Latest / Honey Badger Radio / Women Say Killing Political Opponents Can Be Justified

Transcript

Women Say Killing Political Opponents Can Be Justified · Honey Badger Radio

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: All right, good morning, good afternoon, good evening, wherever you
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: may be, and welcome to Honey Badger Radio.
• 0:05
  Speaker 2: My name is Brian.
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: I'm with Allison, and this is Well it's maintaining frame
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: and we're gonna be talking about an article from well,
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: it's being shared on the daily Wire, but it's about
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: a study that was conducted and it finds that women
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: are more likely to support political assassinations. Seems like a
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: relevant topic.
• 0:27
  Speaker 3: Yeah, irrelevant and also a little bit poking holes in
• 0:30
  Speaker 3: that whole narrative of the angel and well, I guess
• 0:34
  Speaker 3: they're not in the house anymore. The angel everywhere forever,
• 0:37
  Speaker 3: wherever they go, that hits glitter and sneezes pearls or whatever.
• 0:43
  Speaker 3: Cries Amber. I'm getting a little mythological at this point,
• 0:47
  Speaker 3: but yeah, it's it's a poking the hole in that
• 0:49
  Speaker 3: whole narrative of women being the more nurturing gender. Well
• 0:57
  Speaker 3: maybe maybe sometimes maybe not. Maybe we'll see, you know,
• 1:01
  Speaker 3: we'll find out.
• 1:03
  Speaker 2: Yeah, looking at that today.
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: Before we get started, though, Allison, do you want to
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: do the things?
• 1:08
  Speaker 3: Of course? All right, So if you would like to
• 1:11
  Speaker 3: send us a message, the very best way for you
• 1:12
  Speaker 3: to do so is feed the Badger dot com slash
• 1:14
  Speaker 3: just the tip. We get the full benefit of whatever
• 1:17
  Speaker 3: funds you send, and you get the full benefit of
• 1:19
  Speaker 3: sending your comment not through YouTube's comment wood Chipper, and
• 1:24
  Speaker 3: so once again feed the Badger dot com slash just
• 1:26
  Speaker 3: the tip for those comments please guys send them on
• 1:29
  Speaker 3: to take a moment to load it up so you
• 1:31
  Speaker 3: are ready to send your comment through. You know think
• 1:34
  Speaker 3: we want to hear it all of your various you
• 1:38
  Speaker 3: know criticisms. Well, if you want to support what we're saying,
• 1:41
  Speaker 3: if you want to add something, if you want us
• 1:44
  Speaker 3: to talk about well maybe not jello wrestling, Let's let's
• 1:48
  Speaker 3: put a few of those comments please, So feed the
• 1:50
  Speaker 3: Badger dot com slash just the tip. And if you
• 1:53
  Speaker 3: want to support the show, the fundraiser is live at
• 1:55
  Speaker 3: freed the Badger dot com slash support and there are
• 1:58
  Speaker 3: some other ways to help out or take part with
• 2:02
  Speaker 3: the community Badger Nation. Don online if you want to
• 2:05
  Speaker 3: get in our discord, which has additional resources to make
• 2:08
  Speaker 3: these arguments and turn turn yourself into a machine against
• 2:13
  Speaker 3: the narrative. So look in the low bar for everything.
• 2:17
  Speaker 3: Go to feed the Badger dot com slash just the Tip,
• 2:20
  Speaker 3: and get ready to send those messages in as we
• 2:23
  Speaker 3: go through yet another destruction of the narrative, like a
• 2:29
  Speaker 3: deconstruction of the narrative. All right, so Brian, take it away.
• 2:33
  Speaker 1: All right, let's look at this article. So this is
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: from the Daily Wire. It is entitled women are more
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: likely to support political assassinations. Poll shows majority of Americans
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: now saying killing Trump or Mom Donnie would be justified,
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: new poll find So that's like the subtitle within the title.
• 2:51
  Speaker 3: Okay, I no offense, but I feel like one of
• 2:56
  Speaker 3: these things is not like the other.
• 2:59
  Speaker 2: Yeah, well, yeah, a little bit, you know, I will.
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: I will say that. And again, like you know, this
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: is a study. Take it with a bit of a
• 3:06
  Speaker 1: grain of salt. It doesn't necessarily reflect like the general populace.
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: But uh, I think the study was originally had one
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: intention and it got an unexpected outcome, at least from
• 3:21
  Speaker 1: the on the part of the yes, the study, And
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: so they're they're posting their findings, right, Well, we'll just
• 3:29
  Speaker 1: read the article.
• 3:30
  Speaker 3: No, let me guess, let me let me put my
• 3:32
  Speaker 3: my guests in first. All right, So, based on feminist confabulation,
• 3:40
  Speaker 3: they assumed they would find that women are less likely
• 3:43
  Speaker 3: to support political violence, and then they find that women
• 3:47
  Speaker 3: are more likely to support political violence, and I'm sure
• 3:50
  Speaker 3: we're going to I feel like the probability is high
• 3:56
  Speaker 3: that we are going to be enjoying a lot of
• 3:59
  Speaker 3: mental gym nastics. But maybe not in this article, But
• 4:03
  Speaker 3: if we actually looked at the study itself, I think
• 4:05
  Speaker 3: that we would find a lot of very elaborate mental
• 4:11
  Speaker 3: gymnastics to explain how this doesn't actually negate feminist confabulation, because,
• 4:17
  Speaker 3: as I have found out over my twenty five years
• 4:21
  Speaker 3: of study of feminist science, feminism has no predictive value.
• 4:25
  Speaker 3: In fact, it has negative predictive value. So if you
• 4:29
  Speaker 3: take what feminism would predict in any particular situation and
• 4:33
  Speaker 3: you invert it, you are much more likely to land
• 4:37
  Speaker 3: on what actually you find when you investigate reality. So
• 4:41
  Speaker 3: these are my predictions. Now I don't know if the
• 4:44
  Speaker 3: article itself will deliver on them, because maybe it's just
• 4:47
  Speaker 3: trying to honestly talk about this, who knows. But I
• 4:52
  Speaker 3: imagine if we'd go to the actual study that we
• 4:55
  Speaker 3: would find a lot of gymnastics trying to fit this assertion,
• 4:58
  Speaker 3: trying to slam this assertion into the feminist framework. But yeah,
• 5:03
  Speaker 3: so that's all that's my prediction. Let's sake it bears out.
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: Okay, all right, let's see, women are more likely than
• 5:12
  Speaker 1: men to believe political assassination can be justified as assassination
• 5:17
  Speaker 1: culture rises. According to polling exclusively obtained by The Daily Wire,
• 5:22
  Speaker 1: women on both the left and the right were fourteen
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: to twenty percent more likely than men to believe the
• 5:28
  Speaker 1: political assassination of high profile figures could be justified. The
• 5:32
  Speaker 1: Network Contagion Research Institute found Can.
• 5:36
  Speaker 3: I just get in here?
• 5:37
  Speaker 2: Yeah? Go ahead?
• 5:38
  Speaker 1: Can I?
• 5:38
  Speaker 3: Could this be the reason why when women gain political dominance?
• 5:42
  Speaker 3: This is a repeated pattern, Guys, an empire will get
• 5:47
  Speaker 3: to the height of its power, women will start to
• 5:51
  Speaker 3: be more prevalent in the public sphere and more influence
• 5:55
  Speaker 3: on politics, and then a couple generations later at all craters.
• 5:59
  Speaker 3: Could this be one? And why could be? Could the
• 6:02
  Speaker 3: insistence that people be defined in black categories based on
• 6:07
  Speaker 3: their beliefs be a reason why an advanced say a
• 6:11
  Speaker 3: republic or a democracy falls when women gain significant amount
• 6:18
  Speaker 3: of power. Just putting it out there, just asking the question.
• 6:21
  Speaker 3: I'm asking the question that is implied by these statistics,
• 6:25
  Speaker 3: the maybe we need the group of people less likely
• 6:28
  Speaker 3: to think that killing the person who disagrees with you
• 6:31
  Speaker 3: or is currently debating with you is not a really
• 6:34
  Speaker 3: productive way to conduct yourself if you want an advanced
• 6:37
  Speaker 3: system that actually can solve problems. Hmmm, that's I don't know.
• 6:42
  Speaker 3: I'll throw it out to you. Maybe maybe I'm just
• 6:44
  Speaker 3: completely completely off the wall here. I don't know. Guys
• 6:47
  Speaker 3: could kill me, Yeah, all right.
• 6:53
  Speaker 1: The poll comes amid a spike in political violence marked
• 6:56
  Speaker 1: by the assassinations of Charlie Kirk and United health Care
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: CEO Brian Thompson, as well as the attempt on President
• 7:04
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump's life. What is most surprising about the findings,
• 7:07
  Speaker 1: according to ncri's co founder Joel Finkelstein, is that those
• 7:12
  Speaker 1: who justified political assassinations were not part of traditional high
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: risk groups, but people of all persuasions and demographics. So
• 7:20
  Speaker 1: high risks are basically men, is.
• 7:23
  Speaker 3: What they're men?
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: Square, Yeah, white men, or as as presumed by the
• 7:28
  Speaker 1: sort of like establishment, you know, our media institutions.
• 7:32
  Speaker 2: Yeah yeah.
• 7:34
  Speaker 3: But but in particular they found one demographic, and the
• 7:38
  Speaker 3: thing is that people who study like terrorist groups know
• 7:42
  Speaker 3: that women are not are not like innocent bystandards. I
• 7:48
  Speaker 3: just got ustem monetize. Sorry, They're not innocent bystanders and
• 7:52
  Speaker 3: all of this. They're actually the functional core of these groups.
• 7:55
  Speaker 3: So they're the ones who are inspiring and directing the
• 7:58
  Speaker 3: violence and keeping the continent while men are going out
• 8:01
  Speaker 3: and killing themselves. Right, So when they say that men
• 8:06
  Speaker 3: are a high risk group for what, Okay, Like, have
• 8:10
  Speaker 3: you noticed so, for example, this is not a terrorist group,
• 8:13
  Speaker 3: but the polygamous moron communities. They never seem to get
• 8:17
  Speaker 3: rid of them, even though they keep arresting the men
• 8:19
  Speaker 3: in charge periodically. Why is that because it's the women,
• 8:24
  Speaker 3: the women who are the ones who actually have the
• 8:27
  Speaker 3: power of continuity and recruitment. So they just create a
• 8:32
  Speaker 3: new patriarch. They just pop out a new Newica patriarch.
• 8:35
  Speaker 3: You're not going to get rid of those communities until
• 8:37
  Speaker 3: you start implicating the women. So when they say high
• 8:40
  Speaker 3: risk group, okay, yes, men are more likely to engage
• 8:44
  Speaker 3: in violence. Women are more likely to support the structures
• 8:47
  Speaker 3: that make violence a reasonable thing to do. Right, That's
• 8:52
  Speaker 3: what women do. They support the structures that make violence
• 8:56
  Speaker 3: reasonable and something that men can invent in as a
• 9:01
  Speaker 3: legitimate life path. So when you say men are high risk.
• 9:05
  Speaker 3: I think women are higher risk, and women's extremism constructs
• 9:10
  Speaker 3: a situation of higher risk. It isn't necessarily the extremism
• 9:15
  Speaker 3: of the individual, but it's like a almost like a
• 9:19
  Speaker 3: a matrix that enables extremism to grow and thrive. And
• 9:26
  Speaker 3: if you don't get rid of the matrix, you don't
• 9:28
  Speaker 3: get rid of the extremism. Because the men are expendable.
• 9:31
  Speaker 3: These women are treating their men as expendable. You really
• 9:34
  Speaker 3: think that they're going to disappear when they're men, do No,
• 9:36
  Speaker 3: They're just going to make more men. Hell, there was
• 9:38
  Speaker 3: that UN camp with the female where they Isis, or
• 9:45
  Speaker 3: they might have been Isis where the women in this
• 9:49
  Speaker 3: UN camp, and they were former terror they involved in terror,
• 9:53
  Speaker 3: and of course the UN thinks that all women are innocent,
• 9:56
  Speaker 3: so they just put them in this camp and the
• 9:58
  Speaker 3: women would essentially drug and rape thirteen year old boys
• 10:02
  Speaker 3: to make more holy soldiers for their cause. And of
• 10:07
  Speaker 3: course the UN probably has no idea how to deal
• 10:09
  Speaker 3: with it. They're like, ah, well, well, we can't let
• 10:11
  Speaker 3: this continue. But I mean, it's not really a sexual violence,
• 10:15
  Speaker 3: so while we do with it, I mean, this is
• 10:17
  Speaker 3: just acceptable behavior by these women. But again, this is
• 10:21
  Speaker 3: and it's like watching a dog chew a toffee with
• 10:24
  Speaker 3: the un when it comes to actually recognizing the fact
• 10:28
  Speaker 3: that women create a matrix of violence, and they also
• 10:32
  Speaker 3: create the men embedded in that violence and who think
• 10:35
  Speaker 3: violence is their identity. And until again, until you address that,
• 10:39
  Speaker 3: until you recognize that actually women, because they do this,
• 10:43
  Speaker 3: are a higher risk than men, You're gonna just keep
• 10:46
  Speaker 3: having more of it. That and that's your thank you
• 10:50
  Speaker 3: too for coming to my misogynist tech ted talk. Let
• 10:53
  Speaker 3: us continue.
• 10:55
  Speaker 1: Yeah, well, I mean again, I think people are This
• 10:58
  Speaker 1: is why this study is important, because they're finding these things,
• 11:02
  Speaker 1: and yeah, they're surprised by it, but I'm not sure
• 11:05
  Speaker 1: they're going to throw it out and be like, well.
• 11:06
  Speaker 2: That's not happening.
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: So because I think the conversation is moving more in
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: this direction. But anyway, back to this article. So the
• 11:16
  Speaker 1: poll comes amid a spike already read that part. What
• 11:19
  Speaker 1: is most surprising about the findings, according to n see
• 11:22
  Speaker 1: our I's co founder and final scene, is that those
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: who justified political assassinations were not part of traditional high
• 11:27
  Speaker 1: risk groups, but people of all persuasions and demographics. We
• 11:30
  Speaker 1: dug into the data because it felt like it was
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: describing a deeper moral crisis. Final scene told the Daily Wire,
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: we assumed young men would be driving this given unemployment,
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: disengagement and declining graduation rates. That's why we explicitly examined gender.
• 11:45
  Speaker 1: What surprised us, honestly shocked us, was that women were
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: more likely to show tolerance for political violence.
• 11:52
  Speaker 3: What you know, every single time with these people, every
• 11:55
  Speaker 3: single time. All we made these proposal based on our
• 11:59
  Speaker 3: attitudes that women are wonderful, and we were shocked by
• 12:01
  Speaker 3: the reality that they weren't. At what point do we
• 12:04
  Speaker 3: just recognize that this isn't the case. Women aren't wonderful.
• 12:08
  Speaker 3: We just invent that because it's so important. We feel
• 12:11
  Speaker 3: like it's so important to please women. And here's the
• 12:14
  Speaker 3: other thing. They assumed young men would be driving this. No,
• 12:20
  Speaker 3: it's not young men who define what their purpose is.
• 12:24
  Speaker 3: In fact, these are groups and groups and groups of
• 12:27
  Speaker 3: young men who don't feel like they have a purpose.
• 12:29
  Speaker 3: It's why they want They get sucked into communism and
• 12:33
  Speaker 3: all of these other isms because they feel like communism
• 12:36
  Speaker 3: is going to give them a job, which is really
• 12:38
  Speaker 3: ironic considering why women get sucked into it, and it's
• 12:41
  Speaker 3: going to give them a purpose. Of course it doesn't,
• 12:43
  Speaker 3: but you know, and it's that is the motivation for it.
• 12:47
  Speaker 3: When I talk to them, that's what they That's what
• 12:49
  Speaker 3: I eventually parse out of what they're saying. So men
• 12:53
  Speaker 3: want a purpose when they're desperate, they want a purpose.
• 12:55
  Speaker 3: It's women who define that purpose as violence, who create
• 12:59
  Speaker 3: them made tricks of violence, and then populate it with
• 13:04
  Speaker 3: men who don't feel like they have a purpose outside
• 13:07
  Speaker 3: of these ridiculous threat narratives.
• 13:10
  Speaker 1: Okay, yeah, well I mean that well, what it tells
• 13:14
  Speaker 1: me is that like even if you make men's life harder,
• 13:19
  Speaker 1: they don't think that like lashing out with violence is
• 13:22
  Speaker 1: the answer. They like, I mean, for the most part,
• 13:25
  Speaker 1: they just check out. They basically they go inward and
• 13:29
  Speaker 1: they just sort of like do their own thing on
• 13:31
  Speaker 1: their own, right. They they I wouldn't call it retreat,
• 13:34
  Speaker 1: but they they they quit. You know, they basically just
• 13:40
  Speaker 1: check out, is what I wanted to say. And this
• 13:43
  Speaker 1: is like where you're getting like this stuff. This Basically
• 13:45
  Speaker 1: they go migtel, right. They know they know that like
• 13:48
  Speaker 1: violence isn't going to solve their problem anyway, and they're
• 13:53
  Speaker 1: not as they understand the consequences of it women. They
• 13:57
  Speaker 1: I mean, like when if you go on TikTok, you'll
• 14:00
  Speaker 1: find women advocating violence all the time. But the reason,
• 14:04
  Speaker 1: one of the reasons why they feel so brazen and
• 14:06
  Speaker 1: doing it is because they're not the ones that are
• 14:08
  Speaker 1: going to actually act on it. They're going to ask
• 14:11
  Speaker 1: men to act on it. They're going to try and
• 14:13
  Speaker 1: get men to do their dirty work for them. And
• 14:15
  Speaker 1: they have explicitly said this many many times online. So yeah,
• 14:21
  Speaker 1: I mean, and it's and it's not it's like it's
• 14:23
  Speaker 1: it's the true. It's been true through all of history.
• 14:27
  Speaker 1: Like women were always saying, good men, could you like
• 14:29
  Speaker 1: destroy that other tribe? You know, I don't like them
• 14:32
  Speaker 1: for whatever reason, you know, would you kill that leader
• 14:35
  Speaker 1: because I feel unsafe? And that's what they do. They
• 14:39
  Speaker 1: appeal to the men.
• 14:40
  Speaker 3: But yeah, they give men the purpose. Yeah, the men
• 14:43
  Speaker 3: are looking for a purpose, and some of them are
• 14:46
  Speaker 3: damaged enough that they'll find it in violence.
• 14:49
  Speaker 2: Mm hmm.
• 14:51
  Speaker 3: And it's the women that are setting up the preconditions
• 14:53
  Speaker 3: for men to actually regard that as their purpose. You know.
• 14:57
  Speaker 3: I both sides trouble have trouble with content with this.
• 15:02
  Speaker 3: The conservatives and the left side. Both have trouble contending
• 15:07
  Speaker 3: with this. As far as I can tell, women are
• 15:09
  Speaker 3: not angels, right, And the future out of this is
• 15:14
  Speaker 3: to recognize that that women are not angels. They are
• 15:19
  Speaker 3: only as good as the standards they are held to, Okay,
• 15:23
  Speaker 3: and they don't deserve carte blanche like absolution. They are
• 15:30
  Speaker 3: not blameless, right, and they are honestly. One of the
• 15:34
  Speaker 3: things that really bugs me now is how much this
• 15:38
  Speaker 3: narrative of female blamelessness has has colonized things like all
• 15:45
  Speaker 3: forms of media. So not only do we not hold
• 15:50
  Speaker 3: women to a standard, we allow women to tell themselves
• 15:54
  Speaker 3: over and over and over again that they are blameless
• 15:57
  Speaker 3: and any standard is actually patriarch oppression. And then we
• 16:01
  Speaker 3: wonder why everything is going to share and we give
• 16:04
  Speaker 3: them more political power, and then we wonder, why is
• 16:07
  Speaker 3: everything going to shit because you have an entire politically
• 16:10
  Speaker 3: empowered class that thinks it's blameless for everything. Right Again,
• 16:17
  Speaker 3: would this be a problem if if we had empowered
• 16:20
  Speaker 3: peasant women from the seventeenth century, Probably not as much,
• 16:23
  Speaker 3: because they had a sensive responsibility to the continuity of
• 16:27
  Speaker 3: their communities and to the health and well being of
• 16:31
  Speaker 3: their families. But that's not the case now because for
• 16:34
  Speaker 3: generations we've told women that any external standard is patriarchal oppression,
• 16:39
  Speaker 3: and they have, they have lowered themselves to the standards
• 16:43
  Speaker 3: we don't hold them to. That's what's happened. And again,
• 16:47
  Speaker 3: like the instinct, the knee jerk instinct I even see
• 16:50
  Speaker 3: among conservatives, is to blame men. Oh, you're not leading
• 16:54
  Speaker 3: them enough, okay, But leaders have the ability to enforce
• 16:59
  Speaker 3: compliance on some level, either socially or through some kind
• 17:04
  Speaker 3: of sanctions. And if you don't give that to men,
• 17:08
  Speaker 3: like you don't judge women based on their behavior in
• 17:11
  Speaker 3: your social group, how are men supposed to lead them
• 17:14
  Speaker 3: with no ability to actually make them do anything? Are
• 17:19
  Speaker 3: they just supposed to lead them with this supposed the
• 17:21
  Speaker 3: same kind of patriarchal miasma that feminism says pervades everything.
• 17:26
  Speaker 3: But in this case, it's good because it makes women
• 17:29
  Speaker 3: do things that are beneficial. Like it, it's insane thinking,
• 17:34
  Speaker 3: and it's on both sides. And yes, I know I'm
• 17:37
  Speaker 3: both siding, but I think it's true. Okay, let's keep going.
• 17:41
  Speaker 2: All right.
• 17:44
  Speaker 1: To conduct the poll, ncri US cloud Research prime panels
• 17:48
  Speaker 1: from a nationally representative sample of American adults concerting political attitudes,
• 17:53
  Speaker 1: public figures, and views on the future of the United States.
• 17:57
  Speaker 2: Respondents were asked to rate.
• 17:58
  Speaker 1: On a seven point scale, well, how unjustified or justified
• 18:03
  Speaker 1: would someone be if they killed Zorhan Mamdani? And how
• 18:07
  Speaker 1: unjustified or justified would someone be if they killed Donald Trump.
• 18:12
  Speaker 1: Although women commit far fewer murders in the United States,
• 18:15
  Speaker 1: according to for roughly thirteen percent of all killings over
• 18:18
  Speaker 1: the past five years, the poll found that they were
• 18:20
  Speaker 1: more likely than men to say a political assassination could
• 18:23
  Speaker 1: be justified and.
• 18:25
  Speaker 3: Because they don't have to, right, it's not moles get
• 18:29
  Speaker 3: the benefit of crime without engaging in crime, at least
• 18:32
  Speaker 3: not directly.
• 18:33
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 18:35
  Speaker 3: So, I mean, if you don't have to engage in
• 18:38
  Speaker 3: the actual work of working at these things, why would
• 18:43
  Speaker 3: you mm hm, you know, why wouldn't you just create
• 18:48
  Speaker 3: the incentive structure and let that populate with men who
• 18:52
  Speaker 3: don't have a sense of purpose rights. That's how these
• 18:57
  Speaker 3: things work. Repeatedly, researchers with any kind of sense, any
• 19:03
  Speaker 3: kind of responsibility to reality repeatedly find this. Women populate
• 19:09
  Speaker 3: the sense of purpose. You know, you build it and
• 19:12
  Speaker 3: they will come. Women build it, and the men come.
• 19:15
  Speaker 3: They the men say, oh, oh, these women are saying,
• 19:18
  Speaker 3: this is how we derive a sense of purpose, this
• 19:20
  Speaker 3: is how we serve them. Okay, let's do that. That's
• 19:23
  Speaker 3: what happens over and over again. Terrorist groups, polygamous communities, cults.
• 19:28
  Speaker 3: Well maybe not every single cult. The Mason family might
• 19:32
  Speaker 3: be an exception, but regardless, if you're you see these
• 19:36
  Speaker 3: enduring structures, they're usually women constructing the sense of purpose,
• 19:42
  Speaker 3: and then men are orientating towards them. Okay, yeah, all right.
• 19:50
  Speaker 1: The poll found they were more likely to men to
• 19:52
  Speaker 1: say a political assassination would be justified. Specifically, fifty four
• 19:56
  Speaker 1: point seven percent of women compared with forty five point
• 19:59
  Speaker 1: two percent of men express some justification for Mamdani, while
• 20:04
  Speaker 1: fifty seven percent of women express some justification for Trump
• 20:08
  Speaker 1: compared to fifty percent of men fifty point one. We're
• 20:12
  Speaker 1: just still insanely high. Yeah, it is really high.
• 20:15
  Speaker 2: In my opinion.
• 20:16
  Speaker 1: But but yeah, of course, of course women are going
• 20:19
  Speaker 1: to be a lot higher. And again I think it's
• 20:22
  Speaker 1: because they don't have to deal with the consequences for
• 20:26
  Speaker 1: their sentiments and they can just lean into their feelings
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: and just say I feel like this person shouldn't be here,
• 20:33
  Speaker 1: and it just yeah, it just shows that they can
• 20:35
  Speaker 1: be absolutely heartless if they really, if they want to be,
• 20:39
  Speaker 1: and there's no there's no social guardrails for that, there's
• 20:44
  Speaker 1: no like shame for that.
• 20:45
  Speaker 2: Because we can't do that to women. We have to
• 20:47
  Speaker 2: let them have it. We have to act like they're
• 20:49
  Speaker 2: never a problem.
• 20:51
  Speaker 3: Unless you're part of this community, and which you know,
• 20:55
  Speaker 3: we we we all, you know, we have our misogynous
• 20:58
  Speaker 3: minute every five hours. You know, just just just chill
• 21:03
  Speaker 3: with the misogyny whatever. And of course, as I always say,
• 21:07
  Speaker 3: I blame women, you know what, I'm not even gonna
• 21:10
  Speaker 3: qualify that. I'm just gonna let people sit with it.
• 21:13
  Speaker 3: You can stick with that. Be like I don't like
• 21:17
  Speaker 3: her saying that I blame women. You can't stop me. Okay,
• 21:21
  Speaker 3: let's keep going, all right.
• 21:24
  Speaker 1: I got a super chow when I read Richard Bierre
• 21:27
  Speaker 1: sent a super child through. Thank you Richard, and he
• 21:28
  Speaker 1: says for five dollars, let us just remember Seneca Valley
• 21:31
  Speaker 1: High School, where three high school girls and a college
• 21:33
  Speaker 1: student all got together to accuse a certain tf of
• 21:37
  Speaker 1: a rather egregious act because one of the girls just
• 21:39
  Speaker 1: didn't like him, and that is the same attitude that
• 21:42
  Speaker 1: women will bring into positions of power if they get
• 21:44
  Speaker 1: into them, almost as if Mean Girls was a documentary
• 21:48
  Speaker 1: and women getting into political positions have the same maturity
• 21:51
  Speaker 1: as the plastics from Mean Girls, even though Mean Girls
• 21:54
  Speaker 1: didn't kill anybody. But I think that there's another one
• 21:59
  Speaker 1: that's a little bit better, Heathers. I think in that
• 22:01
  Speaker 1: one there was murder, so maybe that's a better way
• 22:04
  Speaker 1: to compare it. But anyway, or Jawbreaker, there's another one.
• 22:11
  Speaker 1: There's a lot of those. We used to have, like
• 22:13
  Speaker 1: media that talked about, like you know, when women go bad,
• 22:17
  Speaker 1: like why this is something you should be aware of.
• 22:19
  Speaker 1: But for some reason, we're not allowed to do this anymore.
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: We have to justify it. But anyway, Okay, so then
• 22:26
  Speaker 1: we have the chart here, let's keep Let's go on
• 22:30
  Speaker 1: to the next thing. Looking at the results for women
• 22:32
  Speaker 1: alongside broader social trends, Finkelstein offered a hypothesis for the pattern. Okay,
• 22:37
  Speaker 1: here's the hypothesis. I feel like they're gonna be he's
• 22:39
  Speaker 1: gonna be wrong. But let's find out. Over the last decade, women,
• 22:43
  Speaker 1: especially younger women, have become more politically polarized, more emotionally moralized,
• 22:48
  Speaker 1: and more immersed in online political identity formation. He said
• 22:52
  Speaker 1: that shift predates our study. What we're seeing now may
• 22:56
  Speaker 1: be the downstream effect of those longer term changes.
• 23:00
  Speaker 3: Emotionally moralized mean okay, uh, they.
• 23:04
  Speaker 1: Moralizing like they like they're they feel like self righteous.
• 23:07
  Speaker 2: Basically, women are more.
• 23:09
  Speaker 3: Just self righteous instead of like hiding this behind Ah wow,
• 23:14
  Speaker 3: you know academic speak. What does emotional moralizing mean in academia?
• 23:19
  Speaker 2: I don't know. You're gonna look it up.
• 23:21
  Speaker 3: Yeah, I'm looking it up. Can you hear me my
• 23:23
  Speaker 3: aggressive typing?
• 23:23
  Speaker 2: I can hear you typing.
• 23:25
  Speaker 1: I will play some sounds for that. That wasn't quite
• 23:32
  Speaker 1: the one I wanted.
• 23:34
  Speaker 3: I hope that was a commentary on me.
• 23:36
  Speaker 1: No, No, I thought I had like I thought I
• 23:40
  Speaker 1: had something else you need like the.
• 23:43
  Speaker 3: Thriller montage music as I do my typing. Okay. In
• 23:47
  Speaker 3: academic context, emotional moralizing usually means treating moral or political
• 23:52
  Speaker 3: claims as if they're justified by primarily by how strongly
• 23:55
  Speaker 3: one feels about them, rather than by argument. Well, I'm
• 24:02
  Speaker 3: just thinking like you mean, ninety nine percent of how
• 24:05
  Speaker 3: women think how strongly one feels about them rather than
• 24:10
  Speaker 3: but I get to say that because I'm I'm a
• 24:13
  Speaker 3: woman who tends towards wanting my arguments to be sound
• 24:18
  Speaker 3: on logical, systemic and rational principles. And I noticed how
• 24:23
  Speaker 3: often that gets me in shit with other women?
• 24:26
  Speaker 1: Right?
• 24:28
  Speaker 3: Okay, so one primarily by how strongly one feels about
• 24:32
  Speaker 3: them rather than by argument, evidence or cream clear principles. Now,
• 24:35
  Speaker 3: having said that, men do also do this as well,
• 24:39
  Speaker 3: but usually it's like a it's women do it like
• 24:42
  Speaker 3: directly like how I feel about this emotionally, men do
• 24:46
  Speaker 3: it as in how does this reflect on my sense
• 24:49
  Speaker 3: of purpose or what I think my goal is? How
• 24:52
  Speaker 3: does this reflect on my connection to a goal or
• 24:57
  Speaker 3: a sense of purpose? It's a bit all right, So
• 25:03
  Speaker 3: evidence are clear principles. It's less a formal theory and
• 25:06
  Speaker 3: more a critical label for a style of discourse core idea.
• 25:10
  Speaker 3: Emotional moralizing frames disagreement as a test of character. Good
• 25:14
  Speaker 3: people feel x, bad people don't like. Brian constantly says,
• 25:19
  Speaker 3: we are the good people, therefore we think the good things.
• 25:23
  Speaker 3: Instead of a contest of reasons, datas are competing theories.
• 25:27
  Speaker 3: Now here's the thing, Okay, if you have a very
• 25:30
  Speaker 3: large group of people who sees everything in terms of
• 25:33
  Speaker 3: how it makes them feel rather than reason, accountability, and logic.
• 25:42
  Speaker 3: How are you supposed to develop responses to novel solutions? Really? Like,
• 25:47
  Speaker 3: think about that. I mean the reason why, for example,
• 25:51
  Speaker 3: the Roman Republic was so successful because they had a
• 25:54
  Speaker 3: lot of debate about things that happened. And they didn't
• 25:57
  Speaker 3: do this, you're wrong because I disagree with your thing.
• 26:01
  Speaker 3: They actually had debate and that's why they could develop solutions. Right. So,
• 26:07
  Speaker 3: a culture that's effective enables debate over solutions other beildies.
• 26:12
  Speaker 3: It becomes fragile in those solutions. And if you have
• 26:15
  Speaker 3: a whole bunch of people that are defining things based
• 26:18
  Speaker 3: on how they make it makes them feel rather than
• 26:22
  Speaker 3: functional reality or goal setting, that's that is a recipe
• 26:28
  Speaker 3: for dysfunction on the level of dealing with real life issues,
• 26:33
  Speaker 3: like real life on non negotiables. You get what I'm saying.
• 26:37
  Speaker 3: It's like, this is this is this is not functional? Okay, sorry, no,
• 26:43
  Speaker 3: it's fine, all right, I hope, I hope I'm conveying something.
• 26:49
  Speaker 2: Check.
• 26:50
  Speaker 3: Huh No, let me, let's let's let's let's finish this up.
• 26:53
  Speaker 3: This is interesting. So core idea emotional moralizing frames disagreement
• 26:57
  Speaker 3: as a test of character. Good people feel x bad
• 27:00
  Speaker 3: people don't, instead of a contest of reasons data or
• 27:04
  Speaker 3: competing theories. Do you guys recognize anything? In this? It
• 27:08
  Speaker 3: treats certain emotions i e. Outrage, empathy discussed as self
• 27:12
  Speaker 3: authenticating evidence of moral truth, rather than as psychological states
• 27:17
  Speaker 3: that are themselves need to be examined and justified. You
• 27:20
  Speaker 3: know what's interesting is that I have seen women like
• 27:23
  Speaker 3: take Natty. She weaponizes this idea that you are emotion
• 27:27
  Speaker 3: you are expressing things because you are emotionally incorrect. That's
• 27:31
  Speaker 3: what she's rolled out with me. So I talk about
• 27:34
  Speaker 3: these things not because I've stepped through the logic carefully,
• 27:39
  Speaker 3: step by step, and I've come to these conclusions regardless
• 27:42
  Speaker 3: of how much they make me, make me uncomfortable, or
• 27:45
  Speaker 3: aren't flattering to me as a woman. I come to
• 27:48
  Speaker 3: these conclusions because they're pointed to rationally right, instead of
• 27:53
  Speaker 3: that I'm being motivated by improper emotions according to her,
• 28:00
  Speaker 3: and that means that all of my conclusions are suspect.
• 28:04
  Speaker 3: And then I've told her repeatedly, well, I could turn
• 28:07
  Speaker 3: around and say that you are improperly emotionally motivated. Therefore,
• 28:12
  Speaker 3: all of your conclusions are suspects. So where do we
• 28:14
  Speaker 3: go from there?
• 28:15
  Speaker 1: Right?
• 28:16
  Speaker 3: That this is ultimately the only way to decide that
• 28:19
  Speaker 3: when its emotional motivation is force, the only way to
• 28:24
  Speaker 3: come to a consensus in this universe where people are
• 28:29
  Speaker 3: suspect based not based on what their arguments, but their
• 28:33
  Speaker 3: emotional reasoning for making their audience arguments. How do you
• 28:37
  Speaker 3: resolve a disagreement? The answer is force. The only way
• 28:40
  Speaker 3: you can resolve a disagreement is by killing it. And
• 28:44
  Speaker 3: you were seeing the results of that kind of rotten thinking, right,
• 28:49
  Speaker 3: And because you can't, you can't actually argue the disagreement,
• 28:52
  Speaker 3: because that's not legitimate because the disagreement, all your arguments
• 28:57
  Speaker 3: all fall fold back into your emotion reasons for making them.
• 29:02
  Speaker 3: And I pointed that out to her, but I don't
• 29:04
  Speaker 3: think she understood. I don't think she understood that what
• 29:09
  Speaker 3: she's doing is sort of evil and will result in
• 29:13
  Speaker 3: terrible amounts of violence. Okay. Relation to moral emotions, academic
• 29:20
  Speaker 3: work distinguishes moral emotions guilt, shame, empathy, indignation from non
• 29:25
  Speaker 3: moral ones because they track norms about right and wrong
• 29:28
  Speaker 3: and influence moral judgment. Emotional moralizing is what happens when
• 29:32
  Speaker 3: those moral emotions dominate the justific just justifactory space. Oh God, academia.
• 29:41
  Speaker 3: The fact that a situation elicits strong guilt, shame, or
• 29:45
  Speaker 3: indignation is proof of a moral verdict instead of a
• 29:49
  Speaker 3: starting point for critical reflection. How it shows up in
• 29:53
  Speaker 3: academia Like for me, whenever something seems too easy, I'm like, yeah, no,
• 29:57
  Speaker 3: this can't be true. How it shows up in ACI.
• 30:00
  Speaker 3: In teaching and research cultures, emotional moralizing can appear as
• 30:04
  Speaker 3: expecting certain effective performances i e. Visible empathy, anger, as injustice,
• 30:09
  Speaker 3: as indicators of scholarly virtue. Who gets to decide who
• 30:18
  Speaker 3: we feel empathy for and what counts as justice? Who
• 30:21
  Speaker 3: gets whose emotional framework reigns supreme? See it all reduces
• 30:26
  Speaker 3: down to force. It has to be the one who
• 30:28
  Speaker 3: with the monopoly on force. Pathologizing or morally condemning emotional
• 30:33
  Speaker 3: nonconformity i e. Treating a cooler analytical stances, morally suspect
• 30:40
  Speaker 3: I feel like I'm being I'm being like I feel
• 30:42
  Speaker 3: like I'm in this somehow, rather than just methodologically different.
• 30:48
  Speaker 3: In argumentation, Brian, that's exactly what Natty was saying you remember.
• 30:53
  Speaker 2: That was what what was?
• 30:56
  Speaker 3: Well, because I have more a cooler, methodologically different affect.
• 31:01
  Speaker 3: She basically said that I'm autistic, I'm even more driven
• 31:06
  Speaker 3: by emotion to pursue my reason and account like a reason,
• 31:10
  Speaker 3: and therefore it's illegitimate. So what it means is if
• 31:16
  Speaker 3: if you don't pursue things in the frame of emotion
• 31:19
  Speaker 3: and instead pursue them in a meth like in a
• 31:24
  Speaker 3: cool and analytical way, they say that itself is illegitimate. Brian, Yeah,
• 31:29
  Speaker 3: an argument argumentation It includes substituting effect laden's speech, harm safety,
• 31:35
  Speaker 3: trauma for clearer causal or normative analysis HM, using emotional
• 31:42
  Speaker 3: impact on audiences. I think that might be a bulletpipe,
• 31:45
  Speaker 3: might be a little bit confused. Using emotional impact on
• 31:47
  Speaker 3: audiences students peers is primary warrant for policies and positions
• 31:51
  Speaker 3: instead of pairing it with careful empirical and conceptual work.
• 31:56
  Speaker 3: Oh so you substitute affect lading, language, harm safety true
• 32:00
  Speaker 3: for clear causal or normative analysis. So basically you just
• 32:04
  Speaker 3: find the people who are hurt in a need, and
• 32:07
  Speaker 3: then you center them and you deny the legitimacy of
• 32:11
  Speaker 3: any kind of merit or expectation of ethical behavior or
• 32:16
  Speaker 3: work or anything. What does that sound like? Distinction from
• 32:20
  Speaker 3: legitimate attention to emotion. Work in moral psychology and philosophy
• 32:25
  Speaker 3: argues that emotions are central to moral judgments and can
• 32:27
  Speaker 3: encode real evaluative information. Yeah, I've never found that that's
• 32:32
  Speaker 3: really the case. I mean, motions are great motivators, but
• 32:35
  Speaker 3: they're not really good at setting the direction.
• 32:38
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 32:41
  Speaker 3: The difference is legitimate moral emotional analysis. This anger guilt
• 32:44
  Speaker 3: might be tracking a value or in justice. Let's test
• 32:47
  Speaker 3: and interpret with reasons and evidence. Hey, I'll believe that
• 32:49
  Speaker 3: when the moral emotion analysiss actually allow the black categories
• 32:56
  Speaker 3: to be included in their analysis of whether or not
• 32:59
  Speaker 3: emotions are recognizing an injustice because they don't. Emotional moralizing
• 33:06
  Speaker 3: the anger guilt proves the value claim questioning it is
• 33:09
  Speaker 3: itself morally dubious. Okay, all right, so that's what he
• 33:16
  Speaker 3: means by emotional moralizing it. I think it does actually
• 33:19
  Speaker 3: map yees.
• 33:23
  Speaker 1: Ye, I mean yeah, I mean I we think it's obvious.
• 33:26
  Speaker 1: I don't think, but but yeah, it's still I guess
• 33:29
  Speaker 1: it needed to be said.
• 33:30
  Speaker 2: So let's see.
• 33:33
  Speaker 1: I'm just taking to see immercier chats or super Child's.
• 33:37
  Speaker 1: So let us continue with the article. Ncr I ran
• 33:44
  Speaker 1: a similar poll in April of twenty twenty five that
• 33:47
  Speaker 1: specifically tracked assassination culture.
• 33:49
  Speaker 3: It's a paragraph.
• 33:52
  Speaker 2: No, I read this whole You didn't finish.
• 33:54
  Speaker 3: That last line. I interrupted you.
• 33:56
  Speaker 2: Oh okay, No, I think you did. I did. Sorry, Yes,
• 34:03
  Speaker 2: and CRI ran a.
• 34:04
  Speaker 1: Similar poll in April of twenty twenty five that specifically
• 34:07
  Speaker 1: tracked assassination culture among left leaning respondents. The survey found
• 34:10
  Speaker 1: that fifty six percent of participants left of center said
• 34:14
  Speaker 1: the assassination of Trump to be justified, while fifty point
• 34:17
  Speaker 1: two percent said the assassination of Elon.
• 34:20
  Speaker 2: Musk would be justified.
• 34:22
  Speaker 1: The results made waves in the media and were publicly
• 34:24
  Speaker 1: shared by Charlie Kirk just five months before he himself
• 34:27
  Speaker 1: became the target of a politically motivated assassination. In the
• 34:31
  Speaker 1: most recent poll, assassination culture was measured by asking respondents
• 34:34
  Speaker 1: if they believed the political murder of two high profile figures,
• 34:37
  Speaker 1: Trump and Memdani could be justified.
• 34:40
  Speaker 3: Hey, just I want to get in here with the
• 34:42
  Speaker 3: Kirk thing. That is like the most stark example because
• 34:45
  Speaker 3: the only thing he did was talk. I mean, he
• 34:48
  Speaker 3: had a big audience, but he was just talking. And
• 34:50
  Speaker 3: I actually investigated all the claims about him. They're not true,
• 34:54
  Speaker 3: Like everything he said had context that they're omitting in
• 34:57
  Speaker 3: order to construct the worst kind of claims him. But
• 35:00
  Speaker 3: even so, killing a person for just their speech, sure
• 35:04
  Speaker 3: you want to go down that route, right, and that's
• 35:07
  Speaker 3: not I'm like, I think that now. I do not
• 35:10
  Speaker 3: think that the any assassination trump attempt on Trump is legitimate,
• 35:15
  Speaker 3: but you could argue he does have leavers of power.
• 35:19
  Speaker 3: Kirk Charlie Kirk was just talking like there's there's no
• 35:24
  Speaker 3: justification and I'm and I'm not saying that again that
• 35:27
  Speaker 3: it is at all justified to kill a democratically elected politician.
• 35:32
  Speaker 3: But at the very least you could say that they're
• 35:35
  Speaker 3: they're the stakes to their decisions are higher than somebody
• 35:39
  Speaker 3: that's just out there because they're talking. You get what
• 35:42
  Speaker 3: I'm saying, And and it's like that that's just that
• 35:47
  Speaker 3: is a line that you are. It's at that point
• 35:51
  Speaker 3: that how how can I support people who believe stuff
• 35:55
  Speaker 3: like that? Not just that your speech does and has consequences. Oh,
• 36:02
  Speaker 3: we got a sense or speech we don't like or
• 36:04
  Speaker 3: makes us feel uncomfortable. Let's be honest, but we need
• 36:07
  Speaker 3: to kill people who engage in speech we don't like.
• 36:10
  Speaker 3: We want to set that precedent. And the funny thing
• 36:13
  Speaker 3: is that I've seen these communities and how they operate.
• 36:17
  Speaker 3: That precedent is hideous because it's not going to just
• 36:22
  Speaker 3: end with your political opponents. Eventually, you're gonna be setting
• 36:25
  Speaker 3: that precedent with each other and you're going to be
• 36:27
  Speaker 3: killing each other over purity. You're basically just speed running
• 36:31
  Speaker 3: the French terror, right, That's what you're doing. And you
• 36:35
  Speaker 3: can see that in the pattern of how these mobs
• 36:39
  Speaker 3: in Minnesota are attacking people, well people, I mean men
• 36:43
  Speaker 3: squared that is, white men. That's the pattern I've been seeing.
• 36:47
  Speaker 3: I did see them attack an elderly couple, but I
• 36:49
  Speaker 3: think their primary target was probably the man elderly white couple.
• 36:55
  Speaker 3: Either that or they were just obstructing and yelling Nazi
• 36:58
  Speaker 3: slogans because they that's their spawn point or something. I
• 37:02
  Speaker 3: don't know, but yeah, it's like they there is a
• 37:06
  Speaker 3: specific demographic that they are targeting, right, and so it's
• 37:12
  Speaker 3: even moved into a situation where these are this particular
• 37:17
  Speaker 3: demographic is in a black category. They have to show
• 37:21
  Speaker 3: their affiliation or they're going to be killed, so that
• 37:26
  Speaker 3: it's moving into from public figures to targeting people just
• 37:31
  Speaker 3: citizens on the street because they happen to be men squared,
• 37:34
  Speaker 3: which is white and male, you know, And it's like,
• 37:39
  Speaker 3: where do you think this is going to go? This
• 37:42
  Speaker 3: is ultimately going to result in the right having to
• 37:46
  Speaker 3: use force against the left out of self defense if
• 37:51
  Speaker 3: you can even call these people a political position to
• 37:54
  Speaker 3: begin with, because it seems more that they are a tactic,
• 37:58
  Speaker 3: not a political position. That tactic is getting more and
• 38:01
  Speaker 3: more violent and more and more extreme, and less and
• 38:06
  Speaker 3: less reasoned about who they actually target, and it's it's
• 38:13
  Speaker 3: it's like I remember in twenty sixteen, I said that
• 38:18
  Speaker 3: this was just going to keep getting worse, this kind
• 38:21
  Speaker 3: of behavior that they were keep going They're going to
• 38:25
  Speaker 3: keep throwing people into black categories. That it's going to
• 38:27
  Speaker 3: get like this, this metastasized nonsense on the left. It's
• 38:31
  Speaker 3: going to keep throwing people into black categories. Their threat
• 38:34
  Speaker 3: response was going to keep getting worse, and then eventually
• 38:37
  Speaker 3: the only solution that the right was going to have
• 38:40
  Speaker 3: was going to have to be equal force. And then
• 38:42
  Speaker 3: you lose your republic at that point because and it's
• 38:47
  Speaker 3: not even it's not it's the the way it works
• 38:51
  Speaker 3: is you're at a debate, right, and you're debating things
• 38:56
  Speaker 3: and you're finding solutions, and then someone decides to bring
• 39:00
  Speaker 3: a club debate and start using it to end debates. Right,
• 39:07
  Speaker 3: you can continue to debate, right, or even the example
• 39:12
  Speaker 3: I used with you know, I'll continue with this. You can.
• 39:14
  Speaker 3: You can be the side that continues to debate, but
• 39:17
  Speaker 3: you're just gonna lose at this point unless you also
• 39:20
  Speaker 3: get a club, and then the entire that your your
• 39:24
  Speaker 3: level of discourse goes from solving problems to beating each
• 39:28
  Speaker 3: other into submission, which means that your ability to solve
• 39:32
  Speaker 3: problems is gone. And that's how our republic does. Yeah, okay, uh.
• 39:43
  Speaker 2: Okay, So let me see here.
• 39:51
  Speaker 1: Among left of center respondents, belief that politically motivated assassination
• 39:54
  Speaker 1: has justified rose to sixty seven percent, while eight point
• 39:59
  Speaker 1: one percent interests and forty two point five percent of
• 40:02
  Speaker 1: right of center respondents indicated at least some level of
• 40:05
  Speaker 1: justic justification.
• 40:07
  Speaker 2: For killing Trump. Okay.
• 40:10
  Speaker 1: Support for the assassination of Mamdani was also high, with
• 40:13
  Speaker 1: fifty four percent of right of center respondents and fifty
• 40:16
  Speaker 1: three point nine percent of centris expressing similar views.
• 40:18
  Speaker 2: This is not broken down.
• 40:19
  Speaker 1: Into gender, by the way, so uh NCRI said the
• 40:24
  Speaker 1: timing of the poll captured heightened exposure to real world violence,
• 40:27
  Speaker 1: which they say may help explain shifts and attitudes towards
• 40:31
  Speaker 1: its acceptability.
• 40:33
  Speaker 3: Okay, we go back down. I want to look at this. This.
• 40:40
  Speaker 3: Among the left of center responses, belief that politically motivated
• 40:43
  Speaker 3: assassination is justified rose to sixty seven percent. Oh god,
• 40:50
  Speaker 3: you know. This is why we find it easier to
• 40:53
  Speaker 3: talk to people from the right of center, Like, I mean, honestly,
• 40:56
  Speaker 3: what we talk about probably offends everyone equally, but at
• 41:00
  Speaker 3: least the right of center will be like, hmm, I
• 41:02
  Speaker 3: find this offensive, but let me consider it, you know,
• 41:06
  Speaker 3: whereas the laughs will be just like col cal kell
• 41:09
  Speaker 3: ll call call. It's like that's that's essentially. And and
• 41:16
  Speaker 3: and then I get like left leaning commentators in our
• 41:20
  Speaker 3: comments saying things like, uh, you don't know you you
• 41:23
  Speaker 3: guys are such right wingers. I'm like, that's not what
• 41:27
  Speaker 3: it's about. Both sides doesn't like this. I don't like
• 41:31
  Speaker 3: what we talk about. Both sides don't and I've gotten
• 41:34
  Speaker 3: into arguments with conservatives who don't like what we talk
• 41:36
  Speaker 3: about because it is casting women not as angels in
• 41:40
  Speaker 3: the house, but actual moral actors that seriously need some control, right,
• 41:46
  Speaker 3: some some standards to be held to, and and they
• 41:50
  Speaker 3: want to recast that as no, it's not women not
• 41:52
  Speaker 3: being held to standards, men not leading them properly and
• 41:55
  Speaker 3: stuff like that. Like so they don't like it either,
• 41:58
  Speaker 3: but they're actually more winning willing to listen to it
• 42:01
  Speaker 3: without immediately trying to deplatform us, silence us, censor us,
• 42:06
  Speaker 3: and throw us out of communities. You know, this is
• 42:09
  Speaker 3: this is this is the thing. It's why inevitably there
• 42:12
  Speaker 3: is a more right wing focus or a more right
• 42:17
  Speaker 3: more right wing stuff comes in because yeah, yeah, you
• 42:21
  Speaker 3: say you're a left wing men's rights advocate, but then
• 42:26
  Speaker 3: you treat anything that is disagreement as an existential threat
• 42:31
  Speaker 3: that needs to be neutralized. Right, stow that ship, stow
• 42:35
  Speaker 3: it and stop attacking men. Okay, The question is.
• 42:43
  Speaker 1: If no, because like it is not debatable that I
• 42:48
  Speaker 1: get way more success when I have guests on I
• 42:52
  Speaker 1: have far more success with right wing people than left
• 42:55
  Speaker 1: wing people. So the question is, and it's not like
• 42:58
  Speaker 1: I don't try. So, then the question I asked myself
• 43:02
  Speaker 1: is why what why is it that even if what
• 43:08
  Speaker 1: we say offends conservatives, why are they still willing to
• 43:12
  Speaker 1: talk to us? And even if what we have to
• 43:15
  Speaker 1: say might benefit to some degree, like you know, leftist
• 43:19
  Speaker 1: ideology or at least like there's something to be had
• 43:22
  Speaker 1: because it's a human rights issue we're discussing, why won't
• 43:25
  Speaker 1: they talk to us?
• 43:27
  Speaker 2: Well?
• 43:27
  Speaker 3: And when they do talk to us, why is it
• 43:30
  Speaker 3: such a high level of threat, like you know, and
• 43:34
  Speaker 3: like that we need to be silenced.
• 43:36
  Speaker 2: Like what they let me?
• 43:38
  Speaker 1: Let me put it this way, what does the right
• 43:42
  Speaker 1: stan to gain by talking to us? And what does
• 43:45
  Speaker 1: the left stand to gain by talking to us or
• 43:48
  Speaker 1: lose by talking to us?
• 43:52
  Speaker 3: Yeah?
• 43:52
  Speaker 2: Well, because I'm not going to answer the question, I'm
• 43:54
  Speaker 2: just gonna put it out there.
• 43:56
  Speaker 1: Because if there are people who don't want to talk
• 43:58
  Speaker 1: to us, and they know what we're about, and they
• 43:59
  Speaker 1: know what we stand for, but they still can't it
• 44:02
  Speaker 1: we're like the worst people ever, then there must be
• 44:05
  Speaker 1: something that they don't want us advocating for.
• 44:11
  Speaker 3: Yeah. Well, I mean I would say that the dialogue
• 44:14
  Speaker 3: that we're having with the left is more with the
• 44:18
  Speaker 3: the censorship and the deplatforming that we deal with. They
• 44:21
  Speaker 3: find us incredibly threatening, so they don't even talk to us.
• 44:24
  Speaker 3: They just influence platforms like YouTube to dlist de boost
• 44:32
  Speaker 3: us in the algorithm. I mean it's not just that,
• 44:35
  Speaker 3: I mean that is confirmed. That is confirmed. We are
• 44:38
  Speaker 3: subject to de boosting and shadow banning because they are
• 44:43
  Speaker 3: extremely threatened with what we say, and that is in
• 44:49
  Speaker 3: their literature. They write it out. They won't say, oh,
• 44:51
  Speaker 3: we're frightened by them, but they will treat us like
• 44:54
  Speaker 3: a very dangerous node. And of course these people do
• 45:00
  Speaker 3: have levers on social media platforms and they use them
• 45:04
  Speaker 3: so to boost us. This is something I a repeated
• 45:06
  Speaker 3: pattern that I've noticed is that we will find a
• 45:10
  Speaker 3: topic that really hits the nerve, and we will get
• 45:13
  Speaker 3: a gigantic spike in traffic, and then immediately after we'll
• 45:17
  Speaker 3: get even worse numbers. Why is that because we blipped
• 45:22
  Speaker 3: up on their dashboard and they said, well, let's put
• 45:26
  Speaker 3: another let's put another hundred kilos of counter pressure on this.
• 45:31
  Speaker 3: We don't want to we don't want to have this
• 45:33
  Speaker 3: come out. And this is specifically the individuals who espouse
• 45:38
  Speaker 3: left leaning talking points. Now, I honestly think that they
• 45:45
  Speaker 3: only espouse them because they protect their activities. So what
• 45:48
  Speaker 3: they're really protecting is a narrative that essentially negates any
• 45:54
  Speaker 3: kind of external oversight over all kinds of completely politically
• 45:58
  Speaker 3: neutral behavior like a violence. Political violence is pretty much neutral,
• 46:04
  Speaker 3: anybody can employ it, bureaucratic graft. But in particular, these
• 46:08
  Speaker 3: narratives defend these things because they deny all outside oversight
• 46:13
  Speaker 3: as patriarchal oppression. So we are threatening the shield of
• 46:18
  Speaker 3: a whole bunch of really bad corrupt actors. So you
• 46:23
  Speaker 3: better believe they're gonna pulling those labors to prevent us
• 46:25
  Speaker 3: from being seen. But anyway, that's the dialogue that we
• 46:30
  Speaker 3: are in with them. It is not a direct dialogue.
• 46:33
  Speaker 3: We are in a direct dialogue with conservatives, because even
• 46:36
  Speaker 3: if conservatives disagree with us, they'll think about it. And
• 46:41
  Speaker 3: this is why, because they aren't immediately in a moralizing frame. Okay,
• 46:49
  Speaker 3: and again we have to contend with this. I'm not
• 46:54
  Speaker 3: saying there aren't like left wing male activists, the mail
• 46:58
  Speaker 3: rights activists. I've seen them on Reddit and they do
• 47:00
  Speaker 3: great analysis. For example, they've done great analysis of the
• 47:03
  Speaker 3: latest CDC chicanery. With the National Intimate Partner and Sexual
• 47:08
  Speaker 3: Violent Survey. Right, good analysis, but they have to realize
• 47:15
  Speaker 3: that everything that they consider politically important, the very side, well,
• 47:20
  Speaker 3: the very quote unquote side that they're on, considers to
• 47:24
  Speaker 3: be being a trader.
• 47:27
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 47:27
  Speaker 3: So the left looks at the left wing, the left
• 47:30
  Speaker 3: wing male advocates and says to itself, these people are traders.
• 47:34
  Speaker 3: These men are traders, right, somehow, the Bernie Bros Are traders.
• 47:39
  Speaker 3: Every time a group of men come together and have
• 47:42
  Speaker 3: an independent thought, they are labeled traders. So you have
• 47:45
  Speaker 3: to ask yourself, like, yeah, you know, this feels like
• 47:50
  Speaker 3: it's moving right, But it's because the left has decided
• 47:53
  Speaker 3: that men should go, should disappear, are illegitimate, and masculinity
• 47:59
  Speaker 3: is a talx and that needs to be eradicated. And
• 48:03
  Speaker 3: I can't like, it's like, I can't avoid that conclusion
• 48:06
  Speaker 3: from their behavior. So if you're left, if you're on
• 48:10
  Speaker 3: the left, I guess clean house. I don't know, Yeah, okay,
• 48:16
  Speaker 3: let's keep going.
• 48:18
  Speaker 2: All right.
• 48:20
  Speaker 1: So NCRI said the timing of the poll captured heightened
• 48:23
  Speaker 1: exposure to real world violence may which they say may
• 48:26
  Speaker 1: help explain shifts and attitudes towards is acceptability. While respondings
• 48:32
  Speaker 1: different in political ideology, the poll found a common thread
• 48:34
  Speaker 1: among those who justified political assassination a strong belief that
• 48:38
  Speaker 1: America is in decline. So the main common thread is
• 48:43
  Speaker 1: nihilism about the future.
• 48:47
  Speaker 3: Among yes, I think there are there are some things
• 48:51
  Speaker 3: to be deeply concerned about, but nihilism. Honestly, I think
• 48:57
  Speaker 3: the most important thing that we need to deal with
• 48:59
  Speaker 3: in terms of nihilism is the relationship between men and women,
• 49:02
  Speaker 3: and whatever state manages to figure out and scale up
• 49:09
  Speaker 3: a solution to that is going to be leading the
• 49:11
  Speaker 3: future full stop. Because every single great power is dealing
• 49:16
  Speaker 3: with the same problem, which is a huge decline in
• 49:20
  Speaker 3: stable family formation and the production of children. There there's
• 49:25
  Speaker 3: not going to be any great powers in the future
• 49:27
  Speaker 3: if we don't solve that problem. And the one great
• 49:30
  Speaker 3: power that manages to solve that problem is going to
• 49:33
  Speaker 3: be the leader of the future. This is this is
• 49:37
  Speaker 3: this is my prediction. The one great power that manages
• 49:41
  Speaker 3: to get men and women forming relationships, having children and
• 49:47
  Speaker 3: productive again is going to seize the future. Every other
• 49:54
  Speaker 3: great power is going to have to orientate to that
• 49:56
  Speaker 3: because they're all facing the same problem, and that that
• 50:00
  Speaker 3: problem is the existential threat. We're engaging in all this
• 50:05
  Speaker 3: political jockeying, I think because we don't want to face that. Okay,
• 50:12
  Speaker 3: so there it is. There it is. I'm outlining hope
• 50:14
  Speaker 3: for the future. It is in solving this issue. And
• 50:18
  Speaker 3: it's not like this is uniquely American. It's everywhere. It's
• 50:23
  Speaker 3: not even uniquely Western. China is having the same problem.
• 50:26
  Speaker 3: Africa is declining, South Threa is dead in the water rights,
• 50:33
  Speaker 3: it's everywhere. I think, even South Latin America. I mean, hell,
• 50:38
  Speaker 3: they've managed to have collapsing birth rates without ever becoming prosperous. Right,
• 50:44
  Speaker 3: So this problem is worldwide. It's an existential problem for
• 50:48
  Speaker 3: the species, and everybody is aware of it on some level.
• 50:52
  Speaker 3: So if you want to be part of the future,
• 50:54
  Speaker 3: you've got to fix it. And the nation that does
• 50:57
  Speaker 3: it is going to be the leader for everyone else. Sir.
• 51:02
  Speaker 3: There you go. That is hope. It's it's hope, but
• 51:06
  Speaker 3: it's qualified hope. There is a problem. Yeah, it needs
• 51:10
  Speaker 3: to be fixed.
• 51:11
  Speaker 2: I don't think the.
• 51:12
  Speaker 1: People in our audience are necessarily thinking that, you know,
• 51:17
  Speaker 1: we have to like commit assassinations because America's in decline.
• 51:21
  Speaker 2: There is so much accelerationism too.
• 51:23
  Speaker 1: This is like another part of this is they want
• 51:24
  Speaker 1: things to get worse because they think it's going to
• 51:27
  Speaker 1: like wake people up.
• 51:28
  Speaker 2: That's not how things work.
• 51:29
  Speaker 1: But anyway, Among respondents who said assassinating Trump could be justified,
• 51:33
  Speaker 1: seventy point three percent also believe that country is in decline.
• 51:37
  Speaker 2: Well. Fifty nine point eight percent of those who.
• 51:39
  Speaker 1: Justified the assassination of Mamdani reported the same social media
• 51:43
  Speaker 1: use was linked to support for political assassination. Left of
• 51:46
  Speaker 1: center respondents who used social media the most scored fifty
• 51:50
  Speaker 1: percent higher on a measure of justification for murdering Trump
• 51:53
  Speaker 1: than those who use it the least. Who's on social
• 51:56
  Speaker 1: media mostly men or women? Are there more men on
• 52:00
  Speaker 1: social media or women on TikTok x? You know, Facebook?
• 52:06
  Speaker 1: Whatever the kids are using Telegram, I don't know WhatsApp,
• 52:10
  Speaker 1: I don't know wherever they are.
• 52:14
  Speaker 2: Anyway, So.
• 52:17
  Speaker 1: On the right, the most active social media users scored
• 52:19
  Speaker 1: fifty nine percent higher on justification for murdering Mamdani compared
• 52:22
  Speaker 1: to the least active users. Experts suggest that online platforms
• 52:26
  Speaker 1: may amplify extreme rhetoric and normalize aggressive behavior.
• 52:30
  Speaker 3: Yeah it's possible, but.
• 52:33
  Speaker 1: Yeah, Among the weak minded. But then you can use
• 52:35
  Speaker 1: that you can also make the argument that social media
• 52:39
  Speaker 1: can amplify all kinds of things. I mean, there are people,
• 52:44
  Speaker 1: you know, BX has like done the work on this.
• 52:47
  Speaker 1: There are places like discord and forums and such where
• 52:52
  Speaker 1: there are bad actors who radicalize children by talking to them.
• 52:57
  Speaker 1: And of course the answer to that is for parents
• 52:59
  Speaker 1: to like honitor what their kids do online. But like, yeah,
• 53:03
  Speaker 1: I mean I think all those things are true. But
• 53:05
  Speaker 1: I think also though, going back to what you said
• 53:07
  Speaker 1: about the relationship between men and women, if you strengthen
• 53:11
  Speaker 1: that bond, people are not going to be looking online
• 53:14
  Speaker 1: for like communities or places of belonging because.
• 53:17
  Speaker 2: They have that exactly. It's kind of like a secondary thing.
• 53:21
  Speaker 3: Yeah, it's going to become a secondary thing. When people
• 53:24
  Speaker 3: identify as men and women in a positive relationship with
• 53:27
  Speaker 3: each other, they don't turn into these mobs seeking a
• 53:33
  Speaker 3: holy war against patriarchy. Right, They're more reasoned and accountable
• 53:38
  Speaker 3: on both sides. Right, the rhetoric on the left side
• 53:46
  Speaker 3: becomes more about presenting a position of open mindedness and
• 53:53
  Speaker 3: self doubt and recognition of novel situations, and the rhetoric
• 54:00
  Speaker 3: on the right becomes much more about you know, family,
• 54:05
  Speaker 3: institution and duty and loyalty, if that makes sense. But
• 54:10
  Speaker 3: both sides then are in dialogue with each other in
• 54:14
  Speaker 3: order to solve problems without losing a sense of self. Okay,
• 54:19
  Speaker 3: but that's when people don't identify with politics as their
• 54:23
  Speaker 3: primary identity. They identify with their family and the production
• 54:28
  Speaker 3: of like healthy relationships and healthy children as their primary
• 54:33
  Speaker 3: purpose in life. Makes very different people, right, and very
• 54:37
  Speaker 3: different politics. And again, this is the thing that every
• 54:41
  Speaker 3: single great power is facing right now. This is the problem.
• 54:46
  Speaker 3: Men and women are not getting together, and they are
• 54:49
  Speaker 3: not forming stable families, and they are not producing children.
• 54:52
  Speaker 3: This is across the board. Every great power and even
• 54:55
  Speaker 3: every medium power and every small power is dealing with this.
• 54:59
  Speaker 3: And this is and again, if you solve this problem,
• 55:03
  Speaker 3: you are going to get a healthier state. You are
• 55:06
  Speaker 3: going to get a state that regards its politics as
• 55:09
  Speaker 3: serving its purpose rather than the purpose. Right, and you
• 55:15
  Speaker 3: are going to be the state that ushers in the future.
• 55:20
  Speaker 1: Okay, yeah, all right, experts already read this part. Okay,
• 55:30
  Speaker 1: to today's social media platforms reward outrage, absolutism, and symbolic
• 55:35
  Speaker 1: aggression while flattening moral complexity, Colin Wright, and evolutionary biologists
• 55:40
  Speaker 1: and contributor to NCRI told The Daily Wire. In these spaces,
• 55:44
  Speaker 1: punishment is not just normalized, but asceticized. Violence is reframed
• 55:49
  Speaker 1: as meaningful, expressive, or even admirable, which lowers the psychological
• 55:53
  Speaker 1: barriers that usually keep it in check. Can I just
• 55:58
  Speaker 1: say that it's in I think that the article seems
• 56:00
  Speaker 1: to be pivoting away from the woman question here, And
• 56:04
  Speaker 1: they're not to say it's social media guys, they're just
• 56:09
  Speaker 1: victims of social media.
• 56:10
  Speaker 2: I'm on social media.
• 56:11
  Speaker 1: I haven't killed anyone or wanted to, at least not literally.
• 56:18
  Speaker 3: Sometimes sometimes the dead of night you sort of feel like,
• 56:21
  Speaker 3: good god.
• 56:22
  Speaker 1: Am, and I'm like, oh my dog moved, Yeah that's.
• 56:26
  Speaker 3: Jojo Yeah sorry sorry voidcat just decided that Wait I
• 56:33
  Speaker 3: see her. Wait wait she might have have been summoned
• 56:38
  Speaker 3: by me saying something. But yeah, that's uh yeah, I mean,
• 56:41
  Speaker 3: but that's just normal human stuff. We're not. You have irritation.
• 56:47
  Speaker 1: I think that I hate I kind of hate blaming
• 56:50
  Speaker 1: social media.
• 56:52
  Speaker 3: Yes, it.
• 56:54
  Speaker 1: Opens It opens a Pandora's box of problems, because you're
• 56:58
  Speaker 1: gonna get people using this to justify you know, basically
• 57:03
  Speaker 1: like further limiting the Internet more than it already has been.
• 57:08
  Speaker 1: It's not like the wild West like it used to be.
• 57:11
  Speaker 1: But and also it's passing the buck, like you're not
• 57:14
  Speaker 1: like there are human beings and they have free will
• 57:18
  Speaker 1: and they can make decisions, and you know, like we
• 57:21
  Speaker 1: should be talking about them as people. Sure that we
• 57:25
  Speaker 1: should offer we could offer like some kind of you know,
• 57:29
  Speaker 1: help to people who are terminally online. Those people exist,
• 57:33
  Speaker 1: But I mean, I don't think that social media is
• 57:36
  Speaker 1: the problem, and I kind of hate that.
• 57:38
  Speaker 3: So but yeah, no, it's lazy thinking. It's really lazy thinking. Yeah,
• 57:44
  Speaker 3: I see it a lot of different places that you know,
• 57:46
  Speaker 3: just becomes this catch all way of excusing any kind
• 57:49
  Speaker 3: of responsibility. So someone said that that the other thing
• 57:54
  Speaker 3: is that we should stop. We need to what did
• 57:58
  Speaker 3: they say, we need.
• 58:00
  Speaker 2: To social chat or regular chat?
• 58:02
  Speaker 3: No, it was regular chat. We need Daniel four Gas said,
• 58:08
  Speaker 3: we will have to fix the issue of throwing children
• 58:11
  Speaker 3: as strangers who could care less and calling it education too. Yes,
• 58:15
  Speaker 3: but the thing is that most of the solutions I
• 58:19
  Speaker 3: see to the family problem require making large coercive changes
• 58:25
  Speaker 3: to people. But I think what's going to happen happen
• 58:31
  Speaker 3: is we're going to have to take the current political
• 58:33
  Speaker 3: situation and the current sort of beliefs and make it
• 58:39
  Speaker 3: so that within that people are able to pair up again.
• 58:42
  Speaker 3: So it has to be a form of a relationship
• 58:47
  Speaker 3: between the set between the sexes, a set of identities
• 58:51
  Speaker 3: for men and women that are impervious to social media
• 58:55
  Speaker 3: and all of this other invitation to political violence, et cetera.
• 59:00
  Speaker 3: And I think that's possible. Right, And again, the country
• 59:05
  Speaker 3: that wins that race wins the marriage race. That's the
• 59:10
  Speaker 3: country that ushers in the future.
• 59:13
  Speaker 2: All right, yeah, keep going, all right, It was like
• 59:16
  Speaker 2: this is almost over. So yeah. The differences were also.
• 59:19
  Speaker 1: Notable among respondents who justified political assassination. On the left,
• 59:24
  Speaker 1: support was highest among younger adults, with eighty two percent
• 59:28
  Speaker 1: of eighteen to twenty nine year olds indicating some level
• 59:30
  Speaker 1: of justification. On the right, the highest support appeared among
• 59:34
  Speaker 1: those aged thirty to forty four, with seventy three percent
• 59:37
  Speaker 1: expressing justification.
• 59:38
  Speaker 2: Huh so, so.
• 59:40
  Speaker 1: Zoomers on the left and millennials on the right, or
• 59:47
  Speaker 1: you know, like that ballpark.
• 59:49
  Speaker 2: I know some people don't like the generation.
• 59:51
  Speaker 3: We go back to that. Yeah, they have moved away
• 59:53
  Speaker 3: from although interestingly enough, they headlined the issue with women
• 1:00:00
  Speaker 3: no goibe the final paragraph. I want to take a
• 1:00:02
  Speaker 3: look at that a little more closely before we continue.
• 1:00:06
  Speaker 3: Here we go age differences. We're also notable among respondents
• 1:00:10
  Speaker 3: who justified political assassination. On the left, support was highest
• 1:00:13
  Speaker 3: among younger adults eighteen to ninety Okay. On the right,
• 1:00:18
  Speaker 3: the highest support appeared among those aged thirty to forty four.
• 1:00:23
  Speaker 3: All right, So what that is is people are taking
• 1:00:27
  Speaker 3: politics as their identities, and it's probably showing up most
• 1:00:31
  Speaker 3: among young people because they're the ones who have been
• 1:00:35
  Speaker 3: so most propagandized against being men and women. That that's
• 1:00:39
  Speaker 3: what the feminist narrative does. It just basically makes it
• 1:00:43
  Speaker 3: very uncomfortable to identify with being a man or a woman.
• 1:00:46
  Speaker 3: You can sort of be one as like a category
• 1:00:49
  Speaker 3: in a checkbox, but it's not like, if you identify
• 1:00:52
  Speaker 3: as a man, you identify with oppression of women. If
• 1:00:55
  Speaker 3: you identify as a woman, you identify with being oppressed. Right,
• 1:00:59
  Speaker 3: And you can see that pressure on people so they
• 1:01:03
  Speaker 3: step away from these identities, which are if you think
• 1:01:06
  Speaker 3: about it, they transcend politics, they transcend nations, they transcend
• 1:01:12
  Speaker 3: cultural systems. They transcend religion. Our identities as men and
• 1:01:17
  Speaker 3: women are granted to us by things that are far
• 1:01:21
  Speaker 3: bigger than any political identity could ever be, far more liminal,
• 1:01:28
  Speaker 3: you know, whether you want to call that God or evolution.
• 1:01:30
  Speaker 3: These are forces that act upon us that you know,
• 1:01:33
  Speaker 3: we as individuals, we're just blink, We're blink of the eye, right.
• 1:01:37
  Speaker 3: These are huge forces that are far bigger than everything,
• 1:01:41
  Speaker 3: everything that we construct. So these identities are so fundamental,
• 1:01:45
  Speaker 3: they are fundamental beyond belief, and this political structure wants
• 1:01:50
  Speaker 3: to have control over that and wants instead for people
• 1:01:54
  Speaker 3: to identify with politics. And the younger generations are generations
• 1:01:59
  Speaker 3: in which that whole schema has been working like there's more,
• 1:02:03
  Speaker 3: there's more momentum behind it on them, so they identify
• 1:02:09
  Speaker 3: more with politics and the the and the The additional
• 1:02:14
  Speaker 3: factor here is when you identify more, when it becomes
• 1:02:17
  Speaker 3: when your politics becomes so entrenched in your identity, then
• 1:02:23
  Speaker 3: any disagreement becomes an existential threat, which means you feel
• 1:02:28
  Speaker 3: more at home with using violence against your opponents. And
• 1:02:33
  Speaker 3: again that comes a way that comes out of people
• 1:02:36
  Speaker 3: stripping out their identities as men and women because they
• 1:02:41
  Speaker 3: don't feel good anymore, because identifying with being a man
• 1:02:44
  Speaker 3: as a pressing women, and identifying with being a woman
• 1:02:46
  Speaker 3: is being oppressed by men's they don't feel good. They
• 1:02:49
  Speaker 3: strip out those identities and then they replace them with politics.
• 1:02:54
  Speaker 2: You know.
• 1:02:54
  Speaker 3: That's this is this is a symptom of it. All right, Okay, Brian,
• 1:03:00
  Speaker 3: you want to you wanna say anything to that. Do
• 1:03:02
  Speaker 3: you think I'm full of shit? This possible?
• 1:03:05
  Speaker 2: No?
• 1:03:06
  Speaker 1: I think that I think it's true, especially because they
• 1:03:08
  Speaker 1: are younger, and I think that maybe they're a bit embedded,
• 1:03:11
  Speaker 1: a bit like embedded in this this uh you know,
• 1:03:15
  Speaker 1: this political stuff because it's been like dominating like our
• 1:03:18
  Speaker 1: lives because there hasn't been anything else really, yeah, and
• 1:03:23
  Speaker 1: I mean all of it's kind of like from the
• 1:03:25
  Speaker 1: same problem. And again, if if you're not, like, if
• 1:03:29
  Speaker 1: you're not working on your personal life, you are going
• 1:03:33
  Speaker 1: to look for like bigger, lower resolution things to address anyway,
• 1:03:39
  Speaker 1: because you need to put your energy into something so well.
• 1:03:43
  Speaker 1: For example, if you're a young man and you don't
• 1:03:45
  Speaker 1: have any prospects and you don't have any romantic like options,
• 1:03:51
  Speaker 1: you're just sort of like excluded your demon eyes, your
• 1:03:55
  Speaker 1: shit on. But in your personal life, you might not
• 1:03:58
  Speaker 1: have much to do, so you end up looking at
• 1:04:01
  Speaker 1: like bigger things that you'd like to do or you
• 1:04:03
  Speaker 1: want change, right, And yeah, it's it's partly because of.
• 1:04:07
  Speaker 2: The identity thing that you said.
• 1:04:10
  Speaker 1: But I think like, for example, people like I know
• 1:04:13
  Speaker 1: a lot of young people that I go to church
• 1:04:16
  Speaker 1: with and they are married, they have jobs, they have
• 1:04:19
  Speaker 1: their own businesses, or they live on a farm, they
• 1:04:21
  Speaker 1: have they have stuff going on in their life. They
• 1:04:24
  Speaker 1: don't know what's happening on the internet because they're too busy,
• 1:04:27
  Speaker 1: and they're happy. They have a purpose, like they're doing something,
• 1:04:33
  Speaker 1: but it's but it's a real purpose.
• 1:04:34
  Speaker 2: It's not just something filling the void. Right.
• 1:04:37
  Speaker 1: They're raising children or they're managing their relationships or whatever.
• 1:04:41
  Speaker 1: So because of that, they're not looking at what's you know,
• 1:04:44
  Speaker 1: this these sorts of like I don't want to call
• 1:04:47
  Speaker 1: them distractions, but they're like less important really, you know, the.
• 1:04:51
  Speaker 3: Politics are subordinate. So for example, if your goal is
• 1:04:55
  Speaker 3: to produce a family, to run a farm, to be married,
• 1:04:59
  Speaker 3: you look at politics in terms of does do these
• 1:05:02
  Speaker 3: politics serve my goal? And that's that's a very pragmatic
• 1:05:06
  Speaker 3: way of looking at politics. Whereas with these with people
• 1:05:10
  Speaker 3: who don't have that as a base. They look at
• 1:05:13
  Speaker 3: politics as in, how do I identify how does this
• 1:05:18
  Speaker 3: you know? How does this express my identity? You know?
• 1:05:21
  Speaker 3: And how do I identify with these? Or I identify
• 1:05:25
  Speaker 3: with these politics because they give me meaning? And then
• 1:05:28
  Speaker 3: in one case, the politics gives the person meaning. In
• 1:05:31
  Speaker 3: the other case, the politics serves the person's actual source
• 1:05:35
  Speaker 3: of meaning, which is family, community, farm, business, and relationship.
• 1:05:41
  Speaker 3: You see the difference. Yeah, and that's why this, that's
• 1:05:45
  Speaker 3: why political violence makes sense to these people. Okay, can
• 1:05:48
  Speaker 3: we go down to the comments and just go through them.
• 1:05:51
  Speaker 1: I don't know if I can look at comments because
• 1:05:52
  Speaker 1: it's an archive link.
• 1:05:55
  Speaker 3: You try, Maybe I can try.
• 1:05:58
  Speaker 1: Oh no, it says, yeah, I can't look at the conversation.
• 1:06:05
  Speaker 3: Huh, yeah I could. I looked at the comments, but uh,
• 1:06:09
  Speaker 3: I guess you can't. Yeah I did. I was like
• 1:06:11
  Speaker 3: looking at them. I was like, hmm, this is this
• 1:06:14
  Speaker 3: is slightly interesting.
• 1:06:16
  Speaker 1: Uh yeah, if I can't see them, can you tell
• 1:06:21
  Speaker 1: me what they say?
• 1:06:22
  Speaker 3: Sure? I I could. Uh, Okay, let's see what's going
• 1:06:26
  Speaker 3: on here?
• 1:06:27
  Speaker 2: Just read some.
• 1:06:30
  Speaker 3: Yeah, let me see if I can I can access
• 1:06:32
  Speaker 3: them again. Maybe maybe I just hallucinated them. Uh no,
• 1:06:38
  Speaker 3: it seems like they're they've disappeared. Now did I hallucinate this?
• 1:06:44
  Speaker 1: Maybe that if they are on a separate link, I
• 1:06:46
  Speaker 1: can maybe try archiving and if you send me that
• 1:06:49
  Speaker 1: link and then it'll it might open the archive.
• 1:06:52
  Speaker 2: I'm not really sure though.
• 1:06:54
  Speaker 3: Yeah, I'm just wondering because I'm pretty sure. Okay, there
• 1:06:57
  Speaker 3: was a couple of things that I did. If I
• 1:06:58
  Speaker 3: can track down the actual moments. I exported this as
• 1:07:01
  Speaker 3: a PDF to put it into perplexity as like not
• 1:07:05
  Speaker 3: necessarily like just to like give some some subsidiary text suggestions. Maybe. Well,
• 1:07:15
  Speaker 3: you know what, from what I remember, they were pretty sane.
• 1:07:20
  Speaker 3: They're they were like, they're not as based as what
• 1:07:23
  Speaker 3: we say, but they weren't like freaking out, which is
• 1:07:32
  Speaker 3: which is something that a lot of people do when
• 1:07:34
  Speaker 3: you criticize men or sorry, criticize men. What am I
• 1:07:37
  Speaker 3: talking about when you criticize women?
• 1:07:40
  Speaker 2: Yeah?
• 1:07:45
  Speaker 3: Yeah, so okay, well all right.
• 1:07:48
  Speaker 2: Well let's see what some of the comments say.
• 1:07:54
  Speaker 3: Sure, I mean in our in our chat, Yeah yeah, yeah,
• 1:07:57
  Speaker 3: that I go to the first and see ma Bounor
• 1:08:03
  Speaker 3: says most men are Mangina's.
• 1:08:05
  Speaker 1: Well, I don't think that that that that's that was
• 1:08:09
  Speaker 1: in response to men supporting assassination.
• 1:08:11
  Speaker 2: I think they're sane.
• 1:08:12
  Speaker 1: I don't know if that's like what you're getting at,
• 1:08:15
  Speaker 1: but I think not wanting to murder your political opponents
• 1:08:18
  Speaker 1: is actually like a normal position. It's not like a
• 1:08:21
  Speaker 1: side position. It's like a being, a health a mentally
• 1:08:24
  Speaker 1: healthy human being.
• 1:08:26
  Speaker 2: Is that? Uh?
• 1:08:28
  Speaker 1: Selita girl says Yoko, sorry for your loss. I assume
• 1:08:32
  Speaker 1: that's for you. Yeah, they're long gone, I think. But
• 1:08:37
  Speaker 1: William Branch says, sorry, we need to devote women. Well,
• 1:08:40
  Speaker 1: good luck with that. You're gonna have to get women.
• 1:08:42
  Speaker 2: To do it.
• 1:08:46
  Speaker 3: Solved it on a fundamental level.
• 1:08:48
  Speaker 1: Yeah, you'll have to solve like that's yeah, And if
• 1:08:51
  Speaker 1: you get it to the point where women are willing
• 1:08:53
  Speaker 1: to do it, you might not need them to do
• 1:08:55
  Speaker 1: it anymore.
• 1:08:56
  Speaker 2: Because they have become sane. Again if they.
• 1:09:00
  Speaker 1: Ever were, Quantum Cat says or well proven correct again.
• 1:09:04
  Speaker 3: M m yeah. Because the biggest supporters of the party
• 1:09:10
  Speaker 3: were young women. Yeah, yeah, specifically young women. I did
• 1:09:15
  Speaker 3: want to say. I mean, it's pretty obvious from this
• 1:09:18
  Speaker 3: that you know, when you think emotionally, it's not necessarily
• 1:09:22
  Speaker 3: a good thing, because it means that instead of debating
• 1:09:26
  Speaker 3: with people, you regard them of disagreeing with you as
• 1:09:29
  Speaker 3: a fundamental violation of your person. So yeah, like the
• 1:09:35
  Speaker 3: fact that women are more emotional does not make them
• 1:09:38
  Speaker 3: better people. I think that's the ultimate conclusion of this article.
• 1:09:43
  Speaker 3: All right, continue, Brian.
• 1:09:45
  Speaker 2: Uh No, it's fine.
• 1:09:48
  Speaker 1: And Dirko one fifteen says Adolph Trump, Ice and Maga
• 1:09:52
  Speaker 1: are terrorists and traders. Just your typical comment and nothing
• 1:09:57
  Speaker 1: to see here?
• 1:09:58
  Speaker 3: Why no, but why they don't.
• 1:10:01
  Speaker 2: Want to answer the question. They're not going to answer
• 1:10:02
  Speaker 2: the question else and they're just.
• 1:10:03
  Speaker 3: Gonna I have at this point, I have a lot
• 1:10:08
  Speaker 3: of concrete criticisms of policies that Trump has been pursuing.
• 1:10:15
  Speaker 3: But Trader, I don't think so. And what else is it? Mega?
• 1:10:20
  Speaker 3: You mean people who just want to have a country
• 1:10:24
  Speaker 3: that works, regardless of whether or not Trump is delivering
• 1:10:29
  Speaker 3: that to them. They voted for him because they wanted
• 1:10:32
  Speaker 3: to have a country that works and no more forever wars.
• 1:10:36
  Speaker 3: Can you at least respect them on that level? And
• 1:10:39
  Speaker 3: ICE's traders were Ice traders when they were being expanded
• 1:10:43
  Speaker 3: under Obama. Like they're just the same people who are
• 1:10:46
  Speaker 3: working under Obama to control all immigration. What the hell changed.
• 1:10:52
  Speaker 3: All right, let's go.
• 1:10:53
  Speaker 2: Okay, and then I got one more.
• 1:10:56
  Speaker 1: From uh let me see g Glenn six five seventy four.
• 1:11:02
  Speaker 1: You guys got to realize that most extreme left are brainwashed.
• 1:11:05
  Speaker 1: You need indifference instead of aggressive reaction.
• 1:11:09
  Speaker 3: What are you even talking about now? I'm getting an
• 1:11:12
  Speaker 3: aggressive reaction. Who was aggressive?
• 1:11:17
  Speaker 2: Yeah? I don't think we're being aggressive.
• 1:11:20
  Speaker 3: Yeah. Sometimes I get really angry because I see absolute
• 1:11:24
  Speaker 3: injustice that men face. Forgive me. Actually, you know what,
• 1:11:28
  Speaker 3: I don't give a crap about your forgiveness. I'm going
• 1:11:30
  Speaker 3: to continue to get angry when I see injustices that
• 1:11:33
  Speaker 3: men face. And if that anger is directed at the left,
• 1:11:36
  Speaker 3: so be it. You know what the left can do,
• 1:11:39
  Speaker 3: It can get the fuck out of my way and
• 1:11:42
  Speaker 3: stop fricking targeting men. Okay, all right? I mean actually, no,
• 1:11:48
  Speaker 3: I have one left thing to say. Literally, I am
• 1:11:51
  Speaker 3: seeing feminists on who are basically ground zero for the
• 1:11:56
  Speaker 3: modern left, arguing that anyone who recognizes male victims of
• 1:12:03
  Speaker 3: loss of custody, false accusations, rape, domestic violence, and male
• 1:12:11
  Speaker 3: victims at all of legal policies like conscription of homelessness
• 1:12:16
  Speaker 3: of suicide. Anyone who recognizes male victims is anti feminist.
• 1:12:21
  Speaker 3: That is them declaring their black category.
• 1:12:25
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 1:12:26
  Speaker 3: That is, if they didn't want me to be anti feminist,
• 1:12:30
  Speaker 3: they shouldn't have decided to make men their escapegoat group.
• 1:12:34
  Speaker 3: And until they undecide that, they are going to get,
• 1:12:39
  Speaker 3: you know, a full blast of my anger. And no,
• 1:12:44
  Speaker 3: I'm not gonna be like, oh yeah, that's okay, it's
• 1:12:46
  Speaker 3: not okay. Yeah, and yeah they're blamewashed. But you really
• 1:12:51
  Speaker 3: think that just continuing to be like, oh no, it's
• 1:12:54
  Speaker 3: all neutral, it's all fine, is the way to go.
• 1:12:58
  Speaker 3: Like people, men are being hurt by these policies that
• 1:13:01
  Speaker 3: are being pursued by people who simply want to make
• 1:13:04
  Speaker 3: male victims invisible so they can continue to condemn men,
• 1:13:08
  Speaker 3: and by extension, condemn men the things that men do,
• 1:13:12
  Speaker 3: like hold people to standards. All right, okay, I'm done.
• 1:13:17
  Speaker 3: That really pisses me off.
• 1:13:19
  Speaker 2: Yeah it's okay, okay, okay.
• 1:13:24
  Speaker 1: So in the regular chat, it's it's a lot more lively.
• 1:13:28
  Speaker 1: Here the chat is where the party is. Let me,
• 1:13:35
  Speaker 1: I'm gonna try just look at a couple of the
• 1:13:37
  Speaker 1: like the later ones, because they've been talking a while.
• 1:13:42
  Speaker 1: Loquacious primate. Maybe the real threat is a world men
• 1:13:45
  Speaker 1: and women are more loyal to each other over those
• 1:13:47
  Speaker 1: that want to control us. Yes, yeah, exactly, Yeah, yes,
• 1:13:52
  Speaker 1: that's what it is. If a man and a woman
• 1:13:56
  Speaker 1: are together and they have a family, and they have
• 1:13:58
  Speaker 1: a community and they forward each other. Yes, the government
• 1:14:02
  Speaker 1: has less power and if they're they're less needed, they're
• 1:14:05
  Speaker 1: frankly less needed. So yes, the government, you're absolutely.
• 1:14:09
  Speaker 3: Right, would have to derive its GDP from other things
• 1:14:13
  Speaker 3: aside from exploiting it's it's it's uh, it's population. It
• 1:14:18
  Speaker 3: would have to derive it from actual intelligent, sane fiscal
• 1:14:22
  Speaker 3: policy and and over and properly managing its budget because
• 1:14:29
  Speaker 3: you know, we we can do that. But it's gonna
• 1:14:31
  Speaker 3: you know, there's gonna be a loss of income for
• 1:14:33
  Speaker 3: a lot of people if if men and women start
• 1:14:36
  Speaker 3: having a healthy relationship. Again, big loss of income. Okay,
• 1:14:41
  Speaker 3: all right, all right, so yeah I'll just do that. Yeah,
• 1:14:46
  Speaker 3: So send those messages, feed the badger dot com slashes
• 1:14:49
  Speaker 3: the tip. You can send them after the show is
• 1:14:50
  Speaker 3: over if you are really annoyed at anything I've said.
• 1:14:55
  Speaker 3: I don't want to necessarily be constantly blasting, like putting
• 1:15:00
  Speaker 3: left people on blast. If they want that to stop,
• 1:15:03
  Speaker 3: they can stop attacking men, then they can stop attacking masculinity.
• 1:15:07
  Speaker 3: There you go, that's all you need to do. Then
• 1:15:09
  Speaker 3: we can have a nice discussion, a nice, calm discussion
• 1:15:13
  Speaker 3: about whatever remains of your ideology after you stop attacking
• 1:15:17
  Speaker 3: men in masculinity. I suspect for a lot of the
• 1:15:20
  Speaker 3: modern left there isn't much left. But anyway, those are
• 1:15:24
  Speaker 3: my conditions. And if you want to comment on that,
• 1:15:26
  Speaker 3: if you are a left leaning person who's really upset
• 1:15:28
  Speaker 3: with me because some of you have left as patrons,
• 1:15:33
  Speaker 3: because apparently the final straw was me defending the ice
• 1:15:38
  Speaker 3: agent who was nearly run over and shot the protester
• 1:15:41
  Speaker 3: who nearly ran over him or no, he was run
• 1:15:45
  Speaker 3: over or he was hit by the car. You know,
• 1:15:48
  Speaker 3: that was the final straw. What did you expect? Right?
• 1:15:52
  Speaker 3: This is an intersection of a man trying to do
• 1:15:54
  Speaker 3: a job that is implicated as immoral because the things
• 1:15:59
  Speaker 3: that men do generally are implicated as immoral, and uh,
• 1:16:03
  Speaker 3: a female protester who apparently thought she was invulnerable and
• 1:16:07
  Speaker 3: could put other people in danger, other people's lives in danger. Right,
• 1:16:11
  Speaker 3: what did you expect? My opinion would be? Okay? So anyway,
• 1:16:15
  Speaker 3: if you want to comment on that, Feed the Badger
• 1:16:17
  Speaker 3: dot com slash just the tip. How about you put
• 1:16:19
  Speaker 3: in your comment instead of raging off because you find
• 1:16:25
  Speaker 3: what I have to say to be what was the
• 1:16:27
  Speaker 3: phrase that was used?
• 1:16:32
  Speaker 2: What was the phrase aggressive?
• 1:16:34
  Speaker 3: No? Uh, emotional.
• 1:16:40
  Speaker 2: Moralizing?
• 1:16:42
  Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's it's offensive to your emotional moralizing. Okay, anyway,
• 1:16:46
  Speaker 3: feed the Badger dot com slash just the tip, send them.
• 1:16:49
  Speaker 3: You know, I also don't mind it if you think
• 1:16:51
  Speaker 3: that this is good content. You just want to say, Hi,
• 1:16:53
  Speaker 3: I like your stuff. Feed the Badger dot com slash
• 1:16:56
  Speaker 3: just the tip. We don't always have to just you know,
• 1:16:58
  Speaker 3: get into arguments, although that happens a lot with me,
• 1:17:00
  Speaker 3: I'll admit it. And then if you want to support
• 1:17:03
  Speaker 3: the show because you want commentary that doesn't necessarily support
• 1:17:08
  Speaker 3: anybody's narrative, feed the Badger dot com slash support to
• 1:17:12
  Speaker 3: do that, accept the narrative that men should be cared
• 1:17:16
  Speaker 3: about and deserve compassion, and that maybe you know, society
• 1:17:20
  Speaker 3: shouldn't throw just considered disposable, the very thing that enables
• 1:17:24
  Speaker 3: us to continue to have a society. All right, So
• 1:17:27
  Speaker 3: I'll hand that back to Brian to make commentary on
• 1:17:30
  Speaker 3: anything I've said and take us out.
• 1:17:33
  Speaker 2: Uh No, I think we went through it.
• 1:17:35
  Speaker 1: It's a I wish that they had gone a little
• 1:17:37
  Speaker 1: bit more in this article into like at least trying
• 1:17:41
  Speaker 1: to understand like what it is about women that like
• 1:17:45
  Speaker 1: they tend to promote this more. And I'm disappointed in
• 1:17:48
  Speaker 1: this researcher. And I'm like, how how is it you
• 1:17:51
  Speaker 1: you probably own like more than one house and every like,
• 1:17:55
  Speaker 1: how are you like living this well? And you haven't
• 1:17:58
  Speaker 1: even said you know, may be at the very least
• 1:18:01
  Speaker 1: you can get into like evolutionary psychology or whatever on it,
• 1:18:05
  Speaker 1: but like, at the very least you have to understand
• 1:18:07
  Speaker 1: that if you live in a bubble as a woman,
• 1:18:11
  Speaker 1: where you are like living in the most prosperous, the
• 1:18:14
  Speaker 1: most abundant, the safest, and the most well protected part
• 1:18:18
  Speaker 1: of the world in human history, which is the United States, right,
• 1:18:22
  Speaker 1: you are the freest, the safest, the least likely to starve,
• 1:18:26
  Speaker 1: the least likely to be go homeless, the least likely
• 1:18:29
  Speaker 1: to have your kids die. Like you are doing so well,
• 1:18:33
  Speaker 1: and yet you are miserable and angry and afraid and
• 1:18:38
  Speaker 1: so like you and you feel like because you live
• 1:18:41
  Speaker 1: in this bubble as a woman that you can just say, well,
• 1:18:45
  Speaker 1: act like a child and basically say, I want to
• 1:18:49
  Speaker 1: be able to kill my babies whenever I want. I
• 1:18:51
  Speaker 1: want free healthcare, I want free you know, boob jobs.
• 1:18:55
  Speaker 1: I want free hair appointments. I want my nails done.
• 1:18:58
  Speaker 1: I want groceries. I want houses, which is what they do.
• 1:19:00
  Speaker 1: I want my kids if I decide to not kill them,
• 1:19:03
  Speaker 1: I want them taken care of by somebody else. I
• 1:19:05
  Speaker 1: want all of this I want, I want. I want
• 1:19:08
  Speaker 1: more than that I deserve. I deserve I deserve. And
• 1:19:12
  Speaker 1: when somebody says, well, we're gonna we're gonna elect this
• 1:19:15
  Speaker 1: guy because he's gonna save the economy, close the borders,
• 1:19:18
  Speaker 1: whatever it is, do reasonable things that don't benefit this
• 1:19:21
  Speaker 1: woman directly, the woman's reaction is he has to die
• 1:19:25
  Speaker 1: and that that's literally what we have seen and are
• 1:19:30
  Speaker 1: still seeing is women on TikTok and on x and
• 1:19:34
  Speaker 1: on other social media platforms saying who's gonna do it,
• 1:19:37
  Speaker 1: who's gonna step up, who's gonna take one for the team.
• 1:19:40
  Speaker 1: Of course they say that because they're not gonna do it.
• 1:19:43
  Speaker 1: They're just expecting a man to step up and say
• 1:19:47
  Speaker 1: I will do it. Tips Fedora and go take care
• 1:19:50
  Speaker 1: of it, even if it means, you know, he ends
• 1:19:52
  Speaker 1: up in jail forever or dies trying or whatever, and
• 1:19:57
  Speaker 1: they haven't even thought to ask the most pampered, the
• 1:20:02
  Speaker 1: most well taken care of, the most spoiled people could
• 1:20:06
  Speaker 1: ask for be or just sort of like normalize the
• 1:20:09
  Speaker 1: idea of using violence to get what they want.
• 1:20:12
  Speaker 2: I mean, it makes sense to me.
• 1:20:14
  Speaker 1: So I don't know why they're not going there at least,
• 1:20:16
  Speaker 1: like I hope that they revisit this at some point
• 1:20:19
  Speaker 1: and they do actually start to think about that. So anyway, Yeah,
• 1:20:26
  Speaker 1: those are my thoughts on that.
• 1:20:28
  Speaker 3: Okay, all right, so again, feed the Badger dot com
• 1:20:32
  Speaker 3: slash just the tip. You can send a message at
• 1:20:33
  Speaker 3: any point after the show is over. You can say hi,
• 1:20:36
  Speaker 3: I have to voidcat and feed the Badger dot com
• 1:20:39
  Speaker 3: slash support if you want to help us out, and
• 1:20:43
  Speaker 3: badgeration down online if you want to join our conversation.
• 1:20:46
  Speaker 3: See all of the resources that go into the making
• 1:20:49
  Speaker 3: of these shows and my opinions. Because I source everything,
• 1:20:55
  Speaker 3: everything that I say usually is underwritten by a study,
• 1:21:02
  Speaker 3: sometimes even feminist studies, because the science can be sort
• 1:21:05
  Speaker 3: of good when the conclusions are absolute crap. But yeah,
• 1:21:10
  Speaker 3: so if you're interested in that, Badger nation dot online,
• 1:21:13
  Speaker 3: all right, I'll hand it back to you, Brian.
• 1:21:15
  Speaker 1: Okay, Well, if you guys like this video, please hit like, subscribe.
• 1:21:19
  Speaker 1: If you're not already subscribed, hit the bel notification, leave
• 1:21:22
  Speaker 1: us a comment, let us know what you guys think
• 1:21:24
  Speaker 1: about what we discussed on the show today, and please
• 1:21:26
  Speaker 1: please please share this video because sharing is carrying, and
• 1:21:29
  Speaker 1: be sure to say goodbye to Jojo or given Pats
• 1:21:31
  Speaker 1: if you don't mind. I don't get to show him
• 1:21:33
  Speaker 1: off that much because usually when we do the shows,
• 1:21:35
  Speaker 1: it's later and Lindsay's home and JoJo's with her, but
• 1:21:38
  Speaker 1: when she's at work, he's in here with me, so.
• 1:21:41
  Speaker 3: Now I don't want to show up at all.
• 1:21:43
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it's okay, we got, we got, We've we've had
• 1:21:46
  Speaker 1: Voycat appearances lately, so that's that's okay.
• 1:21:50
  Speaker 3: She's she's really liking her little containment sphere or containment fillander. Yeah,
• 1:21:57
  Speaker 3: I've appreciated that.
• 1:21:59
  Speaker 1: Really, Jojo and Boidcat should ever meet, I don't know
• 1:22:01
  Speaker 1: what would happen, so it.
• 1:22:03
  Speaker 3: Could be a yeah, I mean, Scipio is fine with
• 1:22:06
  Speaker 3: void Cat like Jojo has never really gotten to spend
• 1:22:12
  Speaker 3: time with a cat.
• 1:22:14
  Speaker 1: He is really intrigued by them, but it comes across
• 1:22:18
  Speaker 1: as aggressive. I don't think he would hurt anyone. I
• 1:22:21
  Speaker 1: don't think he would because one time I went to
• 1:22:23
  Speaker 1: a dog park and some guy showed up with an
• 1:22:25
  Speaker 1: albino turkey, a huge turkey, and he was walking around
• 1:22:29
  Speaker 1: the dog park with the turkey, and he insisted I
• 1:22:30
  Speaker 1: bring my dog over, and Jojo was slobbering at the turkey.
• 1:22:34
  Speaker 1: But I brought him over and Jojo didn't kill it,
• 1:22:36
  Speaker 1: so I was grateful. He just sort of smelled it.
• 1:22:40
  Speaker 1: And that's all he wants to do. He wants, he
• 1:22:43
  Speaker 1: wants to He's a hound. He wants to sniff things. Yeah.
• 1:22:46
  Speaker 3: Yeah, Skep is pretty good with the cats. So I mean,
• 1:22:50
  Speaker 3: if you raise a dog with cats, they tend to
• 1:22:52
  Speaker 3: like cats. Although cats outside of the containment unit that
• 1:22:57
  Speaker 3: Scipio thinks cats should be in might get chased. Yeah,
• 1:23:01
  Speaker 3: and then he's like, I must contain you because you
• 1:23:05
  Speaker 3: are outside of your containment unit. Cat. Although he does
• 1:23:09
  Speaker 3: not like cats and cages, he's particularly offended by seeing
• 1:23:12
  Speaker 3: cats in cages.
• 1:23:14
  Speaker 2: Who built the cages? Joe?
• 1:23:16
  Speaker 1: Yeah, okay, all right, so anyway, yeah, thanks guys for
• 1:23:21
  Speaker 1: coming on the show again like chef subscribing comment and
• 1:23:24
  Speaker 1: I'll see you guys in the next one.