The Touchiness Of Contemporary America

In 1950, an American ethologist named John Calhoun created a series of experiments to test the effects of overpopulation on the behaviour of social animals. The animals which Calhoun chose for his experiments where mice (and later on rats). He chose rodents as these reproduce rapidly thus allowing him to observe the development of several generations of mice  in a relatively short space of time.

Calhoun and his researchers found that in a space-limited/resource unlimited environment, the population of mice would explode; peak-out and then collapse to extinction. This test was replicated several times and it was found that these led to the same outcome each time. The reason for this phenomenon was found to derived from social decay which worsened with each generation. The social decay led to unrest in the environment, which in turn led to sub replacement fertility. It was concluded that nature has a limit in which social animals can interact.

John Calhoun’s experiments gained world-wide recognition and his expertise was sought after by government bodies such as NASA. They present a useful yet grim insight into what could be our own future, for no matter how many times Calhoun repeated the experiment, the results led to the same inevitable conclusion: extinction.

The Experiment

His team created a comfortable environment ideal for the mice. This was achieved by fitting a pen (box-shaped enclosure) with unlimited food and water. The room had space for up to 3000 mice. The room was closed off so that neither the mice could get out nor predators get in. By removing the risk of predation, the mice could grow in an environment free from external stress. The room was then compartmentalised into different units, this allowed Calhoun to identify how different social groupings formed.

Four pairs of mice were screened for diseases (four male and four female). Upon verifying that they were healthy they were introduced into the enclosure.

Calhoun observed the mice population over the course of the experiment. He noted down behavioural changes and population numbers. He found that there were four distinct phases of population change observed during the experiment. The first stage, named “Strive”, was a phase in which the mice explored and adjusted to their new habitat, set territories and created nests.

The second stage was named the ”exploit period”. During this stage the mice population exploded. Calhoun observed that some compartments became more populated than others, and therefore some units used more resources. It was also observed that some units started to become crowded.

The third phase was named the ”equilibrium phase”. During this phase, the mice population peaked at 2200 individuals, although there was space for 3000. During the third phase Calhoun observed the collapse of the mice civilisation. He noted that the new generations were inhibited since most space was already socially defined.

Calhoun and his Experiment

The mice showed different types of social dysfunctions. Some mice became violent. Males fought each other for acceptance, those that where defeated withdrew. Some males became repeated targets of attacks.

Calhoun had noted during his experiments:

“Many [female mice] were unable to carry pregnancy to full term, or to survive delivery of their litters if they did. An even greater number, after successfully giving birth, fell short in their maternal functions. Amongst the males the behaviour disturbances ranged from sexual deviation to cannibalism and from frenetic over-activity to a pathological withdrawal from which individuals would emerge to eat, drink and move about only when other members of the community were asleep. The social organisation of the animals showed equal disruption…”


“The common source of these disturbances became most dramatically apparent in the populations of our first series of three experiments, in which we observed the development of what we called a behavioural sink. The animals would crowd together in greatest number in one of the four interconnecting pens in which the colony was maintained. As many as 60 of the 80 mice in each experimental population would assemble in one pen during periods of feeding. Individual mice would rarely eat except in the company of other mice. As a result extreme population densities developed in the pen adopted for eating, leaving the others with sparse populations.”


“…In the experiments in which the behavioural sink developed, infant mortality ran as high as 96 percent among the most disoriented groups in the population.” – John Calhoun

Newer generations born in the now dysfunctional mouse utopia became withdrawn, spending their days grooming obsessively and dedicating their time solely to eating , drinking and sleeping. This generation, for all the emphasis they placed on grooming, would not reproduce. Moreover, these mice were noted to be unintelligent compared to previous generations.

“…the limit Calhoun imposed on his population [of mice] was space — and as the population grew, this became increasingly problematic. As the pens heaved with animals, one of his assistants described the rodent utopia as having become hell.”

The fourth phase was the decline. In this phase the population plummeted. The last mouse died 600 days after the experiment began.

What Can Humans Learn From Mice?

The limiting factor of Calhoun’s experiment’s was space. As time transpired, the mice passed on the negative behavioural attitudes to the next generation, and these, subsequently passed them on to the next generation, with the addition of new unsocial attitudes. What is it that makes space, and lack there off, such a decisive factor in the development of social animals? And what are the consequences for population condensation?

Notice how the evolution of the behaviours displayed by the mice, parallel those of the people of Easter Island, as explored by Quintus Curtius in his ROK article The Power Of Choice. The people of Easter Island are a historical example of a human version of the mice utopia experiment:

“When humans first arrived there about A.D 900, it [Easter Island] was densely forested, and was capable of sustaining numerous tribes and a relatively high population.”

The conditions of the islanders were similar to that of Calhoun’s mice. On an isolated island, with a lush environment, a group of humans settlers arrived on boats to Easter Island. The settlers could thrive with almost endless resources without natural predators nor external factors of stress.

With time, the island became over populated. Quintus explains what befell the Islanders:

“The islanders then began to compete with each other more and more fiercely for an ever-declining volume of natural resources; vendettas multiplied, intertribal warfare flared, and a pall of hostility and fear descended on the island. As the trees vanished, the islanders were unable to build boats to escape to other islands: they became trapped in their own hell, doomed to fight each other in perpetuity for the last crumbs that the barren land could offer. Eventually the islanders began to starve, and feed—literally—off each other. As wild meats became unavailable, and escape off the island became impossible, the natural consequences followed. Cannibalism stalked the island, animating its folklore and infecting its archaeological sites. Perhaps the islanders compensated for their misery by focusing more and more on the empty ritual of building and raising statutes, as their means of sustenance melted away.”

This is reminiscent of the ”behavioural sink” observed in the mouse utopia. It also resembles the abhorrent behaviours observed in Calhoun’s experiments resemble several shocking stories from recent times. Is it be possible that it’s social decay rather than a shortage of food that led the people of Easter Island  to near extinction?

There are natural limitations on the degrees of social interaction we can manage on a daily basis, just like with the mice. In humans this is referred to as “Dunbar’s number“, and it has been observed to be true in social media sites.

Whilst it could be argued that this could not happen to humans; as we have large swathes of unpopulated land, it has to be noted that at the peak population, only half the colony space was being used. The mice had a tendency to congregate and overpopulate certain sectors of space, something reminiscent of modern day cities.

Modern Cases Of Behavioural Sinks In Humans

It is hard to compare the mouse utopia to the human world because, for obvious reasons, there is no human version of the mouse utopia experiment. Experiments are carried under controlled conditions to mitigate sources of error. However we can compare modern adverse trends in human society to the behavioural sink observed in the mouse utopia experiment. Below are some examples of behavioural sinks in Humans compared to those of the mice utopia.

Population Condensation

Case Study: Germany (Also applicable to: Spain, Japan.)

The first sign of trouble in the mice pen was the crowding observed in some of the units.

In Germany, the Spiegel reports of a growing problem of population condensation in it’s large cities and of ghost towns in rural areas. Rents are soaring in Munich and Hamburg while in other cities apartments stand abandoned.

Whilst this example is not a perfect representation of the mouse utopia, we can make some comparisons. The mice pen was compartmentalised. Similarly, Germany is divided into several regions all with ample resources. In Germany, some regions are becoming more crowded, this is driven by labour demand in some regions and lack of labour demand in others.

Prediction: I predict that as cities become crowded, some of the behaviours observed by Calhoun will become apparent. These will include social unrest and lower fertility rates.

Population condensation was a major cause of social unrest in the mouse utopia. Time will tell if this will be the case in Germany.

Depopulation (failure to achieve replacement fertility)

World wide phenomenon.

Case Study: Republic of Korea [South Korea], Japan

The main correlation between the mouse utopia experiment and our times is depopulation.

Depopulation led to the extinction of the mice. It is fascinating yet terrifying to think that without the hardships of life, a species cannot survive. If we think about this from a human perspective, we see that our struggle for survival unites us as a species. Without hardship our life’s become pointless and shallow.

If we look at South Korea’s fertility rate per woman, which stands at 1.24, we can predict that this nation of 50 million will peak out by 2017. From there the population is expected to decrease to decrease to 42 Million by 2050.

The source of this decline is lack of jobs and thus lack of income needed to rear children. Like in many other nations, the job ladder is stuck as older people retire later in life. South Korea, like Japan, had a booming job’s market which guaranteed lifetime employment. Sadly, this is no longer the case. The job’s from the cities attracted many away from the country side and created a population concentration in cities such as Seoul.

Depopulation presents our species with an ever-growing problem since sub replacement fertility is becoming more prevalent in the developed world.

If we look at Japan, we see that Japan now faces a precipitous depopulation. Depopulation is estimated to drive Japan’s population to 87 million, down from 127 million by 2050. In economic terms it would be catastrophic as Japan’s has an advance welfare state like that of the United Kingdom and depends on having a larger tax base than a retiree base. The problem is getting so out of hand in Japan that the Japanese government is even considering immigration (a big no-no over there).

Sub replacement fertility is also being noted in the Republic of Korea, Spain, Germany, China, Russia, US, UK, Denmark, Sweden and Norway.

Depopulation is likely to be an effect of the social breakdown and not a cause.

Senseless Aggression

Word wide phenomenon.

Case Study: Easter Island.

Aggression is an obvious aspect in both the mice utopia and the East Island case. It is also easily comparable to our society in present day. Whilst violence has always existed amongst our species, this had always been attributed to a range of factors such as poverty or inter-tribal warfare (aggression due to lack or resources) and not as a factor of population condensation (aggression despite of abundant resources).

The first signs of trouble in the mice utopia were male mice fighting for acceptance. This appears to have led a spiral of other societal problems.

“…there where three times as young mice aspiring to enter social groups as there were vacancies in socially established groups…”

Aggression is the cause of the societal breakdown. What was the cause of the aggression? As observed, a lack of space, both physically and socially, which sets into motion a series of events that led to the outcome of extinction.

Breakdown Of Gender Roles

Developed world phenomenon.

Case Study: USA, Japan

At ROK, we place a large importance on gender roles. Looking at this subject from a perspective of another species may give us some further insight on the topic. We have observed that depopulation is an effect, so what is the cause? Perhaps there is more than one cause. The behavioural sink observed in the mouse utopia showed several abnormal social behaviours.

In the male mice, a limited space and a boom in population caused the males to fight more to be accepted. Since not all mice can be alpha males, the losers withdrew. With excess males fighting for dominance, older males gave up, leaving the females to fend for the family. These would then become increasingly aggressive and some even began attacking their own offspring.

Calhoun noted that as time progressed “…mothers fell short of maternal expectations”. In recent years there have been an increasing amount of cases [1], [2], [3], [4] of child neglect and abuse by human mothers that have made it to national headlines. It is not hard to speculate that there are many more we have not heard. In Australia, police have released data that attribute half of the nation’s infanticides to their mothers.

Since these are the more notorious cases which the media publishes, the less extreme cases go unnoticed, under reported or unreported in the media (in the last few decades there have been a string of stories in the media, which when examined as a whole tells us that women are starting to lose their natural instincts for nurture). We know that women in developed nations are suppressing maternal instincts, either intrinsically or extrinsically. It is also becoming more common for women to seek a sex-fueled lifestyle, something that was also observed in the mouse utopia.

“…the mice became more promiscuous…mice would roam around attacking others or mounting them irrespective of gender…”

“…phase C, the incidence of conception in females declined and the resorption in foetuses increased. Maternal behaviour was disrupted. Some mothers in desperate searches for quieter areas abandoned young that fell on the way…” – Tragedy in Mouse Utopia, Dr.J.R Vallentine

As the behaviour in the pen deteriorated, females would abandon their offspring leaving them to fend for themselves. With no parents around to teach them how to be well adjusted mice,

“…prematurely rejected, first by their fathers, then by their mothers, and then by established groups in the community, the young grew up without knowing how to behave, personally or socially as mice…” – Tragedy in Mouse Utopia, Dr.J.R Vallentine

Gender roles are vital in a social species, without that the break down of these lead to sub replacement fertility, depopulation, and finally, extinction.


Case Study: Japan

“Individuals would only emerge to eat and sleep when the rest were asleep.” When I read this, the first thing that came to my mind was the Hikikomori. It’s a term used to refer to a reclusive adolescent who is too introverted to function in society. These youth are so socially inept that they shut themselves indoors and only venture out at night to stock up on groceries. This is a phenomenon that has been occurring for 20 years but that is only recently coming to light in Japan.

The Hikikomori are estimated to number a million. Something that has alarmed the Japanese government who have been unable to tackle an issue they do not fully understand. In Japan, an entire generation of young Japanese have been born into a society in where all space is already socially defined just like in the mice utopia were “the new generations were inhibited since most space was socially defined”.

However this trend is not exclusive to Japan. Japan is however a very close approximation to a mice utopia experiment for humans just like Easter island. Under stress, these boys (and men) have been impaired by a stressed and dysfunctional society. Withdrawal is a cause for depopulation and the effect of an over stressed society which is in turn caused by the behavioural sink.

The Beautiful Ones

Case Study: Japan

There is another social ill in Japan that is comparable to Calhoun’s mice. These are the grass eaters (Soshoku kei Danshi ) of Japan. The term, “grass eater”, refers to males who have no interests in seeking relationships with the opposite sex. The media and the manosphere has confused these guys with whatever pre-conceptions they may have had. For example, the BBC documentary “No Sex please, we are Japanese“, explores the phenomenon with bias and poor journalism. So to ensure we don’t fall for the same pre-conceptions allow me to reiterate that the grass eaters are men who have no interest in pursuing relationships with the opposite sex. They are not homosexuals, asexual’s, otaku nor Hikikomori.

The difference between grass eaters and the Hikikomori is that the Soshoku kei Danshi are withdrawing from relationships and the Hikikomori are withdrawing from society all together. Grass eaters are not asexual, the prefer the vast array of porn available to them. Many grass eaters, although not all, are metro-sexual. These are guys who spend a lot of time and money into personal grooming. Once again this is not applicable to all grass eaters.

Some grass eaters show resemblance to the “Beautiful ones”, spending their time “…[obsessively] grooming, eating and sleeping….[and]…not reproducing”. The correlation appears to be that individuals are not conforming to a stressed societal model and are opting out of relationships and a male gender role. The grass eaters have become so numerous that is has pushed some Japanese girls to initiate the courtship. This phenomenon is most pronounced in Japan but is applicable to other developed nations.

In the Republic of Korea, 10% of men wear make up. In other developed nations, the “beautiful ones” are the vapid and shallow celebrity and beautify obsessed youth. It is possible that grass eaters could become a cause of depopulation and that is caused by the behavioural sink.


The mice utopia experiment presents us with a stark vision of our present and our future. As time progresses we will see more evidence that we are heading for a decline in population which is largely driven by social decay.

Through history we have developed an anthropocentric world view. This is folly. Humans are animals—highly advanced animals, yet animals nonetheless. Regardless of what we may think of ourselves, or how we may try to dissociate ourselves from the rest of the animal kingdom, the rules of nature that apply to mice often apply to us. Not learning or accepting the results of these experiments can only be detrimental for us as a species.

Social animals appear to be regulated by intrinsic behavioural factors. The question is if there is a nature kill switch for a species that has no predators. Calhoun concluded that the stress from social interaction caused the disturbances in behaviour seen in his experiments. If we truly stand apart from the rest of the animal kingdom, we ought to be able to avoid the same pitfalls. What is certain is that unless humans collectively apply some soul-searching, we will fall for the mouse trap.

Read More: The Power Of Choice

104 thoughts on “The Touchiness Of Contemporary America”

  1. Btw, what is with all of these “trigger warnings” being added to media? When did the US become such a nation of wimps that people have to avoid anything that might be upsetting?

    1. Since we started letting women run things and “how you feel” became as important as quality of reporting/discussion.

    2. Serious question, where are you seeing “trigger warnings”? Is it a television thing (hence why I don’t know about it) or something?

    3. God I love triggering people who don’t really have anything traumatic to be triggered over

  2. Well, P.C. is a club welded against white males.
    Females, and men of other races can act and say what
    they damn well want.
    It’s part of a coordinated agenda to wipe out the
    white male. People are being misinformed and
    “played” by the media and popular culture.
    As insane as it sounds, the objective is to
    exterminate white guys.
    You ask, “How can there be pretty white females,
    (Which EVERYBODY wants) without white men?
    Simple. There’s plenty of white male sperm on
    reserve. The white female can be inseminated with
    this sperm, and a contineous crop of white women
    can be grown. No live white male is even nessesary.
    Any woman carring a white male fetus will undergo
    forced abortions. Don’t say you weren’t warned.

    1. Ease up on the paranoia. I’ll admit the hollywood and other agents of propaganda are anti-white but I doubt they would have the audacity to take action in exterminating white guys

      1. See ww2.
        As we commemorate DDay let us for a moment remember the brave defenders of Festung Europa.
        I’m only half joking. The Allies were fighting an anti-racist war designed to batter down the European. Even though I admire grandad for fighting on the British side in WW2 like a hero, I now reckon he was duped into participation in a white genocide that was designed to annihilate whitey.

        1. Which makes me wonder why he criticizes Adolf and praises Sharon. I wonder how many shekels he got for writing this one.
          None of this would have happened if we stayed out of WW2.

        2. Our ancestors had no choice and were only vaguely aware of the demographic looming over them.
          Both the controlling hostile elite that ensured war for all and the counter Malthusian explosion of a third world with access to antibiotics and advanced surgery and a Ryan air flight for £50.
          The German were at least dimly aware of the likely trend. For noticing they were culled.

        3. The writer showed himself an idiotic blue pill tool with his comical demonization of hitler and defense of sharon. He lost me right at that point.
          Clue: Hitler is the only man in the past 150 years who had the guts to stand up for white interests, against the poisonous vipers who work toward our destruction. To demonize Hitler is to be an anti-white idiot.

        4. Ever heard of the “Nero” orders?
          Hitler had the intention to sacrifice every man he could to his war, even when it was already lost, up to the last civilian.
          With friends like this, you don’t need enemies.
          And that should be obvious to you *even if* you believe in the notion of “white interests”, which I certainly don’t.

        5. There were enormous problems with the Germans, naturally. The Nazis were Ethnic supremacists who managed to destroy white run empires. That’s the sum of their efforts.
          But the allied effort was a waste. Much of what ails us today stems from the bizarre notions that the Tommy and GI had about what they thought they they were fighting for.
          Fast forward some of those soldiers to Sarf London or Chicago today or even Detroit then time machine them back…most would down arms.
          Also it was the Allies who were prepared to sacrifice every last man for the cause, just as much as Hitler.

        6. Agreed with a qualification.
          West interlopes on Jewish territory by claiming a Jew is like a Jew who ran an armoured division which is like Hitler.
          Blacks are only allowed to call Anglo Saxons a bunch of Nazis. This way they can run real estate scams, wreck schools, generate white flight and be used to knock off white boys so that Jews get more Jobs. Like Presidentin’ ‘Arvard.
          Back into your cage blackie and only bark at Worthington P Witworth III not Larry Summers.

        7. “John • 2 months ago
          I hate anti-Semites, and not because they are “not PC”. I hate them because they *are fucking leftists* who need to blame the “banksters” for their own uselessness.
          What a delusional bunch of morons.
          John • 2 months ago
          After what I read online I proudly call myself a “race-traitor”. May you useless fucks all rot in hell.”
          Get rekt faggot

        8. The allies would have starved ever German to death. The only reason they didn’t do that is simple enough.
          Both sides of the Allied effort needed German workforces and skills to fight the looming Cold War. The Turk was ferried in to replace the German flunky worker in the West and the Russians built a wall to prevent Slavs from filling that role. The French brought in Africans and the Brits brought in Caribbeans.
          Something like this was in works for Europe already. The Germans were dimly aware of the scope a bit earlier than us. That’s all.

        9. In general, German solutions to global problems are always wrong. They’re excellent at detail work, but horrible at the big picture.
          You don’t even have to use Hitler as an example. Look at World War I: the Kaiser was worried about the rise of Asia (and America), and wanted to establish a single hegemon in Europe to counter them.
          The result? Europe was wrecked and demoralized, thus accelerating the rise of America and Asia to global dominance.
          Germans don’t do strategy.

        10. I agree with the gist of what you’re writing, and let Mencius Moldbug speak for my sentiments about the Allies, because he says it better than I ever could:
          “Imagine you are the captain of a merchant ship, and you pick up a lifeboat in the Sargasso. In the boat are two men, one living and one who has just died of thirst, and assorted small body parts of a third. The living man explains that the third was a murderous cannibal who wanted to eat the other two, who had to kill him in self-defense. They have the wounds to prove it. Since he was dead, well… but then the survivor noticed an ugly glint in his partner’s eye, and the two faced each other down with marlinspikes until one died of thirst. The question is: what actually happened in the lifeboat? Did it contain one cannibal, two, or three? And do you want the survivor to come aboard, or should you just gaff him and push the boat back out to sea?”

        11. “In general, German solutions to global problems are always wrong. They’re excellent at detail work, but horrible at the big picture.”
          They were much better before the war. There war Nietsche and Weber, two guys I hold in the highest regard for a big picture view on why society is the way it is.
          After the war, there was no intellectualism left. All intellectuals died or left.

        12. Somewhat true. Although you are ignoring the nose on your face. The German upper class did have access to the British Empire if they wanted it. The Royals in Britain are essentially German Princes, many of the Aristocrats married German madschen. Same is true with Russia. The Aristocrats there were Germans.
          However observing this doesn’t respond to the question. The Germans who went with the British did okay on the strategy. The Hanoverians built the biggest empire, evah. The Germans who went with Russia did the same thing.
          You should be able to recognize the pattern here, Notice it. Even if you don’t speak of it.

        13. OIt’s not like Mencius doesn’t have a dog breed in that fight either. Can anyone examine the ethnic biases that might, just might explain the position people end up taking?

        14. Imagine Mencius as Lloyds Agent (not an underwriter) for the ship the castaways came from. In reality you find that The Merchant Captain (ahem) was a pirate who raided that ship and fixed the scene to make it look like he didn’t steal the cargo. Imagine that the the captain offers you 10% of the cargo…you’d pass the liability to the underwriter without blinking.

      2. Agree that there’s probably no ultimate plan to take us out and shoot us.
        The easier way to get rid of us is to introduce The Pill to society and get girls hooked on it by the age of 14, to teach women to kill their unborn, to not want to get pregnant until long past their fertile years, to shun men and to buy dogs as replacements for their non-existent children.
        Demographic numbers don’t lie, we’re reducing not only here, but across the entire Anglosphere as well as Western Europe in general. So far only EE and Russia/Ukraine are weathering out the slow depopulation.

        1. No conservative like Limpballs has ever articulated the racial angle of abortion or the pill or Feminism.
          Instead he comically calls feminists Feminazis.
          It never quite made sense when I was younger and liberal. Now it makes even less sense. In my 30s I can quite clearly see that these public policy innovations are quite sinister. The destruction of Rhodesia was a foretaste, the destruction of South Africa an appetizer. The loss of Detroit etc and now London and Paris all part of a pattern. The Krauts were simply the first canary in the coalmine to perish, or to detect there was gas in the mineshaft.

        2. Did you see the Obama speech in Poland?
          This means that Poland is going to get the Lampedusa Cueta overflow and get Envibranted. Prepare for enrichment Polaks!

        3. I don’t care. That state is a never ending source of trouble. Chucking away an Empire over Danzig? It’s mental. What was the exchange? Brixton? Bradford? Tottenham? Leicester? Luton? The burbs of Paris?

        4. Eastern Europe has the worst population decline of all. And Japan and Korea are bad too. It isn’t a racial thing.

      3. Can’t get rid of white men completely. After all, they need someone to pay taxes and work in order to keep the whole system running. A country with nothing but women and “people of color” would collapse within hours.

        1. who is going to fix the airconditioner or fix the powerlines? The Doozers from Fraggle Rock? Certainly not the Fraggles.

        2. The plan IS to get rid of White people completely.
          It’s just that it’s a really stupid plan. Everything will fall apart into a worse than third world scenario within WEEKS without competent White men to run everything. Plus, without White women all chicks will become ugly. But the Chosen Ones will own it all.
          Miscegenation is what brought about EVERY civilisational collapse so far; Ancient Egypt, ancient Greece, ancient Rome, and soon Sweden, England, and then the US.

    2. haha the day the white man actually has to face true threat to his well off life and progeny will be the day of retribution. Right now the whole PC agenda is a concession to keep the masses and self loathing privileged hipsters,socialists and feminists happy. As soon as the chinese and indians displace this group as the wealthy group then you will truly see why whitey made it to number 1.Then back to apologising for a few hundred years and so the cycle continues.

    3. Women still require the labour of men to be able to raise children. Even in the naniest state this could not occur.

  3. The touchiness you write of is indeed ridiculous. However, it is more than that, by claiming the role of “victim”, various groups and individuals use their alleged victim hood as a weapon against those who they claim (usually falsely) they have been victimized by. It is complete BS; but effective, which is why they do it.
    The best response, iis to mock these plaintive cries of grievance and vicimhood ceaselessly. They are not interested in truth and their grievances are not legitimate so treat those grievances like the the farce that they are.

    1. Outstanding thought, and one I advocate as well (hey, confirmation!). Laughter and mockery, openly, to their face, is the surest way to get them off of their self built pedestal of righteousness. Mirth may be of the house of fools, but when you are confronted by self righteous idiots spouting lies and untruths in order to wield power over you, then a little foolishness in response is absolutely necessary.
      Trying to debate the cult of victimhood is futile. Mock at will, Gridley.

  4. Yeah, sad as it is, people in this country are getting soft. I was lucky enough to grow up around a bunch of shipyard workers, later becoming a welder myself. Being a pussy wasn’t an option. I’ve started looking into ways to get certified in other countries. Then this nation can turn into the giant vag everyone wants it to be. I sure as hell won’t be sticking around.

    1. Good idea. I have somewhat permanent ties to Canada because I have a successful business here, but I’m adjusting my life so that it’s seasonal, so that I have to be here only during the warmest six months. For the rest of the year I plan to shut things down and semi-retire in the Philippines with a sexy, hardworking, TRADITIONAL-minded Filipina. I’ve been lucky enough to meet a lady who runs a successful and growing business; she doesn’t really want to leave the Philippines and I really don’t want her to come to Canada, other than to visit. She believes in the mutual exclusivity of mens’ work and womens’ work.
      I would recommend any relationship-minded man adjust his life so that he works seasonally in a prosperous country and plays/romances in a more traditional place. A seasonal business in a northern tourist market, or employment in a hot industry such as Alberta oil where you can come and go as you please, are superb options.

  5. When you say “i don’t really have an opinion on X” people will look at you like you are a swamp monster. Isn’t it entirely possible that I’ve never given any serious consideration to this one thing? Should I try to guess what the popular sheeple opinion is and just spout that?

    1. Agreed. That said, when people express their opinion of X it is almost always something you could have gotten directly from network television or the newspaper. In essence it’s not their opinion so much as it is their parroting of whatever “objective” news source they find that conforms to their already held ideology. When I say I don’t have an opinion of something it actually means I don’t have an opinion because I probably either am unfamiliar with the topic or I haven’t heard sufficient evidence one way or the other on it to make a decision (which itself could be simply my own bias not being confirmed, because hey, we’re all human right?).
      C.Contrary really plumbed this out well in the article, that we rationalize facts to fit our agendas, many times even unconsciously. Generally that’s quite true when it comes to matters of ideology or psychology or sex. A very astute observation on his part.
      @C.Contrary – Another fantastic article that hits it out of the park. I enjoy the intellectual rigor you apply to topics, even if I am in disagreement with some particulars (not the case in this article). You’d be a hell of an interesting guy to sit and talk to over a couple of glasses of Scotch.

    2. Because most people repeat their opinion from other sources.
      By saying you don’t have one, you’re saying that you’re unwilling to play that game. Thus it’s almost as offensive to people as pronouncing an opinion that is eccentric.

  6. You don’t think it’s a bit ironic that a site with a reputation for insta banning anyone who disagrees with it’s mantra or who criticizes the owner is running a post criticizing “touchiness”?
    Just because you read a “redpill” site doesn’t mean you are masculine. You have to act the part too.

    1. They don’t ban disagreement. They ban women, gays and people who respond to them. I’ve disagreed with many here, including some of the management, and they’ve taken my disagreements in stride.

      1. Do you know what disproves your point Ghost?
        The fact that I got
        IP banned(not just one IP….my mobile and work as well) within a few minutes of making the post you’re responding to.
        If you look around you’ll also find a few other posters who were banned
        after disagreeing with mods. I talked to HB and he was banned
        immediately after criticizing Roosh’s post about Elliot Rogers needing
        Another point otherwise, is that Roosh was trying to stir
        up forum members to go stalk a critic in real life, in his hometown.
        That’s a kind of touchiness that goes beyond even most women.

    2. Excellent point. I have a few times wrote a comment that I knew was contrary to the general line around here only to delete it with the knowledge that the redpill acolytes/kool-aid swallowers would not allow it. Hypocrisy. No meaningful debate is allowed, only mutual stroking of egos and swinging off the dicks of the founders is allowed here.

      1. Just make sure you don’t respond to a female user name or somebody that claims to be female in the post.

    3. You have it wrong. Disagreement is not banned. What is being banned is SJW, white nights and women as these come to the site to shill, cause discord and infect the site with appeals to emotion, straw man arguments etcetera

      1. Bullshit.
        I got my account banned by that hack “Alpha Playboy” McQueen awhile back because I had the temerity to criticize one of his useless, brain-dead “25 Ways to Make Yourself a Slave to Dumb Whores” articles. And this was after I pointed out to him that I had actually commented in support of some of his other pieces.
        He banned me and a couple others in that thread; then, the little faggot was in such a butthurt snit that he went through and randomly deleted comments I’d posted in a bunch of other RoK threads — comments that had nothing to do with him.
        Welcome to RoK.

  7. My office politics was just saying “no comment” on every situation where somebody wanted my own personal opinion about something or someone. It protects you from all possible reprimand, and yet it’s also micro-aggression which pisses them off.
    I for one don’t ever add work colleagues to Facebook or consider them “friends”. They are just people where serendipity brought us together in an environment to make money, and ultimately they are only COMPETITION working against you for a coveted promotion or raise.

    1. For the moment. There is a growing belief by the mob that not joining the mob is defense of the other.

      1. Exactly. Those who do not want to burn the witches must be witches. That is the mentality of the commissars in control of the culture.

        1. Those who do not want to burn the witches must be witches.
          But only if they weigh more than a duck.

  8. Weak environments lead to weak people. Political correctness is just an extension of human behavior. We don’t have any truly threatening problems so some of our species must fabricate conflict where none truly exists.

    1. This is something I’ve been trying to figure out. I think we all agree, more or less, on what is happening. What I don’t understand is why? Why is everyone suddenly a victim? When did being a victim become so fashionable? Why do you have these massive public outbursts which are just dead wrong, irrational or ridiculous.
      For example, the whole Donald Sterling thing. The outcry against this guy that’s been whipped up in incredible, and everybody seems to be completely, almost deliberately, ignoring huge, important facts. His girlfriend was a prostitute/con artist/liar. He has Alzeheimer’s for God’s sake. And finally, what he said was in a private conversation. Any one of these reasons, in a civilized society, would be enough for common sense to take over and the entire issue to be shut down, but not here.
      And why is this happening? Your theory is really interesting — to quote “The mind, rather, is pragmatic by nature, and there is no prima facie reason to believe rational reasoning is any more natural to us or altogether superior to what is imaginative and to what is not rationally the case: it all depends on one’s purposes. And if it is the mind’s primary function to allow us to realize basic animals needs and impulses, then it is hardly necessary that everyone should be able (or even want) to get at the truth with much accuracy or precision.
      Here it is no wonder that the gross distortions and simplifications we so often find in the media are not always deliberate. Quite often, people are simply mistaken, doing what they can with their particular (limited) mental equipment. And yet, many people are thrilled to be informed of inaccurate scandal and other falsities though juicy news, because these afford pretexts for their tendency to righteous indignation, and what is much the same thing, for their anger and hatred. If a scuffle breaks out in a bar, and one person ends up getting the worst of it, there are often many people who are happy to get in on the fun, to kick a man when he’s down, as the saying goes. So it is with any sort of controversy. Tapping into their unconscious anxieties and fears, to their resentments and spleen, people will rush to have an opinion. The result is a distortion which serves an utterly irrelevant purpose: but by thus venting their discontent they are able to get on with the hard work of living.”
      To summarize this:
      People are not wired to seek the truth or to be rational. They’re wired to get their needs met. One of these needs is the need to quell anxiety.
      They need some kind of meaningful challenge. It’s how they work off or through their basic anxieties, which are universal and very powerful.
      These basic anxieties are what drive people to find food and shelter, to reproduce, and so on. They’re what drive evolution. They’re kind of a life force.
      When there is no risk anymore — when society is too comfortable and safe, then people have to invent dangers or enemies. That’s what’s happening now. It’s not rational, but it gets emotional needs met.
      Logic goes out the window, and people start attacking others, even symbolically, because of this basic anxiety.

      1. Good shit…the ‘why” of how we became such a bunch of passive aggressive crying sissies perplexes me as well. I think it has its roots at our country’s earliest stage, incorporating a somewhat false tenet as truth, resulting in a ton of frustration:
        “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
        This has been called “one of the best-known sentences in the English language”,[6] containing “the most potent and consequential words in American history”.[7] The passage came to represent a moral standard to which the United States should strive.”
        Unfortunately, it’s a false (and misinterpreted) premise and we’ve been twisting ourselves into knots ever since trying to conform to it.
        We obviously aren’t all equal in every respect..I suck at tons of things that other people excel at…and vice versa….men excel at many tasks that women under perform in (and vice-versa)…but to point this out goes against a founding principle or our Nation, which creates a huge dilemma….thus feminism and other crazy movements that usurp this for personal advancement.
        I think Corporatism confounded it, as corporations have enforced this tenet at work, in media, etc….creating a ridiculous, and ultimately unsustainable environment.

        1. It’s Jefferson or Franklin’s error.
          One we pay for every day as we watch our civilization crash down.
          Caracalla made the same bargain with the subjects of the Roman Empire. citizenship for all! The place fell to bits a century or two.
          Imagine the scene:
          “Hemporah Caracalla say I eeees a Rhoman too, I am Vromeeeennss too! Gibsmedat!”

        2. the declaration of independence was a deliberate piece of propaganda widely printed and distributed world wide to british colonies, inciting rebellion to strain his majesty’s resources so as to give the patriots at home a greater chance of defeating british rule. and it was quite successful: everyone else rebelled too, taking the might of britain to the face, so the 13 north american colonies could succeed – and then not help anyone else. a piece of history forgotten here, but still remembered by those that were the tools.
          the declaration wasn’t meant for the patriots, who widely didn’t regard it in high esteem at the time.

        3. jefferson wrote it. jefferson contributed to gaining international help by making the propaganda, while franklin contributed to the same cause by direct diplomacy instead. at the time, franklin was off in europe convincing the french and others while having a grand old time with prostitutes.

      2. Hence my common response to conspiracy theorists…
        “Never ascribe to design that which can most easily be explained by human incompetence.”

        1. If you’re not a conspiracy theorist (a term created by the CIA to marginalize truth seekers) you are by default-a coincidence theorist.

        2. How would you know? Were you there? Why don’t you admit and break through your mind control programing via the corporate controlled media/public education system that you’re scared SHITLESS to even entertain the idea that Satanists rule the earth and you’re hell-bound?

        3. Driver shot JFK. Frame-by-frame Zapruder analysis shows it. Why does Jackie exit the back of the vehicle contrary to emergency protocol?

        4. Bullet came thru windshield from overpass. LBJ had the car cleaned and repaired.

      3. Sterling/Tokowitz is an interesting case.
        This happened because he liked mystery meat. He was a cosmopolitan guy who loved his basketball players, he got exactly what was coming to him for associating with thugs, hookers and various subversive forces in society. It could have happened to any our remaining Oligarchs who like to play around with social engineering.
        There are very few actual white guys left to demonize so now we get Zimmerman, Sterling, Dzarnaev, Rodger held up a proxy pinata for white privilege.

        1. a more believable cause.
          people are simply witch hunting. they are making shit up to reaffirm their apriori bias, so they can righteously advance their own insane objectives. they have some primordial semblance of consciousness, which tells them they are receiving more than they are giving. this tortures them, whether by guilt or by inability to convince others to give them free shit. so they commence finding scapegoats to justify their putrid selfishness. they seek and pine and obsess to find the needle in the haystack that justifies their insane selfishness, making up self-serving hysteria to advance their repulsive causes.
          it is blind, willful ignorance to believe that hysteria is the result of boredom. hysteria costs time and money; people are advancing hysteria with deliberate expenditure of resources. and they want a windfall return on their investments.

      4. Thanks for the summary. Phew!
        I think people have always been this way. David Hume comments on a similar paradox.

      5. an attractive theory.
        Anxiety medicines are great if you happen to live near or in a ghetto. Anti depressants are very common in the multicult-multirace world now. So much so that the Shrimp get these drugs in their system and float on the surface where they are easy pickings for gulls.

      6. i found this rather profound.kinda explains why 99%of the people ive met have allowed their pursuit of love and relationships to absolutely destroy their lives beyond repair. Im going to assume that others are more and less susceptible to acting and thking in such a way

  9. The “touchiness” we see is a result of a culture where the males go out of their way to make public discourse more to the liking of the female nature. This is because females are no longer under social or economic constraints and the mass man has decided that leading women isn’t moral.
    Notice how when females talk amongst themselves much of the conversation is half truths and outright lies, all done to preserve their fragile egos.
    Real Talk is not something a majority of women are naturally inclined to do. This environment of ‘touchiness’ is ideal for sophists. That’s partly why we see so much cultural marxist victimization rhetoric being so successful.

    1. Good observations. The whole fabric of society today, and what you described above, is inherently fragile. I had a minor epiphany the other day when Roosh published a quick note about how the Men’s Movement is now standing up to these tyrants. My epiphany – the real “backlash” is now here. My sense is that things today can’t sustain for much longer.

  10. Steve Sailer calls it “The War on Noticing.” You’re not allowed to notice that one race is better at this, or one gender is better at that, etc. It’s liberal fascism disguised as good manners.

  11. Let test the “touchiness” barometer.
    1. Roosh is mummy’s boy and that’s why he needs to chase women/replacement. He is an intelligent man but not the alpha type at all. The beard does not help.
    2. Most pick-up-artists look like gays or hipsters with small dicks. Women only fall for their tricks because they are entertaining. The pick-up-artists create sluts.
    3. One can not behave manly if he has not got in himself. Being a man is about how grounded you are. You can’t fake that. Real men attract other men, women come secondary.
    4. Sex is no more special than breathing, eating and shitting but we have turned it into a pleasure movement.
    5. A man can never be truly free if he depends on a woman for sex.
    6. Men have a strong need to be slaves. They usually go for women to enslave them and give them purpose.
    7. Women are more sexually advanced, more realistic and closer to their natural state.
    8. There’s something wrong with Anglo people.
    9. Not all women are bad but they are all humans.
    10. The manosphere is reactionary.
    11. There is no self.

    1. > Real men attract other men, women come secondary.
      Did you know that Roosh has created a site and attracted a good many writers to contribute on all sorts of topics beyond sex?
      By the way, what’s your achievement?

      1. He’s attracted other desperate/disappointed men like him.
        By the way, what’s your achievement?
        I do good for evil.

        1. > I do good for evil.
          That’s what you stack against the “loser” making a living off self-published books?
          Sounds like a keyboard warrior to me.

  12. When kids are brought up through an educational that would rather give out “participation awards” than have there be a clear winner in something, what can we expect. “Losing” and having your feelings hurt as a child and adolescent teach you life lessons on how to deal with, and come back from adversity. When people are sheilded from these things their whole lives, do we wonder why they are such pant asses when they get out of college?

  13. @c.contrary.
    A fine article, Thanks for that.
    I spend some time reading Slate, Jezebel and the NYT just so that I can be aware of and understand the nature of the language that the “other side” uses and so I can more fully develop my own ideas and opinions. I can say for sure that never in a thousand days of postings on those sites would I expect to see an article as thoughtful or as grounded as what you just wrote, nay they would have to stop at a fraction of the thought and wallow in hyperbole and click bait before being able to indulge in any such reflection upon on their own actions.
    So thank you for taking the time to foster some genuine insight.

  14. Sheltered minds, that is minds that are completely detached from the real world(nature) have not have to deal with the harsh reality of the natural world and are therefore mentally weak. Therefore any contact that these weak minds have with the real world will completely break them. After they are broken they immediately return to the safety of their sheltered, institutionalized world where everything is comfortable and easy and they don’t have to deal with the natural consequences of their weakness. If it wasn’t for sheltering these genetic defects would have be elimination by natural culling mechanisms along time ago. They can not survive in the natural world at all since they were not raised in it. This is the definition of a domesticated animal.

  15. It takes intelligence AND attention to detail to rise to a powerful position… but intelligent people rarely bother with fine details, seeing the bigger picture….
    Thus managerial, nit pickers easily rise into positions of power and use all manner of rules, regulations, red tape etc. to keep anyone more talented from taking their position away….
    They also use it to hide their own incompetence.
    Louis 16th times are truly upon us once more…. grab a gun and plenty of ammo….

  16. high quality of life does not cause spoiled children or touchiness. shitty parenting causes spoiled children and a culture devoted to telling everyone theyre special causes touchiness. high quality of life is just the enabler.

  17. This was very good, had to read it twice. RoK should have a section called intellectual perspective and make this the first post.

  18. So true on the “abusive boyfriend” claim. I’ve heard that a number of times from females over the years. The first few times I thought to myself “oh no, that is awful, where are the scars?” but I came to realize that it is just a meaningless phrase they casually throw around and they don’t mean that they were hit or otherwise physically abused.

    1. Jesus, man. If I had a penny for every time I’ve heard some dumb cunt talk about her “abusive boyfriend”, I’d be a fucking billionaire by now.
      I actually met one of these “abusive boyfriends” once. He was a very nice guy, and down to earth with me. Not abusive or angry or arrogant at all.
      Just goes to show that you can’t really ever take anything a woman says seriously.

  19. This is what I mean by dangerously social. In the minds of many, love and compassion justify everything, even when said love is not useful, rational, or even realistic.
    Get used to saying this: So what if it’s offensive?

  20. Great article, most Americans have a hard time dealing with the harsh realities of life and thus it is guaranteed that they will continue voting for big government and a nanny-state, police state. This is what happens when women are given freedom. They destroy civilization.
    Kind of makes you wish that Islam would hurry up and take over Europe, right?

  21. “This way of thinking is very like the many minorities and white liberals who assume that a white police offer pulling over a black man is in itself evidence of racism.”
    Those same white liberals will applaud any FedGov cop who murders white, conservative, gun owning Christians.
    Also, let us not forget that Political Correctness and the prosecution of Thought Crimes is enforced by these very same cops who have often proven themselves to be racists – one of many sociopathic traits extant among the rank-and-file of LEOs today.

  22. “Every time we do something you tell me Americans will do this
    and will do that. I want to tell you something very clear, don’t worry
    about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control
    America, and the Americans know it.”
    Ariel Sharon, Oct 3 2011, Three Weeks After September 11th.
    Why the hell are you defending this punk ContraryTard?

  23. Scanning through the comments, I’m surprised no one has brought this up yet, but I will.
    The Frankfort School of Cultural Marxism is the origin of Political Correctness. Here is what they advocated:
    1. The creation of racism offences.
    2. Continual change to create confusion
    3. The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children
    4. The undermining of schools’ and teachers’ authority
    5. Huge immigration to destroy identity.
    6. The promotion of excessive drinking
    7. Emptying of churches
    8. An unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime
    9. Dependency on the state or state benefits
    10. Control and dumbing down of media
    11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family
    Here are the tactics they endorsed to achieve their aims:
    • attack the authority of the father, deny the specific roles of father
    and mother, and wrest away from families their rights as primary
    educators of their children.
    • abolish differences in the education of boys and girls
    • abolish all forms of male dominance – hence the presence of women in the armed forces
    • declare women to be an ‘oppressed class’ and men as ‘oppressors’
    Understanding the origins and intents of Political Correctness are necessary to stopping its excesses.
    P.S. The members of the Frankfurt School were predominantly Jewish Extremists.

    1. Social Critic Bertrand Russell joined the Frankfort Group in 1951 and perhaps coincidentally, perhaps not had this to say in 1952 in his work The Impact of Science on Society”:
      “When the conspirators get ready to take over the United States they
      will use fluoridated water and vaccines to change people’s attitudes and
      loyalties and make them docile, apathetic, unconcerned and groggy.
      According to their own writings and the means they have already
      confessedly employed, the conspirators have deliberately planned and
      developed methods to mentally deteriorate, morally debase, and
      completely enslave the masses. They will prepare vaccines containing
      drugs that will completely change people. Secret Communist plans for
      conquering America were adopted in 1914 and published in 1953. These
      plans called for compulsory vaccination with vaccinescontaining change
      agent drugs. They also plan on using disease germs, fluoridation and
      vaccinations to weaken the people and reduce the population.”

Comments are closed.