224C. Can Social Control Be Used to Reduce Domestic Violence?
Governments worldwide use social control initiatives to alter public sentiment. Often this is done secretly, in bad faith. But can it be used transparently to promote public health and safety?
I published two papers last November on the topic of Social Control that may be useful resources for those interested in this topic:
Social control and associated influence campaigns are used by innumerable private and public entities to shape public sentiment. Sometimes these are directed domestically, other times against a specific foreign country, and can even be global. I gave an example of how the USA Department of Defence (recently changed to Department of War to remove the pretence, a move I am in support of) tapped Dr. Seuss during WW2 as part of a social control program to dehumanize Japanese people both domestically and globally. This allowed them to be rounded up and sent to concentration camps, and to confiscate their property, with little or no social push back. It also facilitates warfare.
Thus this is hardly a new phenomenon, and with the advent of AI and budgets perhaps 1000 times larger than they were in 1942, this has become a normalized practice that affects all of us regularly. If you are active on social media, you might be targeted by influence campaigns multiple times a day.
As you no doubt have heard, there has been an influence campaign on all mass media and social media platforms, and even Netflix, pushing a narrative that men are becoming increasingly misogynistic due to a shadowy organisation dubbed “The Manosphere”. Scary stuff.
But then an all woman research team dropped a poll asking specifically about this. I wrote an entire paper on this this week:
Wait, what? It actually showed very modest rates of misogyny compared to misandry. How is that possible that the facts contract every major news source? If you watch the researchers talk about it, they aren’t zealots. They are as surprised about their results as we are. But I predicted their results in my paper on Supremacy People and language.
How could I be right and all these governments and organisations be wrong (isn’t the first time)? Well, they aren’t dumb. At least not that dumb. They know they are spreading misinformation as part of a social control campaign. I make them, I can smell them.
What are they up to? I can only speculate, but clearly there seems to be a push to proscribe “The Manosphere”. That means make it and all of its participants illegal. Like the UK did with anti genocide activists by proscribing them on July 5th of 2025 (the high court later ruled it unconstitutional, but not before 2700+ activists were arrested). If that proscription wasn’t ruled unconstitutional, ultimately hundreds of thousands of people could have been rounded up. Even grandma.
I assume this is the Plan for “The Manosphere”, a very loose array of influencers who mostly focus on men’s rights and dating education. They want to legalize a man’s right to DNA test their own children (would you believe you don’t have that right in the USA? Why is that?). Truly a radical organisation. Governments don’t want men to know if a child isn’t theirs, because they want you to pay for that kid, not the government. There is a lot of money at stake. Also, as I explained in Dating Economics, the Epstein Club has survived and rewired the entire dating economy to support their insatiable lust for casual sex. That’s a lot of DNA flying around…
So what to do when a bomb like the UK Poll drops, threatening to disrupt your multi billion dollar global social control campaign? Well, you threaten and deflect of course! With a huge scary shiny object.
That was a CNN report that 50 guys in Europe who were arrested back in 2024 (so they’ve been sitting on this story for a while, in case of emergency) had a mysterious forum populated with instructions for men on how to drug and SA their wives. The really scary part was that it had 62 Million Visitors in just one month! Wow! That’s a fantastic number. Then the internet was flooded with stories saying that 62M Men visited this site in one month. Having crushed a few secret societies myself, one thing I know is that if it has 62M members, it’s not a secret. And people engaged in crimes against humanity value their secrecy. So this is definitely not passing the smell test.
So I pinched myself and asked Google AI for some info:
Wait, what? I’m shocking myself with this paper. There are 2 things very wrong with this answer:
62 million seems to be a VERY popular and coincidental number these days
Why would google start talking about cheating men when I ask about how many men are married in the USA?!!?!
Even Google algorithm seems out to slander men. Hey Google, while you are at it, how many married women cheat on their husbands? …Crickets…
What is going on here? It’s almost like they might be planning something that could trigger kinetic resistance from civilian men. Like interfering in elections or instituting a mandatory military draft. The campaign against Japanese people during WW2 wasn’t this large or aggressive.
So imagine that you just read an article from CNN that implies that EVERY MARRIED MAN IN THE USA IS DRUGGING AND SA-ing THEIR WIVES! If I was them (and gullible) I’d be losing my collective mind too. Heck, all married men could be Pod People from space ready to take over Earth! I always thought there was something suspicious about married men.
Thank you Google, that’s what I thought.
But hey, people completely forgot about that pesky UK Poll on misandry. Back to our previous scripted social control program.
Is This Making Us Safer?
This push against men, misogyny, “The Manosphere”, and SA is all being advertised as an effort to make women safer. Men are disposable so we don’t worry about them. But is it working? Men are proving to be remarkably resistant to “overwhelming” misogyny programming. I would imagine that the number of men who “like” women is dropping, raising the yellow “Neutral” zone. But we still have 72% that like women. That’s pretty friendly. This makes sense to me because men are biologically wired to self-sacrifice to protect women and children. It’s hard to reprogram 250,000 years of very successful evolution.
But women are not proving to be so resilient. I don’t know why, but I just pointed out that this isn’t a new thing in my previous paper about protecting women. Being able to “switch sides” after their men are killed in a raid has always been something they can do, and makes sense from a species survival view. After all, if you lose your men, that’s a problem. But if you lose your women, or even half of them, it’s likely game over for your tribe. Thus prioritizing women’s safety is just smart biology. Some species even have the female eat the male after he’s done his duty. The reverse is not a thing.
As misandry rates rise to 25% (already happened) or even 50%, this generates threat against men, by definition. Men can handle a lot of threat, but at some point they break and attempt to neutralize the threat. That’s also biology. Humans were arguably the most dangerous species on the planet before they invented modern weapons. If this is part of the Soviet/Russian demoralization campaign that was started in the 1970s, then they are doing a fantastic job.
Or, maybe this was an unintended effect of a social control program that didn’t have any qualified neuroscientists involved. I think it’s fair to say women weren’t this angry a few years ago. I would have noticed. We all would have noticed. I think this happened very rapidly. That means the violence statistics you would expect all that hate to generate haven’t been collected and aggregated yet. Pretty soon it should start flooding in. An increase in female on male violence (under reported as usual) and an increase in male on female violence.
So while I am not gullible enough to believe the purpose of this social control campaign is to make women safer, if it was the goal it is a complete failure. The women piling onto LI and man-shaming out of anger, fear, or personal interest are just making themselves less safe.
But Could We Actually Use Social Control to Make Us Safer?
Of course my focus here is going to be on making women safer, but I don’t see any reason why we can’t make men safer at the same time. I think that’s a win-win.
Promoting the Large Tribe Worldview that I introduced in 2017 in my article on making more productive teams using neuroscience would de-escalate the situation immediately. It would be initially opposed by racists, bigots, and sexists. Which, are pervasive at the moment. But hey, AI algorithms are proving remarkably effective so it could be done.
I commented on how having huge numbers of women’s studies programs in universities, but zero men’s studies programs, is causing friction between the genders. We could reverse this by giving men a voice in society with men’s studies programs. Right now all they have is a loose collection of men’s rights activists on the internet. That’s “The Dreaded Manosphere”. That’s not going to disappear, just like women’s interest influencers aren’t going to disappear. Arresting women for giving women advice, or the same with men and men, doesn’t seem practical under any but the most authoritarian governments.
If we are going to normalize sex work (which is already happening), then let’s make it fully legal but regulated. Let’s create support systems for them like other workers have (even though they are losing these too in some countries). Let’s educate our people using social control programs to promote Consent Culture. Australia actually did exactly that, because very few people in Australia understand Consent Culture. It’s a big problem. Their campaign wasn’t very successful because in every ad the men (and boys) were shown as perpetrators and women as victims. This alienated half the population, and in this case maybe the more important half.
We can also then tax, track, and measure what is going on there. We could limit the number of partners per man to 50 per year to improve public health and rein in the Epstein class. Of course, they can just fly to another country/island and do another 50 there so that might not work. As I mentioned in my paper on Dating Economics, we could subsidize young men so that they can actually cycle back into the action with women their age.
Our society has become so Dystopian that I’m concerned that Pandora’s Box is already open. The best solution would be a world where we go back to getting to know each other over time, not objectify each other and ourselves, and treat everyone as being “In Tribe”. Right now there are just too many bad actors profiting off of hate and warfare. As much as we want all these other nice things (like having children), we won’t deserve nice things until we get our house in order.
Oh, and my personal request would be that if we continue to have LinkedIn be a monopoly, I’d like it to be a protected work space where everyone is protected from shaming and hate speech. People shouldn’t have to wade through that ocean just to find a job. Even the political speech/news, as helpful as it is, should be segregated to a different channel at least as this is divisive and can stress people out.
Oh, and in case I didn’t make it clear already, helpful social control programs don’t need to be hidden. They can be transparent and subject to feedback from the community. It’s only the sleezy predatory ones that need to be hidden. That’s why all the social media companies are terrified about the possibility of their algorithms being exposed.