Stop making a collective mockery out of all the men that live in society? I'm an oldfag from 2018 (dilate faggots) and I want to say that for the past 8+ years so many businesses and news "organisations" have placed man hating at the epicenter. And it's getting kinda boring and exhausting to listen or see their new takes every day again and again . Will these people and the trannies that lurk and lead us all stop? I'm looking at you incest faggot
>>544787126Well I figure women don't really do much so men are more important.
>>544787126>What makes men in groups behave so badly on average women scan for approval vs disapproval. men scan for truth and logic no matter who it offendsIf you have 10 men in a room and one woman no one will adjust to that woman. The woman will have to tolerate having her feelings hurt all the time. Unless there's a jew with disproportionate leverage (media, jewish publishers) who can brainwash the men to adjust to the woman. Then everyone will start walking on eggshells.tldr jews are the problem here>tfw didn't even have to look up the author before knowing it was a jew
thinking of beating the shit out of feminists again
>>544787713>Men scan for truth and logic. Only intelligent men do this, normiecattle males scan for approval or disapproval, just not in as overly an emotional way as women.
>>544788178Woah what if it's actually just normies in general who go about their lives seeking approval? Maybe both men and women exist on the margins who actually "scan for logic and truth". It's such a fucking inane statement in the first place because literally everyone is constantly looking for logic and truth. What differs is where they look for it and how anal-retentive they are about their logical and evidentiary standards. There is nothing intrinsically more truthful or logical about contrarianism, for the record. If groupthink is on an axis, truth can't be its opposite. If you are looking to groups -- from a position of supplication OR antagonism -- you are still reacting primarily to consensus. It's entirely possible to be a rigorous thinker rooted in groupthink or a sloppy thinker rooted in individualism. It's an entirely orthogonal axis.
>>544788178It's always funny how these fags are completely irrational themselves
>>544788495>It's entirely possible to be a rigorous thinker rooted in groupthink Groupthink isn't just agreeing with the consensus, it is allowing the norms and emotions of the herd to dictate your thinking. There is a difference between actually contemplating the issue and THEN deciding to go with the consensus on the basis of logic rather than allowing the group to shape your thinking. There is no such thing as intellectually rigorous groupthink you institutionalized cockmongler.
>>544787126this is caused by the neo harem feminist society:women gain power by numerical advantage, to gain numerical advantage as many men as possible have to be kept away. while only high status chads are kept around. this is a very common scenario in many offices. i very often come across sales or hr departments that are 1 chad + a team of women. you can observe this practically everywhere. in this constellation the alpha males dont have to do anything except displaying status, the women will defend them. the women will keep this system stable, because it makes them powerful.
>>544787126>2018You're a tourist m8
>>544789343>Groupthink isn't just agreeing with the consensus, it is allowing the norms and emotions of the herd to dictate your thinkingPeople who are heavily groupthink-oriented don't experience it this way. They experience themselves as logical, rigorous thinkers within a group of similarly logical, rigorous thinkers -- from the depths of /pol/ to the heights of academia. We are very poor at evaluating our own intellectual independence. But as an example of a rigorous thinker rooted in groupthink... have you ever discussed the jewish conspiracy with someone who's actually really smart? They can erect complex, interwoven ideological structures incorporating evidence and rationale and compelling arguments within their own framework. That's the metastructure of rigorous groupthink -- shared axioms with complex, logical thought emerging from those axioms. These shared axioms are largely what distinguish groupthink in the first place: a set of fundamental, pre-rational statements, assumed as fact, from which a group of ideas can sprout while sharing the same root system. That's largely what groupthink actually IS on an ontological level. Despite our broad interconnectivity, we are individually more atomized than we have arguably ever been before. So groupthink increasingly lacks an interpersonal context these days but the lateralizing nature of the internet ensures axiomatic sets are available to all, whether it's the ontological basis of science or the faith of jewish conspiracists or the raw tribalism of identitarians.
>>544787126When men stop acting mockable. Simple as.
>>544787126Men in group act like a belligerent tribethat's not news, it's genetic and natural
>>544787126The demoralization will continue until morale improves.
>>544787126>image of chinese people
>>544789987>People who are heavily groupthink-oriented don't experience it this way. They experience themselves as logical, rigorous thinkers within a group of similarly logical, rigorous thinkers -- from the depths of /pol/ to the heights of academia. Yes I'm sure they think they're being logical even as they bend to the herd, who in this day and age are an utterly nonsensical mass of sick animals. What they perceive and what reality is are two entirely different things.>But as an example of a rigorous thinker rooted in groupthink... have you ever discussed the jewish conspiracy with someone who's actually really smart? All the time and these are the people most inclined to ignore the norms and emotions of the people around them in order to put forth their best effort to piece together the truth. Building on someone else's work or incorporating their ideas isn't groupthink, the ideas are being considered on their merit and NOT on the basis of their acceptance within an emotionally and instinctively driven herd consensus. Intellectual rigor is only possible when the herd is ignored and only the ideas are considered, neither knee-jerk contrarianism nor slavish surrender to the allure of social conformity.> Despite our broad interconnectivity, we are individually more atomized than we have arguably ever been before. While this is true, the average person does not pack the gear for individualized thought, even though they are isolated they will subconsciously gravitate towards consensus or even just the appearance of consensus. A painfully isolated, terminally online normie will conform to whatever segment the online space he identifies with the most.
This is jewish feminism in action. Whites are the primary target for critique, and then men especially
>>544787713This is what happens when ur the nerdy frizzled book girl in the class who Chad thinks is a weird white girl but wont date
