Latest / Honey Badger Radio / Why the Manosphere Just Won the Lindsay Clancy Trial

Transcript

Why the Manosphere Just Won the Lindsay Clancy Trial · Honey Badger Radio

• 0:01
  Speaker 1: And get daily bonuses when you log in.
• 0:11
  Speaker 2: So what are you waiting for?
• 0:13
  Speaker 3: Don't delay.
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: Chumba Casino is free to play.
• 0:16
  Speaker 3: Experience social gameplay like never before. Go to Chumba Casino
• 0:19
  Speaker 3: right now to play hundreds of games, including online slots, bingo, slingo,
• 0:23
  Speaker 3: and more. Live the Chumba life at ChumbaCasino.com.
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: Good morning, good afternoon, good evening, wherever you may be,
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: and welcome back to Honey Badger Radio. My name is Brian,
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: I am here with Allison, and this is Maintaining Frame,
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: or the repo gaming stream, cozy gaming stream, where we're
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: going to be looking at a Medium article by Luke
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: Olinga again. Mm-hmm.
• 0:54
  Speaker 2: And then we're going to play some repos.
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: So the article is entitled Why the Manosphere Just Won
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: the Lindsay Clancy Debate. It's from September 6th, so a
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: couple weeks back. So just for the record.
• 1:07
  Speaker 3: A topical. A topical.
• 1:09
  Speaker 2: It's still going to be topical for a while.
• 1:12
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, go ahead.
• 1:15
  Speaker 3: Well, and also, there is a brouhaha on medium over
• 1:20
  Speaker 3: this article and Olinga's audacity in asserting it. And although,
• 1:25
  Speaker 3: as we found out from going through one of his
• 1:28
  Speaker 3: previous works, the Turkish joke about women's hyperbolegomy... and how
• 1:38
  Speaker 3: it's unsatisfiable. And he talked about that, and he did
• 1:41
  Speaker 3: the ma both sides, but really just women are right
• 1:44
  Speaker 3: kind of thing. So he's definitely not on the side
• 1:47
  Speaker 3: of the Manosphere. He is bemoaning the Manosphere winning.
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it's regrettable that the quote-unquote Manosphere is winning.
• 1:55
  Speaker 3: Yes.
• 1:56
  Speaker 2: Whatever that means.
• 1:57
  Speaker 3: Of course, I would just add this to the pile
• 2:00
  Speaker 3: of that particular side. And yes, they created the side,
• 2:04
  Speaker 3: so I might as well just acknowledge it. That particular side,
• 2:08
  Speaker 3: framing a woman strangling her three kids, and men seeing
• 2:14
  Speaker 3: this and being horrified by other women making excuses for
• 2:18
  Speaker 3: her as a win for the manosphere, certainly speaks to
• 2:21
  Speaker 3: the mentality that the important thing here... is that their
• 2:26
  Speaker 3: side gets rhetorical points, or that the manosphere got rhetorical points,
• 2:32
  Speaker 3: or that the manosphere became justified in its assumptions about women. Like, that's... Brian,
• 2:38
  Speaker 3: did you know that the important thing here is which
• 2:42
  Speaker 3: ideology is winning? Yes. That's the critical matter at hand,
• 2:48
  Speaker 3: is which side... Which position in the positional web is
• 2:53
  Speaker 3: currently winning the debate? Not even debate, but the positioning.
• 2:59
  Speaker 3: That's what's critical. That the manosphere is gaining more people,
• 3:04
  Speaker 3: not even more people who have any interest in listening
• 3:07
  Speaker 3: to Andrew Tate, but more men who are recognizing the
• 3:11
  Speaker 3: truth of the talking points that the manosphere brings up.
• 3:15
  Speaker 2: Right?
• 3:15
  Speaker 3: That's the horrible thing here, is that men are waking
• 3:18
  Speaker 3: up to the fact that society does not hold women accountable,
• 3:21
  Speaker 3: even for the things that used to be the traditional
• 3:24
  Speaker 3: things that women were responsible for, like children and not
• 3:26
  Speaker 3: killing them. You know, more men are waking up, and
• 3:29
  Speaker 3: that is the biggest issue here. The wrong side is winning.
• 3:32
  Speaker 3: Did you know that, guys? Did you know that? Not
• 3:36
  Speaker 3: the fact that three kids are dead. Their mother may
• 3:40
  Speaker 3: walk away from this without being... given delivered the guilty
• 3:46
  Speaker 3: verdict she sorely deserves. You know, that's not the issue.
• 3:50
  Speaker 3: Nor is the copycat killings that have sprung up. No,
• 3:53
  Speaker 3: those aren't the issues. Nor is the issue that women
• 3:55
  Speaker 3: apparently are okay with dead children as long as it
• 3:59
  Speaker 3: preserves the blamelessness of their woman card. None of that
• 4:02
  Speaker 3: is the problem. The problem is that the wrong people
• 4:07
  Speaker 3: are winning. And like I said, that is just an
• 4:12
  Speaker 3: example of of more of the problem. That they think
• 4:15
  Speaker 3: that is the issue here. That that is the critical
• 4:18
  Speaker 3: issue here. Alinga thinks that this is the critical issue.
• 4:22
  Speaker 3: All of the women who are upset at what he said.
• 4:25
  Speaker 3: He's 100% of both sides, but women should be the
• 4:29
  Speaker 3: ones who win kind of man. He's like, there shouldn't
• 4:32
  Speaker 3: be gender war. Men should just surrender to women. That's
• 4:36
  Speaker 3: the kind of person he is. And there are a
• 4:39
  Speaker 3: whole bunch of feminists who are upset at him. Because
• 4:43
  Speaker 3: he dares to say that everything around the Clancy trial
• 4:49
  Speaker 3: is making men realize that the men who are part
• 4:53
  Speaker 3: of the Manosphere have a point. And it's not even
• 4:56
  Speaker 3: that they realize it. They don't even probably care or
• 4:58
  Speaker 3: listen to them. They are coming to their own conclusion
• 5:02
  Speaker 3: about this situation. And that conclusion is uncomfortably close to
• 5:06
  Speaker 3: what the Manosphere has been asserting all along. And that's
• 5:11
  Speaker 3: the real issue here. Not the miscarriage of justice, not
• 5:15
  Speaker 3: the three dead kids, not the multiple other dead kids
• 5:17
  Speaker 3: now that I know at least one other woman has
• 5:20
  Speaker 3: sort of thought on to the Lindsay bandwagon. I feel
• 5:25
  Speaker 3: just like Lindsay. Come here, little Timmy. Come here. Oh,
• 5:29
  Speaker 3: mommy won't hurt you. Dead. Right, yeah, that's not the issue, no.
• 5:35
  Speaker 3: The issue is the Manosphere might be winning, guys. The
• 5:40
  Speaker 3: issue is that men might realize how freaking depraved this is,
• 5:46
  Speaker 3: and might not view women with such a sense of blamelessness,
• 5:50
  Speaker 3: shall we say. And it's not even taking away the
• 5:54
  Speaker 3: 19th Amendment. They might revoke the blamelessness of the woman
• 5:59
  Speaker 3: card and start looking at women with suspicion, with justifiable suspicion, right?
• 6:06
  Speaker 3: Because not only are women evil and capable of evil
• 6:09
  Speaker 3: and fully capable of the entire range of brutality, in fact,
• 6:13
  Speaker 3: plus some that women seem to only do, right? They're
• 6:18
  Speaker 3: fully capable of the same range of brutality as men.
• 6:22
  Speaker 3: But there's one additional factor that women can't seem to
• 6:26
  Speaker 3: not indulge in, which is excusing it, excusing their brutality,
• 6:32
  Speaker 3: excusing their... their failures of responsibility, excusing their criminality, excusing
• 6:39
  Speaker 3: their evil and trying to hide it and pretend like, oh,
• 6:42
  Speaker 3: she's not bad. You're a bad man for noticing and
• 6:47
  Speaker 3: doing crap like that. It is the abject failure and
• 6:51
  Speaker 3: taking accountability that these people are worried that men are
• 6:55
  Speaker 3: going to arrive at as a conclusion about watching from
• 6:59
  Speaker 3: watching women's behavior and that the blamelessness will run out.
• 7:05
  Speaker 3: So not only are women equally capable of men's, the
• 7:08
  Speaker 3: same amount of brutality as men, they have the additional
• 7:11
  Speaker 3: problem of not wanting to hold each other accountable for
• 7:16
  Speaker 3: it in aggregate, willing to cape for each other, willing
• 7:21
  Speaker 3: to pretend it doesn't happen, willing to make excuses, willing
• 7:26
  Speaker 3: to remove punishments, in order to retain the blamelessness of
• 7:30
  Speaker 3: the women card, the credit line of the women card. Anyway,
• 7:34
  Speaker 3: so that's the thing. So guys, it's not about a
• 7:37
  Speaker 3: murder trial, it's not about dead kids, it's not about
• 7:39
  Speaker 3: miscarriage of justice. It's about the fact that the manosphere
• 7:42
  Speaker 3: might win. Oh boy, that's the real issue, isn't it?
• 7:47
  Speaker 3: And not even the manosphere might win, that men might
• 7:49
  Speaker 3: actually come to the same conclusion that guys in the
• 7:52
  Speaker 3: manosphere have already come to. And they haven't even taken
• 7:55
  Speaker 3: it far enough. Because the Manosphere still tells men, oh,
• 7:59
  Speaker 3: you have to lead, you have to grind, you have
• 8:01
  Speaker 3: to max. Right? No. I'm with the MGTOW guys. Yeah,
• 8:09
  Speaker 3: there's nothing. Right? There's nothing. This is not on men.
• 8:18
  Speaker 3: Men did not create this. They may have to end it,
• 8:20
  Speaker 3: but they did not create it. All right, let's... Did
• 8:24
  Speaker 3: you have anything.
• 8:25
  Speaker 2: To say then?
• 8:26
  Speaker 1: No.
• 8:26
  Speaker 2: You haven't even done the things yet.
• 8:27
  Speaker 3: We haven't even begun! We haven't even begun to tarolinga
• 8:31
  Speaker 3: an asshole. Okay, alright. So throughout the show, my rants,
• 8:37
  Speaker 3: and I will try to shut my mouth so Brian
• 8:40
  Speaker 3: can actually talk too. Good luck on me. That's like
• 8:43
  Speaker 3: my nightmare level. But anyway, if you want to send
• 8:47
  Speaker 3: a message at any point throughout the show, go to feedthebadger.com
• 8:51
  Speaker 3: slash justthetip. to send in a comment. Any tip with
• 8:55
  Speaker 3: that comment, very best way for you to send us
• 8:57
  Speaker 3: any funds you would like, aside from just going to feedthebadger.com.
• 9:02
  Speaker 3: It's usually feedthebadger.com slash support, but now the form is
• 9:06
  Speaker 3: on the main page of Feed the Badger, so you
• 9:08
  Speaker 3: just have to go to Feed the Badger to support
• 9:11
  Speaker 3: the show. So feedthebadger.com slash tip to send, just the tip,
• 9:15
  Speaker 3: to send in a tip and a comment with that tip,
• 9:18
  Speaker 3: and feedthebadger.com to support the show and badger nation. Online
• 9:23
  Speaker 3: to join us in our community. And if you want
• 9:25
  Speaker 3: to ever join up with repo, that's probably the best
• 9:28
  Speaker 3: way to do it is to get into our community
• 9:30
  Speaker 3: at badger, badger nation.
• 9:31
  Speaker 1: Online.
• 9:32
  Speaker 3: All right, Brian, let's start.
• 9:34
  Speaker 1: All right. So I, um, just so you guys know,
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: we're going to be doing repo. And if you want
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: to interact with the game to make things interesting for us,
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: there is a link in the description. You can't do
• 9:45
  Speaker 1: it now because we haven't started yet, but there is
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: a link to you to join and, or to not join,
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: but use something called crowd control, which lets you do
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: a bunch of silly effects, and also change the game itself.
• 9:58
  Speaker 1: And I've also modded the game I hope it works
• 10:01
  Speaker 1: I'm not sure it will but it's supposed to allow
• 10:03
  Speaker 1: up to 10 players that's what I modded it for
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: up to 10 players and shared upgrades which I'll explain
• 10:10
  Speaker 1: when we get into that part of it but all
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: right let's see I got a couple of paid comments
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: I'm gonna read and then we'll start the article so
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: Dark Kikimora gives us $ 15 and says, Would it be
• 10:22
  Speaker 1: bad if someone 100% believed Lindsay should 100% be held
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: responsible for what she did, but they also developed a
• 10:28
  Speaker 1: kink for their partners choking them with exercise bands after
• 10:31
  Speaker 1: they heard the story? Asking for a friend. It wouldn't
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: be bad, but it would be strange and I would
• 10:37
  Speaker 1: question your soul. Aaron Clary. Oh, hello. Aaron Clary gives
• 10:43
  Speaker 1: us $ 5.
• 10:44
  Speaker 2: Is this the Aaron Clary?
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: I think it is.
• 10:46
  Speaker 2: And says, so much winning. Thank you, Aaron Clary.
• 10:48
  Speaker 1: Appreciate it. Okay, let us now get into this thought piece,
• 10:55
  Speaker 1: this blog by Luke Olinga. Luke Olinga is a Nigerian
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: man who, I think he's Nigerian. He started making, I guess,
• 11:05
  Speaker 1: content there, and basically talking about the ills of the
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: world in a really, like, Limp-disc Dick Way is a
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: good way to catapult your career into Manhattan living, which
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: is where he's living now.
• 11:18
  Speaker 2: So maybe that's what we should be doing.
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: I don't know.
• 11:21
  Speaker 2: And the article is entitled.
• 11:23
  Speaker 1: I can't.
• 11:24
  Speaker 3: I can't.
• 11:24
  Speaker 2: I know. I know you can't.
• 11:26
  Speaker 1: I don't... Well.
• 11:27
  Speaker 3: I can't. I can... I just can't. I cannot actually
• 11:31
  Speaker 3: attain that standard. That sounds like toxic masculinity to me.
• 11:35
  Speaker 1: I get it.
• 11:35
  Speaker 2: I get it.
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: All right. The article is entitled Why the Manosphere Just
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: Won the Lindsay Clancy Trial by Luke Olinga. And it
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: was published on September 6th, so a couple of weeks back.
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: So whatever you guys know from the last couple of
• 11:53
  Speaker 1: weeks is not considered in this article. So, okay, he goes,
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: I sat in a room of men in Austin and
• 12:01
  Speaker 1: asked about Lindsay Clancy. One word kept coming back. The story,
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: they told me, made itself. After sitting in a room
• 12:10
  Speaker 1: with men in Austin, I stopped being surprised by the
• 12:13
  Speaker 1: word crazy. That's the one that kept coming back when
• 12:17
  Speaker 1: I asked about Lindsay Clancy. Not crazy about her. Crazy
• 12:21
  Speaker 1: about the scene around her. A mother who doesn't deny
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: killing her three children, and then a crowd outside the
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: courthouse in pink defending her. They said the word the
• 12:31
  Speaker 1: way you say something you've given up trying to explain.
• 12:34
  Speaker 1: I've spent two years in rooms like this one, and
• 12:37
  Speaker 1: I've learned to listen for the moment a man decides
• 12:39
  Speaker 1: the argument has already been made for him. This was
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: that moment. The Manosphere won this one without lifting a finger. Yeah.
• 12:51
  Speaker 3: Okay, I learned to listen for the moment a man
• 12:53
  Speaker 3: decides the argument has already been made for him. First
• 12:56
  Speaker 3: of all... So what? So that you can correct him? No, no, no,
• 13:00
  Speaker 3: we don't see women that way. No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
• 13:04
  Speaker 3: Read this feminist brochure of how you're supposed to view women.
• 13:08
  Speaker 3: With equality, right? Of course, in this case, with equality
• 13:12
  Speaker 3: would be wanting her to fry for having killed her children,
• 13:15
  Speaker 3: just like men would want for a man who had
• 13:17
  Speaker 3: done that. Oh, you have schizophrenia? Huh. Well, that's so sad.
• 13:22
  Speaker 3: Go to the electric chair. You have some kind of psychosis. Well,
• 13:27
  Speaker 3: that was really terrible. Maybe you should have told someone
• 13:30
  Speaker 3: or got out of the house or cut off your hands.
• 13:34
  Speaker 3: Been a man about it. And since you didn't, you
• 13:37
  Speaker 3: go to the electric chair. That's how men would deal
• 13:39
  Speaker 3: with a Leonard Clancy. But that's not what happened. And
• 13:43
  Speaker 3: men are noticing. The way women deal with Lindsay Clancy is,
• 13:47
  Speaker 3: oh my god, well, the act negates itself. Obviously she's
• 13:53
  Speaker 3: a good mother, because all mothers are good, and a
• 13:56
  Speaker 3: good mother, which is all mothers, would only kill their
• 13:59
  Speaker 3: children if they were insane. Therefore, by killing her children,
• 14:03
  Speaker 3: she proves that she was innocent of killing her children.
• 14:06
  Speaker 3: Woman logic 101. There you go. Slap a stamp on it,
• 14:10
  Speaker 3: mail it to the courtroom. She should get a gigantic
• 14:14
  Speaker 3: bouquet of flowers, enough gold and incense she could eat,
• 14:18
  Speaker 3: a pat on the head for being a good girl,
• 14:22
  Speaker 3: and then she should be put through the entire talk circuit, right?
• 14:28
  Speaker 3: And then she should be made president. That would be
• 14:31
  Speaker 3: sufficient to... I wouldn't say Lindsay Clancy for all the
• 14:36
  Speaker 3: horrors that she went through slaughtering her children. Like, this
• 14:40
  Speaker 3: is the female mind in operation, and men have noticed.
• 14:44
  Speaker 3: And I say the female mind because this is not
• 14:47
  Speaker 3: a failure mode that men engage in. That's what I've
• 14:51
  Speaker 3: noticed about men. Yes, there are criminal men. And there
• 14:55
  Speaker 3: are certain forms of criminality, like killing kids, that even
• 14:59
  Speaker 3: criminal men find abhorrent and would punish. That's the funny thing,
• 15:03
  Speaker 3: is that, okay, Leonard Clancy, not only would he be
• 15:08
  Speaker 3: fried for what he did by a jury of his
• 15:11
  Speaker 3: male peers, no excuses, schizophrenia, well, that's too bad. Psychosis, eh,
• 15:18
  Speaker 3: I mean, men do raise these defenses and almost never
• 15:22
  Speaker 3: get them. Unlike women, who basically almost always get them.
• 15:29
  Speaker 3: Unless there is some other factor that makes it obvious
• 15:33
  Speaker 3: that it wasn't her illness that did it. Like anything
• 15:37
  Speaker 3: that indicates premeditation. For example, sending her husband out for
• 15:42
  Speaker 3: a half an hour and then taking a phone call
• 15:45
  Speaker 3: to send him out longer. I probably have the timing
• 15:49
  Speaker 3: a little bit off. But anyway, the whole idea is
• 15:52
  Speaker 3: Lindsay Clancy sent Patrick Clancy out so that she had
• 15:55
  Speaker 3: time to do what she wanted to do, kill her
• 15:58
  Speaker 3: kids without his interference. She knows that someone would stop her.
• 16:04
  Speaker 3: What does that mean? It means she knows she's doing
• 16:07
  Speaker 3: something wrong. And then we could get into all of
• 16:10
  Speaker 3: the specifics that came out of the autopsy. You know
• 16:13
  Speaker 3: that one of those kids, like it was the allegation
• 16:16
  Speaker 3: or the presentation of the defense is that she put
• 16:19
  Speaker 3: these things on their throat. and then tied him off,
• 16:22
  Speaker 3: except one of the kids showed signs of struggle. The
• 16:28
  Speaker 3: youngest kid, I believe, had a braiding on his throat.
• 16:32
  Speaker 3: So that cord was not applied and then static. It
• 16:38
  Speaker 3: was moving against his throat, which either means she was
• 16:41
  Speaker 3: strangling the kid herself, or he somehow struggled and she
• 16:47
  Speaker 3: had to reapply it. That is some serious stone cold
• 16:52
  Speaker 3: assassin shit, guys. And that's what the holdout juror was
• 16:56
  Speaker 3: thinking about. That's why the other jurors were like, well,
• 16:59
  Speaker 3: she couldn't get past how brutally she murdered her children
• 17:03
  Speaker 3: in cold blood with chillingly cold nerves. Like that was
• 17:09
  Speaker 3: some serious Nazi assassin shit. He just couldn't get over that.
• 17:13
  Speaker 3: Just couldn't get over it. Because that shows intent. Anyway,
• 17:19
  Speaker 3: so we're going to just ignore all of that, right?
• 17:22
  Speaker 3: To give her the defense that women get anyway. And
• 17:26
  Speaker 3: men would never give to each other. And again, even
• 17:29
  Speaker 3: criminal men. A Leonard Cancy in jail probably would have
• 17:34
  Speaker 3: to be in solitary confinement, or what is it called?
• 17:38
  Speaker 3: It's basically a form of confinement where he's excluded from
• 17:41
  Speaker 3: the general population because they will kill him. Even criminal
• 17:46
  Speaker 3: men hate child killers. Rapists. And rapists. And child molesters.
• 17:54
  Speaker 3: Even criminal men have their own code of honor that
• 17:57
  Speaker 3: they apply to other men. But even normal women don't
• 18:02
  Speaker 3: even have that level of honor. They don't even have
• 18:04
  Speaker 3: the honor of a criminal man. Just wrap your mind
• 18:08
  Speaker 3: around that. And then there's all the women who are like, oh, well,
• 18:12
  Speaker 3: just because a bunch of women are trying to excuse
• 18:14
  Speaker 3: her doesn't mean you need to hold all women accountable. Yes,
• 18:17
  Speaker 3: because you are the sex that has this failure mode. manifestly,
• 18:24
  Speaker 3: because we're only seeing it in women. And this bothers me,
• 18:29
  Speaker 3: as a woman, because I don't want people who cannot
• 18:32
  Speaker 3: take responsibility for men, their fellow citizens, society, having any
• 18:38
  Speaker 3: authority over men, their fellow citizens, society, or even their
• 18:43
  Speaker 3: traditional forms of authority, which is over children. This is
• 18:49
  Speaker 3: actually not even like, you know, send women back to
• 18:51
  Speaker 3: the kitchen. Can you even trust women in the kitchen?
• 18:55
  Speaker 3: Can you? Can you even trust women in the nursery
• 18:58
  Speaker 3: at this point? Like women have managed to do something
• 19:02
  Speaker 3: that disqualifies them from their traditional realms of responsibility. That's
• 19:08
  Speaker 3: where we're at. And my personal preference is that women
• 19:14
  Speaker 3: take responsibility, right? But if they can't, if this failure
• 19:19
  Speaker 3: mode is too universal when it comes to women, then
• 19:22
  Speaker 3: they cannot be allowed to have responsibility. They cannot be
• 19:26
  Speaker 3: allowed to have authority. They must have that taken away
• 19:31
  Speaker 3: if they cannot take responsibility for it. So I guess
• 19:35
  Speaker 3: we have to go back to default father custody. We
• 19:39
  Speaker 3: have to go back to a situation where if Lindsay
• 19:42
  Speaker 3: Clancy does the crazy eyes towards her children, Patrick Clancy can,
• 19:47
  Speaker 3: without without explaining himself just pack up the kids and
• 19:51
  Speaker 3: walk out maybe there was a reason that was the
• 19:55
  Speaker 3: way it was in like victorian england all right maybe
• 19:59
  Speaker 3: maybe they knew something we didn't know yeah maybe they
• 20:02
  Speaker 3: knew something we didn't know and also i'd like to
• 20:04
  Speaker 3: add divorce was like one percent at the time Oh,
• 20:10
  Speaker 3: good lord. So anyway.
• 20:11
  Speaker 1: Well, that's because... Maybe a hundred and so years ago.
• 20:16
  Speaker 3: A hundred and such a few years ago that women
• 20:21
  Speaker 3: were still viewed as chattel.
• 20:26
  Speaker 1: Alright, go ahead.
• 20:27
  Speaker 3: Just a request. I know I'm long-winded. Can you cut
• 20:30
  Speaker 3: it down to literally a hundred years ago women were
• 20:33
  Speaker 3: viewed as chattel?
• 20:35
  Speaker 1: All right.
• 20:37
  Speaker 2: I do have a shorter one, but I don't have
• 20:39
  Speaker 2: it on my board, but that's okay.
• 20:41
  Speaker 3: Yeah. Just because I know some people are like, I
• 20:44
  Speaker 3: don't want to listen to... Anyway, it doesn't matter. My
• 20:48
  Speaker 3: overall point is this, right? Either women can be held
• 20:53
  Speaker 3: accountable for their actions, or they cannot have any authority
• 20:59
  Speaker 3: over their fellow citizens, men, children, the state, Right, that's it.
• 21:05
  Speaker 3: We can't have this half-assed, yeah, they have the same authority,
• 21:10
  Speaker 3: but they have none of the responsibility. Either Lindsay Clancy, right?
• 21:16
  Speaker 3: I know she's not going to fry. I know she's
• 21:18
  Speaker 3: not going to get the lethal injection. I know that.
• 21:22
  Speaker 3: Either Lindsay Clancy does time, or this is a failure
• 21:26
  Speaker 3: mode that indicts the whole, the whole of women. And
• 21:33
  Speaker 3: you may be a woman who says, oh, geez, but
• 21:36
  Speaker 3: I don't, I believe she should do time. I think
• 21:38
  Speaker 3: she's a bad woman. Yes, but here's the problem. This
• 21:42
  Speaker 3: failure mode is ubiquitous in women. There are feminist initiatives
• 21:47
  Speaker 3: right now to remove women's prisons. There have been feminist
• 21:50
  Speaker 3: initiatives over the last 60 years to create female-only laws.
• 21:55
  Speaker 3: In Canada, a woman isn't even charged with murder if
• 21:59
  Speaker 3: she kills her infant. She's charged with infanticide. Right? That's sick.
• 22:05
  Speaker 3: And then there's all kinds of laws that only exist
• 22:09
  Speaker 3: for men around sexual violence. And feminists turn around and say, look,
• 22:13
  Speaker 3: it's mostly men who are sexually violent. Bitch, it's only
• 22:16
  Speaker 3: men who are responsible for their criminal sexual behavior. Women
• 22:20
  Speaker 3: are just given free passes like they're candy. So this
• 22:23
  Speaker 3: is rife. This is a huge problem. And for some reason,
• 22:28
  Speaker 3: all of the women who say, well, I'm not like that,
• 22:30
  Speaker 3: I think women should be accountable, have absolutely zip, zero
• 22:35
  Speaker 3: control over the women who are insisting on reducing women's
• 22:39
  Speaker 3: accountability as they increase women's power. Look, I don't like
• 22:44
  Speaker 3: where that's going. I don't like it. Right? And... As again,
• 22:53
  Speaker 3: my preference. Women take responsibility. But if they can't, the
• 22:59
  Speaker 3: only other option is women are divested of all their authority. Okay.
• 23:07
  Speaker 3: Let's go, Brian.
• 23:08
  Speaker 1: So I got a couple more paid comments I'm going
• 23:12
  Speaker 1: to read and then I'll do more of the article.
• 23:15
  Speaker 1: Xeranks gives us $ 5 and says, in light of Allison
• 23:18
  Speaker 1: highlighting that women losing the benefit of the doubt regarding
• 23:21
  Speaker 1: heinous acts being worse than repealing the 19th, I advocate
• 23:24
  Speaker 1: we continue overtures toward repealing the 19th. Every time people
• 23:28
  Speaker 1: ask why, we discuss the reason for why we came
• 23:31
  Speaker 1: to that position. We aim for the moon and end
• 23:34
  Speaker 1: up among the stars. Thank you for that, Xeranks. And
• 23:37
  Speaker 1: then Roboto gives us a dollar and says, you might
• 23:39
  Speaker 1: be overestimating or underestimating the power of the sisterhood.
• 23:44
  Speaker 2: All right, thank you.
• 23:47
  Speaker 1: Getting back to the article now. Alright, I've spent two
• 23:52
  Speaker 1: years in rooms like this one and I've learned to
• 23:54
  Speaker 1: listen for the moment a man decides the argument has
• 23:57
  Speaker 1: already been made for him. This was that moment. The
• 24:01
  Speaker 1: Manosphere won this one without lifting a finger. Nobody had
• 24:04
  Speaker 1: to sell these men on a theory about women and accountability.
• 24:07
  Speaker 1: The images did it. The pink shirts, the fundraiser, the
• 24:10
  Speaker 1: 11 to 1 split, a lawyer walking out to the
• 24:13
  Speaker 1: cameras to say one man robbed the other 11. Yeah,
• 24:16
  Speaker 1: the manosphere isn't really a factor in this. This is
• 24:21
  Speaker 1: what I don't get. I just want to put this
• 24:22
  Speaker 1: out there. I'm going to be brief. None of this
• 24:27
  Speaker 1: is political in any way. It has nothing to do
• 24:30
  Speaker 1: with necessarily about men's issues or feminism. Yet, and I
• 24:36
  Speaker 1: think it's interesting, everyone that is talking about this is
• 24:39
  Speaker 1: still framing it in that way. They're like, oh, this
• 24:41
  Speaker 1: is the manosphere against the feminists. No, it's a woman
• 24:44
  Speaker 1: who murdered her children... who should be going to jail
• 24:47
  Speaker 1: for a long time, if not for the rest of
• 24:49
  Speaker 1: her life, if not publicly executed. And then there are
• 24:52
  Speaker 1: women and some men who are trying to defend her.
• 24:56
  Speaker 1: And then there's people with common sense that are saying, no,
• 24:59
  Speaker 1: you can't do that. And there's nothing about that that
• 25:01
  Speaker 1: should be political. It shouldn't be political.
• 25:03
  Speaker 2: Let me put it that way.
• 25:05
  Speaker 1: And yet even this guy is like the manosphere. It's like, well,
• 25:08
  Speaker 1: I don't look at what anyone in the quote manosphere
• 25:12
  Speaker 1: and quote has said about this. Everything that I've seen
• 25:15
  Speaker 1: is just from regular people who have like access to
• 25:19
  Speaker 1: the Internet and they're just giving their comments, whether they
• 25:21
  Speaker 1: are normally political commentators or just cultural commentators or just normies.
• 25:26
  Speaker 1: And they're just like, wow, this is fucked up. And
• 25:29
  Speaker 1: they're like, that's Manosphere talk.
• 25:31
  Speaker 3: What?
• 25:31
  Speaker 1: No, no. No, I don't. What is that? Does anybody
• 25:34
  Speaker 1: know what Andrew Tate said about this? Has he chimed in?
• 25:37
  Speaker 1: Has Justin Waller made a comment about this? I haven't
• 25:40
  Speaker 1: been waiting for that with bated breath. I think it's obvious.
• 25:45
  Speaker 1: So what this guy is attributing to the Manosphere is
• 25:49
  Speaker 1: just like people with common sense seeing reality play out
• 25:52
  Speaker 1: and then giving an opinion on it that's normal. That's
• 25:56
  Speaker 1: what is kind of like mind-boggling about this, is that
• 26:00
  Speaker 1: the normal, the common sense, the moral thing, those positions
• 26:05
  Speaker 1: are now manosphere positions. What?
• 26:08
  Speaker 3: It's almost like they were masculinity to begin with.
• 26:10
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, yes, but I... You know, I don't...
• 26:13
  Speaker 1: I'm not even sure the manosphere is masculine, but that's
• 26:16
  Speaker 1: another conversation. I.
• 26:18
  Speaker 2: That's the thing.
• 26:19
  Speaker 1: Like, I... I know that the framing is coming from
• 26:23
  Speaker 1: the way it's been put out on the media. So
• 26:25
  Speaker 1: when the media... like writes articles about anything going on
• 26:29
  Speaker 1: with the Manosphere, they always act like it's like this
• 26:32
  Speaker 1: ever present, you know, multiple, like, like a Hydra that
• 26:37
  Speaker 1: just is like, or, or, or a Kraken that has
• 26:39
  Speaker 1: his tentacles and everything when it literally like is, it's like,
• 26:43
  Speaker 1: I don't even think about those guys. Like most of
• 26:45
  Speaker 1: the time, I don't even think about those guys. And
• 26:47
  Speaker 1: I certainly don't when it comes to Lindsay Clancy. So
• 26:49
  Speaker 1: why is he bringing this up? And I think it's, Well,
• 26:52
  Speaker 1: I think it's because it sells clicks. I think that
• 26:54
  Speaker 1: he puts Manosphere in his article and people are going
• 26:57
  Speaker 1: to click on it, especially.
• 26:58
  Speaker 2: If it's related to this case.
• 27:00
  Speaker 1: But I think he's an opportunist.
• 27:02
  Speaker 3: It's because he's trying to prevent the Manosphere from getting
• 27:06
  Speaker 3: more attention.
• 27:07
  Speaker 1: Right, but he's giving them attention to do it. Yeah.
• 27:10
  Speaker 3: Yeah, but he's also incapable of realizing, well, if this,
• 27:16
  Speaker 3: which is of common sense... Like, yes, there is... schizophrenia
• 27:21
  Speaker 3: and yes there's postpartum psychosis although i will really believe
• 27:25
  Speaker 3: it exists when they extend it to men because men
• 27:28
  Speaker 3: also go through hormonal changes when they have children but
• 27:32
  Speaker 3: but then i'll believe that it's a genuine thing but
• 27:35
  Speaker 3: regardless this particular case has so much in it that
• 27:41
  Speaker 3: indicates she knew what she was doing that this doesn't
• 27:45
  Speaker 3: apply you actually have to have psychosis to use this
• 27:51
  Speaker 3: as a defense. These women are insisting on rendering her
• 27:55
  Speaker 3: blameless and I have listened and analyzed how they've talked
• 27:59
  Speaker 3: about this case. They created their own standard of evidence
• 28:05
  Speaker 3: that has absolutely nothing to do with what they were
• 28:08
  Speaker 3: asked to decide. They were asked to decide if this
• 28:12
  Speaker 3: woman was competent. They were like, we reject that question.
• 28:17
  Speaker 3: We reject that fact we're supposed to find. And we
• 28:21
  Speaker 3: substitute our own, which serves our ends, of rendering her
• 28:25
  Speaker 3: blameless because she was a mother and all mothers are good.
• 28:29
  Speaker 3: And good mothers don't kill their children. Therefore, if you
• 28:32
  Speaker 3: think she did, it was a hallucination created by the
• 28:35
  Speaker 3: patriarchy fairy. QED, give her a cruise, a Disney cruise,
• 28:42
  Speaker 3: because she deserves something for how much she suffered. Right?
• 28:45
  Speaker 3: This is their logic. They were specifically asked to find
• 28:50
  Speaker 3: one thing. Was she sane when she did it? They
• 28:55
  Speaker 3: had the audacity to go in public and tell the
• 28:58
  Speaker 3: world that they considered all of the medical testimony, the
• 29:02
  Speaker 3: forensic psychiatric testimony, was a bunch of BS. They had
• 29:09
  Speaker 3: the audacity to indicate that they answered a question they
• 29:12
  Speaker 3: were not asked. And that question happened to be very
• 29:15
  Speaker 3: convenient for their already existing biases as mother chauvinists, mother supremacists,
• 29:23
  Speaker 3: I guess. All right.
• 29:25
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 29:25
  Speaker 3: I just wanted to point that out. And then men
• 29:30
  Speaker 3: and some women are realizing this, and this sort of
• 29:33
  Speaker 3: brushingly passes on a manosphere talking point, and then he's
• 29:37
  Speaker 3: suddenly saying, oh, look... the manosphere is going to be
• 29:41
  Speaker 3: proven right just accidentally by coincidence by reality. That's not good. Yeah.
• 29:50
  Speaker 1: Yeah, having a sense of justice and common sense, that's
• 29:53
  Speaker 1: the manosphere talking.
• 29:55
  Speaker 2: Well, that's what that is.
• 29:56
  Speaker 3: Brian, we're there.
• 29:58
  Speaker 1: Yeah. No, I look, that's why, that's why the term
• 30:01
  Speaker 1: doesn't mean anything. That's what I've been saying when people
• 30:04
  Speaker 1: are like, well, I'm not part of the manosphere because
• 30:05
  Speaker 1: they're this. It's like, no, no, you are. You are
• 30:09
  Speaker 1: because the manosphere equals people we don't like because they
• 30:13
  Speaker 1: don't have a problem being mean to women sometimes.
• 30:16
  Speaker 2: Like that's all it requires.
• 30:18
  Speaker 3: Or holding women accountable sometimes.
• 30:21
  Speaker 1: Well, yeah, but that's being mean. That's being mean to women.
• 30:23
  Speaker 3: The justice system is the manosphere.
• 30:25
  Speaker 2: Yes, the justice system.
• 30:26
  Speaker 1: The justice system. Well, only if it actually works. If
• 30:30
  Speaker 1: it continues to let women go scot-free or, you know,
• 30:33
  Speaker 1: handhold them or treat them lightly, then it's not the manosphere.
• 30:36
  Speaker 1: It's feminist. Oh, no, no, Brian. If women do end
• 30:39
  Speaker 1: up in jail.
• 30:41
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 30:41
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 30:43
  Speaker 3: If the justice system works when it comes to female criminality,
• 30:47
  Speaker 3: that's the manosphere, right? Okay, if you want to have
• 30:52
  Speaker 3: a wolverine that isn't castrated, you're part of the manosphere. Yep. Right?
• 30:58
  Speaker 3: If you don't want to be talked down to as
• 31:00
  Speaker 3: a man, you're part of the manosphere. If you don't
• 31:03
  Speaker 3: want to permanently be attached to the ball-kicking machine, you're
• 31:07
  Speaker 3: part of the manosphere. If you don't exist... and constantly
• 31:13
  Speaker 3: view your masculinity as some kind of hair suit that
• 31:16
  Speaker 3: you have to wear for the rest of your part
• 31:17
  Speaker 3: of the manosphere. Hell, my mother back in the 70s
• 31:21
  Speaker 3: when she was editing a feminist zine and told the
• 31:25
  Speaker 3: incoherent monkeys who were sending in gibberish to be published
• 31:30
  Speaker 3: in the zine, hey, could you live up to a
• 31:34
  Speaker 3: standard of grammar and clarity? and they froze her out.
• 31:37
  Speaker 3: She was part of the manosphere because she wanted to
• 31:40
  Speaker 3: apply a patriarchal standard of grammar and writing. If you
• 31:47
  Speaker 3: in any way do not allow women to be aimless,
• 31:54
  Speaker 3: formless pools of blubber that are nevertheless lauded for every
• 32:02
  Speaker 3: fart and burp because they made it and it's so
• 32:08
  Speaker 3: wonderful because they're women, then you are part of the manosphere.
• 32:12
  Speaker 3: If you do not applaud the slide into protozoic ooze
• 32:19
  Speaker 3: of all women, no moral standard, no physical standard, no
• 32:24
  Speaker 3: actual standard of physical integrity, nothing. You cannot hold women
• 32:29
  Speaker 3: accountable to anything. You shouldn't even hold them accountable to physics.
• 32:34
  Speaker 3: No way. What the hell are they trying to achieve anyway?
• 32:38
  Speaker 3: It just cursed me. This is utter insanity. It's like
• 32:44
  Speaker 3: men should free women from every possible external standard.
• 32:51
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 32:51
  Speaker 3: And if they don't, they're part of the manosphere. Okay.
• 32:55
  Speaker 1: All right.
• 32:57
  Speaker 2: I'm going to read some of the article again. Let's see.
• 33:02
  Speaker 1: Where was I? Nobody had to sell these men in
• 33:06
  Speaker 1: a theory about women and accountability. The images did it.
• 33:08
  Speaker 1: The pink shirts, the fundraiser, the 11-on-1 split, a lawyer
• 33:11
  Speaker 1: walking out to the cameras to say one man had
• 33:13
  Speaker 1: robbed the other 11. For years, the loudest voices in
• 33:17
  Speaker 1: this space have had to work for it. Hours of podcasts.
• 33:19
  Speaker 2: Telling young men... Not really. No.
• 33:23
  Speaker 1: Hours of podcasts telling young men that women get sympathy
• 33:27
  Speaker 1: where men get judgment and that the culture explains women
• 33:31
  Speaker 1: away and holds men to the wall.
• 33:33
  Speaker 2: Where's the lie, though?
• 33:34
  Speaker 1: The Clancy trial handed them a case that appears to
• 33:38
  Speaker 1: make the argument on its own. No, it does because
• 33:42
  Speaker 1: it's true. It's not like an argument that's being made.
• 33:46
  Speaker 1: It's reality unfolding, and we're looking at it, and we're
• 33:49
  Speaker 1: observing it, and we're saying this is reality. And you're saying, wow,
• 33:52
  Speaker 1: that's the judgment. The Lindsay Clancy trial is making an argument. No,
• 33:59
  Speaker 1: it is an event. that people are looking at and
• 34:02
  Speaker 1: they're saying, huh, look at the reaction to this event.
• 34:05
  Speaker 1: Like this kind of thing where, you know, a parent
• 34:09
  Speaker 1: or an adult like annihilates their children happens all the
• 34:13
  Speaker 1: time and it doesn't make the news, at least not nationally.
• 34:17
  Speaker 1: This one did. And it's specifically because of the way
• 34:21
  Speaker 1: people reacted to the news, not because of the news itself.
• 34:25
  Speaker 1: That's why the story is not the story.
• 34:28
  Speaker 2: The reaction is the story.
• 34:29
  Speaker 1: And people are looking at the reaction to that and
• 34:31
  Speaker 1: they're like, these people are crazy. And this guy's like,
• 34:35
  Speaker 1: oh my God, you guys, you screwed up.
• 34:38
  Speaker 2: You screwed up because.
• 34:39
  Speaker 1: Now the Manosphere is winning. What? Reality always reasserts itself, right?
• 34:49
  Speaker 1: And people who are paying attention, they're going to react accordingly.
• 34:55
  Speaker 3: Indeed.
• 34:55
  Speaker 1: Indeed.
• 34:57
  Speaker 3: And I think what he's trying to do is he's
• 34:58
  Speaker 3: trying to discredit reality by associating with the manosphere.
• 35:01
  Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly.
• 35:03
  Speaker 3: But also, for the years, the loudest voices in this
• 35:06
  Speaker 3: space have had to work for. Are you nuts? Nobody
• 35:09
  Speaker 3: has to work for this. This young man already knows
• 35:14
  Speaker 3: something is seriously wrong. What you have to work for
• 35:18
  Speaker 3: is to tell them, yes, you're not crazy. Please don't
• 35:22
  Speaker 3: give up and unalive yourself. I know there's a whole
• 35:28
  Speaker 3: bunch of manosphere grifters or the grind the max guys.
• 35:32
  Speaker 3: who basically say, look at women's standards, aren't they insane
• 35:36
  Speaker 3: and impossible? Well, here, buy my course on meditation so
• 35:39
  Speaker 3: you too can be cool as a cucumber and keep
• 35:42
  Speaker 3: your rabid baboon from leaving you. That is ridiculous. I
• 35:47
  Speaker 3: totally agree. But a lot of us here are just
• 35:50
  Speaker 3: trying to keep people from, or young men, from unaliving themselves.
• 35:55
  Speaker 3: I know that's Paul. That's Warren Farrell. That's Tom Golden.
• 36:01
  Speaker 1: Parents caught pop.
• 36:03
  Speaker 3: Yeah, that's what we're here for, right? You know, and
• 36:10
  Speaker 3: I'm more about analysis, but then I'm more of a
• 36:14
  Speaker 3: researcher than anything. But regardless, this is ridiculous. We don't
• 36:18
  Speaker 3: have to explain this stuff. Young men are being woken
• 36:23
  Speaker 3: up to the reality because of dating problems. Because of
• 36:28
  Speaker 3: the Lindsay Kenzie trial, because of the Amber Heard trial
• 36:32
  Speaker 3: and everything that happened there. It's just even more stark
• 36:34
  Speaker 3: when it's three dead babies as opposed to Johnny Depp
• 36:38
  Speaker 3: that's getting the short end of the stick.
• 36:40
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 36:41
  Speaker 3: It's at that point you don't have an excuse for it.
• 36:44
  Speaker 3: Like the most vulnerable people in society are going to
• 36:47
  Speaker 3: be sacrificed for the cause of rendering women blameless. Because
• 36:52
  Speaker 3: women get benefits from it. Their benefits are more important
• 36:55
  Speaker 3: than justice, even when it comes to the most vulnerable
• 36:58
  Speaker 3: in our society. Yeah, okay, that's a big wake-up call
• 37:01
  Speaker 3: for a lot of people. But that's the thing. The
• 37:04
  Speaker 3: manosphere doesn't sell itself. It doesn't sell these ideas. I
• 37:07
  Speaker 3: don't know, maybe the manosphere does. Whatever. It's just recognition
• 37:13
  Speaker 3: of them. And what people are working for is when
• 37:16
  Speaker 3: that recognition happens, people survive it. Men survive it. Really.
• 37:20
  Speaker 3: All right, let's keep going with what he's having to
• 37:23
  Speaker 3: say here.
• 37:23
  Speaker 2: All right, well, I got another super chat.
• 37:25
  Speaker 1: Master Goa gives us $ 5 and says, Someone shouldn't get
• 37:28
  Speaker 1: lesser punishment just because they are psychotic or female or both.
• 37:32
  Speaker 2: Thank you for that. Yep, that's obvious.
• 37:34
  Speaker 1: But that sounds like Manosphere talking points, so watch it.
• 37:38
  Speaker 1: All right, anyway. Uh, let's see.
• 37:41
  Speaker 2: Hours of podcast.
• 37:42
  Speaker 1: Right. The Clancy trial handed them a case that appears
• 37:45
  Speaker 1: to make the argument on its own. A man doesn't
• 37:47
  Speaker 1: need the three hour lecture if he can watch women
• 37:50
  Speaker 1: in matching pink outside the courthouse instead.
• 37:53
  Speaker 2: Agreed.
• 37:53
  Speaker 1: Besides, you have to pay for the lectures. You can
• 37:55
  Speaker 1: just look out your window and see the insanity. The
• 37:58
  Speaker 1: men I sat with couldn't get past it. To them,
• 38:01
  Speaker 1: the lesson wrote itself. A woman does the unthinkable and
• 38:04
  Speaker 1: other women form a tribe around her. No accountability. Yes.
• 38:08
  Speaker 1: Are we going to make any conclusions from that? Whether
• 38:11
  Speaker 1: that's a fair reading is the harder question, and it's
• 38:14
  Speaker 1: the one I worked through in this week's edition. The
• 38:17
  Speaker 1: jury deadlock wasn't nine women against three men. The legal
• 38:21
  Speaker 1: standard the jurors had to apply is not the same
• 38:24
  Speaker 1: thing as deciding that killing children is fine. Plenty of
• 38:27
  Speaker 1: women wanted Clancy convicted, but you don't answer a man
• 38:30
  Speaker 1: who believes he watched the theory happen by telling him
• 38:33
  Speaker 1: he didn't see it. Plenty of women, but how many
• 38:36
  Speaker 1: women are actually calling out those other women? How many
• 38:39
  Speaker 1: women are willing to risk friendships with other women by
• 38:42
  Speaker 1: calling them.
• 38:43
  Speaker 3: Out for this? How many women are willing to say
• 38:45
  Speaker 3: something like I'm willing to say? The 19th should be
• 38:51
  Speaker 3: contingent on women getting their shit in order, right? Somehow
• 38:58
  Speaker 3: pulling this out. Like, I'm Canadian, so the 19th, I'm
• 39:02
  Speaker 3: just saying this as symbolic, right? getting their house in order,
• 39:07
  Speaker 3: schooling the sisterhood so it doesn't do shit like this,
• 39:11
  Speaker 3: and getting rid of all of the desire to not
• 39:16
  Speaker 3: be punished that is intrinsic in feminism. The desire to
• 39:20
  Speaker 3: be protected by the law, but not schooled by the law,
• 39:23
  Speaker 3: which seems to be a very female failure mode. All right,
• 39:27
  Speaker 3: I think that women should feel the the 19th is
• 39:30
  Speaker 3: precarious and that the way that they lose it is
• 39:33
  Speaker 3: by not taking responsibility for men, society, and children. And
• 39:37
  Speaker 3: this has been one hell of a demonstration that women
• 39:41
  Speaker 3: in general are willing to To strip away rule of
• 39:46
  Speaker 3: law if it means maintaining their perks and privileges as women.
• 39:51
  Speaker 3: And their blamelessness as women. Right, okay, that's where I
• 39:55
  Speaker 3: am at. But then I am a radical misogynist. A
• 40:00
  Speaker 3: radical woman blamer. Alright, are we done? That's the end
• 40:08
  Speaker 3: of the article.
• 40:11
  Speaker 2: That's the end of the article.
• 40:11
  Speaker 3: It's a short article.
• 40:12
  Speaker 2: It's a short one, but I mean, there's comments too, so.
• 40:17
  Speaker 3: Okay, I want to just... I want to read a
• 40:18
  Speaker 3: few things. Yes, there's one comment I want to go through.
• 40:22
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 40:22
  Speaker 3: But there's something I wanted to go through, which is
• 40:27
  Speaker 3: on the jury itself. And then... All right, so... The
• 40:32
  Speaker 3: thing that they were supposed to decide was whether or
• 40:38
  Speaker 3: not Lindsay was... capable, was competent when she did what
• 40:43
  Speaker 3: she did. And they substituted a different question. They substituted
• 40:47
  Speaker 3: good mother for sane at the moment of the act.
• 40:49
  Speaker 3: They substituted who Lindsay is for what her mind could
• 40:53
  Speaker 3: do that night. They substituted what does Lindsay need for
• 40:57
  Speaker 3: what did the state prove and what she was responsible for.
• 41:01
  Speaker 3: And they substituted love, sympathy converted into the element itself.
• 41:08
  Speaker 3: So everything proved she loved her children, so she had
• 41:12
  Speaker 3: to have snapped. To me, it was proof she didn't
• 41:14
  Speaker 3: know what she was doing. This is a quote from
• 41:17
  Speaker 3: the jurors. So love evidence transmuted directly to an insanity evidence,
• 41:23
  Speaker 3: no expert step in between. And it strengthens as the
• 41:27
  Speaker 3: crime worsens. If Lindsay had slaughtered them, fried them up,
• 41:32
  Speaker 3: and then served her to their mother-in-law, that would have
• 41:37
  Speaker 3: increased their sense of her innocence. I'm just saying that because,
• 41:42
  Speaker 3: you know. They refused, the jury refused or dissolved the
• 41:46
  Speaker 3: evidence that bore on the question.
• 41:47
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 41:49
  Speaker 3: The 9-11 call. They blocked their ears. Jurors had to
• 41:53
  Speaker 3: put in their AirPods and just could not hear it.
• 41:55
  Speaker 3: Turn up their music. During deliberation replays. The same room
• 42:00
  Speaker 3: that certified what the audio contains. And, okay, so this
• 42:04
  Speaker 3: is part of whether or not they could ascertain if
• 42:07
  Speaker 3: Lindsay Clancy was aware of what she was doing. When
• 42:10
  Speaker 3: Patrick came back, he asked, where are the children? And
• 42:17
  Speaker 3: he says that she said the basement, which indicates she
• 42:20
  Speaker 3: was aware of what was going on. and actually really
• 42:25
  Speaker 3: stone-cold brutal, because it's just like a father loses his kid,
• 42:28
  Speaker 3: the murderer says, he asks the murderer, hey, where are
• 42:31
  Speaker 3: the kids? And she's like, yeah, in the basement. Like,
• 42:34
  Speaker 3: I don't know. The thought process of this woman is terrifying.
• 42:40
  Speaker 3: But anyway, so when the jurors are trying to figure
• 42:43
  Speaker 3: out whether or not she knew what she was doing,
• 42:46
  Speaker 3: what she said to Patrick is essential to determine if
• 42:50
  Speaker 3: she knew where she was and what she was doing.
• 42:53
  Speaker 3: And they weren't even listening to the call when it
• 42:56
  Speaker 3: was replayed. And then they also ignored Patrick's sworn testimony
• 43:01
  Speaker 3: that she said the basement. And then they responded to
• 43:05
  Speaker 3: the question by one of the journalists about whether or
• 43:09
  Speaker 3: not they heard Lindsay Clancy say the basement with absolutely not.
• 43:13
  Speaker 3: It was just garbled. And that, of course, absolves the
• 43:20
  Speaker 3: evidence that she knew where she was because she knew
• 43:23
  Speaker 3: the children were in the basement. The autopsy photos, the
• 43:27
  Speaker 3: ax mechanics ruled irrelevant. Too much piling on the morbid pictures,
• 43:32
  Speaker 3: which was not even what we were trying to prove,
• 43:35
  Speaker 3: just whether or not she knew what she was doing.
• 43:37
  Speaker 3: But the mechanics are that proof. Three sequential stranglings with
• 43:41
  Speaker 3: exercise bands is sustained, deliberate, organized force. Capacity evidence of
• 43:47
  Speaker 3: the most direct kind, filed as morbidity. So, looking at
• 43:51
  Speaker 3: how she strangled her children also bore on whether or
• 43:54
  Speaker 3: not she was sane. So if the ligament, the ligature
• 43:58
  Speaker 3: had to be taken off and reapplied, which is suggested
• 44:01
  Speaker 3: by the abrasion on one of the children's throats, that
• 44:04
  Speaker 3: suggests that she was able to function, at least methodically,
• 44:09
  Speaker 3: in killing her children. They ignored that. They were like, oh,
• 44:12
  Speaker 3: that's morbid. It's not even relevant. Bitch, it is 100% relevant.
• 44:17
  Speaker 3: The state's experts. Content discarded for delivery. Mr. Mack, which
• 44:22
  Speaker 3: was one of the state's experts on her forensic psychiatry. Smug,
• 44:26
  Speaker 3: not sincere, not believable. The fact that they had to
• 44:30
  Speaker 3: pause so often to think, it made them really disbelievable. Disbelievable?
• 44:36
  Speaker 3: The prosecution's sanity case lived in its experts. Their testimony
• 44:40
  Speaker 3: was scored on social fluency by the jurors. Wait time, expression, smugness,
• 44:45
  Speaker 3: not content. The one place that capacity was directly litigated.
• 44:51
  Speaker 3: And the jurors graded the performance of the experts. They
• 44:56
  Speaker 3: graded how entertaining they were. How much they had good vibes, guys.
• 45:01
  Speaker 3: They probably would have graded them on their astrology charts
• 45:05
  Speaker 3: if they had them. Yeah, this is definitely the course
• 45:09
  Speaker 3: of justice, huh? The state sanity narrative never engaged. In
• 45:14
  Speaker 3: all of their commentary to the media, they don't engage
• 45:19
  Speaker 3: the state sanity narrative. They don't even bother with it.
• 45:23
  Speaker 3: It's all vibes and entertainment and, oh, that's morbid. The
• 45:28
  Speaker 3: medical record, and it was outsourced to sworn jurors, so...
• 45:34
  Speaker 3: When the holdout had a question about the medication, the
• 45:38
  Speaker 3: jurors told him to take their word for it, which
• 45:42
  Speaker 3: means that they were presenting themselves as experts, but not
• 45:48
  Speaker 3: sworn in by the court, which is not allowed. This
• 45:52
  Speaker 3: was not a hung jury. This was a runaway jury.
• 45:56
  Speaker 3: And the runaway jury nearly fucking got away with it,
• 45:58
  Speaker 3: except for the holdout. All right, so they corrupted the
• 46:06
  Speaker 3: standard the question is asked under. Doubt sourced from non-elements.
• 46:10
  Speaker 3: So when you're supposed to look at these things, you're
• 46:14
  Speaker 3: not supposed to introduce things other than the exhibits presented
• 46:17
  Speaker 3: at trial. And they're answering questions that nobody had and
• 46:22
  Speaker 3: nobody presented at trial, right? And they also seemed to
• 46:29
  Speaker 3: misunderstand reasonable doubt. They substituted their own belief, which was
• 46:32
  Speaker 3: that she was innocent, which they attested to. They came
• 46:37
  Speaker 3: in believing that she was innocent. That's motivated doubt. They
• 46:41
  Speaker 3: weren't going to find it. Was there any evidence that
• 46:44
  Speaker 3: would have made them go down on her having done this?
• 46:49
  Speaker 3: having her being sane when she did it? No. Because
• 46:53
  Speaker 3: they had motivated doubt. And they replaced the standard of
• 46:56
  Speaker 3: reasonable doubt with their motivated doubt. So if there's any
• 47:01
  Speaker 3: potential doubt at all, oh, it was the underpants gnomes
• 47:04
  Speaker 3: that strangled her children. I have no evidence for it,
• 47:08
  Speaker 3: and underpants gnomes have never been proven to exist, but
• 47:11
  Speaker 3: it's possible... I mean, can you really say they don't
• 47:16
  Speaker 3: exist and didn't strangle Lindsay Clancy's children? There you go.
• 47:20
  Speaker 3: That's doubt. That's doubt.
• 47:23
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 47:23
  Speaker 3: And then they adjudicated on people's vibes, like literally all
• 47:28
  Speaker 3: the defense. Oh, the defense lawyer. He's got great vibes.
• 47:31
  Speaker 3: I'm going with him. What is this? A boy band
• 47:34
  Speaker 3: popularity contest? Like, this is, all of this, it's like
• 47:40
  Speaker 3: watching every single failure mode of how women think through things,
• 47:45
  Speaker 3: playing out one after another after another, and then the
• 47:48
  Speaker 3: horror of it all is these old biddies who conducted
• 47:52
  Speaker 3: some kind of popularity contest instead of determining actual veracity, like,
• 47:57
  Speaker 3: facts of the child. They're saying, oh, which one do
• 48:01
  Speaker 3: I feel, which one reminds me of Matlock more? Right? Which, which,
• 48:06
  Speaker 3: does the defense lawyer remind me of Matlock? Does the prosecution? No, no. Like,
• 48:14
  Speaker 3: what does, all of this, they have, in the end
• 48:19
  Speaker 3: of the day, they had the social clout or the bullying,
• 48:26
  Speaker 3: the ability to bully everyone else in line. So they
• 48:29
  Speaker 3: turned this into a vibe contest, a popularity contest. A
• 48:35
  Speaker 3: folk wisdom contest. Oh, a good mother, and all mothers
• 48:38
  Speaker 3: are good, would never kill her children. Therefore, we must acquit. Right?
• 48:43
  Speaker 3: They just garbled justice into this fem-slop. And then they
• 48:49
  Speaker 3: freaking bullied everyone in line except for the holdout. This
• 48:55
  Speaker 3: is a massive miscarriage of justice. And then they have
• 48:58
  Speaker 3: the audacity to say all this in public. They did
• 49:02
  Speaker 3: a good thing. Every single one of their statements has
• 49:07
  Speaker 3: dug the hole deeper for them. And I'm like watching
• 49:11
  Speaker 3: all this. I'm like, what the fuck is... And again,
• 49:14
  Speaker 3: this is female failure mode after female failure mode. Adjudicating
• 49:19
  Speaker 3: on Vi. adjudicating on popularity, adjudicating on made-up shit that
• 49:24
  Speaker 3: doesn't even bear, isn't even logical. Emotions are more important
• 49:28
  Speaker 3: than the facts of the case. All of this, female
• 49:31
  Speaker 3: failure mode after female failure mode after female failure mode,
• 49:36
  Speaker 3: terminating and women using the relational web to bully one
• 49:42
  Speaker 3: into their position. Some of the jurors, who are still anonymous,
• 49:47
  Speaker 3: probably because they don't want to deal with this anymore,
• 49:51
  Speaker 3: one of the women was like, yeah, there's still a
• 49:53
  Speaker 3: part of me that feels she's guilty. Yes, because you
• 49:57
  Speaker 3: were bullied out of the truth by a bunch of
• 50:02
  Speaker 3: women who went in that courtroom basically thinking they were
• 50:06
  Speaker 3: going to win one for Team Women. Team Woman. Team Woman. Okay,
• 50:12
  Speaker 3: I just wanted to point that out there, because he's
• 50:14
  Speaker 3: making it seem like the record is... And of course,
• 50:17
  Speaker 3: he did publish this before the jury just went out
• 50:19
  Speaker 3: and hung themselves with their own tongues.
• 50:22
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 50:23
  Speaker 3: So he gets a bit of a pass for that.
• 50:25
  Speaker 3: But I'm just pointing out that everything that they've said
• 50:29
  Speaker 3: since has indicated that the manosphere was right. Like, all
• 50:34
  Speaker 3: the guys who stepped up and said, this is what's
• 50:36
  Speaker 3: going to happen, yeah, you were right. You were right.
• 50:41
  Speaker 3: Everybody who used their pattern recognition to know what was
• 50:47
  Speaker 3: happening in the jury chamber, yeah, it turns out we
• 50:50
  Speaker 3: were all right. And this guy, he's got not a
• 50:57
  Speaker 3: leg to stand on. Once again, the manosphere, as it were,
• 51:03
  Speaker 3: is found to be right. It's almost like they're observing
• 51:06
  Speaker 3: something real, Brian.
• 51:08
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Almost.
• 51:09
  Speaker 2: Almost.
• 51:11
  Speaker 1: I just want to add one other thing. I got
• 51:14
  Speaker 1: a paid comment, but I'll read it in a second.
• 51:18
  Speaker 1: When I skimmed the comments, I think that his maneuver
• 51:24
  Speaker 1: was successful. The maneuver being, get everyone to use the
• 51:29
  Speaker 1: Lindsay Clancy case to talk about the Manosphere. Again, even
• 51:33
  Speaker 1: though the Manosphere has basically nothing to do with this
• 51:37
  Speaker 1: at all, And so now everyone in the comments is
• 51:40
  Speaker 1: like talking about the Manosphere instead of the Lindsay Clancy case.
• 51:44
  Speaker 2: Like that, like it worked.
• 51:45
  Speaker 1: Like that was the goal was to be like, look, guys,
• 51:49
  Speaker 1: the Lindsay Clancy case means the Manosphere has won or something.
• 51:53
  Speaker 2: They got a victory. I don't know.
• 51:56
  Speaker 1: So what do we do? And now everybody in there,
• 51:59
  Speaker 1: mostly women, but there are also men. They're all like, oh,
• 52:02
  Speaker 1: the Manosphere. Oh, my God. Oh, oh. They're just getting
• 52:06
  Speaker 1: triggered off of that, and that's like the conversation now.
• 52:09
  Speaker 1: How many children have the Menosphere killed?
• 52:11
  Speaker 2: Oh, right, none.
• 52:13
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 52:14
  Speaker 2: It's, you know, it's just like the.
• 52:17
  Speaker 1: If you want to get engagement, then you can just
• 52:21
  Speaker 1: invoke certain words, certain terms, or certain people, personalities, or
• 52:25
  Speaker 1: groups in your article. It could be about anything. And
• 52:29
  Speaker 1: if you know you succeeded when the entire conversation becomes...
• 52:33
  Speaker 1: about the completely wrong thing which is like these you
• 52:37
  Speaker 1: know this this it's not even like a group a
• 52:40
  Speaker 1: specific person it's just the manosphere like it's the manosphere
• 52:44
  Speaker 1: tm whatever that means is irrelevant right but that but
• 52:49
  Speaker 1: that that's what people are now talking about in this
• 52:51
  Speaker 1: comments so they took the bait and they're completely like
• 52:55
  Speaker 1: you know eating the worm and they're being pulled in
• 52:57
  Speaker 1: and they and now the conversation is that that's that's
• 53:00
  Speaker 1: where we're at now so all right Roboto gives us
• 53:05
  Speaker 1: a dollar and says on rumble and says pretty sure
• 53:08
  Speaker 1: that killing three children, one would have to be very
• 53:11
  Speaker 1: aware like Rambo level aware, unless it was a crime
• 53:14
  Speaker 1: of passion, which can be made for one child, but
• 53:16
  Speaker 1: not three. No, it was, I mean, the odds of
• 53:20
  Speaker 1: it being not premeditated are slim to none. Literally this
• 53:23
  Speaker 1: was a year after or about a year after the
• 53:26
  Speaker 1: youngest was born. I think the youngest was like eight months.
• 53:29
  Speaker 1: So like eight months later, um, And she did all
• 53:32
  Speaker 1: three of them, and she obviously planned it out in advance.
• 53:36
  Speaker 2: So this is.
• 53:37
  Speaker 1: It shouldn't even... That's what I'm saying, like, it's tragic, right?
• 53:41
  Speaker 1: But there's no need for this to be a thing
• 53:45
  Speaker 1: that we're still talking about. Because we're not talking about
• 53:48
  Speaker 1: her anymore. We're talking about the people that are trying
• 53:52
  Speaker 1: to cope around this. Justify it. Whatever.
• 53:55
  Speaker 2: Lay blame.
• 53:56
  Speaker 3: Like.
• 53:57
  Speaker 1: You know, like, the lawyer went up to Trump or
• 54:01
  Speaker 1: made a statement saying that Trump should, you know, pardon
• 54:03
  Speaker 1: her or something. And the only reason why he did
• 54:06
  Speaker 1: that was to basically make the conversation about Trump now.
• 54:09
  Speaker 1: Because Trump was like, well, I don't have the authority
• 54:10
  Speaker 1: to do that. It's a state thing. And the guy's like, look,
• 54:13
  Speaker 1: he wouldn't do it. And, of course, the women, because
• 54:15
  Speaker 1: they all got fucking TDS, now they're all like, oh,
• 54:18
  Speaker 1: my God. The orange man is signing with Patrick Clancy.
• 54:21
  Speaker 1: He's extra double guilty now.
• 54:24
  Speaker 2: It's ridiculous.
• 54:25
  Speaker 1: It's fucking stupid. All right.
• 54:29
  Speaker 2: So that's the.
• 54:30
  Speaker 1: Yeah, you know.
• 54:31
  Speaker 3: It's like you think about where the human race would
• 54:36
  Speaker 3: be if it wasn't shackled to these rabid baboons. Yeah.
• 54:43
  Speaker 3: That is represented by the femmosphere's behavior here. Right? I mean, honestly,
• 54:50
  Speaker 3: what should the femmosphere have said? The woman is guilty.
• 54:53
  Speaker 3: She should be in jail for life.
• 54:54
  Speaker 1: The end.
• 54:56
  Speaker 3: And... And why don't they? That's the real question. Why
• 55:02
  Speaker 3: is it that feminism has been on a 60-year campaign
• 55:05
  Speaker 3: to remove the course of justice when it comes to
• 55:07
  Speaker 3: female defendants? Like, why is it so hard for women
• 55:12
  Speaker 3: to be like, no, she killed her kids? Like, women,
• 55:15
  Speaker 3: and why is it so hard, and not just for women,
• 55:17
  Speaker 3: because some women do, why is it so hard for
• 55:21
  Speaker 3: those women who do say that to not be able
• 55:26
  Speaker 3: to keep the other women who get the laws changed,
• 55:30
  Speaker 3: get the policies changed, get the criminals acquitted if they're female.
• 55:35
  Speaker 3: How is it that the women who agree that she
• 55:38
  Speaker 3: should be treated like a man cannot keep the women
• 55:42
  Speaker 3: who insist she should have do-overs and free passes? They
• 55:46
  Speaker 3: can't keep them in line.
• 55:49
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 55:49
  Speaker 3: Why is it that we can't police our own as women? Properly.
• 55:54
  Speaker 3: Not just, oh, she said, she pointed out that women
• 55:57
  Speaker 3: can be bad, yo, or what, she's a pick-me. I mean,
• 56:00
  Speaker 3: really police our own. Why can't we do that like men?
• 56:05
  Speaker 3: Like men will, if some dude does something heinous, a
• 56:09
  Speaker 3: man will break himself to pieces to make sure he
• 56:12
  Speaker 3: stands to justice. Women aren't like that. It's not even
• 56:17
  Speaker 3: that we won't sacrifice to make sure another woman sees...
• 56:21
  Speaker 3: Like she gets punished for her bad behavior. It's we
• 56:25
  Speaker 3: will actively obstruct that punishment. We'll actively go and make
• 56:31
  Speaker 3: a bunch of excuses for her. That's what we do.
• 56:37
  Speaker 3: And it's not even solidarity because we still tear each
• 56:40
  Speaker 3: other to pieces over resources. It's just whenever a woman
• 56:45
  Speaker 3: justifiably should be punished for something, somehow we take a
• 56:49
  Speaker 3: front at it. Even though, I mean, even though, you know,
• 56:52
  Speaker 3: if Lindsay was doing something like, you know, if Lindsay
• 56:57
  Speaker 3: was advocating for, Lindsay Clancy was advocating for, I don't know,
• 57:02
  Speaker 3: men's issues, these women would be like, yeah, hang her.
• 57:07
  Speaker 3: I really wish that someone would just, you know, shoot
• 57:09
  Speaker 3: her in the head. Yeah. I think that she shouldn't
• 57:13
  Speaker 3: be able to say those things. They can come together
• 57:17
  Speaker 3: and agree that a woman doing that should be punished. But,
• 57:20
  Speaker 3: you know, not slaughtering her kids. No, that's not, that
• 57:24
  Speaker 3: should be acceptable. So they will come down like a
• 57:28
  Speaker 3: ton of bricks on any woman who threatens their resources,
• 57:32
  Speaker 3: or what they've decided is their collective resource, their collective
• 57:35
  Speaker 3: ticket to a resource, but they will not actually uphold
• 57:40
  Speaker 3: altruistic punishment of women who engage in this nasty behavior
• 57:44
  Speaker 3: towards men, children, or society. What's up with that? When
• 57:51
  Speaker 3: feminism said equality, I thought they meant we're now responsible
• 57:56
  Speaker 3: for keeping our bitches in line too, just like men
• 57:58
  Speaker 3: keep their bastards in line. I guess not. Okay, let's...
• 58:03
  Speaker 3: So I guess we don't have any further to do
• 58:05
  Speaker 3: with this particular... I guess we could read some comments.
• 58:07
  Speaker 3: I know there's one comment we should probably cover.
• 58:09
  Speaker 2: Yeah, you said there was a comment. I just don't
• 58:12
  Speaker 2: know which one it is.
• 58:14
  Speaker 3: Ella Bew... Which I believe is on the medium version.
• 58:17
  Speaker 1: Oh, Ella Boe.
• 58:18
  Speaker 2: I see it.
• 58:19
  Speaker 1: I see it. Ella Boe.
• 58:20
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 58:21
  Speaker 2: It's the top comment.
• 58:22
  Speaker 1: All right. So Ella Boe made a comment. She quoted
• 58:27
  Speaker 1: from the article to respond specifically to a part of it.
• 58:32
  Speaker 1: The article had a sentence, the manosphere won this one
• 58:35
  Speaker 1: without lifting a finger. So Elle quoted that and she said...
• 58:40
  Speaker 1: I'm going to assume it's a woman.
• 58:42
  Speaker 2: She said... I see it exactly opposite.
• 58:45
  Speaker 1: These guys lost this one with every unhinged, out-of-touch, with
• 58:49
  Speaker 1: science or reality rant they embraced. They may be high-fiving
• 58:53
  Speaker 1: their bros and the men who bought into the same
• 58:56
  Speaker 1: hypocritical narrative, but they've truly laid bare how much this
• 58:59
  Speaker 1: is not about anything based in reality, it's just grievance
• 59:03
  Speaker 1: culture and sexism. It also makes clear just how deeply
• 59:07
  Speaker 1: entrenched misogyny is in this society. Men kill a woman
• 59:11
  Speaker 1: they claim to love every three days. Men kill their
• 59:14
  Speaker 1: entire families every five days in America.
• 59:17
  Speaker 2: Citation needed?
• 59:19
  Speaker 1: According to the FBI, men perpetrate well over 80% of
• 59:23
  Speaker 1: all violence and about 95% of all sexual violence. About
• 59:28
  Speaker 1: one in four women will experience severe domestic abuse. Refusing
• 59:34
  Speaker 1: to even mention that, much less grapple with it or
• 59:36
  Speaker 1: take it into the equation, is what weak people who
• 59:41
  Speaker 1: are deeply warped by the toxic aspects of this culture
• 59:44
  Speaker 1: do to evade their own culpability in a culture where
• 59:47
  Speaker 1: misogyny is normal and usual. That's not a win, except
• 59:51
  Speaker 1: in their own deluded minds. It's just pathetic and disgusting. Okay,
• 59:58
  Speaker 1: that's the comment. Do you want me to read the
• 1:00:01
  Speaker 1: responses to it? There's two replies to the comment.
• 1:00:04
  Speaker 3: Do you have a response to it? Do you have
• 1:00:06
  Speaker 3: a response to it?
• 1:00:07
  Speaker 1: I mean, she's not saying anything, so I can do
• 1:00:10
  Speaker 1: this one at a time.
• 1:00:11
  Speaker 2: Let me see.
• 1:00:12
  Speaker 1: I mean, it sounds like a lot, but it's the
• 1:00:14
  Speaker 1: sound of fury amounting to nothing. So, okay. The guys
• 1:00:19
  Speaker 1: lost this one with every unhinged, out-of-touch, with science or
• 1:00:23
  Speaker 1: reality rant they embraced.
• 1:00:24
  Speaker 2: Which ones?
• 1:00:25
  Speaker 1: What out of touch or not in line with science
• 1:00:30
  Speaker 1: or reality rants are we speaking about? She doesn't have
• 1:00:33
  Speaker 1: an answer. You can just say that. People aren't going
• 1:00:36
  Speaker 1: to look into it. They're not going to be like, oh,
• 1:00:38
  Speaker 1: when did they say something out of touch with reality
• 1:00:40
  Speaker 1: or science?
• 1:00:42
  Speaker 3: If a woman gets on your table and takes a
• 1:00:46
  Speaker 3: shit on it, and people are like, that woman took
• 1:00:49
  Speaker 3: a shit on the table, this Al Bew or Al Bow... Elbow. Oh,
• 1:00:55
  Speaker 3: I get it now.
• 1:00:56
  Speaker 1: Elbow.
• 1:00:58
  Speaker 3: We'll tell you... Oh, that woman didn't take a shit
• 1:01:01
  Speaker 3: on the table. Because science. Yeah. Is there a scientific
• 1:01:07
  Speaker 3: study that specifically says that women are incapable of taking
• 1:01:12
  Speaker 3: shits on tables? I didn't know of that one.
• 1:01:16
  Speaker 1: Right?
• 1:01:17
  Speaker 3: It has no... What she's going to say is she's
• 1:01:18
  Speaker 3: going to quote some kind of science like women are
• 1:01:22
  Speaker 3: just as moral as men.
• 1:01:24
  Speaker 1: Well, it could be, yeah, that, or there were female
• 1:01:26
  Speaker 1: Vikings or whatever. Like a bunch of pop science bullshit
• 1:01:30
  Speaker 1: that she saw on Facebook from I fucking love science.
• 1:01:32
  Speaker 1: But it could also just be something that she's just
• 1:01:36
  Speaker 1: throwing out there because she just wants to throw it
• 1:01:39
  Speaker 1: out there.
• 1:01:39
  Speaker 2: No one's going to fact check this comment. No one's
• 1:01:41
  Speaker 2: going to say anything.
• 1:01:42
  Speaker 1: And everyone already agrees that they hate the Manosphere, whatever
• 1:01:45
  Speaker 1: that means, just like on principle. So she can say
• 1:01:49
  Speaker 1: whatever she wants about them, and no one's going to
• 1:01:52
  Speaker 1: challenge that, not really. So the next sentence she says,
• 1:01:57
  Speaker 1: it's just grievance culture and sexism. So it's grievance culture
• 1:02:02
  Speaker 1: to want to hold a woman who murdered her three
• 1:02:06
  Speaker 1: children accountable.
• 1:02:07
  Speaker 2: And that's also sexism, apparently.
• 1:02:10
  Speaker 1: It also makes clear how deeply entrenched misogyny is.
• 1:02:14
  Speaker 2: In this society. Isn't it interesting that we.
• 1:02:16
  Speaker 1: Do we have a word for people who hate children
• 1:02:19
  Speaker 1: enough to want to murder them?
• 1:02:20
  Speaker 2: We just have misogyny.
• 1:02:22
  Speaker 1: Misandry has only recently been not fact-checked or spell-checked by
• 1:02:27
  Speaker 1: various computer programs. But still, not enough people are using it.
• 1:02:32
  Speaker 1: Misogyny is everywhere. Or sexism, whatever you want to call it.
• 1:02:36
  Speaker 1: Sexism just means misogyny, guys. It doesn't apply to anybody else.
• 1:02:39
  Speaker 1: It's just for women. But there's nothing for children... So
• 1:02:42
  Speaker 1: you can just say that. Again, woman kills her kids.
• 1:02:45
  Speaker 1: I mean, we're already living in this world where because
• 1:02:49
  Speaker 1: there is no vocabulary that best describes women's behavior, we
• 1:02:56
  Speaker 1: just assume that because we don't have words that generally
• 1:02:59
  Speaker 1: apply to them, or at least nothing universal in terms
• 1:03:01
  Speaker 1: of standards, then that means that women are not doing
• 1:03:04
  Speaker 1: the thing, right? So when she says, men kill a
• 1:03:08
  Speaker 1: woman every three days, Men kill their families every five days.
• 1:03:12
  Speaker 1: All of this is only predicated on the assumption that
• 1:03:15
  Speaker 1: when women kill their children or their families, it doesn't
• 1:03:18
  Speaker 1: count as murder or killing. So therefore, the stats show
• 1:03:23
  Speaker 1: men do it more. Like men rape women more than
• 1:03:27
  Speaker 1: women rape men, right? Why?
• 1:03:29
  Speaker 2: Because rape means when a man has sex with a woman.
• 1:03:32
  Speaker 1: It doesn't mean when a woman has sex with a
• 1:03:34
  Speaker 1: man or when a woman has sex with a woman
• 1:03:36
  Speaker 1: or when a woman has sex with children. None of
• 1:03:38
  Speaker 1: that's rape. So when you're looking at the rape statistics,
• 1:03:40
  Speaker 1: you're only going to see the men. And of course,
• 1:03:44
  Speaker 1: she's going to look at that because that agrees with
• 1:03:46
  Speaker 1: her own preconceived prejudice towards men. She's going to look
• 1:03:52
  Speaker 1: at that and say, oh yeah, that tracks. Yeah, sure.
• 1:03:55
  Speaker 1: Women never do that. Men do it all the time.
• 1:03:58
  Speaker 1: So this is already baked in. the one in four
• 1:04:03
  Speaker 1: statistic like this is all just regurgitating shit that she
• 1:04:07
  Speaker 1: was told to say by the media the TV box
• 1:04:10
  Speaker 1: whatever you know her phone and it all just happens
• 1:04:15
  Speaker 1: to be exactly what she wanted it to be and
• 1:04:18
  Speaker 1: now she gets to just say that and no one's
• 1:04:19
  Speaker 1: gonna say no one's gonna challenge it because there's no
• 1:04:22
  Speaker 1: vocabulary for it so I mean what is the hatred
• 1:04:29
  Speaker 1: of children what is.
• 1:04:30
  Speaker 3: That Yeah, that's a good point. It hadn't occurred to me.
• 1:04:35
  Speaker 3: Because Lindsay Clancy definitely has a lot of that.
• 1:04:38
  Speaker 1: Yeah, what's the hatred of your own children?
• 1:04:40
  Speaker 3: That's less important than misogyny. And the other thing is
• 1:04:44
  Speaker 3: she just doesn't see it. Right? The number of people
• 1:04:50
  Speaker 3: who engage in crime is irrelevant to how society responds
• 1:04:55
  Speaker 3: to it when they do. And how women respond to
• 1:04:58
  Speaker 3: it when women do it. Versus how men respond to
• 1:05:01
  Speaker 3: it when men do it.
• 1:05:04
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:05:04
  Speaker 3: I don't even think men want these passes to kill
• 1:05:07
  Speaker 3: children that women seem to adore. And that's the point.
• 1:05:13
  Speaker 3: And men are finally waking up to that. That there
• 1:05:17
  Speaker 3: seems to be something missing in women. And what's missing
• 1:05:20
  Speaker 3: is the willingness to hold other women accountable when they
• 1:05:23
  Speaker 3: engage in criminal behavior... and failure at their citizen and
• 1:05:30
  Speaker 3: motherhood and wifely responsibilities. And that holding women accountable to
• 1:05:37
  Speaker 3: anything is considered to be the worst thing you can do.
• 1:05:40
  Speaker 3: That is literally the manosphere, which is why I was
• 1:05:43
  Speaker 3: going off on that weird tangent about women going back
• 1:05:47
  Speaker 3: to the protoplasmic ooze of complete liberation from even having
• 1:05:52
  Speaker 3: a skeleton. Right? Anything that applies any kind of expectation
• 1:06:00
  Speaker 3: or effort that women have to apply is the manosphere now.
• 1:06:04
  Speaker 1: Yep.
• 1:06:05
  Speaker 3: Which means the manosphere is life. It's love. It's physics.
• 1:06:10
  Speaker 1: It's grammar.
• 1:06:12
  Speaker 3: It's justice. It's kids still being alive to live out
• 1:06:16
  Speaker 3: their lives. It's everything good in the world. And women
• 1:06:19
  Speaker 3: have set themselves in opposition to that, so I guess they're.
• 1:06:23
  Speaker 2: Just as the devil.
• 1:06:24
  Speaker 1: Anything that could potentially inconvenience a woman, I don't even
• 1:06:29
  Speaker 1: mean harm or obstruct or limit, just inconvenience, anything that
• 1:06:34
  Speaker 1: could inconvenience a woman from her liberation is the manosphere,
• 1:06:39
  Speaker 1: which basically just means it's patriarchy, which basically just means
• 1:06:42
  Speaker 1: it's men.
• 1:06:44
  Speaker 3: And basically, or any external standard. And men are looking
• 1:06:49
  Speaker 3: at this and they're like, well, if women have more rights,
• 1:06:54
  Speaker 3: which they do, and they have more authority, which they do,
• 1:06:57
  Speaker 3: and they're given a golden escalator into more authority, which
• 1:07:02
  Speaker 3: they are through DEI, how are we going to maintain
• 1:07:08
  Speaker 3: an advanced civilization and give women a complete lack of
• 1:07:12
  Speaker 3: accountability card?
• 1:07:14
  Speaker 1: We can't.
• 1:07:17
  Speaker 3: All right, anyway, let's... All right, I got a... You
• 1:07:20
  Speaker 3: want to read the responses?
• 1:07:22
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I will. I got a couple more paid comments here,
• 1:07:25
  Speaker 1: so let me read those really quick. NovaFan21 gave us
• 1:07:29
  Speaker 1: a dollar and said, yeah, women better scared of resisting
• 1:07:32
  Speaker 1: the patriarchy. And then GhostOfAces gave us five and said,
• 1:07:37
  Speaker 1: the study showing men harm their kids more also counts
• 1:07:40
  Speaker 1: men in the home, whether it's boyfriend, stepfather, and other
• 1:07:43
  Speaker 1: men unrelated but in the home. Yeah, when men.
• 1:07:45
  Speaker 3: And they still don't find that.
• 1:07:47
  Speaker 1: Yeah, when that happens, when you have, like, abuse in
• 1:07:50
  Speaker 1: the home by men, it is usually not the biological
• 1:07:53
  Speaker 1: father of the children. And it's usually, like, a stepfather
• 1:07:59
  Speaker 1: or a boyfriend or someone that has no connection to
• 1:08:03
  Speaker 1: the children or the woman. But, like, they're not going to...
• 1:08:07
  Speaker 1: The problem with that is that... It's an obstacle to
• 1:08:10
  Speaker 1: the women's liberation thing. Like, oh, you don't want to
• 1:08:12
  Speaker 1: be married. Marriage is basically prison. So just live your life, lady.
• 1:08:17
  Speaker 1: Just do what you want. But the thing is that
• 1:08:19
  Speaker 1: they're in more danger with men that they're not married
• 1:08:22
  Speaker 1: to or they're not vetting for long-term commitment than men
• 1:08:26
  Speaker 1: who are so but they can't acknowledge that that's why
• 1:08:29
  Speaker 1: they just say it's men and they just hope nobody
• 1:08:32
  Speaker 1: asks questions about well which men are we talking about
• 1:08:35
  Speaker 1: here are we talking about husbands and fathers are we
• 1:08:39
  Speaker 1: just talking about random dudes like what are we talking
• 1:08:41
  Speaker 1: about but they don't want to do that because that's
• 1:08:43
  Speaker 1: a that's a problem it breaks their narrative anyway so
• 1:08:46
  Speaker 1: the replies i.
• 1:08:47
  Speaker 3: Can yeah go ahead I can get into the statistics
• 1:08:51
  Speaker 3: for that. All right. First of all, are you talking
• 1:08:53
  Speaker 3: about conviction statistics? Conviction statistics only apply to who we
• 1:08:57
  Speaker 3: consider we are willing. to punish and we're not willing
• 1:09:01
  Speaker 3: to punish women let's be honest our society is dead
• 1:09:04
  Speaker 3: set against that and plus we have feminists uh rowing
• 1:09:07
  Speaker 3: with the tide to not hold women accountable so there's
• 1:09:13
  Speaker 3: When you look at conviction statistics, that's only which people,
• 1:09:17
  Speaker 3: which types of people our society holds accountable for crime
• 1:09:21
  Speaker 3: in many cases. And when you look at actual maltreatment statistics,
• 1:09:28
  Speaker 3: women do the majority of it. And when it comes
• 1:09:30
  Speaker 3: to killing kids, biological mothers do it, I think, two
• 1:09:35
  Speaker 3: times more than biological fathers. Might even be three times more.
• 1:09:40
  Speaker 3: And so women are engaging in all kinds of child
• 1:09:44
  Speaker 3: abuse far more than men. When you include mom's boyfriend,
• 1:09:50
  Speaker 3: then you start to equalize that. But I don't think
• 1:09:52
  Speaker 3: you even get to equality between men and women in
• 1:09:55
  Speaker 3: terms of child abuse.
• 1:09:57
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:09:58
  Speaker 3: And the honest to God truth is that if you
• 1:10:00
  Speaker 3: include a woman's boyfriend, I think that ultimately that's her
• 1:10:06
  Speaker 3: fault too. Because she's exposing her child... to someone who's
• 1:10:11
  Speaker 3: not appropriate because she wants a sexual relationship. If she
• 1:10:19
  Speaker 3: brought home a dog that hadn't been properly vetted for
• 1:10:23
  Speaker 3: being able to be around children and that a dog
• 1:10:27
  Speaker 3: attacked her child, you would consider her to be responsible.
• 1:10:31
  Speaker 3: And I know that men are conscious beings, but criminal men,
• 1:10:35
  Speaker 3: I don't know. Right, you're still responsible for bringing that
• 1:10:38
  Speaker 3: into the home. The only person the mother is not
• 1:10:42
  Speaker 3: responsible for, at least after, you know, for being in
• 1:10:46
  Speaker 3: the home, because they have some reason to be there,
• 1:10:48
  Speaker 3: is the biological father. So his behavior is the only
• 1:10:51
  Speaker 3: behavior she's not responsible for. As far as I'm concerned,
• 1:10:53
  Speaker 3: she's also responsible for the men who are not the
• 1:10:59
  Speaker 3: biological father who are in her child's life. And in particular,
• 1:11:03
  Speaker 3: the men that she's brought into her life... the child's
• 1:11:07
  Speaker 3: life that she's not willing to make a binding commitment with. Right?
• 1:11:12
  Speaker 3: So maybe the stepdad can be responsible, but even then,
• 1:11:18
  Speaker 3: when you include the stepdad, stepdads aren't doing this. It's
• 1:11:21
  Speaker 3: the damn mother's boyfriends that are doing this.
• 1:11:26
  Speaker 1: Mm-hmm.
• 1:11:27
  Speaker 3: It's the desire for a liberated lifestyle when you need
• 1:11:32
  Speaker 3: to be a woman who is responsible for a child. Oh,
• 1:11:35
  Speaker 3: look at that. What is the court case that we're
• 1:11:39
  Speaker 3: arguing about right here? A woman who wanted to be
• 1:11:43
  Speaker 3: a liberated... Well, she's liberated now, except that she's in
• 1:11:45
  Speaker 3: a wheelchair. I guess that was a bit more suicide
• 1:11:48
  Speaker 3: than she was expecting to get. Sorry, Lindsay Clancy wanted
• 1:11:54
  Speaker 3: to be liberated from her children. I'm just saying, like,
• 1:11:59
  Speaker 3: this is when women want to be liberated, children suffer.
• 1:12:03
  Speaker 3: Men suffer. But children suffer even more because they can't
• 1:12:06
  Speaker 3: even get away from them. All right, let's keep going.
• 1:12:12
  Speaker 1: All right, so responses to this. Cynthia Harrington responded and said,
• 1:12:19
  Speaker 1: their reaction is a hard edge that makes it harder
• 1:12:21
  Speaker 1: to don a mask for dating. Easy red flag before
• 1:12:24
  Speaker 1: you even.
• 1:12:25
  Speaker 2: Order the drink.
• 1:12:26
  Speaker 1: Clancy.
• 1:12:27
  Speaker 2: Then take off in those situations.
• 1:12:30
  Speaker 1: So Cynthia is saying that if you go on a
• 1:12:32
  Speaker 1: date with a guy and you're on your first date,
• 1:12:35
  Speaker 1: you should bring up the Lindsay Clancy case to see
• 1:12:38
  Speaker 1: what he thinks. And if he says the bitch is
• 1:12:41
  Speaker 1: crazy and should go to jail, you should leave him.
• 1:12:44
  Speaker 1: There in the bar. You're doing him a favor. I'm
• 1:12:47
  Speaker 1: just saying. Okay, Cynthia. I agree. Yes. Do that, ladies.
• 1:12:53
  Speaker 1: Do that. If you go on a date with a guy,
• 1:12:55
  Speaker 1: ask him what he thinks about Lindsay Clancy. And if
• 1:12:58
  Speaker 1: you are one of these fucking whack jobs that thinks
• 1:13:01
  Speaker 1: that she's innocent somehow, and he says the bitch is guilty...
• 1:13:05
  Speaker 1: then yes, leave. He will be okay with that. I
• 1:13:09
  Speaker 1: am fairly certain. I would think. She thinks that women,
• 1:13:14
  Speaker 1: because she believes that women's power over men is basically
• 1:13:18
  Speaker 1: their sexual access. So just deny him that. And I
• 1:13:23
  Speaker 1: just hope that more men recognize that that's just not
• 1:13:26
  Speaker 1: that important. Getting your dick wet is not that important.
• 1:13:30
  Speaker 1: You just have to be able to put that on
• 1:13:31
  Speaker 1: the back burner and focus on people that are righteous
• 1:13:35
  Speaker 1: and like, you know, virtuous.
• 1:13:39
  Speaker 2: Just saying.
• 1:13:40
  Speaker 3: Focus on things that are going to actually change the
• 1:13:42
  Speaker 3: situation for the better at this point in time.
• 1:13:45
  Speaker 1: It's like a new way of asking, what's your body count?
• 1:13:51
  Speaker 1: How many lives have you taken? Literally, yeah. Literally.
• 1:13:55
  Speaker 3: Yeah, but I want to get in there. Like, yes,
• 1:13:57
  Speaker 3: it's a misunderstanding. Okay, so you've just done the man
• 1:14:01
  Speaker 3: a favor. I don't think you understand this, lady. This
• 1:14:05
  Speaker 3: is a vetting and you are being vetted. You offering
• 1:14:10
  Speaker 3: up the information that men are vetting you on is
• 1:14:12
  Speaker 3: not you getting a gotcha. Like you. Yeah, exactly. Brian,
• 1:14:18
  Speaker 3: I think that it's all about sexuality. I don't think
• 1:14:21
  Speaker 3: it is. Do you remember that dating panel? Those guys
• 1:14:25
  Speaker 3: who were wanting to date weren't there because they wanted
• 1:14:29
  Speaker 3: to get their dicks wet. Right. They wanted to get wives.
• 1:14:35
  Speaker 3: And then they were paired up with object reasons why
• 1:14:38
  Speaker 3: there were no wives. Because women have become a bunch
• 1:14:43
  Speaker 3: of dysregulated baboons that are treating relationships with men like
• 1:14:48
  Speaker 3: being in queues, being in position in queues. A man
• 1:14:54
  Speaker 3: isn't a man. You're not having a relationship with a man.
• 1:14:58
  Speaker 3: You're just occupying the position he represents. And looking around,
• 1:15:03
  Speaker 3: trying to find the next position in the queue that
• 1:15:06
  Speaker 3: you can move up the queue. The next position you
• 1:15:09
  Speaker 3: can occupy so you can move up the queue. Or
• 1:15:14
  Speaker 3: you're just a sloot. Or you're just a sloot machine.
• 1:15:19
  Speaker 3: Which is like being a sloot, except the man has
• 1:15:22
  Speaker 3: to take his chances. Put the coin in, pull the lever,
• 1:15:25
  Speaker 3: and maybe something will happen. Like....
• 1:15:30
  Speaker 1: I wish.
• 1:15:31
  Speaker 3: I think maybe men are starting... Like, maybe this new
• 1:15:33
  Speaker 3: generation of men are just deciding, you know what, I
• 1:15:35
  Speaker 3: choose my dignity.
• 1:15:38
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:15:40
  Speaker 3: Over this. But again, this woman doesn't understand the concept.
• 1:15:44
  Speaker 3: Men are vetting you using the Clancy trial. You bringing
• 1:15:48
  Speaker 3: it up is doing them a favor. Hopefully you do
• 1:15:52
  Speaker 3: it before... before the end of the meal so they
• 1:15:57
  Speaker 3: can stick you with the bill. All right. Anyway, well, no,
• 1:16:03
  Speaker 3: at the end of the meal. If you bring it
• 1:16:05
  Speaker 3: up at the end of the meal, then he can
• 1:16:09
  Speaker 3: stick you with the bill. These are the things I
• 1:16:13
  Speaker 3: wish would happen. I know they don't happen. Men are
• 1:16:15
  Speaker 3: too responsible. Okay, let's... Okay, another.
• 1:16:20
  Speaker 1: Is there any other?
• 1:16:21
  Speaker 2: Well, there's one other reply. Like, this one seems a
• 1:16:24
  Speaker 2: bit more common sense.
• 1:16:26
  Speaker 1: Abdul Nabi said, What a bullshit argument and deflection attempt. Yeah,
• 1:16:32
  Speaker 1: if those men committing the crimes you describe admit to
• 1:16:34
  Speaker 1: them in court, they get harsh sentences. But thanks for
• 1:16:37
  Speaker 1: giving the point about evading accountability. Yeah, yeah, I know
• 1:16:41
  Speaker 1: facts and logic are tools of the patriarchy. So, basically,
• 1:16:44
  Speaker 1: pretty straightforward. Like, yeah, I mean... You know, I would actually,
• 1:16:48
  Speaker 1: if I don't know that I would be able to,
• 1:16:50
  Speaker 1: but I'd like to talk to this Luke Olinga guy,
• 1:16:52
  Speaker 1: because I really want to know, what is he driving at?
• 1:16:54
  Speaker 2: What does he hope to accomplish?
• 1:16:57
  Speaker 1: Other than just, like, I hate to say, because I
• 1:16:59
  Speaker 1: know it's an overused word, but grifting. Because it's like
• 1:17:03
  Speaker 1: a good way to make money, because if you pander
• 1:17:05
  Speaker 1: to women, especially their rage and their frustration, you'll get
• 1:17:09
  Speaker 1: a lot of fucking clicks, and it'll help you out.
• 1:17:11
  Speaker 1: I mean, there's a reason why you're, like, posting on
• 1:17:13
  Speaker 1: Substack and your Medium account, So, I don't know.
• 1:17:17
  Speaker 2: I think this guy's trying to make money.
• 1:17:19
  Speaker 1: And I think that pandering to women is a really,
• 1:17:21
  Speaker 1: really easy way to do it.
• 1:17:23
  Speaker 2: So, alright.
• 1:17:25
  Speaker 1: I got a super child from DarkKigimora for five. And
• 1:17:28
  Speaker 1: he says, Why are people more tolerant of women killing
• 1:17:31
  Speaker 1: children than men not paying child support? Based on a
• 1:17:34
  Speaker 1: Thomas Ball article I read, you can literally cite a
• 1:17:37
  Speaker 1: man not paying child support as the biggest reason you
• 1:17:40
  Speaker 1: shouldn't feel any sympathy when a man self-immolates himself. And
• 1:17:44
  Speaker 1: positive rights are always inferior to negative rights. I think
• 1:17:47
  Speaker 1: you've just explained your own point.
• 1:17:50
  Speaker 2: Why?
• 1:17:50
  Speaker 1: Because a man who doesn't place child support is inconveniencing
• 1:17:55
  Speaker 1: a woman somewhere. And a woman who is not allowed
• 1:17:58
  Speaker 1: to kill her kids is also inconveniencing a woman somewhere.
• 1:18:02
  Speaker 2: That's the thread.
• 1:18:03
  Speaker 1: That's it. That's the whole argument.
• 1:18:07
  Speaker 3: I wanted to stop him because he said, why are
• 1:18:09
  Speaker 3: people more tolerant of a woman killing children than men?
• 1:18:14
  Speaker 3: I don't think you need anything further. Yeah.
• 1:18:17
  Speaker 2: It's not.
• 1:18:18
  Speaker 1: Yeah, like, you've answered your own question. That's the problem.
• 1:18:21
  Speaker 3: Yeah, but also, you didn't even need that final clause.
• 1:18:24
  Speaker 3: It's just, why are people more tolerant of women killing
• 1:18:27
  Speaker 3: their children than men?
• 1:18:29
  Speaker 1: Yep.
• 1:18:30
  Speaker 3: Death is not even men doing anything. It's just men.
• 1:18:34
  Speaker 3: Men existing. Why do men do that, Brian? Why do
• 1:18:37
  Speaker 3: you guys exist?
• 1:18:40
  Speaker 1: Yeah, why? Why do men... Why?
• 1:18:42
  Speaker 3: Why do men.
• 1:18:45
  Speaker 3: That's the psychology of men in masculinity's field, which is
• 1:18:47
  Speaker 3: derivative of feminist conjecture, which is. is basically the Red
• 1:18:51
  Speaker 3: Stockings Manifesto, except with the biology filed off.
• 1:18:55
  Speaker 1: Right? Why men?
• 1:18:57
  Speaker 3: Why do you men? Why? Why? Why men? Jonathan says
• 1:19:04
  Speaker 3: I'm being obtuse. Okay, let's keep going.
• 1:19:07
  Speaker 1: That's it. That's that thread.
• 1:19:10
  Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, that's it.
• 1:19:11
  Speaker 3: OK, so I just wanted to cover like.
• 1:19:12
  Speaker 2: An hour and 20 minutes. So go ahead.
• 1:19:15
  Speaker 3: One one other thing that. Oh, God damn it. I
• 1:19:20
  Speaker 3: can see his name. I cannot pronounce it. Olinga Olinga
• 1:19:24
  Speaker 3: said he talks about another case. And he's basically trying
• 1:19:29
  Speaker 3: to say this isn't about women because he finds a
• 1:19:32
  Speaker 3: black woman in the same courtroom. She didn't have a
• 1:19:36
  Speaker 3: jury trial. She had a judge trial. So it's less
• 1:19:39
  Speaker 3: likely to end up with this kind of a circus.
• 1:19:42
  Speaker 3: But she had schizophrenia, but she ended up being held
• 1:19:46
  Speaker 3: criminally responsible for killing her kids. But the thing is
• 1:19:49
  Speaker 3: that one thing that it rested on was she actually
• 1:19:53
  Speaker 3: intimidated witnesses. So at that point, it's hard to say
• 1:19:58
  Speaker 3: that the schizophrenia made her do it. Schizophrenia isn't a
• 1:20:02
  Speaker 3: get-out-of-jail-free card for criminal behavior. If you're not actually experiencing
• 1:20:08
  Speaker 3: a hallucination, and you're actually doing it because schizophrenics aren't
• 1:20:13
  Speaker 3: just left in a padded room. They can exist in
• 1:20:16
  Speaker 3: society because they are capable of understanding their behavior and
• 1:20:21
  Speaker 3: behaving appropriately. especially when they stay on their meds, their
• 1:20:25
  Speaker 3: antipsychotic meds, right? So she was found guilty even though
• 1:20:30
  Speaker 3: she had, she brought up the defense of schizophrenia, which
• 1:20:33
  Speaker 3: is itself amazing because when women do that, they usually
• 1:20:38
  Speaker 3: get off. But she was also found guilty of intimidating witnesses,
• 1:20:43
  Speaker 3: which speaks to her knowing what had happened and not
• 1:20:47
  Speaker 3: being in a psychosis when she did it. Right? So
• 1:20:52
  Speaker 3: that's not even a case. Well, I mean, it is
• 1:20:55
  Speaker 3: a similar case, but she happened to be black. So
• 1:20:58
  Speaker 3: Olinga was trying to make the argument that this really
• 1:21:02
  Speaker 3: isn't about women, Brian. Because the black woman didn't get
• 1:21:07
  Speaker 3: the defense and she didn't get the pink shirt. So
• 1:21:09
  Speaker 3: it's really Lindsay Clancy's.
• 1:21:11
  Speaker 1: They didn't bring that same energy for the women of color.
• 1:21:14
  Speaker 1: Like on that Oprah special where the black woman said, well,
• 1:21:17
  Speaker 1: I hope that there's the same energy that Lindsay Clancy
• 1:21:20
  Speaker 1: got for us women.
• 1:21:23
  Speaker 2: So now we're vying for another position.
• 1:21:26
  Speaker 1: How many different colors of women should be allowed to
• 1:21:29
  Speaker 1: murder their own children? All of them. And if you don't,
• 1:21:32
  Speaker 1: then you're racist, too, somehow. Yeah.
• 1:21:35
  Speaker 3: Purple women, green women, chartreuse women, they all should be
• 1:21:39
  Speaker 3: allowed to murder their children. But my point is that
• 1:21:42
  Speaker 3: he's trying to use the fact that a black woman
• 1:21:46
  Speaker 3: was supposedly treated differently. All women get these passes, by
• 1:21:49
  Speaker 3: the way, guys. As a way of saying this isn't
• 1:21:54
  Speaker 3: about women. So intersectionality is working here. Sure. Because a
• 1:22:01
  Speaker 3: black woman supposedly didn't get the pass that Lindsay got
• 1:22:04
  Speaker 3: as a white woman. It's not about them being women.
• 1:22:07
  Speaker 3: It's about Lindsay Clancy being a white woman, even though
• 1:22:11
  Speaker 3: white men do not get these passes. All right. That
• 1:22:15
  Speaker 3: black men and black women are black. Black men and
• 1:22:18
  Speaker 3: white men are in the same position when it comes
• 1:22:21
  Speaker 3: to killing their kids. Yeah, you don't. Well, black men,
• 1:22:24
  Speaker 3: maybe not because they are already removed from their families.
• 1:22:28
  Speaker 3: But yeah, so this is not something that ever applies
• 1:22:32
  Speaker 3: to men. But because it applies to white women more,
• 1:22:36
  Speaker 3: it's obviously because of their whiteness. See how intersectionality is
• 1:22:40
  Speaker 3: used to make women blameless again? Intersectionality is the greatest...
• 1:22:49
  Speaker 3: criminal laundering tool in human history and also the best
• 1:22:56
  Speaker 3: mechanism by which white people white women excuse their accountability
• 1:23:01
  Speaker 3: because they can excuse it on being white and then
• 1:23:04
  Speaker 3: just do the the white tithe you know once a
• 1:23:08
  Speaker 3: once a decade and and then they get to enjoy
• 1:23:10
  Speaker 3: their female privilege right totally free They don't have to
• 1:23:15
  Speaker 3: answer for it. The woman card remains blameless. But also,
• 1:23:20
  Speaker 3: all victimhood ultimately drops in their lap because everything, it's always,
• 1:23:26
  Speaker 3: black men are always the white men of black people.
• 1:23:28
  Speaker 3: Gay men are always the white men of gay people.
• 1:23:32
  Speaker 3: So the victimhood always accrues to women, ultimately. It's a
• 1:23:38
  Speaker 3: great tool. It's why liberal women love it. It puts
• 1:23:42
  Speaker 3: them on top of every single social hierarchy. It seems
• 1:23:45
  Speaker 3: like it doesn't, but it does.
• 1:23:47
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:23:48
  Speaker 3: Because it allows them to excuse their privilege as women
• 1:23:52
  Speaker 3: on being white, and it allows them to appropriate all victimhood.
• 1:23:56
  Speaker 3: All victimhood flows upwards to the white liberal woman. And
• 1:24:01
  Speaker 3: then they get to use it to socially climb and
• 1:24:05
  Speaker 3: increase their wealth. I mean, it doesn't ultimately benefit all
• 1:24:10
  Speaker 3: liberal white women. Because they don't all get a richer husband.
• 1:24:15
  Speaker 3: But if you're a two and you're a liberal white woman,
• 1:24:18
  Speaker 3: you can get a four. And if you're a four,
• 1:24:21
  Speaker 3: you can get an eight. And if you're an eight,
• 1:24:25
  Speaker 3: you can get an NGO that pays you millions. And
• 1:24:30
  Speaker 3: the CIA can recruit you. And you can get a
• 1:24:37
  Speaker 3: millionaire husband. Okay. Now, speaking of glory.