The Comfortable Danger of Social Catharsis

The human desire for Catharsis is the bait used by the Liberal Media to lure one into a Suspension of Disbelief and thereby convert one to Wokism.

Readership: All;
Theme: Political Shenanigans
Length: 1,200 words
Reading Time: 4 minutes


Have you ever noticed how the internet lights up in response to certain news or other media covering current events?  Do you ever look on at the commotion with a sense of being emotionally distant or removed, feeling irrelevant, and wondering how to reestablish your sociopsychological balance?

There’s no need to worry about how to fit your own convictions into the larger narratives being presented to you, once you understand that it is a part of human nature to respond in such a manner.  The whole purpose of the MGM is to get you tuned in to the click-batey sensationalism of the liberal mythos and thereby sweep you away into a converged world characterized by a Suspension of Disbelief.  From a personal standpoint, it essentially displaces your thoughts about those things that truly matter in your life. Over time and repeated exposure, it becomes a Suspension of Belief itself.

This post follows up on a previous post, Infiltrating the Minds of the Masses through Suspension of Disbelief and Social Catharsis/Cathexis (2022-7-25), and is written in the hope of helping the reader understand how and why current events can evoke such a meaningless dry splash that only consumes one’s precious time and energies.

Social Catharsis

Emotional situations can elicit behavioral, cognitive, expressive, physiological, and subjective changes in individuals.  Affected individuals often use social sharing as a cathartic release of emotions.

Bernard Rimé [1] studied the patterns of social sharing after emotional experiences.  He found that 80–95% of emotional episodes are shared, and that the amount of social sharing of emotion increases as the intensity of the emotion increases.  The affected individuals talk about the emotional experience recurrently to people around them throughout the following hours, days, and weeks.  His research suggests that individuals seek social outlets in an attempt to modify their psychological state in order to restore personal homeostatic balance.  The results also indicated that this response is irrespective of culture, education, emotional valence, and gender.

Stages of Social Catharsis

Émile Durkheim [2] proposed three emotional stages of social sharing:

  1. Directly after emotional effects, the emotions are shared. Through sharing, there is a reciprocal stimulation of emotions and emotional communion.
  2. This leads to social effects like social integration and strengthening of beliefs.
  3. Finally, individuals experience a renewed trust in life, strength, and self-confidence.


It stands to reason that the underlying motive and the entire purpose of social sharing is to allow an individual to reach Durkheim’s third stage.  However, scientists studying emotional affect have found differences in motives for the social sharing of positive and negative emotions.

1. Positive Emotions

A study by Langston [3] found that individuals share positive events to capitalize on the positive emotions they elicit. Reminiscing the positive experience augments positive affects like temporary mood and longer-term well-being.

In general, the motives behind social sharing of positive events are to recall the positive emotions, inform others, and gain attention from others. All three motives are representative of what Langston identified as social “Capitalization”. Red Pilled readers will recognize that women are especially prone to these behaviors, but it is true for men too.

A study by Gable et al. [4] confirmed Langston’s “capitalization” theory by demonstrating that the relationship quality is enhanced when partners are responsive to positive recollections. The responsiveness increased levels of intimacy and satisfaction within the relationship.

We now have a name for this kind of online behavior: Positive Social Capitalization.

2. Negative Emotions

In contrast to positive social capitalization, Rimé’s studies suggest that the motives behind the social sharing of negative emotions are to vent, articulate, understand, bond, and gain social support. Negatively affected individuals do not necessarily seek to restore positive affects but instead often seek out the meaning of life (hello Jordan Peterson!) and emotional support from others in order to combat feelings of anger, depression, loneliness, and stress after a tragic event.

Collective Catharsis

Collective responses to emotional events are similar to individual responses, but on a larger scale.

When communities are affected by an emotional event, members repetitively share emotional experiences. According to Rimé, every round of sharing elicits an emotional reactivation in both the sender and the receiver. This then stimulates and reactivates the need to share in both.

Positive events can bring people together, whereas negative events create a distended need for catharsis that ripples outward like concentric waves emanating from a stone tossed into a pond. The snowballing and self-perpetuating continuance of this social sharing throughout a community leads to high amounts of emotional recollection and “emotional overheating”.

For example, After the 2001-9-11 event in New York city and the 2004 terrorist attacks in Madrid, it was found that more than 80% of respondents shared their emotional experience with others.

Stages of Collective Catharsis

Pennebaker and Harber [5] defined three stages of collective responses to emotional events.

  1. A state of “emergency” takes place in the first month after the emotional event. In this stage, there is an abundance of thoughts, talks, media coverage, and social integration based on the event.
  2. A “plateau” occurs in the second month. Abundant thoughts remain, but the amount of talks, media coverage, and social integration decreases.
  3. “Extinction” occurs after the second month in which people come to accept the event and have adjusted psychologically. People gradually forget about the event as its memory is displaced in favor of newer and more relevant events.


We are constantly inundated by liberal viewpoints that invite us to enter into the world wide web of Woke and thereby lose our moorings in reality and sound reason.  We are intensely pressured to integrate these viewpoints into our world view and play along with the game of identity politics at the risk of being doxed, ostracized, shadowbanned, shamed, socially rejected, targeted, and/or unemployed if we don’t.

Our initial reaction is to fear such outcomes, but the Lord tells us the opposite.

17 “Therefore, come out from their midst and be separate,” says the Lord.
“And do not touch what is unclean;
And I will welcome you.
18 “And I will be a father to you,
And you shall be sons and daughters to Me,”
Says the Lord Almighty.

2nd Corinthians 6:17-18 (NASB)

Resisting this urge to merge is not quite as simple as turning off the Boob Tube and opening your Bible.  As we have learned from this essay, the human psychological needs for a cathartic release, psychological integrity, trust, and social relevance, all compel a vast majority of people to respond to what is perceived to be significant news and/or world events by talking about it and sharing their thoughts and experiences, thereby attaining a homeopathic balance by keeping themselves within the ever shifting Overton Window.

Readers need to be well aware of any type of news or information that they are exposed to, as this will affect their thoughts and what they talk about in the upcoming days and weeks.

Σ Frame Maxim 33 (Jack): It’s easier to tear down than to build up. Destruction is simple but creation is long and labor intensive. A simpleton naturally creates discord, but it requires a united collaboration of the wise to foster civility and unity.

Exit Questions

  1. By participating in the cathartic activities surrounding the larger social narrative, are you creating harmony or are you fostering animosity?
  2. With each click of the mouse or remote, with each story you hear or read, is your mind converging or diverging from the narratives that are antithetical to faith?


  1. Rimé, Bernard; “Emotion Elicits the Social Sharing of Emotion: Theory and Empirical Review,” Emotion Review 1:1 (2009) 60–85.  [DOI]
  2. Durkheim, Émile; The elementary forms of the religious life, a study in religious sociology. Translated by Swain, Joseph Ward. George Allen & Unwin. (1915)
  3. Langston, Christopher A.; “Capitalizing on and coping with daily-life events: Expressive responses to positive events,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 67:6 (1994) 1112–1125.  [DOI]
  4. Gable, Shelly L.; Reis, Harry T.; Impett, Emily A.; Asher, Evan R.; “What Do You Do When Things Go Right?  The Intrapersonal and Interpersonal Benefits of Sharing Positive Events,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87:2 (2004) 228–245.  [DOI]
  5. Pennebaker, James W.; Harber, Kent D.; “A Social Stage Model of Collective Coping: The Loma Prieta Earthquake and The Persian Gulf War,” Journal of Social Issues, 49:4 (1993) 125–145.  [DOI]


About Jack

Jack is a world traveling artist, skilled in trading ideas and information, none of which are considered too holy, too nerdy, nor too profane to hijack and twist into useful fashion. Sigma Frame Mindsets and methods for building and maintaining a masculine Frame
This entry was posted in Agency, Attitude, Calculated Risk Taking, Collective Strength, Conflict Management, Conserving Power, Conspiracy Theories, Convergence, Counterfeit/False Paradigms, Cultural Anthropology, Culture Wars, Decision Making, Discerning Lies and Deception, Elite Cultural Influences, Enduring Suffering, Freedom, Personal Liberty, Fundamental Frame, God's Concept of Justice, Holding Frame, Identity, Introspection, Media, Moral Agency, News Critique, Politics, Power, Psychology, Purpose, Self-Concept, Self-Control, Society, The Power of God, Zeitgeist Reports. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to The Comfortable Danger of Social Catharsis

  1. thedeti says:

    Sort of on topic.

    How the mainstream media and current society has treated the manosphere is illustrative of your post.

    Whenever something new or not well understood comes on the scene, there is an immediate need to cast it as “good” or “bad”. So it was with men’s advocacy and men’s interest issues such as PUA, MGTOW, men’s rights, and men’s interest in relationships and sex. These were adjudged “bad” because they don’t serve the feminine imperative and because portions of them could be viewed as threatening or “creepy”. The effect is to reduce the entire entity down to a few easily understood, easily digestible “sound bites”.

    The sound bites the current societal zeitgeist associates with men’s advocacy and the manosphere are…

    — Incel
    — 3l!0t R0dger / T5arn@3v
    — MGTOW (to them, it’s “Men Groaning Terrible On Women”)

    Anytime anyone in “society” talks about “the manosphere”, it’s always, “Oh, you mean those incels who killed those girls in California and Canada?”, or “Oh, you mean those weird Miggtauuuu guise who don’t want women and spend all day online talking at each other about how terrible women are?”, or, most often, “Oh, you mean those men who hate women? No wonder they can’t get laid.”

    To our current society, any criticism of women is “hate” and “misogyny”. Any suggestion that women might bear some responsibility for our society’s current ills is “hate” and “blame mongering” and “whining” and “complaining”. Anytime men get together to talk about what they want from relationships and the discussion does not slavishly serve women or women’s interests, it’s “whinging” and “b!tching” and “hatemongering”. Anything men want is “selfishness” and “misogyny”. When a man gets something he wants and a woman doesn’t, it’s “abuse”.

    The best things anyone says about this place is that it has laid bare women’s dual mating strategy of AFBB, and helped men see that marriage is a bad deal for men.

    Of course there is much more to what has been discussed here. But because our society has a need to understand it and distill it down, it got broken down into “incels and men who hate women”.

    Liked by 5 people

    • feeriker says:

      “Of course there is much more to what has been discussed here. But because our society has a need to understand it and distill it down, it got broken down into “incels and men who hate women”.”

      This really just serves as confirmation that MPAI.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Sharkly says:

      “All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” ~ Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)

      “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” ~ Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948)

      Liked by 1 person

    • thedeti says:

      “MGTOW (to them, it’s “Men Groaning Terrible On Women”)”

      Now that I think about it, what they really call it is Misogynists Groaning Terrible On Women”.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. Pingback: Sodomite Orgies Yes, Communion and Hymns No | okrahead

  3. Devon70 says:

    It’s expected in the West that every guy will be a feminist. A week ago a female co-worker was talking to me about a true crime podcast that was being done by a female FBI agent. She was upset that the FBI hadn’t hit their goal of being 40% female and the expectation is that I should care about that. Since I’m at work I just changed the subject. I won’t ever agree with feminist points but I don’t want to get into an argument at work either.


    • feeriker says:

      The best workplace policy for any man to set for himself is to ignore women in the workplace as much as possible. Whether they are “toxic” or not. Whether they are “productive” or not. By paying any attention to them whatsoever, a man is validating women’s presence in a place where 90 – 99 percent of them don’t belong in the first place.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Pingback: Frustrated Collective Catharsis as an Incentive for Social Unrest | Σ Frame

  5. Pingback: The Distension of Cathartic Cathexis | Σ Frame

  6. Pingback: Hexis Cathexis and Voodoo Catharsis | Σ Frame

  7. Pingback: It’s too easy to blame everything on Feminism | Σ Frame

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s