Q:

Why is such a sin asking "Men Going Their Own Way" questions?

Well the few times i wrote a mgtow-like question people just spam downvotes and close my question,I thought there was freedom of expression here... Why is this such a sin?!
If some philosophies are prohibited here please let me know,I dont want to break the rules or lose more reputation.

A:

No philosophy is prohibited, but there are some things you should keep in mind:

Make sure that it is very clear that said philosophy is a philosophy of nation in your world, not yours. If it's also yours or not is irrelevant and best left out altogether. 
Make sure that this is very clear it's not just one person. This would be story-based, see Why is my question "Too Story Based" and how do I get it opened?
Make sure you clearly describe how this philosophy relate to the realities of fictional world you are building. Is it reasonable? Or bull excrement? In the fictional world we don't know, not in our real world. 

What is this philosophy? How does it work? What it assume? 
What in-world circumstances created it? 
Does it have real world analog, and what are the differences? 

Provide clarifications requested. 
Assume good faith - people comment to help you recover from bad question. Most of us are not native speakers so sometimes this may sound rough to you, and we have limited time and comment length (and patience), so we aren't always able to put enough "honey" in these comments. Deal with it and read carefully, without prejudice, what flaws in your questions these comments point out. You don't have to agree with them. But if these flaws are causing your question to get downvotes, show some gratitude for insight you got. Comments on votes are not mandatory, by commenting people are just trying to make you a favor. 

I believe you failed at all these points. 

"Freedom of speech" is not a shield from consequences. We acknowledge your right to post what you posted. But it's also our freedom of speech to vote it up or down or VTC, as we see fit. Calling it "spam voting" is unjust, you try to have your freedom of expression and at the same time take ours away. 
* by "we" I mean me and people who posted similar comments under original question(s). 

A:

We will not build your world for you
In general, questions of the sort...
"Assume the world as we know it. Then I postulate that we change this one thing. Now tell me what the outcome is"
...questions of that sort are of very poor quality by Stack Exchange standards and — in my personal opinion — quite annoying. 
The poor quality is because they are very broad and as such have no clear answer. They could take any number of directions from there. As a questioner you need to limit the scope of the question, because otherwise you have just done the Stack Exchange equivalent of asking "Ok, so I throw two dice. What happens?". 
And the annoying bit is that the questioner is requesting that other people do the work that they themselves are meant to do.
Ok, so you came up with a High-concept. That is all good, very clever of you to come up with it. I salute your ability to think out of the box. And this is usually the start for some really good and interesting world building.
But to then dump that concept in someone else's lap and say "Develop this for me. Come up with all the consequences and tell me what happens"... no. Just: no. 
We are not here to build your world for you. 
We are here to help you build your world on your own. When you get stuck in that process; when you have a specific problem that must be solved, that is when you post a question. If there are some kinks and wrinkles that need ironing, we can help you. If you need a way around an inconsistency in your logic; if you require justification that will allow you to astroturf the field for a specific world; if you need a fact- or reality check... then we can do that for you, and gladly so.
But we will not build your world for you. That is your job. 
The "sin" of your question about fembots was that you did just that which I said above: you introduced a high-concept, but then you did not take that anywhere. You did not even begin to try to figure out what happens in a premise such as yours. You did not say anything about what possible routes this could take. 
Instead you just dumped the premise on Worldbuilding and asked everyone else to develop the world for you. That was your sin. MGTOW had nothing to do with the down-votes. 
A note on Freedom of Expression
Freedom of Expression is a contract between you and the government. Freedom of Expression means that the government is not allowed to censor you, that is to say the government cannot demand to pre-approve that which you are about to express. (*)
And that is all that it is. 
Freedom of Expression is NOT...

The right to demand to post anything, anywhere. People are not required to provide you with the means to express yourself. You have no right to conscript the usage of private assets — such as this forum — in order to express yourself. You are here as a guest, and your presence is by the good graces of the people responsible for Stack Exchange. The government is not an actor in this place, and so Freedom of Expression is not actually relevant here.
The right to demand people approve of that which you express. It feels silly to have to point this out this but it must be said: even under Freedom of Expression, no-one is required to like that which you express. If the reader does not like it, they are entirely entitled to form and hold such an opinion, and they are at least as much as you within their rights to express this opinion. 
Immunity from criticism. See the point above. If people form the opinion that your posts are of such a quality that they do not approve of them, then they are within their rights to express this. And if they have valid arguments for their opinion, then it is the expressed purpose of the ratings and comments systems for them to use them to give you feedback as to why they think your post is of poor quality. 
You cannot use "Freedom of Expression" as a shield against criticism.
Immunity from other consequences. Freedom of Expression is not a "Get Out Of Jail Free" card, nor is it something you can invoke to escape other unpleasant consequences of that which you have expressed. Expressing yourself is an action. Actions may have consequences. Freedom of Expression does not exempt you from consequences. You are free to express yourself in the eyes of the government — they cannot stop you from doing it, even if they know what you are about to do and they do not like it — but you are not free from having to suffer for it, afterwards. 
Whether this rhymes well with your concept of "freedom" or not can be debated, but these are — never the less — the facts.
EDIT: Thank you Frostfyre for the mandatory xkcd reference...

(*) Usually there are some more bits to this — such as for example in the Swedish Act of Freedom of Expression where it is stated that the government may not prevent you from partaking of expressions — but the main point is that the government may not try to stop you from expressing yourself.

