to Scripture to help glue everything together.
Today, people rely heavily on science and apply a little bit of reason while ignoring revelation altogether. This was one of the big takeaways from the Knowles/Davis debate.
Pearl Davis, as is the case with many MGTOW influencers, has adopted a scientific and atheistic worldview devoid of nuance and reason.
Davis repeatedly rattled off a laundry list of sweeping generalizations, statistics, and tragic divorce stories throughout the debate, often lacking substantive context.
Early in the conversation, Pearl proclaims that a child is more likely to be harmed by the mother than by the father. "One out of three women's had an abortion," says Davis. "I've seen some numbers that say one out of four, but the point is still the same. If one out of four men committed murder..."
Knowles added the much-needed nuance. "Abortion is murder, but, you know, there's a lot that goes into that because...When we point to an issue like abortion...obviously that is murder. It's not only morally synonymous; it's the same thing, but then also...the male abortionists are involved in the murder. The male legislators who pass [the laws]."
Laws and the legislators enacting the laws reflect the society in which the laws are erected. The misandry nature of marriage and custody laws can only be enforced because men stand idle. The whole kit and caboodle of feminism exists today in its radically lopsided form because men stand idle. Politics and culture are unanimously linked. Culture can be downstream from politics, and politics can stream down from culture. Reverse the Tender Years Doctrine. Roll back some of the provisions of the Best Interests laws. Changing this law or that law without the cultural fortitude to uphold them will lead to more of the feminist status quo.
The same concept applies to people who lean too heavily on The Constitution. It is only as good as the people who uphold its statutes. Do Democrats infringe on our First and Second Amendment rights? Yes, but Republicans stand passive and allow it to happen.
Pearl Davis "suggests" men should, at the very least, wait until laws change before considering marriage. Let's imagine a Republican-led Congress introduces and passes a reversal of the Tender Years Doctrine, providing more equal footing for men in custody courts. That's great! All right, fellas! The coast is clear. You can get married now! Then, a few years later, a Democrat-led Congress or a progressive Democrat President reverses the laws. Now what? What are men hoping to be married do? Wait for the laws to change back again?
What Pearl is really suggesting is that men never marry. She implicitly says this in a roundabout way throughout the debate. Late in the discussion, she proclaims, "You [Daily Wire] guys are the ones pushing men into a feminist institution." Davis is a self-described Catholic. Perhaps from the Joe Biden denomination of Catholicism, but not the traditional one. Catholicism teaches that marriage is a natural institution.
In some ways, Men Going Their Own Way is extreme liberalism run amok. When a manosphere-supporting writer for GQ Magazine calls the MGTOW movement the "Taliban of the Manosphere," perhaps some of these “freedom-loving individuals” should reevaluate their stances.
The MGTOW account on X says it gives "insights on men's rights, self-reliance, and freedom from feminism." This is partially true. The men in the community accurately highlight real issues, which is the backbone of its appeal. The solutions to the problems, however, are not that different from the ones offered by feminists who spell woman "w-o-m-y-n." The MGTOW doctrine, which tells men to resist the natural urge to marry and reproduce so they can make money and chase trivial pursuits, is the same feminist doctrine that tells women to forego their prime reproductive years so they can make money and chase trivial pursuits.
MGTOW and feminism are the same thing. They will eventually lead to the same outcome, fewer families and fewer people. Both attempts to solve theological and spiritual problems through secular and material means. There is a hyper-focus on freedom and becoming a rugged individual.
Today, freedom is defined as being able to do whatever you want, whenever you want. The word free was derived in the 12th century, meaning "not in bondage, acting in one's own will." It referred to God freeing the Israelites from captivity in Egypt. Acting in one's own will meant not becoming a slave to sin. Individual derived as an adjective, not a noun. It describes a state of being indivisible from our Creator. God grants us individual rights and freedoms. There is no such thing as an individual person. Everyone is born as a member of a family. As our country continues to slink down a secular path, we have lost sight of this scriptural reality.
An America full of MGTOW men, feminist women, and DINK (Dual Income, No Kids) couples is a liberal autocrat's wet dream. All of the left's major stances lead to fewer people: the murder of babies in the womb (abortion), euthanasia (assisted suicide), LGBT activism, which leads to fewer people producing children naturally, loosening of drug laws, resulting in more drug-induced deaths, and the abolishment of police and prisons, which lead to spikes in homicide rates. BLM has already vowed for the end of the nuclear family. And don't forget climate activists suggest not having children to save the environment. Then, the healthy people capable of reproducing choose not to because of individualism? That's how civilizations become extinct.
I will not argue that finding a worthy partner to marry and raising children in a fallen world is difficult. I have yet to do either. There are endless scientific studies, books, and statistics to scare me into not wanting to pursue marriage. Some are reasonable and worthy of my attention. I think a few of the MGTOW activists are sincere. But I choose to apply science, reason, and revelation to my worldview.
Here is where I will throw a few flowers Pearl's way. She successfully found a lane in the hyper-masculine, male-dominated MGTOW influencer space. Being a woman encouraging men to avoid commitment will definitely set one apart. But her shallowness was on full display as she sparred far above her intellectual weight class.
What happens if a MGTOW/feminist/liberal utopia is achieved when men and women ignore their natural instincts to couple and reproduce? As the Apostle Paul says in Romans 3:9, "What then? Are we any better off? Not at all!"
