The herd giveth and the herd taketh away.

Post Reply New Topic

Inspired by someones comment in the circumcision thread... This is probably one of the more sexist, politically incorrect things I've posted on this board but f**k it this is one of my favourite articles from the manosphere. Do enjoy. If you feel like following only one of the links I left in, follow the 6th one "Men without direction", it's another great one by DelusionDamage before he became all cheesy.

The Herd giveth and the herd taketh away.

By DelusionDamage

- Rihanna, “Only Girl In The World“ (emphasis mine, because yeah, I see what’s going on there, even though this article is not about that)

Have you heard that women have a deep, innate desire to blend in and be the same as everyone else?

Have you heard that women have a deep, innate desire to be uniquely special little snowflakes?

Have you heard that online mischief has become an outlet for young men angry at being helpless and hopeless in the real world because they are not valued by women and feminist dominated society?

Have you heard that the American workforce takes exploitation lying down?

Have you heard that our modern age is rife with the fallacy known as argumentum ad populum; the idea that because something is popular that is proof enough that it is good?

Have you heard that men aren’t “manning up” in support of masculine values?

Have you heard that most men are unable to shoulder the burden of leadership?

Have you heard that men are not taking initiative and control of their own lives?

You’ve heard a lot, but have you heard about the underlying cause that connects all these phenomena to each other?

Have you heard about the herd?

Most people haven’t. Most people don’t even know that for 99% of the time the human race has existed, we lived in tribes of about 50-150 individuals spread out on the African savanna, and that the ways of thinking and behaving that we evolved thousands of generations ago, suited for optimal survival and reproduction in those conditions, are still what we’re using today.

Everything I’ve listed above goes back to what was, for our ancient ancestors, a fundamental facet of survival – something that’s still embedded in the fundamental wiring of the brains carried around by all modern women, and the truth about which their “equality”-obsessed institutions would give anything to hide.

Absolute deference to the herd.

Up until a few thousand years ago, a woman could not survive without the support of the herd – it was simply impossible.

A man could go out in the wild on his own, hunt his food and defend himself against predators. It would be difficult and dangerous, but he could have a decent chance at making it on his own until such a time as he decided to band together with others again. A man had options. If the herd was pissing him off, he could withdraw his support from it and go his own way. A man was naturally a power plant – his labor could support not only himself but others as well. A man was an asset to the herd, and the herd to the man, but he could take it or leave it.

Not so for a woman. If a woman were to fall out of favor with her herd, she would die. No ifs, buts or second guesses, do not pass go, do not collect $200, go straight to an unmarked grave in some lucky lion’s den. Weak, soft and likely saddled with children or pregnancy, a woman couldn’t muster enough labor to even support herself let alone possible offspring. She needed the support of a man of her own, or the collective support of the men of the herd, or she would die.

Nothing was as important for a woman’s survival and that of her children as being socially accepted. That imperative to survive, imprinted deep into the female brain by countless years of natural selection, is still there. Even today, nothing is as important to a woman as being in good favor with the herd. There is only one general case in which women can, with any reliable frequency, be seen going against the wishes of the herd – when they’re catching a man. The scientific explanation is simple – the entire surplus labor supply of a privately owned man, caught in the net of a sexual pair bond and never set free again, can do even more for her than a share of the collective plate.

It is in this special case when the seeming contradiction in female behavior appears – where normally she’d do everything she can to be just like all the other girls, not to single herself out in any way for instinctive fear of being kicked from the herd, she must now do the opposite. In order to ensnare a man so completely that he can be relied on not to break free from her spell until he’s fed and protected the children through their helpless growth phase, she must make herself seem so incredibly special that there’s simply no other woman he could even consider sharing some of his – now, her – surplus labor with. She must indeed make herself the only girl in the world for him.

The underlying mechanism is the same – the prime directive to make sure she’s always provided for by someone else – only its target changes from the collective to the individual, and the behavioral manifestation of the dependence instinct changes to what can on the surface seem like its opposite. It’s the same instinct of unfaltering attachment to a meal ticket, with a new coat of paint.

Due to the paramount importance of fitting in for survival, the idea that anything popular is good is irremediably built into the female brain. Human brains have not changed since tribal times. Today’s woman is still looking for the approval of the herd before anything – no matter how harmful, how illogical or how ridiculous a thing is, if it’s popular, she must have it, love it and defend it with all her power. It feels to her like a matter of life or death – because that’s exactly what it used to be.

Give women money, they’ll buy what they think others are buying. Let them vote, they’ll vote for what they think others are voting for.

Give them influence over every aspect of society, and every aspect of society will be permeated with the idea that everything popular is great and all other alternatives are death. Give them control over education, and they’ll discourage experimentation, achievement and discovery, extolling the virtues of conformity, conformity and conformity. Ordinary will become the new extraordinary.

Give them a majority share in the workforce and fill the rest with boys educated by the twelve-year feminine conformity program mandated by law, and you’ll get a workforce that’ll take anything lying down. Give them sole custody and put their fatherless male children in female-run conformity training for their first twenty years, and you get a population of men who won’t lead others or even stand up for themselves.

Give them all public spaces and institutions, and they will reshape it all in their own image, leaving only the wild west of the internet as a place for that fraction of their male children who just couldn’t be beaten into the mold to lash out in reaction to the abuse.

This is simply what happens, none of us can choose to go against our innate programming. We do what we must because we can. A woman must conform at all times in order to feel safe, and she will naturally project the same dynamic onto everyone around her. You can hardly assign blame for that any more than you can for breathing or eating – we do these things because we start to feel terribly uncomfortable as soon as we don’t.

The feminine drive for conformity works nicely when it’s in balance with the masculine drive for excellence, but we didn’t have the luxury of being born into a time like that. Most of us can also thank our lucky stars for not growing up in conditions leaning too heavily toward masculine patterns either – those environments exist too, and they are in many ways even less decent places than ours.

Comparing the urban jungle with the affluent suburbs provides a conspicuous example of how the equilibrium between opportunity and security determines what position a social environment will assume on the spectrum between masculine and feminine values. The lack of security in the ghetto and the enticing opportunity of a quick fix through success in its criminal gangs promote a “get rich or die trying” approach to life, whereas the monotone stability of life in the suburbs combined with a perception of an inevitable future of more of the same until the end of time itself embeds grating, soul-sucking routine in the lives of their inhabitants.

A decrease in our society’s currently heavy skew toward feminine values will require a decrease in the security-opportunity ratio. I’m certain the imbalance will correct itself one way or another, as I’ve written about previously. I’m not seeing any increase of opportunity on the horizon – in fact, bureaucracy control of a “free” man’s life is constantly getting worse. That leaves only one option – the change will most likely come about through a decrease in security.

Women aren’t about to willingly relinquish the political power men have given them, and sooner or later men are going to realize that women don’t really “have” the real power even now – they are only borrowing symbolic exchange tokens for it. Like paper money, women’s political power is only valuable as long as the men who issue it back up the imaginary currency with real economic and military power. In practical terms, real power – life and death power – always rests with men, and the worse the pressure on men in our society becomes, the rougher the backlash will be when men have had enough and, if women won’t negotiate, unilaterally restrict the political power that’s been lent to women by devaluing it relative to that which backs it up - the only real form of power that has ever meant anything in this world.

In plain English: women don’t have any “rights” expect those that men choose to uphold through use of force – women have no force of their own to use in defense of their “rights.” Whatever of women’s “rights” men get tired of protecting will cease to be.

I challenge you to find a truth more politically incorrect than that.

Luckily, women are good at conforming to the demands of the herd and will not be putting up more than token resistance before settling amiably into their new roles, whatever those may be. Women have worked hard for their liberation, but it looks like they’re going to push the envelope all the way to that inevitable point where they can’t sneak their privileges under the collective male radar any more – indeed the very event of me writing this and you reading it is something of a sign that that time is already dawning – and when men do wake up to how free women have become to walk all over them, women’s liberties will likely be scaled back far beyond current levels. History, it seems, is not without a sense of irony

"The weaker sex is the stronger sex because of the weakness of the stronger sex for the weaker sex." --unknown

WOW. I am taken aback. This was so disgusting to read I had to stop half-way. I've seen it worse though so the guy still has some room left to improve his douchebagginess. This virgin no-lifer can go and live as he pleases there are still plenty of people living in herds (don't need to go far). Yet somehow I doubt if he could ever make it. Until this BS floats all around there is no hope for better life for all of us. It is very very sad.. I abhor men who dare to say crap like this.

The only thing he quoted to prove his point was rihhanna. I think that sums it up. How come this is your favourite article from *manosphere* whatever that is is beyond me. Hide in shame for posting this delusion.

Oh yeah, I've "heard a lot". enough even. Stacking unbacked claims together does not really have the effect to make them look more valid, it has the opposite effect. So, when you remind us of your past rants you are actually reminding us why we shouldn't take any of the rest of your current one seriously.

I think it was written with a reader in mind who was rather well read in this particular area.

It's also occurred to me that if I had posted this in the women's forums under a alias, changed the language a little and replaced "women" with "NT women", you'd all be clapping like seals.

No that kinda proves my point. "Well read"... I wonder who would actually waste one's time reading such propogandistic vomit.
Why don't you do that. Post it, pretend to be a *hard-core evil feminist as they are* and report us your findings. That is just pathetic.
Ah, and I will also add that trolling aspie forum is even more so. Burn in hell. ( this suggestion was made only in the latter case I realize that it sounds a bit off)

Last edited by mar00 on 30 Oct 2011, 7:45 pm, edited 2 times in total.

A typical sexist male point of view

can't we keep all this gay misogyny in the L&D section? it's already found its little fan club in there

Why? would you want that.

Any reasonably inquisitive man. The only other theories offered are:
1) Men and women think exactly alike, just the plumbing is different. Anyone with more than two brain cells, working eyes and ears can see that's not true.
2) Women are all uniquely mysterious, men will never understand them aka sticking fingers in your ears and shouting LALALALA.

The manosphere offers a rather comprehensive set of explanations for female behaviour and like any good theory, there are different thinkers offering slightly different explanations for phenomena and one or two things yet unexplained. But combined with plenty of observation and a touch of evolutionary psychology it's pretty solid.

You of course are welcome to put forth your own theories.

If you were a 16yo teenager angry with his mom and jealous of his sister I could understand.
Now it just makes me wonder why on earth would you do that. What's with this gender frustration?
Of course if you live in USA then it might be explainable. Today's culture has corrupted a lot of people. You for giving into this s*** and of course some women to act like rihhanna. To generalize from this is a crime. Go and see the world...
You know, feminists have much better explanation for various *male* behaviour including this one. So what makes you think you are right? My theory - these are only stupid stereotypes. A person, whether male or female, defines oneself. Conforming to society norms goes for everyone.

I don't like gender stereotypes because they seldom apply to me.

Misogyny? Yeah it's here. Don't talk about all women again like that. Be too blunt with saying all people are the same and you say offensive things, no matter what you were intending. And to be honest much of what is said above is at times just outright sexist.

But a few of the posters complaining here drive right in to androphobic alley with their stereotypes.

Or maybe we should just grow up and grow thicker skins. Negative observations/generalisations are not automatically misogyny or misandry and talking about them should not make people squeamish.

And that probably explains why a certain person with a thick skull can't detect the misogyny they make.

Men are more prone to violent, statistically they commit more crime.
Men are shallow when it comes to choosing mates. Looks rule over everything else.

Agreed? I guess we hate men then.