Mass Hysteria

[tom]

Mass Hysteria, its always women who generate mass hysteria leading to Moral Panics, that's where warrior men take action on a mass hysteria. Also Economic Bubbles are another manifestation of action taken on mass hysteria were things get grossly miss valued, like the Tulip Bubble. Looking at several bubbles like the Tulip Mania (you know women were the prime drives behind overvaluing flowers) or the 2000's housing bubble it seems like about 10 times the average male income is the point of collapse. The education bubble is about 75% there. The next recession will put the education bubble over the edge as incomes will fall and higher ed will up there prices. I will make a prediction of the next bubble, defense and weapons.

Mass Hysteria need not always be pathologically destructive. Its a natural thing that women do and in the ancient past had a useful purpose. 30,000 years ago the wolves or lions would find an easy meal eating the kids and the women would collectively go into mass hysteria and trigger a moral panic. Men would be cajoled/guilt manipulated into staying up all night watching and warriors would spring into action hunting down some wolves or lions. But mass hysteria can easily be triggered(gamed) and used for nefarious purposes as we are exclusively seeing today.

This explanation of the Three Estates of the Realm restated in biological and evolutionary terms. Explains what progressives, conservatives and libertarians want, and why, all without ideology or psychology, purely with biology and evolution.



Political Triangle
Social Class Triangle
Spectrum of Self-Ownership

[tom]

This was from the site five thirty eight on October 20, 2016. About 2 weeks before the actual election. Most news and various liberal sites showed countless polls proving Hillary was going to win by a massive landslide.



The main stream media is using the narrative of negative Trump polls a year after he won the election. The actual reality before the election was clearly different from the narrative. Perhaps outrage exhaustion from prolonged cognitive dissonance caused by these certain narratives may happen. Multiple new virtuous victim narratives have been attepted to create new mass hysteria but all have failed so far.

[tom]

When I saw this hash tag #MeToo
Wow, that's pretty clear cut tell of mass hysteria. Its the sex scandal mass hysteria. As the left is currently loosing the narrative they are wholesale eating there own. Many of us Red Pilled and MGTOW guys have all suffered these kinds of attacks, built up our immunity, we know how to fight these social arson's. But the left which was previously untouchable has no experience or made any defense against SJW attacks. Hollywood is in a firestorm and no man is being spared. This is there punishment for loosing the narrative and Trumps victories. What comes post firestorm?

Another Book - Malleus Maleficarum (1486) - It was second most printed book after the Bible in the late middle ages. If you substitute witch for feminist the social psychology on female malfeasance is dead on. The supernatural stuff is not true obviously, lots of physical false equivalencies and generalizations that are open to abuse. It was these poor constructs which was the best answers to female hysteria and lies used to obscure treachery.

Vague rules are exploited for abuse Today. Like the false rape and sexual harassment hysteria where you are guilty until found innocent under an SJW inquisition. There is a good reason why feminist decry the Malleus Maleficarum, it has accurate red pill like truth on female behavior which feminist want to keep men ignorant and in denial about.

In the late middle ages things like poising was rampantly done by women, drugging was not clearly understood, this was a time when the black death was still making comebacks, a great cover for poisoning. There was a reason this book was so popular.



The Apocrypha was part of the Bible for nearly 2000 years, it was removed in 1885. Clearly some MGTOW - Red Pill wisdom in there.
Ecclesiasticus 25: 15-16
15 There is no head above the head of a serpent; and there is no wrath above the wrath of an enemy.
16 I had rather dwell with a lion and a dragon, than to keep house with a wicked woman.

Remember the Salem Witch Trials, the prime drivers behind this mass hysteria was three teenage girls, it was mostly female on female violence but they also singled out MGTOW men. The Salem witch trial accusing teenage girls seemed immune to question.

We see a similar immune to question narrative reoccurring in mass media, Some young girls are busted for making a large haul of illegal drugs from some third world country. The press makes excuses for them and argues they should be freed. Often after a short stay in prison they are set free.

[Mark_in_Bangkok]

... its always women who generate mass hysteria ... in the ancient past had a useful purpose. ... But ... can easily be triggered ... for nefarious purposes as we are exclusively seeing today.

I'd never thought about it that way.

I hope you'll explain more about this.

.

[MrMan]

Mass Hysteria, its always women who generate mass hysteria leading to Moral Panics, that's where warrior men take action on a mass hysteria. Also Economic Bubbles are another manifestation of action taken on mass hysteria were things get grossly miss valued, like the Tulip Bubble. Looking at several bubbles like the Tulip Mania (you know women were the prime drives behind overvaluing flowers)

Why would women be the prime drivers behind the tulip bubble. The high price of flowers may be because women overvalue them. But the valuation for tulips in the Netherlands was ridiculously high, and this was from their being sold on an exchange. Is there any evidence that women were active in trading on the financial markets in the Netherlands hundreds of years ago?

The word 'hysteria' is related to hysterectomy. If you ask me if I believe that women are more prone to hysteria, I would agree. If a plane hits an air pocket and drops, you are much more likely to hear a woman go into some kind of loud emotional panic attack than a man. Most women don't, but more women do than men.

But economic bubbles do not have to be driven by hysteria. A rational person could realize that he is participating in a bubble and try to get out before the bubble bursts. The housing bubble wasn't caused by women acting in an emotional hysterical manner, or I've never heard any evidence of it. It was caused because the organizations and individuals lending out money did not bear the risk for doing so. Those who bore the risk were unaware of the risk. The banks no longer had to lend to good prospects. They could lend to anyone and sell the loan. The loans ended up in a security bought by investors, many of whom did not realize how risky they were. The valuation companies valued loans based on the idea of prices going up at 5% consistently, which was unreasonable.

When it comes to student loans, lenders make loans but do not bear financial responsibility for them (maybe), since the government guarantees the loan. The one who bears the risk, the college student, is often young and uninformed of the true risk of the financial instrument. Much of the public is uninformed or just doesn't care about the risk the government bears.

I'm getting a message for a bad link, btw.

[tom]

My assumption on flowers was this simple premise, who is more interested in flowers men or women? That answers is hands down women. Women's avarice was likely the initial push that got that mania going is my speculation. Economic bubbles are a psycho-social phenomena with an irrational bases.

One of the main drivers of the housing bubble was masses of greedy women in a collective feedback loop of ever increasing avarice.

[MrMan]

My assumption on flowers was this simple premise, who is more interested in flowers men or women? That answers is hands down women. Women's avarice was likely the initial push that got that mania going is my speculation.

The demand for flowers in general probably has a lot more to do with women than men. But the men handled the complex calculations and buying on exchanges, as far as I know. I don't know about centuries ago in Holland for sure, but I would imagine that is the case. But that did not create the bubble. The bubble was a result of the market valuing the price of tulips beyond any realistic valuation for the tulip.

Economic bubbles are a psycho-social phenomena with an irrational bases.

Why do they have to be irrational? From the perspective of the common good, yes, driving up the price of tulips farms so that you'd have to have many, many generations of tulips to pay for the value of one to justify the market capitalization seems irrational. But from the perspective of the individual who realizes the price is too high, but thinks it has not reached its peak, but still has further to go, he can participate in the bubble and make money off of it. One think that drives bubbles is ignorance, when players in the market do not realize the assets are overvalued.

I suspect bitcoin is over-valued. The risk is high that if it grows to a certain levels, governments may squash it. On the other hand, if certain governments back it but other governments oppose it, it could still be valuable but the legal risks could be high for certain players. It's guesswork.

If I think bitcoin is really overvalued right now, I could still be a rational actor and buy bitcoin.

One of the main drivers of the housing bubble was masses of greedy women in a collective feedback loop of ever increasing avarice.

I can understand the manosphere tendency to blame things on women. There are plenty of female vices we can discuss, but how was the housing bubble an example of this? I seem to recall an interview with one of the women who worked at a company who valued the CDOs, I think it was, on the investor end of the subprime loans. You could blame it on her being a woman. But I suspect you would find men in the office there, too. I suspect many of the financial experts who created these instruments were men, too. And from their perspective, it may have been rational to do so. I suspect they did not predict the danger of the securities they were designing, but even if they were time travelers from the future, their actions could have been perfectly rational if they were making themselves rich.

There are women in finance, but it seems to be a bit skewed toward more male participants. I'm not sure about that, though. If you look at Goldman Sach's webpage as an example of a company in the finance industry, they put a bunch of faces up there for us to see, racially and in terms of gender, lots of women, many of them rather good-looking, in reasonably high roles. But they could be cherry picking faces to make themselves look more diverse.

[tom]

Women are not the only factor, they are often but not always the starting factor. Women's hysteria can be manipulated for nefarious purposes.