Thread: Script for youtube videos

I have been working on scripts for a future Youtube channel (which I shall call Mad Wizard because apparently you can be a wizard if you become a 30 year virgin. I still have a decade to go). I analysed MGTOW using knowledge from a Criminal Justice degree I am working on. The series will be called "MGTOW Criminology".


Introduction to Deviance – MGTOW Criminology – Ep.1

Whaddup comrades, this is Mad Wizard with the first video in the series of MGTOW Criminology. What is this about? It is about the interactions between MGTOW and society at large with particular attention focused on why the hell the latter is so hell bent on getting into our business. Throughout this series, we will examine deviance, social norms, social control, justice and criminalization.

Before I bore you with my ranting, let’s begin the first video.

MGTOW. Men Going Their Own Way. The MGTOW website states that MGTOW is a statement of self-ownership, where the modern man preserves and protects his own sovereignty above all else. We are just people who decided to play the game of life as we see fit, the only common thread perhaps being avoiding situations where females can get legal leverage over us. You know, like marriage. Some of us go further, ghosting from society altogether.

It is a perfectly rational thing to do given the modern legal climate and yet we have been smeared, hated on, silenced and marked as deviants.

And you know what? We ARE deviants. Don’t shit yourselves yet, because in this context, deviance and deviant are not pejorative in nature. The only reason these words are used because no others are suitable.

So what does deviance mean in this context?

To quote Marshal Clinard it is “deviations from social norms that encounter disapproval”.

In our context, the social norm is marriage and having kids. Deviants would be us MGTOWs, who refuse to marry or have kids.

Regardless, the statement raises some fascinating questions.
· Who said that “getting married and having kids” is the norm?
· How widely held is the belief that “getting married and having kids” is the norm?
· How does society at large react when we MGTOW violate that norm?
· Is being MGTOW a deviation that society at large disapproves of or do different circles of individuals react differently
· How big does a circle that condemns MGTOW need to be or how many circles that disapprove of MGTOW are needed so that MGTOW becomes deviant?

Now, I will do my best to answer.

Mark my words no matter what an individual does, there is ALWAYS going to be someone who approves of it and ALWAYS someone who disapproves of it. ALWAYS. Society is made up of groups, circles and individuals. Upon encountering attitudes, beliefs and characteristics they don’t approve of, they act to punish the individual. Those three things I mentioned make up the ABCs of deviance. This is the heart of social control, which I will cover in a later video.

Thus, deviance is whatever that is different from what is normal that attracts negative attention. As such, it isn’t inherent to an action or inaction. Some things have been seen as deviant before but not now, like homosexuality. The opposite is also true, with smoking now being seen as deviant.

MGTOW is definitely different from what is “normal”. Almost every religion, culture or society states that getting married and reproducing is the norm. And the persecution of bachelors has gone back to the time of the Romans. Hell, maybe even earlier.
But why is “getting married and having kids” the norm? Why did doing the opposite become labelled deviant? Who gets to make these seemingly arbitrary judgements AND make them into social norms or even laws? Technically speaking, anything that violates a norm and attracts negative attention is deviant. But that isn’t very helpful in understanding how a bunch of dudes going their own way suddenly became a public enemy of sorts.

So let us consider two kinds of deviance.

There is the labelling of deviance by those with power and influence. This would be the government, the media, institutions of religion and whatever other power out there. Essentially, they can declare something is deviant and by virtue of their power and influence, it becomes deviant. So far, that hasn’t exactly happened. Yes, smaller media outlets have already caught onto us and paint us in a negative light. But the real power brokers haven’t noticed us or taken action against us.
Not yet, at least, and I would prefer things to stay like that. But there is no guarantee that things won’t change, especially since rulers have taken action against us in the past. This theme will be explored in a later video regarding whether the powerful will take action against us again.

So far, the deviance we are have been attributed to is grass-roots in nature. That is, smaller audiences of different contexts and settings label us deviant. And oh boy, don’t our ideologies make a lot of people uncomfortable. The traditional conservatives hate us, the feminists hate us, the pick-up artists hate us and if MGTOW reaches numbers that cause a decline in human population or even just the economy, the elite will hate us as well.
Alright then, we have been established to be deviants because...society said so. What we haven’t covered is how we have been slammed as deviants.

How or why did the label get slapped onto us can be investigated using two views.
The first view is based on the belief that there is some real objective property to acts, beliefs and conditions that are considered to be deviant. This is known as positivism. Positivists study why people think deviant thoughts, do deviant things or even have deviant features.

Constructionism is the opposite. Deviance is determined by the reactions of those who witnessed the violation of the norm. Furthermore, social norms varied wildly throughout history and in different places. Therefore, constructionists believe that the social norms and the reactions to the deviance should be studied.

In the next video, the reasons behind people going MGTOW will be briefly analysed using the two views and their associated theories.

This is Mad Wizard, peace out.

Theories of Going Your Own Way

Hey comrades, Mad Wizard is back with the second video in MGTOW criminology. And today, we are going to analyse MGTOW using positivist approachs. If you don’t know what I am talking about, watch this video or enrol in a Bachelor of Criminology, Criminal Justice, Justice or whatever your university calls the damned degree. And if you are a special snowflake who gets triggered by being called a deviant, I am going to tell you two things.

One, in the context of criminology and sociology, deviance is not pejorative in nature. It merely describes attitudes, behaviours and conditions that stray from what is called normal by society at large.

Two...you hear that *insert jet flyover sound*? That is the get the fuck out jet. Hop on it and never come back.

Ahem, yeah, let us start with the positivistic view. Founded on empiricism, objectivism and determinism, it states that all deviance (and by extension crime), have some common factor. Empiricism is the idea that deviance is something that can be analysed in a scientific way using our senses. Objectivism is the idea that deviance has qualities that are real. Determinism looks at the cause and effect of deviance, seeking to find a naturalistic cause for the deviant behaviour, whether it be a common trait possessed by all deviant individuals or possessed by a facet of society that leads to deviant behaviour and crime.

I will begin with the rational choice theory. As its name suggests, it is the theory that individuals choose a rational course of action based on a cost – benefit analysis and risk – benefit analysis. Balancing pleasure and pain, so to speak. Therefore, crime was to be deterred through certain, swift and very unpleasant punishment. This fits MGTOW, because a majority of us became MGTOW after being burned in a divorce ass fuck and deciding that it is better to be alone. It goes without explaining that MGTOW is the most rational choice in the modern legal climate, what with the alimony, false rape, affirmative consent and other weird shit society chucks at us. I swear they are pushing us to see how far they can go before we have a violent revolution or something.

Anyway, the theory was used for explaining crime after 1700s, replacing notions of possession by devil or evil spirits or whatever supernatural explanation the ignorant masses could conjure up. It was deemed inadequate for explaining crime because it assumes people are rational. That isn’t always the case, not even in crime. A lot of crimes are unplanned, spur of the moment acts. It is more than enough to explain MGTOW, at least in the cases where people were actively going their own way after taking the red pill.

The biological theories like Cesare Lombroso’s theory of being born a particular way or theories regarding DNA and enzymes and the like are irrelevant here. MGTOW has been around for a long time but only greatly increased in recent years. Unless the big companies like Monsanto spiked our food with shit that changed our DNA or something, our biological functions remained largely unchanged throughout history. Furthermore people aren’t born MGTOW, as avoiding or minimising contact with the opposite sex goes against our nature. They experience things that cause them to become MGTOW, deliberately or inadvertently. I am one of the latter who didn’t know he was MGTOW until he encountered the ideology.

Those last two theories were individualistic theories, theories that tried to find an explanation for deviance by examining the individual. Now, we will examine the structural theories, which seek explanations by examining the society. First thought up by the University of Chicago, it explains only a minority of deviance, as the assumptions it rests on do not apply for the many deviances on the individual scale, like sexual preferences.

But it is very relevant to MGTOW. As long as the forces that drive men to go their own way remain, there will always be MGTOW. It is as stated on the MGTOW webpage. In fact, there are those who go their own way completely of their own will, even in the days of the iron fisted patriarchies.

Perhaps the most interesting structural theories relevant to MGTOW would be Emile Durkheim’s and Robert Merton’s works on the strain and anomie theory. Anomie was used by Durkheim to describe disturbances to the social order. This can be an economic crisis, a major change in social organisation, you know, things that disrupt the normal way of life. Such events lead to changes in what is a social norm. Or removes them altogether. A lack of guidelines causes people to behave in ways that deviate from what was considered normal.

In Durkheim’s original context regarding deviant and criminal behaviour, it meant that a lack of social norms allowed people to behave as they pleased. That led to people behaving in ways that would usually considered deviant.

In context of MGTOW, it would be the destruction of patriarchy by feminists. I’ll digress a little bit here. Yes, men are still the ones occupying the positions of leadership, but if you think that they are the ones who hold the power, you are sadly mistaken. Anyone who speaks single word against women will be slammed as misogynists who face the prospect of losing their jobs. Find me one government who thinks of men beyond using them as means to an end, be it as cannon fodder or tax base. Besides, the men in power are content with using women to keep other men weak and subordinate.

In accordance with Durkheim’s theory, the destruction of the family unit meant that men effectively lost their roles. After all, men were basically expected to be the leader of the house and be providers and whatnot. Feminism effectively destroyed this role and the social norms around it. As a result, men stopped providing for women and to an extent for society as they attempted to find a new role to take up. They became greedy and selfish. Well, greedy and selfish according to society at large. I call it acts of self-protection and self-ownership. Come on, who is greedier? Those who want to spend the fruits of their own labour on themselves? Or those who want to spend the fruits of other peoples labour?

Besides, it’s not like men who go their own way are loser who do not contribute to society. MGTOWs have made great contributions to humanity, much more than the average person realises. Just look up Issac Newton, Nikola Tesla, Leonardo Da Vinci, Ludwig van Beethoven, Robert Boyle and of course the Wright Brothers.

What about Merton’s theory? His was opposite to Durkheim’s. The so called greed and selfishness was socialized and cultured into us. What did he mean? Merton spoke of none other than the “American Dream” of getting affluent or even rich, which has been seen as the ultimate goal of life or something. This could cause some people to resort to deviant means to attain that goal, especially since the availability of wealth is inadequate for everyone to attain that culturally ingrained.

Does this not apply to the dating game? Replace “American Dream” with “getting married and having kids” and replace “study hard and find a good job” with “be a nice beta provider”. You all should know the 80/20 rule, where the top 80% of the women are lusting after the top 20% of the men. The situation is made worse by the pandering of mainstream society which hyper inflates their self worth. Ridiculous amounts of legal red tape surrounding a woman make it possible, if not probable, that she can fuck you over with no more than a testimony. The bottom 80% of men are invisible to women. Well, until she smashes the wall with the force of the fucking dam busters. And all this is while society tells us to be a nice sensitive beta provider.

Faced with this kind of dilemma, how do men react? How can their reactions be classed?

First, there are the Conformists. In the Red Pill context, they are those who choose to follow the narrative that getting married and having kids is the pinnacle of human life or whatever other fancy label society likes to slap onto marriage. They also choose to be the nice beta providers that society tells them to be. This is not deviant by any means of the imagination. In Merton’s original context, these are the people who study hard and work hard to be those who have high paying jobs. In the Red Pill context, they are the ones we call Blue Pill Men.

Second are the Innovators. Merton used this to describe those who wanted to attain the same goals as the Conformists but were willing to use ways that are looked down upon by society or even illegal. The Pick Up artists and MGTOW who use their techniques are the Red Pill analogue, albeit this is a rather inaccurate comparison. While using seduction techniques have been frowned upon or even labelled as misogynistic, the end goal of these Red Pillers are NOT to get married and have kids. A better comparison would be the so-called Purple Pillers who have Red Pill knowledge but have Blue Pill goals. They use PUA techniques to “game” their wives, so to speak.

The next three can apply to MGTOW, depending on which way he chooses to go.

Ritualism is following the conventional way but rejecting or downsizing the goal. The Red Pill counterpart is kind of difficult to explain. In Merton’s context, it refers to those who follow the narrative of working hard but do not try to attain the goal. Perhaps a person who works hard but is not materialistic and not hell bent on becoming rich fits the bill. A Red Pill counterpart would be one who is a nice beta provider but isn’t interested in marriage or children. Such a being would be something of a contradiction, a paradox. It may fit MGTOWs who are kind and generous to everyone in his life. But to my knowledge, a separate distinct group with this as their defining characteristic does not exist in the manosphere. Even if they did, they’d probably be accused of being blue pilled. Tell me in the comments section if I am correct.

Now, we are on Retreatism. This is about those who reject the goal and the means. One who cops out and stops working to attain the goals. Ghosting fits this bill perfectly. The MGTOW ghosts not only reject the notion that getting married and having kids is the end goal, they also stop working off their asses. Instead, they work as much as needed to support themselves. Merton’s original version is far less flattering. He associated psychotics, autists, pariahs, outcasts and vagrants and all other failures of society with this name, people who do not follow the American Dream and are not interested in working hard.

Aside from ghosts, I think this is a MGTOW who just swallowed the red pill. His worldview that was built upon the indoctrination and propaganda fed to him by society has been completely and utterly shattered. He will feel confused, betrayed and angry. There will be a time where he will be lost, not sure what is the next step he should take. He will have restructure his entire worldview and meaning of life, taking into account the stuff that society did not want him to see.

Finally, Rebellion. The Rebels are similar to the Retreatists for rejecting the goals and the means of achieving them. The difference is that the Rebels replace the goals society gave us and the means by which were supposed to achieve them. So instead of marrying or having kids, these men would have another goal. Perhaps it is to pursue scientific knowledge and reach new artistic heights. Maybe it is to climb the corporate ladder and get loaded. Or it is to pump and dump women while not settling down. This can apply to both PUAs and MGTOWs.

Heh, this one long-ass video, isn’t it? I’ve analysed the forces that drive men to go their own way and detailed the reactions that could arise from men who encounter them. But so far, I simply shoved MGTOW into the deviance box with minimal explanation. I didn’t explain why or how MGTOW can be considered deviant. I was supposed to but that will happen in the next video.

Good. But I think you should also focus on the reaction beyond just being a theorical Mgtow. I mean, explaining how to be a Mgtow is not so hard, not even the reasons why a man should become a Mgtow is hard to understand. Only dumbs and simps can not see the reasons.

So, when I talk about "reactions beyond just being a theorical Mgtow", I mean what we need to know to live as a Mgtow in an anti-Mgtow society. For example, learn how to be independent and to live alone is a good theme. Learning some housework skills are needed here to live alone as a single man.

Learning about psychology as well, especially female psychology (to learn how female mind works and how to deal with women, like PUAs do) and social psychology (to know how the "collective mind" of people in society work and how to deal with them).

And so on. This could be better because we talk about the problems and the reactions and solutions in the same time. We don't need to waste time only explaining only basic problems. And spreading a practical explanation can even make easier for men to understand the importance of being a Mgtow. I can write something more to help you in these points if you want.

This series is MGTOW Criminology, where I focus on the social and legal aspects of MGTOW. I might make another series called MGTOW Survival. Thanks for the input. But the problem with MGTOW survival is I don't know anything about it. Sure, I can do housework but surely one would not need to go to my channel to look up how to operate a washing machine.

What I may do is to teach people how to hide their red pill knowledge and how to blend in.

I am wondering if there is anything else I missed in the last two scripts. If there isn't, my next script is about society and social control.

On a side note, my university claims to believe in the SJW indoctrination but I have not seen any hardcore brainwashing yet. Even my radical feminist Intro to Crime and Criminology lecturer seems chill compared to the internet radical feminists. Of course, there are those students who spread socialism around the school and generally act like pricks.