LIAM DEBOER: This is the feminine conflict mode operating through bureaucracy. The result is societies that cannot handle direct confrontation because every dispute immediately gets routed through institutional mediation.

every dispute immediately gets routed through institutional mediation. We've lost the capacity for what de Waal observed in male chimpanzee interactions.  Direct conflict, clear resolution, and then rapid reconciliation. Instead we get proxy conflicts that never truly resolve because the underlying tensions are never directly confronted.  --Liam DeBoer

https://t.co/69BwFlnfKa

— Mike Walgenbach (@Walgenbach82743) September 4, 2026

We were told that a more feminized society would result in less conflict.  But reality has determined that a lie.  

Frans de Waal, 1948-2024, spent decades studying chimpanzees social dynamics at Arnhem Zoo and discovered something that revolutionized our understanding of primate politics.  Most conflicts aren't initiated by the strongest males.  They're orchestrated by females who recruit others to do the actual combat.  The pattern is observable.  A female approaches a male screaming and gesturing in the direction of her opponent until she's aroused him to such a pitch that he launches a furious attack on the other animal.  The instigator herself never directly participates in the ensuing fight.  This pattern of behavior is our new normal.  

The sequence is always the same: 

1) Identification of Target, 

2) Signal of Distress, 

3) Recruitment of enforcement, then 

4) Withdrawal during consequences.  

The instigator is the most influential player in the entire drama but she never lifts a hand.  The fighting happens through proxy.  

Now look at every feminized Institution in Western societies and watch how conflicts unfold. University bias reporting where students identify "harmful" content, file a complaint, then withdraw while administrative process investigates and punishes.  Corporate HR systems where an employee signals distress about workplace behavior, appeals to HR, then steps back while investigation proceeds through company policy.  Social media moderation, where users flag offensive content, appeal to platform authorities, then withdraw while algorithmic review systems determine violations and deliver consequences.  The pattern is identical across all domains: Identify Target, signal distress, appeal to Authority, withdraw while the system delivers consequences.  This is the feminine conflict mode operating through bureaucracy.  We haven't gotten rid of conflict, we've simply delegated it.  

We are creating systems that amplify female initiated coalition behavior at civilizational scale.  The result is societies that cannot handle direct confrontation because every dispute immediately gets routed through institutional mediation. We've lost the capacity for what de Waal observed in male chimpanzee interactions.  Direct conflict, clear resolution, and then rapid reconciliation. Instead we get proxy conflicts that never truly resolve because the underlying tensions are never directly confronted. The promise was that feminization would reduce violence and create more Cooperative societies.  Instead, we got surveillance states where disagreement becomes a compliance issue routed through bureaucratic systems that monitor and punish rather than resolve. What de Waal observed in a zoo enclosure we've made the organizing principle of Western Civilization: the scream, the point, the appeal to Authority, the withdrawal, while others handle enforcement.  The only difference is scale, and scale is everything. 

Chimpanzee Politics: Power and Sex Among Apes, Frans de Waal, 1982.

This was entertaining.

LIAM OUT LOUD: So learn to be thankful for enemies rather than perplexed or angered by them.

Liam Out Loud.

Liam DeBoer @ YouTube.

Liam Out Loud @ Instagram.

Liam Out Loud @ Facebook.

If you find yourself feeling annoyed, angry, or impatient with the world or the people in it, I have some advice worth taking seriously.  Negative emotions are almost always the result of reality failing to meet our expectations.  You have no control over the world or the people in it. Most people barely have control over themselves.  That leaves only one variable that you can govern reasonably: your expectations.  

Marcus Aurelius understood this well.  He advised beginning each morning by reminding yourself that you'll encounter the busybody, the ungrateful, arrogant, deceitful, envious, and unsocial.  Once you accept this frame, once you accept that undesirable people exist and always will, you stop feeling shocked or personally wronged when you encounter them.  Go a step further, and admit that parts of you are undesirable as well and the reaction softens more.  You're no longer offended.  You are simply meeting expectations.  At that point, irritation gives way to something more useful, gratitude even.  Why wouldn't you want to learn from someone else's mistakes instead of paying the full cost of making them yourself?  With this mindset, angry, bitter, resentful, lazy, and ignorant people you encounter are no longer obstacles that you failed to avoid.  They become walking lessons.  The wise man encounters a fool and improves himself.  The fool encounters a fool and acts foolishly.  There may even be something shameful in allowing such people to unsettle us.  As Epictetus put it, if someone were to hand your body over to a stranger, you would be outraged; yet you think nothing of handing over your mind to anyone who provokes you allowing it to be disturbed and confused. So learn to be thankful for enemies rather than perplexed or angered by them.  Used properly, they become fuel for self-improvement.  Used poorly, they drag you down into the same resentment that consumes them. 

LIAM OUT LOUD: In [Nietzsche's] view, women, particularly in their role as caregivers and moral enforcers, tend to prioritize safety and compassion over risk and freedom. In that instinct, while natural, is easily weaponized by totalitarian systems.

women have been propagandized to see every relationship as a power dynamic, except one with the State, which is ironically the centralization of raw power.  They've been told that to rely on a man is weakness but to rely on a bureaucracy is empowerment. . . . A woman without her own child often directs her maternal instincts towards abstract causes infantilizing minorities under the guise of social justice. --Liam Out Loud

George Orwell once wrote, "Women are always and inevitably on the side of the state."  He wasn't being misogynistic, he was making a psychological observation.  In his view, women, particularly in their role as caregivers and moral enforcers, tend to prioritize safety and compassion over risk and freedom.  In that instinct, while natural, is easily weaponized by totalitarian systems.  When conformity is marketed as compassionate, control is rebranded as care, the State taps into the feminine psyche to enforce ideological obedience.  

Now consider this.  Men will do almost anything to attract a mate, so when the state captures women through propaganda, redefining tyranny as empathy and compliance as virtue, men follow, especially those who can't compete in the traditional dating market.  They feminized themselves and trade strength for submission.  This is what evolutionary biologists call the "sneaky fucker" strategy, low-status males mimicking feminine traits or moral positions in hopes of reproductive access.  

And while all of this unfolds, families disintegrate.  Single motherhood, a top predictor of poverty and social dysfunction, becomes the norm.  Children from single-parent homes are far less likely to climb the economic ladder, and who steps in as provider and protector?  Not the father.  The state.  But here's the kicker.  The state is funded disproportionately by men, so rather than supporting the women they married and raised children with directly, men subsidized the state, which in turn provides for women through social programs. Why?  Because women have been propagandized to see every relationship as a power dynamic, except one with the State, which is ironically the centralization of raw power.  They've been told that to rely on a man is weakness but to rely on a bureaucracy is empowerment.  This is not progress.  This is dependency with a new face, and both men and women are suffering.  The childless middle-aged woman and the incel are two sides of the same broken culture.  A woman without her own child often directs her maternal instincts towards abstract causes infantilizing minorities under the guise of social justice.  What we are witnessing from psychologically unwell men and women is Nietzsche's concept of ressentiment, envy dressed up as morality.  The strong became evil.  The week became good.  Strength became tyranny.  We now live in a pathologically soft society that sides even with those who harm it, where punishing crime feels unfair, and victimhood is the highest virtue.  Nietzsche called them the tarantulas, those who preach justice but act from bitterness.  They don't want to uplift the weak, they want to drag down the strong.  Orwell saw them too.  "Most middle-aged socialists while theoretically pining for classless society clean like glue to their miserable fragments of social prestige."

These bitter, well-educated, and affluent types don't actually care about the downtrodden, they weaponize them.  The real target is success, competence, independence, because those qualities expose their own inadequacies.  But the answer to pathological femininity isn't pathological masculinity.  It's not swinging the pendulum too far in the other direction.  The answer is balance.  Masculinity and femininity are not enemies, they're symbiotic.  We've simply overcorrected.  We escaped a world where masculinity once tyrannized femininity only to arrive in a world where femininity is tyrannizing masculinity.  We are not oppressed by patriarchy, we are being suffocated by pathological softness, envy, and resentment, and unless we recognize this imbalance, the future will not be free.  It will be emotionally manipulated, morally confused, and biologically unsustainable.

Follow Liam on Facebook.