No announcement yet.


  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts


    MGTOW stands for Men Going Their Own Way. The word is pronounced megtau.

    It is hard to determine who first coined the acronym mgtow, but some of the early pioneers who used the acronym to define the phenomenon include Zed the Zen Priest and Ragnar.

    In the mid 2000s, these guys formulated the basic idea of self-ownership and the right of individual men to define their identity. They argued that men should stop defining themselves through female and societal memes.

    Since 2010, a burgeoning internet community of like-minded men has expounded on several theories about the nature of the relationship between man and woman.

    The mgtow internet community has reached a couple of consensuses about the relationship between man and woman.

    The first consensus is that mgtows can only recognize unmarried men as mgtows.

    The second consensus is that female hypergamy is valid. Briffault’s law does a nice job of encapsulating female hypergamy.

    I – The female, not the male determines all the conditions of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefits from association with the male, no such association takes place.

    II – Past benefit provided by the male does not provide for continued or future association.

    III – An agreement where the male provides a current benefit in return for a promise of future association is null and void as soon as the male has provided the benefit.

    IV – A promise of future benefit has limited influence on current or future association, with the influence inversely proportionate to the length of time until the benefit will be given and directly proportionate to the degree to which the female trusts the male, which is not at all likely.

    A much simpler definition of female hypergamy is the tendency of women to marry men of higher social status.

    The third consensus reached is that men and women are not equal. In the human species, the male gender is superior to the female gender.

    The fourth consensus is that the traditional conservative family unit, in which the male is the protector/provider and the female is the homemaker/caregiver is the bedrock of male enslavement and the prelude to misandry.

    The fifth consensus is that men love women but women are incapable of loving men.

    The sixth and most controversial consensus is that the ultimate cause of mgtow is the success of the civilization that men have built.

    Examining the MGTOW Consensuses

    Let us start with the sixth consensus, since it is the most controversial.

    The MRA (men’s rights activists) and anti-feminist point to feminism as the source of blatant misandry. But what is the source of feminism? Feminism is the product of safety and prosperity.

    There is no feminism in third world countries. There are strong feminist movements in newly industrialized countries such as Brazil, India and China; yet, it has not taken foothold in the mainstream culture.

    Feminism never becomes mainstream; unless, a mechanism exists, through which women can bypass individual men to extract protection and resources. This mechanism is invariably the government.

    A woman needs a man for protection and resources. A man is largely useless to a woman, if she can be safe and prosperous without him.

    In the west, feminism has transformed into blatant hatred for men _ misandry. Neither feminism nor widespread misandry is a prerequisite for men going their own way.

    To emphasize, the prerequisite for men going their own way is a mechanism through which women can bypass men to get protection and provisions.

    Japan has never suffered from a feminist movement; yet, the Japanese have one of the most prominent mgtow movements _ herbivore men (grass-eaters or soshoku danshi).
    In the 1960s, John B. Calhoun carried out a series of experiments in Poolesville, Maryland, which became known as the mouse utopia experiments.

    In these experiments, the mice where provided with an abundance of food and nesting material. No predators where introduced into the universe. Space was the only limiting factor imposed on the mice.

    The mice population rapidly doubled every 55days. After day 315, the population growth started declining and completely came to a halt on day 600.

    After day 600, normal social behavior evaporated. The dominant rats (alpha males) lost the ability to defend their territory and control their females.

    The average rats (beta males) suffered repeated attacks from other males and refused to defend themselves.

    A strange category of males appeared. Calhoun dubbed these males the “beautiful ones.” The beautiful ones withdrew completely from the social environment and only engage in solitary activities such as eating, drinking and grooming themselves.

    I dare to propose that the beautiful ones have a startling resemblance to the Japanese herbivore men phenomenon.

    In Japan, the herbivore men take great interest in personal grooming. Their western equivalent is probably the metrosexual.

    The Japanese herbivore men prove that feminism is not the determining factor of a mgtow phenomenon. The determining factor for a mgtow-like phenomenon is the existence of a mechanism (welfare state), through which women can bypass men to acquire protection and resources.

    What do you think? Does the above contention validate the sixth mgtow consensus that the ultimate cause of mgtow is the success of the civilization that men have built?

    The fifth mgtow consensus is that men love women but women are incapable of loving men.

    There are a few truly altruistic human beings. These are the exceptions. The overwhelming majority of human beings are self-interested i.e. they seek to advance their self-interest.

    A man only cares about furthering his self-interest and so does a woman.

    A man does not love a woman for selfless reasons. He is not primarily interested in making the women happy. He only strives to make her happy because he wants to continue extracting sexual pleasure, affection (companionship) and perhaps children from the woman.

    The most dominant need in a man is sex. Sex completely eclipses the need for affection (companionship) and children.

    Men can satisfy their sexual desire with masturbation but most men prefer women. A few sex toys exist for men but most men still prefer women.

    Men can get affection (companionship) from pets (dogs, cats, etc) but most men prefer women.

    There are two points to note here.
    1. Men generally, prefer to get their sex, affection and children from real human females.
    1. A man does not strive to make a woman happy for altruistic reasons. He strives to make her happy for selfish reasons. If he does not make her happy, he may lose access to the three things mentioned in (1).
    What about a woman’s love? Is a woman’s love for a man altruistic?

    No, a woman’s love for a man is not altruistic. Her love is contingent upon the benefits, which she can extract from a man.

    A woman’s SOLE and UNIQUE interest in a man is the extraction of benefits (protection/provisions).

    A woman does not strive to please her partner out of selfless love. She strives to please her partner because she wants to continue extracting benefits from him.

    What is the difference between a man’s love and a woman’s love?

    First off, what is love?

    Love is not some mystical, mushy feelings as described in the fairy-tale universe of romance novels. We (both men and women) only love that which is necessary. A thing is necessary, if we are going to die without it.

    Air, water, food, homeostasis (heat) and shelter are necessary for survival.

    Let me put it this way. You love air, water, food, homeostasis and shelter.

    You will eventually die, if you are deprived of any of these necessities for a long enough period.

  • #2
    MGTOW versus White Nationalism

    Even though, MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way) is only an infant phenomenon, it is increasingly coming under attack from conservative-traditionalist types.

    White nationalism is the bastard child of traditional conservatism.

    The most natural thing in the world is for a man to love himself. For how can he truly love others, if he does not love himself? How can a man love the family next door, if he does not love his own family?

    Who expects a man to have equal love for his family and his neighbour’s family? If both houses were simultaneously on fire, which family will he save first? The answer should be obvious to any moral person.

    Only the same kind of sick mind that produced “from every according to his ability, to each according to his need,” will expect that the man saves the family of his neighbour, before saving his own family.

    This very basic logic is valid both in the micro and macro scale.

    Suppose a flood threatened several continents. Would you save your continent first or would you save the other continent(s)? Would you save your country first or would you save another country? Would you save your city/town/village/community first or would you save another city/town/village/community first?

    The point is; there is nothing wrong with an individual being pre-occupied with the survival of the group he identifies with. This is perfectly normal, logical and moral.

    Whites should be pre-occupied with the survival of whites.

    Blacks should be pre-occupied with the survival of blacks.

    Reds (Indians) should be pre-occupied with the survival of reds (Indians).

    Yellows should be pre-occupied with the survival of yellows.

    Anything less will not only be hypocritical; but also abnormal, illogical and amoral.

    Consider MGTOW! This is a lifestyle which extols individual sovereignty; yet, mgtows do not wonder off quietly into the wilderness to live their solitary lives. Mgtows are not simply advocating for the survival of the “men going their own way” lifestyle; they are actively proselytizing it.

    Men going their own way need a heavy dose of introspection before mustering the chutzpah to take potshots at white nationalists.

    MGTOW versus White Nationalist Women

    Let us first establish the facts! The vast majority of women, in the order of 9 out of 10, are completely ignorant of the societal bias against men. Most people (men and women) are completely submerged in the feminist propaganda of patriarchal oppression.

    Most people (men and women) believe in the pay gap myth, the skewed domestic violence statistics, the false 1 in 4 rape statistics and the whole glass ceiling vibe.

    But we are not examining most people. We are examining white nationalist women.

    Horrified, these women scream with indignation at the waves of immigrants from Latin America, North Africa and the Middle East streaming into majority white countries. Why are these women surprised; that they are no men of integrity to defend these lands?

    These women falsely assumed that the integrity of their men was infinitely elastic. They were wrong. Now, they wonder, “where have all the good men gone?”

    Here is where, they have gone. NOWHERE!!!

    They are right here, but their priorities have changed. For decades, you (women) have yelled that you do not need them. For decades, you have cried harassment, when there was none. For decades, you have cried rape, when there was none.

    For decades you have leveraged the family court system against your men. Countless men have been labeled “deadbeat dads” and thrown into essentially what have become debtor dungeons. Even for the dads, who pay child support, you have prevented them from visiting their children.

    You use the divorce courts as your personal IRS agent to extort money from your ex-husband(s) and hand it over to you. You have no compunction in promiscuously humping dozens of men in the house that was built and paid for by your ex-husband.

    Come on! Are you really surprised that your men are not defending you? From whom should they defend you?

    You are the danger, woman! It is from you that men need to defend themselves; not immigrants.

    When a guy no longer gives a damn about you nor society, why should he give a damn about immigrants? Immigrants are not about to get him divorce-raped; thrown in jail on false charges; demonize him on every other media outlet, etc.

    No, it is not the immigrant, but you (woman) who is the threat. It is the most capable men, who have identified you as the threat to their safety, freedom, wealth and independence.

    MGTOW versus Pro-black Women

    Is there really such a phenomenon as pro-black women? This must be the most delusional comedy skit on the planet.

    Every woman has the right to entertain a racial preference. Even black American women have this right. Nonetheless, if you are an American pro-black female, consider never sharing your views with another human soul. It will only make you look more delusional and disgusting.

    In America, 7 out of 10black children are born to a single mother(s). Many single black mothers give birth to multiple kids from multiple goons.

    “Strong independent black woman, don’t need no man!”

    Judging from your actions, it is not only the men you do not need. You do not need other women, too. You abort more fetuses (male and female) than the women from any other race. Is this what pro-black looks like? …the cold-blooded systematic murder of helpless black babies!

    Ha! Ha! Ha! The whole sham is beyond funny!

    Once a black man hits the jackpot, what does he do? Why does he run to the white girl? There is no mystery there! It is not about self-hate or any such nonsense. The brother is simply running for dear life.

    Once he’s got money, the brother will do anything to stay away from you. Tiger Woods plowed through more than 15mistresses, none of them black, not even one. Take a good look at all those women accusing Bill Cosby. More than 35. Only 3 are black.

    The capable black men run away from black women. The only men (black and non-black), who touch black women are thugs, the unemployed, soon-to-be deadbeat dads and the poor can’t-afford-better low-life-scum.

    Pro-white and pro-black women both need to stop the charade. Maybe one is slightly better than the other, but both are still black widow spiders. The concept of loyalty is foreign to both. The only loyalty they have is to hedonistic excitement.

    The guys out there with functioning brains, better go your own way; else in a few days/weeks/months/years/decades you might be facing the same fate as Bill Cosby.
    Last edited by Redvenus; 01-03-2016, 07:24 PM.


    • #3
      MGTOW – The Trader

      TFM's Channel

      All social interactions are an exchange in their basis

      Every time when two organisms of any species come together, they exchange something. In our case, when men come together, they exchange strength (alliance against a threat), resources (trading), ideas (discourses), etc.

      Now, it is an implied social convention that when someone gives you something you need, that you give something back to that person. This exchange forms a relationship.

      When men and women come together, men give women protection and resources in exchange for sex and paternity. It is implied that those two are of equal value – or at the very least, that each side thinks they got the better end of the deal.

      But, as we know, the value of this is a function of utility and scarcity. And there is the answer to the above question:

      Men keep giving in to women because their utility and scarcity is in a state of decline.

      Technology makes male strength obsolete and redundant, lessening their intrinsic utility and their physical abundance subtracts further from their value. They need to give more and more in order to get less and less to account for the difference in values.

      And here’s another kicker: In order to form a relationship between a man and a woman, there has to be an exchange in utility between them.

      A man gives a woman, say, his protection and resources and the woman gives him sex and paternity. But, the truth is she also gets protection and resources from the community and/or state, which is also comprised of men, other men.

      To whom does she give sex and paternity? To whom should she be faithful? Which source of resources is more important – the man she’s currently with, or other men?

      And this is where traditionalist women and feminist women come into play – based on how they’ve resolved this conundrum.

      One batch favours individual men, the other favours the men of the community. It’s essentially two sides of the same coin. The results seem similar, so it’s just a matter of arbitrage, more or less.


      • #4

        The Fable of the Seagulls and the Fishermen

        Long ago, there once was a kingdom along the coast that was ruled by a king that had a particular fondness for seagulls. The fishermen of the kingdom were respected far and wide for their skills, and the coastline was teeming with the fishermen and their boats, while the shore was teeming with those eager to purchase the fish they caught.

        The king raised a small family of seagulls, and allowed them to live along the coast, forbidding all from disturbing them. The lives of the seagulls were truly easy, as they did not concern themselves with catching fish themselves. They would simply watch the fishermen’s boats, and when the nets were pulled up, filled to the brim with large and delicious fish, the seagulls would swoop in to get their fill. There were so many fish that the fishermen did not even seem to mind, and joked about appreciating the assistance of the seagulls in lightening their nets.

        Both the fishermen and the seagulls got along, and everyone seemed to be happy. Things continued like this for many years. In time, the old king died, but his son continued the his father’s tradition of deference towards the seagulls. Meanwhile, the small family of seagulls had become a vast flock over the years.

        The seagulls became so numerous that when the fishermen would raise their nets full of fish, the seagulls would nearly pick them clean, leaving almost no fish for the fishermen. The fishermen complained to the king, asking that he do something about the seagulls, but he, like his father, was quite fond of seagulls, and ordered that the fishermen do nothing to disturb them.

        The fishermen began working at night, while the seagulls were asleep, but once the fish were safely caught, the seagulls would see the fish as they were brought to the market, and the hungry seagulls would attack the fishermen’s booths, damaging their property, and making off with most of the fish for themselves. Again, the fishermen pleaded with the king to help them, but again, the king refused.

        The fishermen closed the market along the shore, and moved it far away, where it was hoped that the seagulls would leave them alone. Unfortunately, the seagulls found them, attacked their booths, damaged their property, and made off with most of the fish once again. The fishermen were furious, but again the king decreed that no harm may come to the seagulls.

        Finally, the fishermen decided that they would have to leave the kingdom; even though, it was their home. Long ago, their proud forefathers had built the kingdom, but now they had been relegated to the status of serfs with no claim to the fruits of their labour. Refusing to abide by the king’s edicts, they gathered their tools and left the kingdom out of desperation. The king’s favouritism towards the seagulls had become unbearable.

        Once the fishermen were all gone, there was no more fish to be bought or sold. The vast flock of seagulls began to starve, for even though the sea was teeming with fish (many more since the fishermen had left), the seagulls had forgotten how to fish for themselves. Too many generations had passed and the seagulls had grown accustomed to being fed by the labour of the fishermen, and knew nothing else. For until then, they would simply watch the fisherman and wait for their meals to be delivered to them, but now the fishermen were gone, they began to starve and die.

        The sight of starvation of his beloved seagulls caused the king to fly in a feat of rage. He ordered his soldiers to capture the fishermen and force them to return and provide for the seagulls. However, the fishermen were warned about the king’s intentions and fled to a distant land.

        The king ordered that food be gathered from throughout his realm, which he personally delivered to the seagulls. However, the seagulls were mad with hunger at that point. The sight of the food provoked a tremendous stampede as the seagulls swooped on the food. They killed the king and consumed him along with the food, which the king had brought them.

        Devoid of fishing skills and devoid of the king, the seagulls began to starve once again.

        The word of the king’s death spread. With the death of the king, all the laws granting special treatment for the seagulls were abolished. The new king had the surviving mad seagulls killed. He offered incentives for the fishermen to return to the kingdom. The fishermen did return and once again, the coastline was teeming with the fishermen and their boats, while the shore was teeming with those eager to purchase the fish they caught.


        • #5
          Top 10 Things Only Red-Pill Men Understand About Women

          Why do women order a salad and then eat my fries?
          It is called the shit test. The woman is testing, if you will stand up for yourself, bargain or just roll over and let her take whatever she wants from you. If you let her take your fries or food without pushing back, then she’ll now you will let her get away with far more.
          It is a way women test their limits with a man. It may seem entirely trivial that a woman takes your food. The point is not that she takes your food. It is that she just reaches over and take your food. It is that she feels entitled to your food. You see this in relationships all the time. This whole what-is-mine is mine, what is yours is mine attitude. The woman just feels entitled to whatever the man has but likes to have her own things as well. This can only exist at the man’s permission. If you are in a date and the girl reaches over and take your food, reach over and take her food. If you wants some of your fries, reach over and take her drink. Do something to communicate that you are not just going to allow her to take whatever she wants without putting up a fight. You don’t have to start and argument. You can make it into a game. She takes your food, and you reach over and take her food and you both laugh about it. The point is you are communicating to her that you are not just going to allow her to take what is yours without saying anything.
          These shit-tests start very small, very trivially. They don’t seem like a big deal at the time. But when they know they can get away with the little things. They step it up and try to get away with the big things. If you have rolled over until then, you can’t expect them to take you seriously when they try to get away with the big things.

          Why are women so fixated on marriage?
          Women’s obsession with marriage is extremely easy to explain. Women require a man to take care of them. They require it. A woman can’t be a mother and a carrier woman at the same time. A woman can be an unwed mother and have a carrier but she is going to perform poorly at both. She is not going to be able to climb the corporate ladder as she could’ve without the kids. She is going to have to take time off. She is going to have to take sick days off, when the kids fall sick and she needs and appointment. She is not really a carrier woman. She is just an affirmative action hire with a carrier. And the company is going to keep her where she can be easily replaced because they know, if they keep her in an important position, she can flake out on them. These women also make terrible mothers because they are too busy at work to take care of their kids.
          Some people who responded to my comments were very defensive about their single mothers. I had a single mother. Single mothers are terrible and I have the statistics to back it up. If you had a single mother and you turned out ok. It is completely inspite of you single mother not because of you mother being a single mother. Had you mother had a husband, your childhood would have been much better. Everything that you loved about your single mother, would have been amplified and better if she wasn’t a single mother. There is no scenario, I can imagine, where a woman makes a better parent to a child than in a stable marriage. It is almost always better to have the father in the child’s life, if for no other reason than having another adult help you raise the children. You are not trying to juggle carrier and parenthood all by yourself. When a woman tries to be a carrier woman and a mother, it creates this paradox. The woman needs to acquire a husband, when she is young and attractive. But as men get older and acquire more resources, they can attract younger, better women; until the age of 50, the quality of woman he can attract goes up and up. So how can a woman ensure that she is going to keep this man and ensure that she is taken care of the rest of her life _ as the man’s sexual market place value increases and hers diminishes _ the answer is marriage.
          You get a contract, you have the state point a gun at the man to make sure that he can’t leave. He has to take care of you. So, women are obsessed with getting married because it is extremely important. A man can attract a woman for decades. So long as he is earning good money, women are going to be attracted to him. A woman has a much smaller window to attract a quality man. Once she hits her 30s and 40s and she hasn’t attracted a man by then, she is screwed. In some cultures even in her late 20s is considered and old maid.
          And as for the obsession about the wedding, it is because everything is about the woman. I mean what does a man do at a wedding. He just stands there. Doesn’t talk. Everything is about the woman _ the bride. And women just love to have everybody paying attention to them. So a wedding is the ultimate female social orgasm, where everybody is paying attention to them. When a woman gets older and knows that she’ll never get married because nobody wants to marry them _ they sometimes marry themselves so that they can still have this ceremony. So that they can still be the center of attention. It is really pathetic.

          Why do women love bad boys?
          A woman will always desire a man that is better than herself. The reason why women are not attracted to nice guys, they are actually turned off when a man is nice to them. That is because, when a man is nice to them, that creates this perception that that man is equal or less valuable than her. You like one of these nice guys who knows that the woman is out of your league and you are being nice to her because you hope to win her over. That is going to be a huge turnoff. You are never going to get into her pants. The reason why is that you are communicating that you are less valuable than her and since women have this hypergamous instinct, they will seek a mate that is greater than them. They are not going to settle for a man that is worth less or even equal. If they are equal, they are going to assume that they can do better because if they got you, they know that they can always date up.
          On the contrary, men basically have to always date down. If you understand sexual marketplace values, it is not that difficult to figure out where you stand and where you should look. So, if you are in a relationship, if you have a wife, I want you to do this thought experiment.
          If you were richer and better looking, would you treat you wife differently? If the answer is yes, because you are fully aware that you have infinite options besides her. If the answer is yes, I want you to start treating you wife as if you had infinite options. That is going to hack her hypergamous instinct. When a man is nice to her, it communicates that the man is of a lower worth and this will trigger her hypergamous instinct to start looking for a better mate.
          However, when you treat a woman like dirt, you are communicating to her that you have a higher value than her and by communicating that, she’ll actually become more loyal to you.
          Now, this is not a foolproof plan. She still may cheat on you but treating her like dirt counterintuitively lessens the likelihood of her cheating on you. There are no guarantees in life.
          When a woman shit-tests you to find out what you will put up with, she is actually testing your worth. If you put up with her lousy attitude you are communicating to her that you have less value than her. That is why men who fail her shit-tests get dumped or cheated on.
          The men who refuse to put up with her lousy attitude communicate that they have a higher worth than the woman. The woman will respond by appreciating the man more and treating him better.
          Women don’t want a partner. They want a leader.

          But you said it was fine?
          This is another version of the shit-test. She wants you to fight for her and give her plausible deniability. She doesn’t want to be responsible for her own words and actions. She wants you to be responsible. When she is evasive and you take the responsibility, then it is now your responsibility.
          If she outright told you what she was thinking and feeling, then she has to take responsibility for her own feelings and she doesn’t want to do that. It is one of her shit-tests. She doesn’t want to take responsibility. The way to pass the shit-test, is to just walk away from her. Tell her, when she is ready to talk, she should come find you. Simply walk away and return to your activity.
          She will be temporarily annoyed but she will love you more.

          Why do women love gossip?
          Women love gossip because they rely on social control due to their limited to manipulate others physically. Since women are weaker than men, they have to rely on social manipulation to get what they want. Children do the exact same thing, when they throw tantrums or make a puppy dog face to get their parents to give in to their demands. Children and women share this characteristic. They can’t use physical strength to force you give them what they want. So they have to manipulate you to give them what they want.
          Knowing the latest gossip allows women to have social control. Remember, there is no knowledge which is not power. Women have better social manipulative skills than men because they need these skills for their survival. Social manipulation is used by those who cannot physically enforce their will.

          Why are women so obsessed with shoes?
          Women are not only obsessed with shoes but with fashion in general. In general, women are obsessed with shoes and fashion because women’s fashion is designed to express how a woman isn’t working but has lots of money. A successful woman is one who is able to live off a man and do no work herself. This explains why long hair and other fancy hair styles are considered feminine and attractive. You can’t afford to sweat intensely if you have a fancy hairstyle. Also, there really aren’t many jobs which you can do with long finger nails. Most women’s clothing isn’t very comfortable. It is designed to be constrictive to restrict movement. It is not designed for work. The whole point is to communicate, “I am a successful woman who doesn’t have to work.”
          After all, work is for men.
          Women’s fashion goes beyond communicating “I don’t have to work.” It is about splurging money. It is about displaying how rich you are. It is about emphasizing how you have all this money; even though, you do not work. This is why, products marketed to women is only fashionable, when they are expensive.
          Look are all the brand name purse that women purchase. You could get a nice leather bag that performed the same function as a purse. But it is not about functionality. It is about showing off. That is why women purchase expensive brand name purses.
          It is all about communicating that:
          • I don’t work
          • I have lots of money.
          The reason why purses exist at all is because women are trying to maintain their figure. If women were to keep they wallets and masquerade kit in their trouser pockets, it would cause their hips to bulge and skew their figures out of shape.
          Women know that men look at their hips. So, in order to stay attractive they avoid stuffing their trouser pockets with things that will alter the shape of their hips. The purpose of the purse, is to provide a solution for women not to keep things in their trouser pockets, thus altering the shape of their hips and making them less attractive to men.

          Why are women constantly cold?
          The answer is purely biological and has nothing to do with female psychology. Women’s body are designed to birth babies, as a result, the female body maintains a higher core temperature than a man’s. Even though the core of the female body maintains a higher temperature, it comes at the cost of a lower temperature at the extremities of the female body (her arms, legs, head). That is why she perceives to be cold because the temperature at her extremities is actually lower. For the core of the body to maintain that higher temperature, heat has to be pulled from the extremities to the core.

          Why do women hold bathroom parties?
          Female bathroom are a female space. They want a space where they can talk without men overhearing them. Men can make decisions on their own. Women like to seek consensus. Women do not like to make independent decision because they want to avoid responsibility for their decisions.
          This is why women love to make decisions as a group. This is especially true, if the decisions they are making concerns someone outside the group. If they don’t want to include this person; then they will go to the restroom and talk about the issue there. They’ll form the consensus and then come out and execute it.

          Why do women take so long to get ready?
          The appearance of a woman is everything. You only have to understand what women look for in a man and what a man looks for in a woman to answer this question.
          A woman is looking for a man who looks good, has a good job and has a high social status (utility). Does his social status and connections permit her to get a job or favours? Can she use his social connections to launch her own carrier? Can she extract some benefits from his social status?
          A man needs to have some physical attractiveness. If she is not attracted to you on sight, she is obviously not going to have sex with you; unless, she is blatantly using you for something.
          A man doesn’t have to spend much time on his appearance because he can communicate his value in other ways. Women are primarily attracted to money, utility and status. Only status is related to appearance. If a man wants to communicate his high status, he needs to wear a suite. He can’t wear sweat pants and hoodies and assume that women are going to know he is important. A man can attract a woman without giving a thought to his appearance. This is especially true for well known celebrities. Leonardo DiCaprio to walk around in sweat pants and hoodies and still get any woman he wants. Off course, not every guy can pull this off because not every guy is a celebrity.

          A man is attracted to a woman’s youth, her beauty and her fertility. All this are physical attributes. A woman has to look young, good and fertile. Female make up is designed to accentuate youth and fertility. Men find red lipstick attractive because they are looking for signs of fertility. Women use make up to cover their wrinkles because they want to look young.
          This tinkering with their appearance to look young, beautiful and fertile takes time. A man doesn’t have to worry about his appearance, as a result, he can get ready in 5minutes. He just has to put on a suite at best. But a woman has to carefully paint all over her face with make up; in order to fake the signs of youth, beauty and fertility.