Spot on! Good show, FSchmidt! That's exactly it, and that was a relatively mild rebuke. For those who do not wish to click the link, here it is:fschmidt wrote:https://www.mgtow.com/forums/topic/just ... post-41569Yohan wrote:Show me such a MGTOW-Forum which is supportive to shame MEN who are looking for a relationship with a foreign woman.
Why don't you link to your MGTOW forum? Then we can judge it.I am very familiar with several MGTOW Forums. I am strongly supportive to one MGTOW forum where I have admin-rights.
I am not aware of such comments, despite I am using it since over 10 years and the forum contains over 700.000 comments.
Prove what you say. Show me those comments - links please.
Keymaster wrote 2015-04-18 at 6:42 PM:
I agree with most of the things he says, except for his opinion on God and zionism.No you have been banned from various MGTOW forums for extremely obvious and sensible reasons. Let’s leave aside for a moment your stinking f*cking attitude and lets go right to the fact that you’re not even a MGTOW. You’re married to a Mexican NAWALT and this is no place for you.
QUOTE from [Fschmidt]: “I will add my anecdotal experience of being happily married to a Mexican woman for 24 years”.
http://www.mgtow.com/forums/topic/foreign-women/page/2/
But don’t worry. We won’t “ban” you for that. You will just be reduced to spectator status.
You may remain an forum discussion observer from the outside.
You [Fschmidt] being at a MGTOW forum is like an Amish person signing up at a auto racing forum talking about how wonderful it is to ride around in a buggy.
Perhaps you showed upon looking to get banned, but we’re happy to disappoint you.
You can sign up and join the NAWALT forums. That’s right up your alley.
What's wrong with being married to a Mexican woman? Oh that's right. You're forbidden to marry! Forbidden to have children, with any woman.
They like to pretend this is a movement about reconciling with women. But they are against having women in subjection. Yet their form of "activism" is trying to starve women of male companionship, so that they would submit to men, and force women into subjection. Is that not the same thing, but on a macro scale, instead of a micro scale?
These fools claim they want women as a whole to compromise with men as a whole. They do not. If they were in favor of a reconciliation in which women submit and compromise, then they would not be averse to individual men doing it on a micro scale. They should be in favor of men actually going their own way and marrying ANY woman who is willing, as long as she is submissive. On the contrary, they are not in favor of individual men having individual choice. Neither are they in favor of having women in subjection to their husbands. Nor are they truly interested in a societal compromise by women.
Nope. What they want is to forbid other men from interacting with women, which is the same stupid thing feminists want. Yet somehow these geniuses think they are doing young men favors by advising them of the evils of modern women. Nope, that isnt the goal in itself. The warning is a tool used to scare those who are on the brink into jumping in head first. The warnings are scare tactics meant to recruit more members. The end is not the warning. The warning is the means to the end, which is the same thing with feminists telling regular women that one in four women are raped, when it is much closer to one in one hundred thousand.
