Hubbry Logo
Men Going Their Own WayMen Going Their Own WayMain
Open search
Men Going Their Own Way
Community hub
Men Going Their Own Way
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Men Going Their Own Way
Men Going Their Own Way
Men Going Their Own Way
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

MGTOW logo as shown in the episode "Men at War" of the BBC series Reggie Yates' Extreme UK[1]

Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW /ˈmɪɡtaʊ/) is an anti-feminist, misogynistic, mostly online community that espouses male separatism from what they see as a gynocentric society that has been corrupted by feminism.[2] MGTOW specifically advocate for men to avoid marriage and committed romantic relationships with women.[3] The community is a part of the manosphere, a collection of anti-feminist websites and online communities that also includes the men's rights movement, incels, and pickup artists.[4]

Like other manosphere communities, MGTOW overlaps with the neoreactionary alt-right movement[5] and has been implicated in online harassment of women[6] and domestic terrorism in the United States.[7][page needed] The Southern Poverty Law Center categorizes MGTOW as a part of the male supremacist ideology.[8]

History

[edit]

MGTOW ideology emerged in the early 2000s, although it is not clear where it originated.[9] A blog called No Ma'am was one of the first sites dedicated to the ideology, publishing a "MGTOW Manifesto" in 2001.[10] Early members of MGTOW were largely politically libertarian and focused on individual self-reliance in accordance with traditional notions of masculinity. Over time, the movement's focus shifted toward male separatism.[11]

Far-right commentator and polemicist Milo Yiannopoulos is credited with helping to popularize MGTOW with a 2014 Breitbart article titled "The Sexodus", in which he described men who were eschewing women, love, sex, and marriage because of feminism.[12] MGTOW discussion forums include the subreddit r/MGTOW, created in 2011, smaller auxiliary subreddits, and MGTOW Forum, an independent website that emerged in 2014. Following Reddit's 2017 ban of a large incel subreddit, r/MGTOW was briefly the largest and most active manosphere forum on the site.[13]

Researchers have implicated MGTOW communities in online harassment of women. r/MGTOW and MGTOW Forum are among the communities which "have been growing in size and in their involvement in online harassment and real-world violence", according to computer scientist Manoel Horta Ribeiro and colleagues.[14] Communications researcher Scott Wright and colleagues state that "MGTOW propagate extensive and wide-ranging passive or undirected harassment and misogyny on Twitter."[15] Shortly after publication of a 2020 preprint of a paper examining manosphere groups online, Reddit quarantined r/MGTOW, a restriction the platform applies to subreddits determined to be "extremely offensive or upsetting to the average redditor" which prevents them from earning advertising revenue and requires visitors to agree to seeing potentially offensive content before entering.[16] r/MGTOW was banned in August 2021 for breaking the site's policies against promotion of violence and hate.[17]

Membership

[edit]

Members of MGTOW communities are primarily heterosexual, white, middle-class men from North America and Europe. Unlike the men's rights movement, MGTOW do not permit women to join.[18] MGTOW often disavow hierarchies and claim to be leaderless; some deny that MGTOW is a group or movement at all, instead emphasizing each member's individuality and independence within a collective.[19]

Researcher Callum Jones and colleagues write in New Media & Society that "while the precise number of MGTOW followers is unclear, it appears to be a popular and growing group within the Manosphere".[20] As of 2018, MGTOW was smaller than both the men's rights movement and the pickup artist communities online, with MGTOW Forum having over 25,000 subscribers and the subreddit r/MGTOW having over 35,000.[21] The subreddit had grown to 104,000 members by 2019,[note 1] with another MGTOW forum listing over 32,000 members.[20]

Ideology

[edit]

MGTOW advocate for men to withdraw from what they see as a gynocentric society that has been corrupted by feminism.[22] MGTOW believe that men are better off avoiding any relationships with women, including marriage. Instead, the group believes that men should either abstain from sex with women entirely, or alternatively only have casual sex while avoiding romantic or financial commitments.[3] Online MGTOW rhetoric is characterized by anti-feminism, masculism,[23] and misogyny.[24] MGTOW believe that feminism has made women dangerous to men, and that male self-preservation requires dissociating completely from women.[25]

A 2020 study by Wright et al. found that despite MGTOW claiming to reject women entirely, some 59% of MGTOW forum posts mentioned women, with the majority (61%) of those mentions being misogynistic in some way.[3] Jones et al. suggest that this reflects a need for MGTOW to perform their rejection of women in order to belong.[26]

The MGTOW community uses jargon shared by the broader manosphere, including the red pill and blue pill metaphor borrowed from the film The Matrix. Those in the manosphere who have been awakened from feminist "delusion" to the supposed reality that society is fundamentally misandrist and dominated by feminist values are said to be "redpilled" or have "taken the red pill"; those who do not accept that ideology are referred to as "bluepilled".[27] Other jargon includes pejorative terms for other men such as "beta", "cuck", "soy boy", and "white knight".[28]

Like other manosphere groups, MGTOW subscribe to the "red pill" belief that there is systemic bias against men in society,[29] including double standards in gender roles[30] and bias against men in family courts.[12] MGTOW endorse the belief shared by other manosphere groups that women follow a similar pattern in dating and marriage: young and attractive women are promiscuous and engage in "hypergamy", having sex with numerous men and abandoning a man if a "higher-value" man shows interest. They believe women gravitate towards "alpha men" who are attractive but mistreat them, reinforcing the ideology of feminism.[31] According to MGTOW, as women begin to age, they settle down with "beta males"[32] who provide for them financially, but to whom they deny sex, sometimes engaging in extramarital sex with more attractive men; these relationships ultimately lead to divorce, in which the women will be favored by the courts due to what MGTOW call female privilege.[33]

MGTOW men gauge their participation in the movement on a series of four levels.[34] At the first level, men believe they are used and manipulated by women (called "situational awareness" or the "red pill"[35]) but still believe in the value of marriage; they are sometimes described as "purple pilled".[36] At the second level, men reject long-term relationships, cohabitation, and marriage, but will still participate in shorter term relationships and sexual encounters.[37] At the third level, men reject short-term relationships and limit their interactions with women.[38] At the fourth level, men minimize their engagement with the state and society, including employment; this is called "going ghost".[34][note 2]

The Southern Poverty Law Center categorizes MGTOW as a part of the male supremacist ideology,[8] a category they began tracking on their hate group tracking project, Hate Map, in 2018.[39] Fellows at the Institute for Research on Male Supremacism publishing with the International Centre for Counter-Terrorism have said that members of MGTOW "openly disdain women, and normalize it through online harassment."[40] MGTOW and other manosphere communities overlap with the reactionary, white nationalist alt-right[5] and other white supremacist, authoritarian, and populist movements worldwide.[41] Both MGTOW and the alt-right believe that feminism has destroyed Western society.[12]

Relation to other manosphere groups

[edit]
Further information: Manosphere

The MGTOW community is a part of the manosphere, a varied collection of websites, blogs, and online forums promoting masculinity, hostility towards women, and opposition to feminism.[42] The manosphere also includes men's rights activists, incels, pick-up artists, and the fathers' rights movement.[43]

Although some[who?] consider MGTOW to be a part of the men's rights movement,[44] others[who?] have cited MGTOW's separatist ideology as distinguishing them from the MRM, which engages in political activism to try to drive societal change.[45][35] MGTOW members describe men's rights activists and incels as "losers" and "betas".[3] Early MGTOW groups were primarily libertarian and opposed to "big government"; this led to a rift with men's rights activists who wished to lobby for governmental change, particularly with regards to custody and divorce law.[46] Wright et al. state that the founders of MGTOW were originally men's rights activists who became disillusioned with political activism, believing the "gynocentric world order" could not be changed.[47]

MGTOW is also at odds with the pick-up artist (PUA) community. Both PUA and MGTOW rhetoric is frequently misogynistic and objectifying towards women; however, whereas PUAs seek to manipulate women into providing sex, MGTOW claim to reject heterosexual relationships entirely.[3] The two groups share a reciprocal disdain for one another; PUAs have mocked MGTOW as "Virgins Going Their Own Way",[21] and MGTOW deride PUAs as being dependent on women's approval, contributing to what they see as overvaluing of women in society.[48]

See also

[edit]
  • 4B movement – Radical feminist movement
  • Herbivore men – Japanese term for men with little interest in getting married or finding a girlfriend
  • Meninism – Advocacy for the rights and interests of males
  • Shakers – Christian monastic denomination
  • Sex segregation – Physical, legal, and cultural separation of people according to their gender or sex

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]

Works cited

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Men Going Their Own Way

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW) is a philosophy and loose that encourages heterosexual men to forgo romantic relationships, , , and sometimes sexual relations with women, often citing risks such as unfavorable divorce laws, potential false accusations, and perceived societal misandry as justifications from a commonly anti-feminist perspective, in favor of pursuing personal sovereignty, , and self-improvement. Emerging in the mid-2000s from earlier men's rights discussions, MGTOW is part of the and emphasizes individual withdrawal over activism or seduction strategies.

Origins and History

Early Foundations ()

The phrase "men going their own way" draws from longstanding idiomatic expressions of male independence dating back centuries, but its adoption in the specific context of strategic male separatism emerged in the early . The early foundations of Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW) took shape amid online discussions within the broader men's rights . Bloggers such as Angry Harry contributed to these discussions. By the mid-2000s, these conversations coalesced around the core tenet of men voluntarily eschewing , , and long-term partnerships, as articulated in nascent online manifestos and forums. Key early advocates included Solaris, an Australian participant in men's online , and Ragnar, a Scandinavian former pilot. Influential platforms during this period, such as independent blogs and chat rooms, served as incubators for these discussions. Figures like Paul Elam, through early writings that evolved into the 2009 launch of , reinforced these themes. This era laid the ideological groundwork for MGTOW as a of strategic withdrawal, distinct from broader men's by prioritizing individual sovereignty over reform efforts.

Expansion in the Digital Age (2010s)

The MGTOW movement expanded in the through the proliferation of online forums, subreddits, and video content platforms. The subreddit r/MGTOW, established in mid-2011, served as a primary venue for discussions. Auxiliary subreddits, such as r/MGTOWBooks for literature recommendations, emerged shortly thereafter. YouTube contributed to increased visibility, with channels like (launched around 2011), Stardusk, and Turd Flinging Monkey producing hundreds of videos. Content included memes and testimonials, with growth in the early to mid-2010s. Independent forums supported the infrastructure; the MGTOW Forum, launched in , hosted threaded discussions, following earlier sites like mgtow.com (active since circa ).

Deplatforming and Underground Persistence (2020s)

In August 2021, banned the primary MGTOW subreddit (r/MGTOW), which had over 100,000 subscribers, along with its backup (r/MGTOW2), citing violations of site policies against promoting hate based on gender. followed suit in 2021 by prohibiting the MGTOW . These actions aligned with broader platform efforts in the early to curb communities. YouTube imposed demonetization on select MGTOW channels as early as 2018, affecting creators like , but did not enact wholesale bans, allowing content to persist under algorithmic scrutiny. By , MGTOW-themed videos continued to upload. Post-deplatforming, MGTOW adherents migrated to independent forums and less regulated sites, including mgtow.com and goingyourownway.com. Imageboards such as MGTOW.me sustained anonymous engagement, while decentralized alternatives like Gab and private Telegram groups facilitated relocation away from mainstream platforms.

Core Ideology and Principles

Philosophical Underpinnings

MGTOW philosophy posits that contemporary society operates under , a systemic prioritization of female interests that fosters male disposability and institutionalizes disadvantages for men through mechanisms like and cultural norms. Adherents contend this structure, amplified by , renders traditional male roles—such as provider and protector—obsolete or punitive, compelling men to reclaim sovereignty by rejecting entanglement in romantic or marital relationships. At its core lies a neo-individualistic emphasizing rational and personal , where men are urged to "go their own way" by focusing on and self-determination rather than societal expectations of or . Drawing on and observations of , MGTOW frames intersexual dynamics as biologically asymmetric, with female —seeking higher-status mates—and branch-swinging tendencies contrasting male provisioning instincts. Proponents view awareness of these dynamics, often termed "taking " as movement jargon for perceived intersexual realities, as a key element of the philosophy.

Degrees of MGTOW Engagement

Within the MGTOW community, degrees of engagement are commonly delineated into levels representing commitments to personal and disengagement from romantic, cohabitational, and societal involvement with women. These levels, originating from early forum discussions around 2010-2014, provide a framework used within the discourse to conceptualize alignment with autonomy. Level 0, often termed or the "red pill" phase, involves recognizing perceived imbalances in gender dynamics; individuals may continue pursuing relationships while harboring skepticism. Level 1 entails rejecting long-term relationships, , and , but permits short-term encounters or casual interactions. At Level 2, engagement extends to forgoing all , hookups, or sexual relations, emphasizing self-improvement and over relational pursuits. Level 3 incorporates economic disengagement, where men minimize earnings beyond personal sustenance to limit contributions to state-supported systems. Level 4 advocates full societal withdrawal, including limited interactions with women or broader , often through isolation or off-grid living to achieve total . These categorizations, while influential in MGTOW , vary slightly across sources and represent stages of ideological commitment to sovereignty.

Practices and Daily Implementation

Self-Improvement Strategies

Self-improvement forms a foundational element of Men Going Their Own Way practices, with adherents redirecting energy toward individual autonomy, resilience, and long-term fulfillment through personal discipline and resource cultivation. Physical fitness involves consistent weight training, cardiovascular exercise, and nutrition optimization to build strength and enhance vitality. Financial independence includes aggressive saving, debt elimination, skill acquisition for career advancement, and investment in assets like stocks or real estate. Practitioners adopt minimalism to redirect funds toward passive income streams. Development of hobbies and intellectual pursuits, such as trades, arts, or technical skills, expands personal competencies. Mental well-being practices include stoic philosophy reading, meditation, and boundary-setting. These strategies interconnect, with fitness supporting productivity for career gains and financial security enabling hobby exploration. Practitioners of Men Going Their Own Way emphasize avoidance of marriage and long-term cohabitation. In jurisdictions recognizing common-law marriage, adherents avoid prolonged shared residency. Strategies include maintaining separate finances, eschewing joint accounts or commingled assets, and prioritizing personal investments in career advancement or entrepreneurship. Some use asset protection vehicles like irrevocable trusts or limited liability companies to shield holdings, with consultation from legal experts. Prenuptial agreements are considered. Relational practices involve opting for non-committed situationships and advocating mandatory paternity testing before acknowledging fatherhood.

Social and Relational Boundaries

Adherents implement social and relational boundaries beginning with rejection of marriage and long-term romantic relationships. Short-term or casual encounters may occur at entry levels but are often limited. Boundaries extend to curtailing non-professional social interactions with women, including platonic friendships or group socializing. The community slogan "AWALT" (All Women Are Like That) informs this approach. At advanced levels, adherents pursue near-total separation from social engagement with women. Some pursue "going ghost," minimizing societal footprint through reduced employment, relocation to low-regulation areas, or anonymous living.

Membership Demographics

Typical Profiles and Motivations

Men in the MGTOW community are predominantly heterosexual males who self-identify as having opted out of romantic and marital relationships with women. Common self-reported backgrounds include divorced individuals and never-married younger men. Typical entry points involve relationship breakdowns or discovery through online forums. Participants span a broad age range, from adolescents to older adults, though quantitative demographic data is limited due to the anonymous nature of online participation and lack of formal surveys. The community draws men from varied socioeconomic backgrounds, with analyses indicating a tendency toward white, middle-class individuals. Active members often participate digitally and emphasize self-sufficiency via hobbies, career advancement, and practices focused on personal development. Many report personal experiences such as relational failure or rejection as factors in their participation.

Scale and Geographic Distribution

The scale of the MGTOW movement remains difficult to ascertain with precision, given its reliance on dispersed online forums, susceptibility to , and lack of centralized organization or formal membership tracking. As of August 2020, the primary dedicated forum at mgtow.com hosted approximately 33,000 registered members, serving as a key hub for discussions among adherents. The movement's largest community, r/MGTOW, experienced significant growth prior to its in early 2020 and subsequent ban in June 2021, reflecting tens of thousands of subscribers engaged in the at its peak visibility. Post-, participants migrated to alternative platforms such as Telegram channels, independent websites, and private servers, where activity persists but evades comprehensive enumeration due to privacy measures and platform fragmentation. Geographically, MGTOW engagement is predominantly concentrated in English-speaking Western nations, including the , , the , and . European countries with similar societal structures, particularly those in , also feature notable pockets of adherents, as evidenced by the linguistic focus of MGTOW content on English-language platforms and the movement's in North American online . Limited data from tweet analyses and forum interactions suggest minimal organized presence in non-Western regions, though isolated adoption occurs in countries like and . Overall, the movement's scale appears niche rather than mass, with estimates of active core participants in the low tens of thousands globally as of the early , though informal sympathy or partial alignment may extend influence to a wider, unquantified audience of disaffected men.

Empirical Justifications

Family Law and Divorce Realities

In the United States, women initiate approximately 69% of divorces, according to analysis of data from the 2009-2015 American Community Survey and National Survey of Family Growth. This disparity persists across studies, with rates ranging from 70% to 80% in various datasets. Child custody outcomes show that about 80% of custodial parents are mothers, with fathers comprising 20%, based on U.S. Census Bureau data from custodial parent families. In contested cases, mothers receive primary physical custody in roughly 80-85% of instances. Fathers awarded sole custody represent 17.5% of cases, with child support obligations averaging $5,760 annually per child and non-compliance risking incarceration. Financial settlements under equitable distribution laws divide marital assets, with alimony imposed in 10-15% of cases, predominantly paid by men to women. Post-divorce, men's household income declines by 21-23% on average, while women's drops 41%, per analyses from the U.S. and Europe; divorced men experience 57% wealth reductions, comparable to women's 53%. Enforcement includes wage garnishment and imprisonment for arrears, affecting over 1 million men annually, with women rarely facing equivalent penalties for non-payment.

Broader Societal Metrics on Male Outcomes

These metrics include disparities in suicide rates, homelessness, incarceration, educational attainment, life expectancy, and occupational fatalities compared to females.
MetricMale OutcomeFemale ComparisonYear/Source
Suicide Rate (per 100,000)22.85.9 (4x lower)2023/CDC, NIMH
Homeless Population Share~60%~40%2023/HUD-derived
Sentenced Prisoners93%7%2023/BJS
HS Graduation Rate~82%~88% (6 pt gap)2021-2023/NCES, Brookings
(years)75.881.1 (5.3 yr gap)2023/CDC
Fatalities Share~91.5%8.5%2023/BLS
Father-absent homes correlate with elevated risks for boys, with longitudinal data showing 71% of high school dropouts, 85% of behavioral disorder cases, and 63% of youth suicides from such households. About 17.6 million U.S. children, or one in four, live without a father in the home, per Census figures.

Relations to Broader Movements

Position Within the

Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW) forms a separatist faction within the , a decentralized online network of communities critiquing , roles, and structures seen as disadvantaging men. The manosphere encompasses subgroups like pickup artists (PUAs), focused on seduction for romantic pursuits; red pill communities, centered on intersexual dynamics; men's rights activists (MRAs), pursuing legal changes; and incels, expressing frustration over involuntary . Unlike these groups' strategies of engagement or reform, MGTOW prioritizes male withdrawal from women in intimate contexts to achieve autonomy.

Contrasts with Men's Rights Activism and Incels

MGTOW differs from men's rights activism (MRA) by eschewing collective advocacy for systemic change, deeming such efforts futile amid perceived institutional biases, and instead favoring personal avoidance of commitments like or . It splintered from MRA circles in the mid-2000s toward individualized risk aversion. Relative to incels, MGTOW frames disengagement as a proactive, empowering decision available to all men regardless of attractiveness or relational history, rejecting incel resignation and urging autonomy over pursuit of partnerships.

Criticisms and Counterarguments

Accusations of Misogyny and Extremism

Critics from advocacy groups, media, and academics have accused the Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW) movement of fostering through rhetoric that generalizes women as manipulative, inferior, and parasitic on men. The (SPLC) classifies MGTOW as a form of male supremacy, citing ideological tenets that portray men as rational victims of a gynocentric society while depicting women as emotionally immature and resource-exploiting, with examples from forums including statements such as "I hate women with a passion." The (ADL) frames MGTOW within the misogynist "," arguing that its anti-feminist narratives—attributed to as a source of male —reinforce beliefs linked to broader misogynistic cultures. Accusations of extremism stem from MGTOW's structured "levels" of disengagement, with the highest level involving total societal isolation, which some observers describe as promoting antisocial withdrawal and associating with elements such as homophobia, transphobia, and antisemitism. Media reports have characterized the movement as a "toxic male separatist" ideology, citing examples from MGTOW forums that include derogatory language toward women and advice some interpret as encouraging harm. These critiques often reference the movement's online rhetoric and growth, which contributed to actions such as the 2021 Reddit ban of r/MGTOW for violations of policies against promoting hate based on gender. Critics have also pointed to rare incidents of involving self-identified MGTOW adherents as potential evidence of radicalizing effects, despite the movement's stated non-violent position.

Responses from MGTOW Proponents

MGTOW proponents describe the movement as a for male in response to perceived legal, financial, and social in romantic relationships, rather than an expression of toward women. They present opting out of and as a form of , referencing data such as women's 70-80% rate of divorces in Western countries and patterns in court asset divisions. Proponents frame MGTOW as promoting personal , self-improvement, , and avoidance of dependency. In addressing claims of , MGTOW advocates distinguish core tenets—outlined in "levels" from awareness of societal biases to disengagement—as focused on individual empowerment rather than collective grievance. They argue that accusations of misogyny conflate critiques of systemic factors, such as laws introduced in the U.S. starting in and associated with increased rates, with . Proponents contend that such labeling aims to delegitimize men's choices to withdraw from relationships amid perceived biases against male . Regarding inflammatory in MGTOW communities, proponents attribute it to individual expressions rather than central doctrine, emphasizing the philosophy's role in building resilience and , with some adherents reporting gains in and . They differentiate MGTOW from views by rejecting entitlement to relationships in favor of personal opting out, and interpret mainstream criticisms as resistance to challenges against relational norms. Proponents cite factors like outcomes and estimates (1-10% in various studies) as supporting risk avoidance.

Internal Variations and Debates

MGTOW adherents vary in their views on the extent of disengagement required from romantic and societal interactions with women, resulting in debates over philosophy and application. One debate centers on whether casual sexual encounters align with MGTOW principles, with some favoring celibacy to avoid risks like false accusations, while others support selective, non-committal interactions without legal ties. Strict adherents advocate abstinence or alternatives such as pornography or sex dolls to maintain autonomy. Discussions of "monk mode" often position it as a phase for self-improvement rather than a lifelong requirement, allowing adaptation to individual needs. Debates also address political involvement versus individual focus, with some seeing activism on issues like family law as distracting from personal independence, while others integrate critiques of state or feminist policies. These differences contribute to platform fragmentation and accusations of inconsistency among adherents. The decentralized nature of MGTOW, lacking formal leadership, accommodates these variations but has drawn external critiques of inconsistency or extremism.

Societal Impact and Reception

Cultural and Behavioral Shifts

The MGTOW encourages men to redirect energies previously invested in romantic pursuits toward personal sovereignty, including career advancement, , and skill acquisition. Adherents often report heightened focus on , viewing it as a safeguard against potential losses in proceedings or cohabitation disputes. This behavioral pivot aligns with self-reported experiences in MGTOW forums, where participants describe reallocating time and resources to hobbies, , and , eschewing traditional provider roles. Empirical trends reflect parallel shifts among broader male populations, with U.S. marriage rates for men declining from 62.8% in 1990 to 54.0% by 2024 among white males, and overall never-married rates reaching 25% for 40-year-olds by 2023. Voluntary has also risen, with approximately 10% of men reporting intentional from , consistent across generations and linked to disillusionment with dynamics. Among younger cohorts, 28-30% of men report no sexual activity in the past year, often correlating with single status without active partner-seeking. Culturally, these patterns manifest in normalized depictions of male singledom, from online testimonials emphasizing to reduced societal pressure for matrimony. MGTOW reinforces this by framing withdrawal from intergender entanglements as rational adaptation to legal and economic disincentives, fostering communities that celebrate unencumbered lifestyles over familial obligations. Such shifts contribute to observable declines in formation, with unpartnered adults peaking at 44% in 2019 before slight stabilization, disproportionately affecting men who prioritize self-sufficiency.

Media and Institutional Responses

Mainstream media outlets have framed MGTOW as a misogynistic or extremist phenomenon, often linking it to broader concerns about online within the . A 2020 article in described the movement as a "toxic male separatist movement" that advocates for men to avoid contact with women. Similarly, in 2024, interviewed extremism researcher Stephanie Lamy, who categorized MGTOW alongside incels and pickup artists as ideologies asserting male domination, urging authorities to treat masculinism as a potential terrorist threat. Coverage in outlets like has portrayed adherents as voluntarily celibate men swearing off women. Watchdog organizations have classified MGTOW under male supremacist ideologies. The Southern Poverty Law Center maintains a profile on MGTOW as an online community of male supremacists promoting self-empowerment through eschewing relationships with women, situating it within a broader category of male supremacy. The Anti-Defamation League, in a 2024 report, positions MGTOW as a faction of the manosphere advocating complete societal withdrawal and minimal female interaction in response to perceived gynocentrism. UN Women, in a 2025 explainer, highlighted MGTOW's narrative that society disadvantages men, recommending avoidance of women and mainstream institutions as a core tenet. Tech platforms have responded with actions, citing violations of content policies. Reddit banned the r/MGTOW subreddit and its backup in 2021 for promoting hate based on gender. demonetized MGTOW-affiliated channels around 2018–2020 for content violating guidelines on . Academic analyses, such as a 2025 ethnographic study in eScholarship, have examined MGTOW forums through lenses of masculinities and , interpreting withdrawal strategies as rooted in anti-feminist resentment.

Long-Term Implications

MGTOW's advocacy for male disengagement from and long-term romantic partnerships aligns with observed declines in rates in Western societies. In the United States, the rate fell from 8.2 per 1,000 population in 2000 to 6.2 per 1,000 in . Conservative analysts emphasize marriage's role in child well-being and societal stability.

References

  1. https://d-nb.info/1234462788/34
  2. https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/go+one%27s+way
  3. https://www.adl.org/resources/article/men-going-their-own-way-mgtow-what-you-need-know
  4. https://danieldashnawcouplestherapy.com/blog/the-history-of-mgtow-men-going-their-own-way
  5. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2020/aug/26/men-going-their-own-way-the-toxic-male-separatist-movement-that-is-now-mainstream
  6. https://ridehamilton.medium.com/a-look-back-at-the-history-of-the-mgtow-movement-b49b44eed8a6
  7. https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/10113225/1/no_comments.pdf
  8. https://www.newsweek.com/reddit-bans-men-going-their-own-way-forums-violating-hate-speech-rules-1616379
  9. https://www.dailydot.com/news/mgtow-subreddit-banned/
  10. https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/what-do-the-mgtow-search-tags-attached-to-pierre-poilievre-s-youtube-videos-mean/article_786648ef-0ac5-52f7-a74a-98f8e2f64b27.html
  11. https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-YouTube-demonitized-MGTOW-content-Is-manosphere-under-attack
  12. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzGOD_i3llg
  13. https://mgtow.com/
  14. https://spectrum.library.concordia.ca/993475/1/Hoebanx_PhD_S2024.pdf
  15. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1618037/FULLTEXT01.pdf
  16. https://gynocentrism.com/2015/08/03/definition-of-mgtow/
  17. https://www.mgtow.xyz/the-mgtow-philosophy
  18. https://bonpote.com/en/mgtow-the-movement-men-going-their-own-way/
  19. https://www.girlsaskguys.com/guys-behavior/a32145-what-s-the-deal-with-mgtow-men-going-their-own-way
  20. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskWomen/comments/1d93fd/what_do_you_think_of_the_mgtow_phenomenon/
  21. https://www.cyberdefinitions.com/definitions/MGTOW.html
  22. https://themgtow.com/about-us/
  23. https://www.reddit.com/r/stupidquestions/comments/1kc6ztz/can_someone_explain_to_me_a_31f_what_an_mgtow_is/
  24. https://mentalzon.com/en/post/2264/mgtow-the-psychology-behind-men-choosing-to-%2522go-their-own-way%2522
  25. https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-good-reasons-to-join-the-MGTOW-movement
  26. https://www.unmarried.org/common-law-marriage-fact-sheet/
  27. https://resolution.org.uk/news/millions-of-couples-at-severe-financial-risk-due-to-common-law-marriage-myth/
  28. https://groundreportindia.org/monthly/reports/2016/01/men-start-to-go-their-own-way-and-avoid-relationships-with-women-now/
  29. https://mgtow.blog/the-benefits-of-situationships-a-mgtow-perspective-on-modern-dating-freedom
  30. https://privatewealth-insights.bmo.com/en/insights/wealth-planning-and-strategy/10-ways-to-divorce-proof-your-assets-and-protect-your-wealth/
  31. https://www.iafl.com/media/1169/prenuptial_agreements_in_the_us.pdf
  32. https://www.lawdepot.com/us/resources/family-articles/prenup-survey/
  33. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/36030749
  34. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1541051/FULLTEXT01.pdf
  35. http://wagner.edu/newsroom/files/2015/11/151115-Sunday-Times-UK-Meet-the-men-giving-up-on-women-Miles-Groth-quoted.pdf
  36. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340951816_%27The_pussy_ain%27t_worth_it_bro%27_assessing_the_discourse_and_structure_of_MGTOW
  37. https://uu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1331052/FULLTEXT01.pdf
  38. https://escholarship.org/content/qt2qh1p7nn/qt2qh1p7nn.pdf
  39. https://csw.fsu.edu/sites/g/files/upcbnu1131/files/documents/Research%20Brief%20mgtows%20PDF%20CLEANED.pdf
  40. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14680777.2022.2137829
  41. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364703490_Men_not_going_their_own_way_a_thick_big_data_analysis_of_MGTOW_and_Feminism_Tweets
  42. https://www.quora.com/How-many-men-are-part-of-the-MGTOW-movement-What-is-their-population
  43. https://www.asanet.org/women-more-likely-men-initiate-divorces-not-non-marital-breakups/
  44. https://divorce.com/blog/who-initiates-divorce-more/
  45. https://www.aecf.org/blog/child-support-statistics
  46. https://www.divorcenet.com/resources/divorce/for-men/divorce-for-men-why-women-get-child-custody-over-80-time
  47. https://www.chiattorney.com/post/what-percentage-of-fathers-get-full-custody-all-you-need-to-know
  48. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/pam.22661
  49. https://www.townsendfamilylaw.co.uk/the-divorce-gap-the-disparity-in-household-income-after-divorce/
  50. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8599059/
  51. https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/suicide
  52. https://www.cdc.gov/suicide/facts/data.html
  53. https://aibm.org/research/homelessness-in-the-united-states/
  54. https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/prisons-report-series-preliminary-data-release-2023
  55. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/racial-disparities-in-the-high-school-graduation-gender-gap/
  56. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/life-expectancy.htm
  57. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cfoi.pdf
  58. https://www.fatherhood.org/father-absence-statistic
  59. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3904543/
  60. https://spssi.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/asap.12308
  61. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09593535211033461
  62. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10600567/
  63. https://bristoluniversitypressdigital.com/view/journals/gj/1/1/article-p13.xml
  64. https://www.splcenter.org/resources/extremist-files/male-supremacy/
  65. https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-an-incel-and-a-MGTOW-Are-they-considered-separate-groups-or-just-two-sides-of-the-same-coin-How-do-you-define-them-for-someone-who-doesnt-know-about-either-group
  66. https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-an-Incel-and-a-MGTOW-in-terms-of-ideology-and-beliefs-Are-they-two-different-terms-for-the-same-thing
  67. https://www.instagram.com/reel/CnJZwtUh5IL/
  68. https://www.splcenter.org/resources/extremist-files/mgtow/
  69. https://dominiquemag.com/mgtow-is-about-selfpreservation-not-hating-women-p474-176.htm
  70. https://www.honeybadgerbrigade.com/2014/11/12/mgtow-a-boycotting-of-women/
  71. https://twitter.com/MikeyMgtow/status/1206260587854016512
  72. https://www.quora.com/Why-is-MGTOW-looked-down-upon-even-though-it-is-just-for-self-preservation
  73. https://www.vice.com/en/article/inside-the-global-collective-of-straight-male-separatists/
  74. https://datingforpoorugly.com/what-do-mgtow-men-do-for-sex/
  75. https://illimitableman.wordpress.com/2014/04/13/monk-mode/
  76. https://www.publish0x.com/moonbasemgtow/12-rules-of-monk-mode-1-live-like-the-lobster-xxonyel
  77. https://xyonline.net/sites/xyonline.net/files/2023-01/Wright%252C%2520%2527The%2520pussy%2520ain%2527t%2520worth%2520it%252C%2520bro%2527%2520-%2520MGTOW%25202020.pdf
  78. https://usafacts.org/articles/state-relationships-marriages-and-living-alone-us/
  79. https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-societal-cost-of-the-marriage-decline
  80. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-myths-of-sex/202407/is-voluntary-celibacy-on-the-rise
  81. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-myths-of-sex/202507/how-many-people-are-taking-a-break-from-sex
  82. https://gynocentrism.com/2025/06/26/whos-opting-out-of-sex-relationships-open-ai-on-approximate-trends-by-gender/
  83. https://mgtow.blog/the-delta-male-embracing-independence-from-a-mgtow-perspective
  84. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/single-adult-americans-decline-pew-survey/
  85. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/02/america-marriage-decline/681518/
  86. https://theconversation.com/why-we-need-to-approach-masculinism-as-a-terrorist-threat-qanda-with-stephanie-lamy-233257
  87. https://medium.com/mel-magazine/the-straight-men-who-want-nothing-to-do-with-women-2653920a42e8
  88. https://www.unwomen.org/en/articles/explainer/what-is-the-manosphere-and-why-should-we-care
  89. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2qh1p7nn
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.