FREE STUFF


The paradigm of most relationships with western women involves giving them free stuff. It may seem crude to simply say it. And there are plenty of nice names we furnish to take away the sting of disingenuousness from calling it what it really is. Free Stuff. And beyond free stuff, there is also free goods and services. Think about it, you go to a bar, see a woman you're attracted to, or you're taking your date out to dinner and without thinking too hard about it, you're buying her drinks or dinner. You're reaching into your wallet to pull out either cash, a checkbook or credit card. And before the night is over, you're diminished several tens of hundreds of dollars. Add to this the sense of foregone obligation to get into your pocket during holidays to give her more free stuff like jewelry, or some other expensive item. Then there is her birthday, and anniversaries and of course more free stuff  to prove you still have affection for her.

You know the old joke that women in America make only 70-80 cents to a man's dollar? Yet how often do you hear how much of that dollar a man makes that is funneled straight to women. I suspect once that is factored in, the supposed dollar a man makes compared to women would be well below 60 cents.

Yet if you watch any of the popular daytime TV shows, movies, or read the multitude of relationship advice column as well as see their videos they almost all uniformly preach the gospel of giving women free stuff. Of course it's never explicitly put in those terms, instead its dressed up in romanticist terms like "showing her you care," "keeping the spark alive," "making her feel like she's just as appealing as when you first met her." and the daddy of them all, "Being a gentlemen." Often the typical claim among these relationship gurus generally proclaim you must behave with the same intensity of pursuit as when you were first dating, (for those in long term relationships.)

At a point in the distant past, western women were given free stuff because the man who wanted to impress her, genuinely didn't mind furnishing the drinks, presents and dinners, because back then there was some reasonable reciprocation that made all this gift giving worth it. And I don't mean worth it exclusively with regards to sex, but a genuine and open expression of appreciation on her part. Back then you could observe that she didn't take a man's act of giving or buying stuff for her for granted. If he spent 1/4 of his annual income on a ring or necklace, it truly meant something to her and she held those items with priceless esteem. When a man put himself out to fix her car or pay for repairs to it, she expressed true sincere gratitude that typically resulted in something like a finely cooked meal or some form of praise that made those men feel special.

Today, on average, those dynamics of the past no longer exist in a meaningful way in the present.

Today, you're expected to provide free stuff, free goods and services as a prerequisite for first getting her attention, and maintaining her attention. Not only are you obligated as a matter of course to prove your worth to her by furnishing lots of material stuff, but as a man in contemporary reckoning, you have to do so with the knowledge that you are but one of several contenders simultaneously vying for the affections of a woman who solidly feels ENTITLED to free stuff, goods and services. The entire moral relativism determining what some call the traditional roles and what is presumed to be the challenge of traditional gender roles comes full stop at the free stuff paradigm. The likelihood of a woman earning more money than a man who buys HIM dinner, or expensive gifts, like cars, houses, jewelry, and other items of luxury is so rare as to be virtually non-existent. And there exist no serious effort from feminists to disparage women who insist upon the free stuff paradigm, but of course, men are frequently disparaged  for not giving women MORE free stuff. And it gets worse. The modern general relationship with a western woman also demands not just free stuff like drinks dinners and gifts, goods and services, but essentially increased physical labor. It's not enough for him to spend ten to twelve hours working a hard job, but he's now expected to come home to do the dishes, and other housework and so on. For reasons I cannot wrap my head around, decades of men mowing the yard, or cleaning gutters, or doing plumbing, or painting the fence, doing basic maintenance around the house mysteriously doesn't count as housework. So, I suppose he's expected to continue doing what he's generally done for several decades on top of all the other labors, which many women incessantly complain they have to do.

Now comes the kicker.

If the relationship doesn't work out, you may have to face the unpleasant fact that several months, weeks or years of material investment has absolutely no meaning. In other words, the romanticist self-deception that generated a false sense of belief that one can expect some sort of reasonable equitable remuneration has as much value as cold ashes on a hard winter day. Worse still, if he's married with a home. Upon divorce, in most cases, he will in all likelihood be forced by the state to continue subsidizing her life in the form of alimony. In most cases he loses the home, to her and is still obligated to pay the mortgage and property tax. And God forbid if children is involved.


Now that we've explored all the expectations men are encouraged to meet to satisfy the contemporary relationship paradigm, what are women in the west expected to do to earn or deserve all this free stuff?

Nothing.

Why? Because the setup operates on the basis that it is the man who pursues women, and not the  other way around. As a result, most modern western women base relationship prerequisites on the principles of demands, conditions and ultimatums. In other words, a zero sum principle. They themselves as the presumably pursued, have no obligation to give or do anything except exist. Sincerity, appreciation or even a modicum of praise for the man is non-existent, because from their point of view, the man in the relationship, however casual or not, is EXPECTED to exist in mindless deference to their needs, wants and whims. Then there is a rather silly idea that giving a man access to sex is reward enough. As if sex is a treat to be parcelled out like a WWII ration card or doggie treat if you perform enough tricks on command.


Which brings me to MGTOW

MGTOW is the end of free stuff for women. And when this is understood, one can easily observe one of the reasons why many western women  contemptuously complain about MGTOW stems from a realization that a growing number of men have decided to negate the average western woman's sense of over-the-top entitlements. In other words, since more men are refusing to pursue entitled-minded western women, the concept defining male value from a gynocratic paradigm becomes upended. On result of this is men suddenly have a lot more money to invest in themselves. And when a man  makes investing in himself a top priority, then many of the psychological and monetary issues that contribute to much of his anxiety, pain and self-esteem conflicts is dramatically reduced.

MGTOW can equal many things, one of those things is NO MORE GIVING WOMEN FREE STUFF.