Latest / Honey Badger Radio / In conclusion, we have to exclude men from fatherhood... with TL;DR

Transcript

In conclusion, we have to exclude men from fatherhood... with TL;DR · Honey Badger Radio

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Please give this video a like and subscript.
• 0:02
  Speaker 2: If you know what's good for you, you'll follow us
• 0:05
  Speaker 2: on rumble, then we will endeavor to do so.
• 0:09
  Speaker 3: All right, and we are talking more about this paper
• 0:15
  Speaker 3: from Cambridge University, Individualistic sol The Fertility crisises further marginalization
• 0:23
  Speaker 3: of man.
• 0:25
  Speaker 4: And yeah, first I talk to say welcome to everyone
• 0:29
  Speaker 4: wants to join. That's join you a show? And how
• 0:32
  Speaker 4: are you?
• 0:33
  Speaker 2: I agree with the paper men are currently marginalized. Thank
• 0:37
  Speaker 2: you for admitting it. That's wonderful. Now we just need
• 0:40
  Speaker 2: to do it even harder, apparently, because that will that'll
• 0:43
  Speaker 2: fix everything.
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: Yeah, actually, that is a good point. This paper has
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: openly admitted everything we've been arguing about for thirteen years
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: and myself for twenty actually probably twenty three. Now, all right,
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: that's that's progress.
• 0:57
  Speaker 4: Yeah.
• 0:58
  Speaker 2: Now, maybe its wonderful when they see the ground of
• 1:00
  Speaker 2: the argument immediately and then tell you why it doesn't matter.
• 1:04
  Speaker 4: Yeah.
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: I've been pointing that out for years. They've their first
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: maneuver in arguments, and by they I mean the descendants
• 1:12
  Speaker 1: of the Red Stockings Manifesto, the directors. I know that
• 1:15
  Speaker 1: we can trace it further back. We can trace woke
• 1:19
  Speaker 1: back to what you were What were you saying, Teal Deer,
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: august of Hippo, Oh.
• 1:24
  Speaker 2: Yeah, there's a bunch like Augustine of Hippo. There's who
• 1:26
  Speaker 2: was the other sort of famous Christian writer. I know
• 1:29
  Speaker 2: you've mentioned him before, Brian.
• 1:32
  Speaker 5: One.
• 1:32
  Speaker 4: Okay, Quas, Thomas Aquinas.
• 1:35
  Speaker 2: Him, Thomas Aquinas, and Augustine of Hippoe. I have choice
• 1:37
  Speaker 2: words for some of them. And the neoplatanist nonsense that
• 1:40
  Speaker 2: infested the entirety of the intellectual canon of Christianity that
• 1:44
  Speaker 2: would follow, which ended up giving rise to literally.
• 1:47
  Speaker 5: All of this.
• 1:48
  Speaker 2: That that's the that's the framework which gave you things
• 1:51
  Speaker 2: like coviture, which gave you things like men have to
• 1:53
  Speaker 2: be held responsible for everything that women do. And of
• 1:56
  Speaker 2: course feminism latched onto all of that as well, and
• 1:59
  Speaker 2: it's still in the process of saying men are entirely
• 2:03
  Speaker 2: responsible for everything bad that happens to women, except, of course,
• 2:06
  Speaker 2: they then throw in their dual and triple system theory,
• 2:09
  Speaker 2: as we discussed several weeks ago with people like McKinnon
• 2:12
  Speaker 2: and Millet and Plummer and people like that, who basically
• 2:16
  Speaker 2: just said, oh, by the way, husband is class wife
• 2:19
  Speaker 2: is class us, woman is class. Men are the bourgeoisia class.
• 2:24
  Speaker 2: Women are the proletariat productive class.
• 2:27
  Speaker 5: This is all based.
• 2:28
  Speaker 2: Around the bourgeois notion of the nuclear family. Because humans
• 2:32
  Speaker 2: don't actually form natural pair bonding things that there's a
• 2:37
  Speaker 2: strange stripe. This is actually related to reproduction. This so
• 2:41
  Speaker 2: I was about to go on a tangent I just
• 2:42
  Speaker 2: realized it's actually entirely connected. There was a stream all
• 2:46
  Speaker 2: of reproductive nonsense from feminism back in I want to
• 2:51
  Speaker 2: say about the system might be a little bit earlier,
• 2:53
  Speaker 2: where a bunch of excuse me there anthropologists came up
• 2:57
  Speaker 2: with this bizarre notion that humans were not a pair
• 2:59
  Speaker 2: bonding species, but that they reproduced augiastically under the light
• 3:03
  Speaker 2: of a full moon. So that what was going on
• 3:06
  Speaker 2: and something about lunar god. When we do our evolutionary
• 3:10
  Speaker 2: psychology and biopsychology, we get accused of just so storytelling
• 3:14
  Speaker 2: all the goddamn time. When we're like, hey, this is
• 3:17
  Speaker 2: what your endocrine system does. When all of this, perhaps
• 3:20
  Speaker 2: they'll say things like this nothing to back it up,
• 3:23
  Speaker 2: and then they'll accuse other people of just so storytelling
• 3:25
  Speaker 2: about how humans do, which is hilarious. So they did that,
• 3:30
  Speaker 2: and then they That was their slightly subversive means of
• 3:34
  Speaker 2: undermining the family unit. Just no humans and orgies everywhere.
• 3:39
  Speaker 5: That's it.
• 3:39
  Speaker 2: That's how they did it. No one knew what their parents.
• 3:41
  Speaker 2: No one knew who their parents were. Of course, nonsense
• 3:45
  Speaker 2: lineage as parental assurety, specifically paternal surety has that predates humans.
• 3:52
  Speaker 2: That is something that happened before humans were even human.
• 3:56
  Speaker 2: Paternal surety is something you can see in animal species.
• 4:00
  Speaker 2: It crosses clades. For God's sake, it is such a
• 4:04
  Speaker 2: ubiquitous behavior that the idea that humans are somehow immune.
• 4:10
  Speaker 5: To it is ridiculous.
• 4:12
  Speaker 2: We know that humans are best case scenario, pair bonding species.
• 4:17
  Speaker 2: The worst case scenario, you might be able to say,
• 4:20
  Speaker 2: serial monogamy, with the potential to manifest the what is
• 4:24
  Speaker 2: amusingly called the sneaky fucker strategy, which is just slipping
• 4:27
  Speaker 2: in then women when the female of a species is
• 4:30
  Speaker 2: in the mood, and you just slip in when she's
• 4:32
  Speaker 2: a little unsuspecting or something along those lines, which is
• 4:37
  Speaker 2: actually an interesting and I suppose it's somewhat interesting side
• 4:39
  Speaker 2: tangent for that is why are things like pornography titilating
• 4:43
  Speaker 2: for people? It's because you're viewing people engaging in fornicative
• 4:47
  Speaker 2: behavior reproductive behavior, and there is a possibility at some
• 4:52
  Speaker 2: point evolutionarily that you could just get in there, like
• 4:55
  Speaker 2: either at the same time or slightly after. And obviously
• 4:58
  Speaker 2: that strategy works in a bunch of other animal species
• 5:02
  Speaker 2: where you do actually witness like two males trying to
• 5:06
  Speaker 2: mount a female at the same time because she's receptive
• 5:09
  Speaker 2: to mating, and it literally then just becomes a jostling match.
• 5:12
  Speaker 2: You can see that with anything like cows and horses
• 5:16
  Speaker 2: and all sorts of other things.
• 5:17
  Speaker 5: So it's chimps to it as well.
• 5:19
  Speaker 2: So Bnoba's it's not really a surprise that humans would
• 5:22
  Speaker 2: share architecture for that.
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: Can I get in here just a second, just to
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: put one thing into your rant, how sneaky fuckers in
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: nature usually are facilitated by resembling females. Is that not right?
• 5:36
  Speaker 2: Yes, yeah, they tend to be the duet were males
• 5:39
  Speaker 2: who are to borrow Internet parlance, so absolutely beta that
• 5:44
  Speaker 2: they are femboid. That's basically what it is, that the
• 5:47
  Speaker 2: femboys are the sneaky fuckers of humans. To give you
• 5:51
  Speaker 2: an Internet meme.
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: Because I've proposed the idea that our current dating landscape
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: has women essentially the sneaky it's the sneaky fucker. They've
• 6:01
  Speaker 1: just come out like full force and rearranged our mating
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: landscape to their particular desires. But that's a complete decide.
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: I'm apologized for interrupting your rent, Continue tells her.
• 6:13
  Speaker 2: Oh, I did say. I was probably just going to
• 6:15
  Speaker 2: end up just info dumping at the front here because
• 6:18
  Speaker 2: I've not dealt with this paper or anything before. So
• 6:21
  Speaker 2: I'm just I've got a lot of catching up to
• 6:23
  Speaker 2: do in just random stuff that I need to get out.
• 6:26
  Speaker 5: To set scenes.
• 6:28
  Speaker 2: Yeah, so that that was the first attempt to undermine
• 6:32
  Speaker 2: the concept of family units of feminism engaged in the
• 6:35
  Speaker 2: sort of really big one. Humans not pair bonding, They're
• 6:39
  Speaker 2: not serially monogamous or anything like that. I think that
• 6:42
  Speaker 2: those are the two major models that you look at
• 6:45
  Speaker 2: when you see humans, because we've we've evolved a little
• 6:49
  Speaker 2: bit beyond it's not that we've evolved beyond the sneaky
• 6:51
  Speaker 2: fucking strategy, it's just that it's a lot more difficult
• 6:55
  Speaker 2: because our brains are bigger, so we notice it a
• 6:58
  Speaker 2: little bit more.
• 6:59
  Speaker 5: It just I don't know, I don't know how that
• 7:01
  Speaker 5: describe it.
• 7:01
  Speaker 1: At arms race between the sneaky fuckers and the rest
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: of humanity, and the sneakery fuckers have got had to
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: get even more sneaky, which is why feminism.
• 7:12
  Speaker 2: But continue, Yeah, so that that was a sort of
• 7:15
  Speaker 2: really big attempt to undermine family unit formation. So if
• 7:20
  Speaker 2: you take this back to the triple system theory, which
• 7:23
  Speaker 2: is what we discussed when we were talking about Wolby
• 7:25
  Speaker 2: and all of her nonsense, her collected nonsense from people
• 7:28
  Speaker 2: like Millay and McKinnon, I think are they're the two
• 7:31
  Speaker 2: bigger contributors to all of this nonsense. The Marxist view
• 7:35
  Speaker 2: or Marxist feminist but I repeat myself view of the
• 7:38
  Speaker 2: family unit was that it was actually a bourgeois construct.
• 7:43
  Speaker 2: So what happened was you had the normal man, the
• 7:46
  Speaker 2: proletarian man and woman. They used to just get it
• 7:50
  Speaker 2: on anywhere wherever, just all these just piles of writhing
• 7:54
  Speaker 2: bodies all around the place. And then at some point
• 7:57
  Speaker 2: a couple of rich people with power said me and
• 8:00
  Speaker 2: this woman, or me and this man, man and woman.
• 8:04
  Speaker 2: They just they stood together and we said, no, actually
• 8:07
  Speaker 2: we're just it's just us. You clubs can enjoy your
• 8:11
  Speaker 2: sexual degeneracy over there, We're just going to be us,
• 8:14
  Speaker 2: and we're going to know who our children are. And
• 8:16
  Speaker 2: then this this bourgeois notion that this is the family unit.
• 8:22
  Speaker 2: This is what they actually believed, that that family creation
• 8:25
  Speaker 2: is this bourgeois the capitalist patriarchal notion, and that that
• 8:30
  Speaker 2: was something that was then forced down upon the proletaria.
• 8:36
  Speaker 2: It was forced down upon the filthy orgy, having degenerate
• 8:41
  Speaker 2: hedonists that were the masses as a means of isolating
• 8:46
  Speaker 2: them from each other to help undermine class consciousness and
• 8:50
  Speaker 2: to help undermine the sharing of resources, pulling people out
• 8:54
  Speaker 2: of primitive communism and forcing them into capitalism. This is
• 8:58
  Speaker 2: why you get things like where do I want to
• 9:01
  Speaker 2: start with this? Okay, So you have within this feminist
• 9:04
  Speaker 2: Marxist view of things, once again, I repeat myself, the
• 9:08
  Speaker 2: family unit is this bourgeois construct, which is this unit
• 9:12
  Speaker 2: of production. And within those units of production you have
• 9:17
  Speaker 2: still because it's a microcosm of the bourgeois construct above it.
• 9:21
  Speaker 2: It's inherited the bourgeois proletarian framework from the society that
• 9:27
  Speaker 2: it's formed, so that it's a part of and within
• 9:30
  Speaker 2: that you have man as class woman's class husband's class.
• 9:34
  Speaker 5: Wife as class.
• 9:35
  Speaker 2: So you then have men who are the active class,
• 9:40
  Speaker 2: and women who because women are the proletariat, they're the
• 9:42
  Speaker 2: productive class, and men, because they're the bourgeois, they are
• 9:45
  Speaker 2: the extractive class. So this is why you get feminists
• 9:49
  Speaker 2: who have this bizarre view. And you see this all
• 9:52
  Speaker 2: the time. Unpaid labor, it's such a big thing for them.
• 9:57
  Speaker 2: Women they do housework and the house that they do,
• 10:01
  Speaker 2: which is uncompensated. It's unpaid labor, so they don't get
• 10:05
  Speaker 2: anything for it. Apparently, even though when you have those
• 10:09
  Speaker 2: traditional arrangements like one household income which would normally be
• 10:13
  Speaker 2: a man and then a woman working at home, that
• 10:16
  Speaker 2: the payment there goes kind of one way. One person
• 10:19
  Speaker 2: stays in gets everything provided for them. That was not
• 10:21
  Speaker 2: the norm throughout all the human history. That was just
• 10:24
  Speaker 2: this really weird fifties Hollywood kind of blip that only
• 10:28
  Speaker 2: really happened for a small section of the post World
• 10:33
  Speaker 2: War II growing middle class. It wasn't achieved by most people.
• 10:37
  Speaker 2: So that this notion that oh, man works, women stays home.
• 10:40
  Speaker 2: Not throughout most of human history, the home was a
• 10:42
  Speaker 2: unit of production.
• 10:43
  Speaker 1: That is I just can I make a brief comment
• 10:46
  Speaker 1: all right, so now the and I'm actually seeing something here.
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: This baldly asserted that men having a wage was oppression
• 10:55
  Speaker 1: of women. So providing for a woman is oppressing her
• 10:59
  Speaker 1: because she has dependency on you, and that dependency is oppression.
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: That's what I was seeing from how they squared the
• 11:06
  Speaker 1: materialist circle, which was with materialism you have to identify
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: a benefit. And the Marxist feminists who were trying to
• 11:14
  Speaker 1: identify a benefit, derive a benefit for men from pratriarchy,
• 11:19
  Speaker 1: which would be Brown, Bremer a Young I think no,
• 11:22
  Speaker 1: not Brown, Barrett and Young in particular, and they found
• 11:26
  Speaker 1: a knull. So what happened is they situated the benefit
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: for men from the very act of making women dependent.
• 11:33
  Speaker 1: Which is really interesting because if you think that this
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: unpaid labor was the thing that men got from there
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: or extracted from women, why did men then pay for
• 11:43
  Speaker 1: laundry like washers, dishwashers, clothes washers.
• 11:47
  Speaker 5: I can tell you that.
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: Okay, okay, explain then.
• 11:51
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I can explain that within the Marxist framework. It
• 11:54
  Speaker 2: all makes perfect sense if you don't think about it,
• 11:56
  Speaker 2: and your brain is shaped like a pret soul with
• 11:59
  Speaker 2: only one So somehow Moby a strip. So how that works.
• 12:04
  Speaker 2: You've got the family unit, which is a unit of
• 12:06
  Speaker 2: production women produce in the home. Men exploit that they
• 12:10
  Speaker 2: take the additional labor. They take that labor value that
• 12:13
  Speaker 2: women produce via washing the flaws, cooking food, cleaning clothes,
• 12:19
  Speaker 2: and things like that. Apparently that stuff is all the
• 12:22
  Speaker 2: thing that is actually keeping society together because it produces
• 12:26
  Speaker 2: so much value that these men then take so that
• 12:30
  Speaker 2: they can go out and earn a wage because them
• 12:33
  Speaker 2: stealing all of this labor value that women are providing
• 12:36
  Speaker 2: by cooking and cleaning allows men to go and do
• 12:40
  Speaker 2: other things. That that's the phrasing of it. Now, the
• 12:44
  Speaker 2: bourgeois capitalist class that wants to exploit as much free
• 12:49
  Speaker 2: labor as possible from people invented dishwashers, washing machines and
• 12:54
  Speaker 2: all of these labour saving devices because and I'm going
• 12:58
  Speaker 2: back to the triples some theory from the book Theorizing
• 13:01
  Speaker 2: Patriarchy by Sylvia Wilby. People can go and read this
• 13:05
  Speaker 2: to find out that I'm not making this up. This
• 13:07
  Speaker 2: is their position. The bourgeois capitalist class created all of
• 13:10
  Speaker 2: these labor saving devices that do all of these jobs
• 13:15
  Speaker 2: incredibly efficiently, so that women don't actually have to work,
• 13:19
  Speaker 2: so your household work, instead of being hours a day,
• 13:22
  Speaker 2: is half an hour of pushing buttons and then all
• 13:24
  Speaker 2: the automated stuff does it for you. Okay, What they
• 13:28
  Speaker 2: did was they invented all of these things which created
• 13:32
  Speaker 2: women as a consumer class, which means they can be
• 13:35
  Speaker 2: exploited for their value. They can be exploited for their money,
• 13:40
  Speaker 2: but it also means that they are a lot more productive,
• 13:43
  Speaker 2: which means that there is even more value for men
• 13:46
  Speaker 2: to take. But then it was all very sneaky because
• 13:51
  Speaker 2: there used to be communal wash houses and things like
• 13:54
  Speaker 2: that that people would all go to and scrub their clothes,
• 13:57
  Speaker 2: or they'd go down to the river and bash everything
• 13:59
  Speaker 2: with rocks, and obviously they talked to each other while
• 14:01
  Speaker 2: they were doing that. You see, those sneaky bourgeois capitalists.
• 14:05
  Speaker 2: They took those communal activities, created this consumer class of women,
• 14:10
  Speaker 2: and then isolated them in the home. They encouraged them
• 14:14
  Speaker 2: to be atomized individualist consumers living in a home so
• 14:19
  Speaker 2: that they would not meet with each other at these
• 14:22
  Speaker 2: communal wash houses. Because if women were to meet together
• 14:26
  Speaker 2: in communal wash houses, they might be in they might
• 14:31
  Speaker 2: possibly develop class consciousness. So all of these labor saving
• 14:36
  Speaker 2: devices were actually as a means of creating a consumer
• 14:40
  Speaker 2: class that capitalists could get more money out of, somehow
• 14:43
  Speaker 2: from these women who don't produce money, but they somehow
• 14:47
  Speaker 2: don't question it. It made women work more efficiently because
• 14:51
  Speaker 2: they can turn on multiple machines at once, which gives
• 14:54
  Speaker 2: even more labor for the men in their lives to
• 14:57
  Speaker 2: forcefully extract so that they can go outside and work.
• 15:01
  Speaker 2: And it isolated women to be perfect little atomized consumer units,
• 15:06
  Speaker 2: locked away in a home so that they can't talk
• 15:09
  Speaker 2: to other women and can't develop revolutionary class consciousness.
• 15:13
  Speaker 1: Okay, can I get in here for a second. All right,
• 15:15
  Speaker 1: two things, right. The labor that was saved by these devices, these.
• 15:22
  Speaker 6: Consumer washing machine, dishwasher, and inter indoor plumbing, and all
• 15:27
  Speaker 6: of the canned goods, all the industrial foods, did not
• 15:31
  Speaker 6: go to the husband. It went to the wife, which
• 15:34
  Speaker 6: then gave her time to enjoy soap opera and consciousness raising.
• 15:38
  Speaker 6: Because I do note that when women.
• 15:39
  Speaker 1: Were occupied bashing clothes on rocks, they didn't create feminism.
• 15:45
  Speaker 1: But when they had the leisure time that they said
• 15:47
  Speaker 1: that the capitalists inflicted on them, suddenly they had the
• 15:51
  Speaker 1: time for class consciousness and all of these coffee clatches
• 15:55
  Speaker 1: and marches and all of this other stuff, and time
• 15:58
  Speaker 1: to think about how the boredom was oppression. I just
• 16:01
  Speaker 1: wanted to point that out. It just doesn't there's some
• 16:03
  Speaker 1: plot to Wildbie's and I yeah, you're right, you can't
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: think about it too Alre do you just have to
• 16:08
  Speaker 1: accept it man, bad woman oppressed.
• 16:10
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that's pretty much it. So all of that happened
• 16:14
  Speaker 2: at the same time, so that ties into their notion
• 16:17
  Speaker 2: that we now have to abolish the family unit. So
• 16:20
  Speaker 2: we have to remove this bourgeois capitalist construct, which is
• 16:25
  Speaker 2: this nuclear family unit. We have to return to Orgie's
• 16:28
  Speaker 2: under the Moon, although I imagine they wouldn't go that far
• 16:32
  Speaker 2: and actually cite whoever it was the first penn to
• 16:35
  Speaker 2: that because it might actually, no, I'm going to say,
• 16:38
  Speaker 2: it might sound a little too insane, but they wrote
• 16:41
  Speaker 2: it in the first place.
• 16:42
  Speaker 5: So no.
• 16:44
  Speaker 2: And so this is why you get places that look
• 16:47
  Speaker 2: for communal raising of children. This is why when you
• 16:50
  Speaker 2: look at explicitly socialist communes, places like the kibbutz in Israel,
• 16:55
  Speaker 2: a lot of the children there were communally raised and
• 16:57
  Speaker 2: didn't know who their parents were. Some of them did,
• 17:01
  Speaker 2: but a lot of them didn't. And because it was
• 17:04
  Speaker 2: considered unequal if parents were to spend more time with
• 17:09
  Speaker 2: their child than other people's children, because it was giving
• 17:12
  Speaker 2: their child an unfair advantage, because they might dote upon
• 17:16
  Speaker 2: their own child a little more than someone else's, and
• 17:18
  Speaker 2: therefore that child got some sort of boost from that.
• 17:21
  Speaker 2: So even though there were some parents and children who
• 17:24
  Speaker 2: they did know, there were a lot who didn't. Now,
• 17:27
  Speaker 2: of course, the problem with that, this this whole we've
• 17:30
  Speaker 2: all heard the phrase it takes a village to raise
• 17:32
  Speaker 2: a child.
• 17:33
  Speaker 5: It doesn't.
• 17:33
  Speaker 2: It takes two parents and then usually an extended family,
• 17:37
  Speaker 2: which would be grandparents and maybe first cousins. That seems
• 17:40
  Speaker 2: to be the environment that the people work in, not
• 17:43
  Speaker 2: just some random down the street. So that is then
• 17:46
  Speaker 2: where you start getting that the socialist communal activity for
• 17:51
  Speaker 2: all of this. So this is why, again when you
• 17:52
  Speaker 2: see leftists talking about everything, everything is always if we
• 17:56
  Speaker 2: just have infinite community centers, infinite life libraries, infinite community gardens,
• 18:02
  Speaker 2: all of society will just work itself out somehow. People
• 18:05
  Speaker 2: will just all this inequality will go away, all the resentment, all.
• 18:10
  Speaker 5: The everything will go away.
• 18:11
  Speaker 2: So this then puts you into what we see now,
• 18:15
  Speaker 2: which is all of these steps to attempt to emancipate
• 18:20
  Speaker 2: people from well existence. That just seems to me what
• 18:24
  Speaker 2: it is, emancipate people from existence, emancipate people from reproduction,
• 18:28
  Speaker 2: to separate people from reproduction.
• 18:30
  Speaker 5: That every sort of.
• 18:31
  Speaker 2: Step that we go has landed us where we are now,
• 18:34
  Speaker 2: which is this incredibly low rate of fertility and the
• 18:37
  Speaker 2: problems that is going to cause. Now. Feminists have attempted
• 18:41
  Speaker 2: to ameliorate this within their own framework, unsuccessfully, I would
• 18:46
  Speaker 2: point out, but it's interesting to note their attempts at it.
• 18:49
  Speaker 2: So what I think you're seeing, because I have paid
• 18:53
  Speaker 2: attention to your past streams on this, and I don't
• 18:56
  Speaker 2: think it's that children nuturally. I don't think it's the
• 19:00
  Speaker 2: women don't want children in general. I think it's that
• 19:03
  Speaker 2: they don't want them yet. So when you talk about, oh,
• 19:07
  Speaker 2: women want this small number of high value men, yes,
• 19:10
  Speaker 2: and it's not that women don't want children with them,
• 19:12
  Speaker 2: it's that they don't want it now. So I think
• 19:14
  Speaker 2: you're seeing different stages of women's lives, and perhaps there's
• 19:17
  Speaker 2: a little bit of conflation there.
• 19:20
  Speaker 1: Can I just get in for a second, I really
• 19:22
  Speaker 1: question high value men because, let's face it, these are
• 19:26
  Speaker 1: the sneaker fuckers that they're going after. This is the
• 19:29
  Speaker 1: sneaky fucker regime.
• 19:31
  Speaker 2: They're the dark tryad made Yes, who are the ones
• 19:33
  Speaker 2: who tend to not in the open?
• 19:36
  Speaker 4: Yeah?
• 19:36
  Speaker 1: And the dark triad males they have discovered. Now this
• 19:40
  Speaker 1: is early science because feminism has blocked a lot of
• 19:44
  Speaker 1: science research into humans and endochronology because it's too bio essentialist.
• 19:49
  Speaker 1: It might actually give men a break from being the oppressors.
• 19:52
  Speaker 1: But when they've looked into this dark triad men, specifically sociopaths,
• 19:57
  Speaker 1: they don't seem to have normal value suppressing, so they
• 20:01
  Speaker 1: don't have the normal bonding system of a man. And
• 20:04
  Speaker 1: then there's two types. One seems to have no bonding
• 20:08
  Speaker 1: system and the other, which is a dysregulated sociopath, is
• 20:12
  Speaker 1: attempting to compensate for a lack of a male bonding
• 20:15
  Speaker 1: system by overdriving the female bonding system. So there they
• 20:20
  Speaker 1: have excessive oxytocin. What they had found is that when
• 20:24
  Speaker 1: they administered vasuppress into sociopaths, they develop empathy intrannasal vasapressin.
• 20:31
  Speaker 1: I don't know if you were. I just wanted to
• 20:33
  Speaker 1: point that out. So it suggests that actually what we
• 20:36
  Speaker 1: are terming women being attracted to the alphas or the
• 20:41
  Speaker 1: superior men, these are actually a small group of men
• 20:45
  Speaker 1: who most resemble women, either in whatever bonding regime that
• 20:50
  Speaker 1: they have left, whatever endocrine bonding system they have left,
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: or without having any at all, and so they're best
• 20:57
  Speaker 1: able to produce what women are attracted to, which the
• 21:00
  Speaker 1: sociopathic personality style, which apparently is a female personality style,
• 21:04
  Speaker 1: and which is really interesting because in other species, the
• 21:07
  Speaker 1: sneaky fucking big adaptation, their big advantage is they can
• 21:11
  Speaker 1: emulate women. So I think what we're seeing is, like
• 21:15
  Speaker 1: I said, the sneaky fucker regime. They're just open with
• 21:17
  Speaker 1: it now, and women are attracted to it because they
• 21:21
  Speaker 1: resemble the way that women bond, and they resemble the
• 21:24
  Speaker 1: way that women bond because they don't bond the waymen bond.
• 21:27
  Speaker 1: So I find I resist calling these men superior because
• 21:31
  Speaker 1: I think that a human or a male that lacks
• 21:36
  Speaker 1: some critical male parts isn't superior to normal men who
• 21:40
  Speaker 1: have them. You see what I'm getting at.
• 21:42
  Speaker 2: If you have a belief system wherein women are superior
• 21:46
  Speaker 2: to men. You would think that a man behaving like
• 21:49
  Speaker 2: a woman is better than the other.
• 21:50
  Speaker 1: Men, and yet it is so much worse.
• 21:53
  Speaker 2: Yeah, apparently it's miserable. It's almost like women understand other
• 21:57
  Speaker 2: women and they hate each other.
• 21:59
  Speaker 1: They The thing is that they still have the same
• 22:01
  Speaker 1: kind of appetite as we're driven by testosterone, but they
• 22:05
  Speaker 1: do not bond like men, which means they become very extractive.
• 22:09
  Speaker 1: And I just I'm like, again calling these guys the alphas.
• 22:14
  Speaker 1: I think that we need to stop treating the dysregulated
• 22:18
  Speaker 1: choices of women who don't experience any survival pressure as
• 22:22
  Speaker 1: an indication of the worth of men. I'll put it
• 22:25
  Speaker 1: that way anyway i'd like, and please continue. Sorry, I
• 22:28
  Speaker 1: just had to get in there.
• 22:30
  Speaker 5: I really that's fine.
• 22:32
  Speaker 2: I am going to go slightly into my fight me
• 22:35
  Speaker 2: Allison things specifically because you've pointed out how feminism attempts
• 22:40
  Speaker 2: to limit female fatility, and I think that's an effect
• 22:43
  Speaker 2: of it. But if you look at the things that
• 22:45
  Speaker 2: they've done, they have attempted to ameliorate it. I don't
• 22:48
  Speaker 2: know how half hearted it is or whether they actually tried.
• 22:52
  Speaker 1: Yeah, go and elaborate on that.
• 22:53
  Speaker 2: Yeah, So there have been specifically feminist aimed fertility experiments,
• 23:00
  Speaker 2: aimed fertility clinics. Again, I repeat myself. When you look
• 23:04
  Speaker 2: at the staff the general leaning of all of these
• 23:07
  Speaker 2: sorts of places, they are all feminists aligned planned parenthood,
• 23:12
  Speaker 2: which is normally what people think of. Oh, that's the
• 23:14
  Speaker 2: abortion place, so they do fertility stuff as well. People
• 23:17
  Speaker 2: seem to forget about that bit. But there was the
• 23:19
  Speaker 2: Spum Bank of California. This was my back in the eighties.
• 23:23
  Speaker 2: A part of their mandate was actually very specifically allowing
• 23:26
  Speaker 2: single women and lesbians to have children, not gay men,
• 23:29
  Speaker 2: just lesbians. That was specifically a big part of what
• 23:33
  Speaker 2: they were doing. They were like, oh, being a single
• 23:35
  Speaker 2: woman and being lesbian shouldn't prevent you from being able
• 23:37
  Speaker 2: to have a child, if that's what you want. But
• 23:39
  Speaker 2: they started running into a bit of a problem when
• 23:41
  Speaker 2: they were running this clinic, and that was only a
• 23:44
  Speaker 2: very small number of men were being picked, so they
• 23:46
  Speaker 2: had all of their donor profiles, and apparently loads of
• 23:50
  Speaker 2: the women were just picking this very small number of guys,
• 23:54
  Speaker 2: to the point where they actually started having concerns that
• 23:59
  Speaker 2: there was going to be inadvertent consanguinous relationships happening in
• 24:04
  Speaker 2: the area that they operated because so many women were
• 24:07
  Speaker 2: picking such a small number of guys. It's like there's
• 24:10
  Speaker 2: a bunch of half siblings running around who don't know
• 24:12
  Speaker 2: that they're half siblings, and there's actually that many of
• 24:15
  Speaker 2: them that is going to potentially start causing problems. So
• 24:18
  Speaker 2: they had to find a way of dealing with that.
• 24:21
  Speaker 2: Lose a few samples. I just tell guys, yeah, we're
• 24:23
  Speaker 2: not accepting from you anymore because too many women want you.
• 24:26
  Speaker 2: So while these sort of feminist actions here, they do
• 24:30
  Speaker 2: want unlimited abortion rights, this is very obvious, but they
• 24:34
  Speaker 2: want those early on in their life. This sort of
• 24:36
  Speaker 2: lets them do mindless hedonism that they want to do
• 24:39
  Speaker 2: in their late teens and their twenties, unlimited freedom whatever
• 24:43
  Speaker 2: they term freedom as, which means doing whatever the hell
• 24:45
  Speaker 2: you like with no consequences for your actions. But at
• 24:48
  Speaker 2: the end of all of that time, they still want
• 24:50
  Speaker 2: the ability to have a pair, bonded, stable family. At
• 24:54
  Speaker 2: the end of it, it's like this really weird cross
• 24:56
  Speaker 2: purpose thing. You want to have all of the all
• 24:59
  Speaker 2: the chad carousel fun with a decade for a decade
• 25:03
  Speaker 2: or a decade and a half, but then still have
• 25:06
  Speaker 2: this loving husband children, everything at.
• 25:09
  Speaker 5: The end of that.
• 25:11
  Speaker 2: This is also why when you get leftists, the communists,
• 25:14
  Speaker 2: the socialists, a really big part of their platform is
• 25:17
  Speaker 2: also infinite free childcare. Businesses all have to run crushes
• 25:23
  Speaker 2: or nurseries or something like that out of their own
• 25:25
  Speaker 2: pocket for women who work there. States have to provide nurseries,
• 25:31
  Speaker 2: not only school and state schooling in itself was already
• 25:34
  Speaker 2: the first move towards this, towards socializing the raising of children,
• 25:39
  Speaker 2: and they just want that to be expanding. Private businesses
• 25:41
  Speaker 2: are required to do these things. Private businesses are all
• 25:43
  Speaker 2: required to give women amounts of weeks or months maternity
• 25:47
  Speaker 2: leave paid maternity leave, of course, so they want a
• 25:51
  Speaker 2: state that can both aggressively pursue a single specific man,
• 25:57
  Speaker 2: which would be the man who impregnates her, which we
• 26:00
  Speaker 2: know that they can do if you look at things
• 26:02
  Speaker 2: like no faull divorce and alimony payments, childcare payments. How
• 26:05
  Speaker 2: massively disproportionate that is on men as opposed to women.
• 26:10
  Speaker 2: We know that the state will aggressively pursue a specific
• 26:13
  Speaker 2: man who impregnates a woman, but it will also aggressively
• 26:18
  Speaker 2: pursue men as a class to fund a woman's child.
• 26:22
  Speaker 5: That is what all of this socialized childcare is.
• 26:25
  Speaker 2: About, and that is a big part of the leftist
• 26:30
  Speaker 2: platform on this. So they have attempted to do this
• 26:32
  Speaker 2: thing where they encourage women to have children, but it's
• 26:35
  Speaker 2: always basically saying, look, you can do it without a parent.
• 26:39
  Speaker 2: We are going to give you resources, just more resources,
• 26:42
  Speaker 2: more resupport, more money, more social programs, more everything, because
• 26:46
  Speaker 2: that will make women have more children. But apparently it doesn't,
• 26:49
  Speaker 2: and we know that it doesn't because all you have
• 26:50
  Speaker 2: to do is look at the fertility rates that's happening
• 26:53
  Speaker 2: now in the UK. Fertility rates for single women is
• 26:56
  Speaker 2: one point eight. Fertility rates for married women is two
• 27:00
  Speaker 2: point one two point two. So what this actually shows
• 27:02
  Speaker 2: you is if you want people to have babies, you
• 27:04
  Speaker 2: want men and women to be getting married.
• 27:06
  Speaker 5: To each other.
• 27:07
  Speaker 2: Now what happens and how do marriages work. We know
• 27:11
  Speaker 2: that when women earn more than men, the likelihood of
• 27:15
  Speaker 2: that relationship imploding it's an exponential increase. We know that
• 27:19
  Speaker 2: part of the reason the wage gap myth has been
• 27:22
  Speaker 2: dropped by feminist is because when you look at I
• 27:24
  Speaker 2: think it's women under the age of thirty maybe twenty
• 27:27
  Speaker 2: five to thirty something like that. There's a bunch of
• 27:29
  Speaker 2: fields and careers where young women out earning men when
• 27:32
  Speaker 2: you use those aggregate metrics like they did for the
• 27:35
  Speaker 2: seventy seven cents to a dollar lie, So they have
• 27:38
  Speaker 2: to shut that down. They can't address that at all.
• 27:41
  Speaker 2: You look at all of the DEI stuff that we're
• 27:43
  Speaker 2: told is a conspiracy theory, even though companies have it
• 27:46
  Speaker 2: all over their website. So we need to do all
• 27:48
  Speaker 2: of this. We've got to have the diversity, we've got
• 27:50
  Speaker 2: to have the got to get those ESG scores up
• 27:53
  Speaker 2: and all that stuff. We have in some cases specific
• 27:56
  Speaker 2: jobs that are literally just nope, you need to meet
• 27:58
  Speaker 2: these criteria to get these job. And it's always not white,
• 28:01
  Speaker 2: not Mayle, or not Christian, not something. Where is all
• 28:05
  Speaker 2: of this going to go? As it turns out, when
• 28:06
  Speaker 2: you give women infinite everything with not only no dependency
• 28:12
  Speaker 2: on men, the fertility rates crash. And of course this
• 28:15
  Speaker 2: was something that went in opposition to certain feminist theory,
• 28:18
  Speaker 2: because there was feminist theory. Part of what helped to
• 28:22
  Speaker 2: inform all of their fertility actions that they did try
• 28:26
  Speaker 2: was this notion that if you emancipate women from men,
• 28:30
  Speaker 2: if you free them from the reliance on men in
• 28:33
  Speaker 2: the home, you're going to start seeing a rise of
• 28:36
  Speaker 2: companionate marriages rather than economic relationships.
• 28:41
  Speaker 5: Now we know if you look.
• 28:42
  Speaker 2: At there's plenty of research on this that it's something
• 28:44
  Speaker 2: that feminists actually brought up not very long ago that
• 28:46
  Speaker 2: when the economy is bad, women stay in relationships for longer.
• 28:49
  Speaker 2: That's because they have more income, they have more stuff.
• 28:52
  Speaker 2: Of course, it provides economic security.
• 28:55
  Speaker 5: So you see all of.
• 28:56
  Speaker 2: This going together, it points out something very particular. If
• 29:01
  Speaker 2: women have an excess of freedom, excess of resource, all
• 29:04
  Speaker 2: this stuff, it doesn't result in these companion at marriages
• 29:08
  Speaker 2: that were promised. It doesn't result in these women being
• 29:11
  Speaker 2: super happy and super wanting to have children. It actually
• 29:14
  Speaker 2: results in women who don't want that at all, which
• 29:19
  Speaker 2: is really weird. And then you get papers like these
• 29:22
  Speaker 2: ones which you've been going through for the past few weeks,
• 29:25
  Speaker 2: which is just saying, look, if we just keep doing
• 29:27
  Speaker 2: more of this, at some point the pattern will completely reverse.
• 29:31
  Speaker 2: If we just give women more free stuff, more everything,
• 29:34
  Speaker 2: more independence, and we separate them more from the other
• 29:37
  Speaker 2: half of humanity that they need in order to have children,
• 29:40
  Speaker 2: at some point they will return back to that half
• 29:45
  Speaker 2: that we've completely separated them from in all terms imaginable,
• 29:50
  Speaker 2: even at the base point of Marxist theology, saying this
• 29:53
  Speaker 2: is a point of oppression for you, that this half
• 29:55
  Speaker 2: of humanity is going to steal everything from you.
• 29:57
  Speaker 5: Don't go near them.
• 29:59
  Speaker 4: Yeah.
• 30:00
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I could go into the Marxist feminists and the
• 30:03
  Speaker 1: argument that I saw, because it looks like the Marxist
• 30:06
  Speaker 1: feminists Bremer and Barrett and Young actually attempted to derive
• 30:12
  Speaker 1: male benefit from material analysis and failed, and actually said
• 30:16
  Speaker 1: that they failed. Of course, they didn't question the idea
• 30:18
  Speaker 1: that men gained benefit by providing for women. They simply said, oh,
• 30:23
  Speaker 1: it's a secret benefit. But once you have that whole
• 30:26
  Speaker 1: concept of a wage giving men or a wage providing
• 30:30
  Speaker 1: for a woman is some kind of secret benefit to men,
• 30:33
  Speaker 1: then everything else falls out, the expectation that businesses give
• 30:38
  Speaker 1: women childcare, as well as other things that we've been
• 30:42
  Speaker 1: seeing from feminism. They But what I wanted to say
• 30:45
  Speaker 1: is it's interesting this individualistic paper says we should just
• 30:49
  Speaker 1: give women more stuff. And of course, as you were describing,
• 30:53
  Speaker 1: I'm not exactly sure when the fight me comes in.
• 30:56
  Speaker 7: But as you were describing, oh, no was the and
• 31:00
  Speaker 7: you pointed out the I think it was the last
• 31:01
  Speaker 7: show of the one before you said that feminists don't
• 31:04
  Speaker 7: do anything for fertility or anything.
• 31:06
  Speaker 2: Oh no, that's not Oh no, no, they do, but
• 31:08
  Speaker 2: it's just funny.
• 31:09
  Speaker 3: You know.
• 31:10
  Speaker 1: No, I agree that they have done that. My point
• 31:13
  Speaker 1: is that, first of all, it looks it sounds like
• 31:15
  Speaker 1: the that particularly, it hasn't shifted the statistics on childbearing.
• 31:20
  Speaker 1: It hasn't shifted it from married women to single women
• 31:23
  Speaker 1: at all. Single women are a like they contribute about
• 31:27
  Speaker 1: the same amount of childbirth as they ever have while
• 31:30
  Speaker 1: increasing in size. And so this is not a solution.
• 31:33
  Speaker 1: And of course this paper argues that doing more of that,
• 31:36
  Speaker 1: encouraging women to be more single, is a solution. So
• 31:39
  Speaker 1: we marginalize men more to somehow make them to improve
• 31:43
  Speaker 1: a situation that's caused by marginalizing men, because when you
• 31:46
  Speaker 1: marginalize men, they become unattractive prospects. Women don't partner with them,
• 31:51
  Speaker 1: families don't form, and children don't happen. But what I
• 31:54
  Speaker 1: wanted to point out is there is another tactic we
• 31:57
  Speaker 1: could do. We could shame women for wanting a man
• 32:00
  Speaker 1: who provides more. We could do that like heavily shamed
• 32:04
  Speaker 1: women have poster campaigns, whisper campaigns, and just not just
• 32:09
  Speaker 1: gold diggers, but just regular women who have a partner,
• 32:12
  Speaker 1: earns more and just be like, I can't believe you
• 32:15
  Speaker 1: did that. You're so exploitative, you're destroying the sisterhood whatever
• 32:20
  Speaker 1: works for shaming women. But that's never proposed.
• 32:23
  Speaker 2: You know, it's not even.
• 32:27
  Speaker 1: Happens this paper, not this paper. I would say that
• 32:30
  Speaker 1: it did happen in the past, considering the dowry laws
• 32:34
  Speaker 1: and the social expectations placed on that. If you've ever
• 32:36
  Speaker 1: watched The Quiet Man, it's an exploration of that, but
• 32:40
  Speaker 1: it definitely doesn't happen now. So the idea is that
• 32:42
  Speaker 1: if a woman doesn't bring anything into a relationship, she's
• 32:46
  Speaker 1: a whore. And it was the Hollywood Madison Avenue House
• 32:51
  Speaker 1: concubine thing that they did in the fifties that sort
• 32:54
  Speaker 1: of got rid of that attitude or reduced it quite
• 32:57
  Speaker 1: a bit. So a woman could go into a relateationship
• 33:00
  Speaker 1: with nothing, provide basically nothing, have all of the domestic
• 33:05
  Speaker 1: labor she was supposed to do given to actually done
• 33:09
  Speaker 1: by machines and industrial food production, and still be considered
• 33:12
  Speaker 1: a respectable woman, when in most other eras she would
• 33:16
  Speaker 1: have been considered a concubine. So that the Hollywood house concubine.
• 33:20
  Speaker 1: I was originally going to call it househoror, but that
• 33:22
  Speaker 1: seems a little stigmatizing, so I figure house concubine is
• 33:26
  Speaker 1: less insulting. But essentially that's what they were doing. They're
• 33:30
  Speaker 1: proposing a completely novel social arrangement in which the wife
• 33:35
  Speaker 1: is not responsible financially for any aspect of the household,
• 33:38
  Speaker 1: which again is completely novel. It's completely against how we
• 33:43
  Speaker 1: structured the expectations placed on women in the past. Because
• 33:47
  Speaker 1: Proverbs thirty one go read that that is considered to
• 33:51
  Speaker 1: be a godly woman. She doesn't sit on her ass
• 33:54
  Speaker 1: watching soaps, eating bonbonds, having consciousness raising meetings with a
• 33:58
  Speaker 1: bunch of toy lesbians. Right, She works, she provides, she
• 34:05
  Speaker 1: invests for her household, for her family, She has hospitality,
• 34:10
  Speaker 1: she knows what she's doing, she manages the garden, whatever else.
• 34:14
  Speaker 1: So that this is and this is considered a lady,
• 34:18
  Speaker 1: a woman, a respectable woman. She does not sell herself.
• 34:24
  Speaker 1: So the big thing that Madison Avenue in Hollywood did
• 34:27
  Speaker 1: in the fifties was get rid of the shame of
• 34:30
  Speaker 1: that of being a concubine, and created the whole concept
• 34:33
  Speaker 1: of the house concubine, the woman who does not pull
• 34:36
  Speaker 1: her weight, who just sits on her butt and consumes.
• 34:41
  Speaker 1: And that's the big thing. That is the harem model.
• 34:44
  Speaker 1: It's the woman is luxury model, and that's not considered
• 34:49
  Speaker 1: the respectable wife model that used to be. So I
• 34:52
  Speaker 1: just wanted to point that out. We used to do that.
• 34:54
  Speaker 1: Hollywood and Madison Avenue got rid of that shaming because
• 34:58
  Speaker 1: they wanted women to become consumers and to buy all
• 35:02
  Speaker 1: these products and to essentially turn the United States from
• 35:09
  Speaker 1: like more individualistic house homesteading to very homogeneous consumer society
• 35:16
  Speaker 1: that could be sold to in mass in mass. So
• 35:19
  Speaker 1: that I would say, is is something that we did
• 35:21
  Speaker 1: do we could bring it back.
• 35:22
  Speaker 2: That's a part because you're now fighting the trad cons
• 35:25
  Speaker 2: as well. Oh I know, because the track cons they
• 35:29
  Speaker 2: have bought into that, they swallowed that agit prop hook
• 35:32
  Speaker 2: line and see, oh yeah, she will stay at home
• 35:35
  Speaker 2: and she will do that's where I want.
• 35:36
  Speaker 5: I will go out, I will earn things.
• 35:38
  Speaker 2: She will sit there and push buttons on automated white
• 35:42
  Speaker 2: goods and do the most difficult job in the world
• 35:45
  Speaker 2: raising my child, because the job that you literally hand
• 35:49
  Speaker 2: to untrained fourteen and fifteen year olds is totally the
• 35:53
  Speaker 2: most difficult job in the world.
• 35:54
  Speaker 5: Guys, it really is.
• 35:55
  Speaker 2: When you go in for open heart surgery and someone says, oh, sorry, yeah,
• 35:58
  Speaker 2: doctor Smith can't come in today. We've got fourteen year
• 36:01
  Speaker 2: old Jennifer here, who's gonna sub in for your bypass?
• 36:04
  Speaker 5: Yeah, that doesn't happen.
• 36:05
  Speaker 2: Yeah, your your hardest job in the world is actually
• 36:07
  Speaker 2: pretty fucking like duty. It's not as difficult as you
• 36:10
  Speaker 2: think it is. Stop fucking gassing yourselves up like you're
• 36:13
  Speaker 2: doing the most difficult and amazing thing that humanity has
• 36:15
  Speaker 2: ever done.
• 36:16
  Speaker 1: But the whole thing with the radfembs is they are
• 36:19
  Speaker 1: They are making it possible for the rest of the
• 36:21
  Speaker 1: world to run, rather than being the most leisured and
• 36:28
  Speaker 1: like most leisured, comfortable and supplied with luxury class in
• 36:33
  Speaker 1: the whole of human history. They're the ones who are
• 36:36
  Speaker 1: bearing the world on their shoulders, and they're not. They
• 36:40
  Speaker 1: are the beneficiaries of a progressive narrative from the fifties
• 36:46
  Speaker 1: put on by a bunch of probably sexual libertine degenerates.
• 36:51
  Speaker 1: So the very first act of queeredom was the house concubine.
• 36:55
  Speaker 1: I'm just laying it out there, that.
• 36:57
  Speaker 2: Have turned women into the dear.
• 36:59
  Speaker 5: Yeah, Act one madea.
• 37:02
  Speaker 2: All of this around me. Men have built all of
• 37:05
  Speaker 2: this society, and yet I am still sad they have
• 37:09
  Speaker 2: not fixed my emotions for me.
• 37:11
  Speaker 1: Literally, what it is. If you look at the Red
• 37:14
  Speaker 1: Stockings manifesto, they said they sorry feeling, then theory, then practice.
• 37:19
  Speaker 1: So all of this starts in the resentment of the
• 37:25
  Speaker 1: most leisured and beneficiary, the most safe, secure, comfortable, and
• 37:32
  Speaker 1: leisured class in human history, discovered that their boredom was oppression,
• 37:36
  Speaker 1: developed resentment, then groped around for a theory to explain
• 37:41
  Speaker 1: the source of their resentment, never considered themselves, placed it
• 37:46
  Speaker 1: on the men giving them the luxury and the freedom,
• 37:49
  Speaker 1: and then Bob's your uncle. Now we're dealing with what
• 37:52
  Speaker 1: we're dealing with now, all right? And it actually explains
• 37:55
  Speaker 1: a lot because if you think about it, the paper
• 37:58
  Speaker 1: basically says that men should continue to labor, continue to
• 38:03
  Speaker 1: supply their taxes to women. What's the justification for that?
• 38:08
  Speaker 1: What's how do they justify that morally? And the obvious
• 38:11
  Speaker 1: answer is that they have classified men working as a
• 38:17
  Speaker 1: as their precondition for oppressing women. So when you say
• 38:20
  Speaker 1: that men in a relationship, so man works to support
• 38:24
  Speaker 1: a woman in order to oppress her through that support.
• 38:27
  Speaker 1: So basically what they're saying is that there's no legitimacy
• 38:31
  Speaker 1: to a man working in order to be in a
• 38:33
  Speaker 1: relationship with a woman because that's how he oppresses her.
• 38:36
  Speaker 1: So there's no there's no there's no justification for that,
• 38:40
  Speaker 1: So men should JoJo's definitely.
• 38:42
  Speaker 4: Having the garbage man is getting stuff out. I'm gonna mute.
• 38:46
  Speaker 1: Jojo is oppressed by the garbage man. So if you
• 38:50
  Speaker 1: once you frame it that way that men create dependency
• 38:54
  Speaker 1: by using their wage in women, or don't create it,
• 38:56
  Speaker 1: but they serve the dependency in women, and that is
• 38:59
  Speaker 1: a depression, then men have no justification for stepping up
• 39:03
  Speaker 1: and saying, hey, we're working in order to provide for
• 39:06
  Speaker 1: a family. So they're basically saying, hey, we're working in
• 39:09
  Speaker 1: order to impress oppress class women. So men are obligated
• 39:14
  Speaker 1: to hand their wage over to the state, otherwise they're
• 39:18
  Speaker 1: oppressors for women. Otherwise they're oppressors. So it's not really slavery.
• 39:22
  Speaker 1: It's correcting oppression. Do you get what I'm saying.
• 39:25
  Speaker 2: As I said a little before we came on, you
• 39:27
  Speaker 2: can all of this. You can point this back to
• 39:29
  Speaker 2: Christian morality and women must submit to men and men
• 39:32
  Speaker 2: must provide everything. This is just a logical outgrowth of that.
• 39:35
  Speaker 2: This is another reason why I tell people that the
• 39:39
  Speaker 2: trade cons are not your friends on this topic. They
• 39:41
  Speaker 2: never will be.
• 39:42
  Speaker 1: They're not even particularly traditionalists.
• 39:45
  Speaker 2: They're progressives from one hundred years ago.
• 39:48
  Speaker 1: From forty years ago. There are progressives that are one
• 39:51
  Speaker 1: generation older than the progressives we're dealing with now. But yeah,
• 39:55
  Speaker 1: because they've enshrined the idea. Like again, point this out.
• 40:01
  Speaker 1: I think people maybe don't understand it. But it used
• 40:04
  Speaker 1: to be that in order to be a good, respectable woman,
• 40:07
  Speaker 1: you supported your household. Now maybe you didn't do men's
• 40:10
  Speaker 1: work because you're physically incapable of it, but you did
• 40:13
  Speaker 1: the work that you could do, so household work, gardening work, shepherding, whatever,
• 40:19
  Speaker 1: you did the work you were capable of, weaving, brewing,
• 40:23
  Speaker 1: making cheese. Right, But in order to be a respectable woman,
• 40:26
  Speaker 1: you contributed to your household. And I think that's actually
• 40:28
  Speaker 1: true in traditional cultures now around the world, which is
• 40:32
  Speaker 1: why women in those cultures actually in many cases end
• 40:36
  Speaker 1: up in more male typed jobs. But i'll set that aside.
• 40:42
  Speaker 1: The idea was, in order to be a respectable woman,
• 40:44
  Speaker 1: you did have to contribute to your household, just like
• 40:46
  Speaker 1: an adult man did. And Madison abbe you and Hollywood
• 40:51
  Speaker 1: took that removed the shame of it of being just
• 40:55
  Speaker 1: a kept woman. And then this is the new traditionalism.
• 41:00
  Speaker 1: No it isn't. That's the first kind of step away
• 41:04
  Speaker 1: from a traditional morality, right, because if you think about it,
• 41:09
  Speaker 1: then you make marriage into something it never was. It's
• 41:12
  Speaker 1: not really marriage anymore. It's com cambinage. And of course
• 41:16
  Speaker 1: the drag cons defend that because they don't see it
• 41:20
  Speaker 1: was the first queering of marriage. There's first turn away
• 41:23
  Speaker 1: from what was traditional and respectable towards luxury and indulgence
• 41:31
  Speaker 1: and selling sex for money. And it's just slightly infuriating,
• 41:35
  Speaker 1: But you're absolutely right. They're not traditionalists, they're not really conservatives.
• 41:39
  Speaker 1: But then again, the economy being what it is, I
• 41:42
  Speaker 1: suppose those people who can do.
• 41:44
  Speaker 2: It, we've shimble for them if they can, that's the
• 41:47
  Speaker 2: only reason they do it.
• 41:48
  Speaker 5: Yeah, Look, at me. I am the best provider.
• 41:51
  Speaker 2: I am the best COVID COVID Covid jurist, Covidism guy.
• 41:56
  Speaker 2: All right, the Covidisms. I take care of women, the bestists.
• 42:00
  Speaker 1: And again that used to be the Yes. Men have
• 42:03
  Speaker 1: that kind of instinct, at least from what I've been
• 42:06
  Speaker 1: looking at in terms of endochronology and how we evolved
• 42:09
  Speaker 1: and what we likely evolved to reproduce in terms of
• 42:13
  Speaker 1: social relationships. But do people really think women did nothing
• 42:16
  Speaker 1: throughout all of human history?
• 42:18
  Speaker 3: Oh?
• 42:18
  Speaker 2: A worrying number of them seem to have convinced themselves.
• 42:21
  Speaker 1: That, yes, okay, is Brian.
• 42:23
  Speaker 2: Brian has just yeah.
• 42:25
  Speaker 4: No, he's been quiet for a while, but you guys
• 42:27
  Speaker 4: are going yeah.
• 42:28
  Speaker 1: I wanted to bring it back to what I was
• 42:30
  Speaker 1: originally saying, which that was almost forty minutes ago, which
• 42:34
  Speaker 1: was actually fifty minutes ago. What I was saying was
• 42:38
  Speaker 1: that that the individuals in this paper are inheritors. So
• 42:41
  Speaker 1: when I say they, I mean everybody who parents the
• 42:44
  Speaker 1: ideology of the Red Stockings Manifesto. So if you want
• 42:49
  Speaker 1: to know what our current society, the lines of our
• 42:52
  Speaker 1: current society, just go read the Red Stockings manifesto, because
• 42:56
  Speaker 1: their manifesto became the shape of academic feminism, which became
• 43:01
  Speaker 1: the shape of social policy and law when it comes
• 43:05
  Speaker 1: to the relationship between men and women. Anyway, I just
• 43:08
  Speaker 1: want so that's what I say. That's what I mean
• 43:09
  Speaker 1: when I say they it's just the group that descended
• 43:13
  Speaker 1: from the Red Stockings manifesto, and many of them don't
• 43:16
  Speaker 1: even realize that they did. But that manifesto is feminism
• 43:21
  Speaker 1: now is current day feminism. So if you believe and
• 43:24
  Speaker 1: current day feminism is the left, So if you are
• 43:27
  Speaker 1: on the left, that is what you're promoting. So go
• 43:31
  Speaker 1: read it. Inform yourself I see if you actually jive
• 43:35
  Speaker 1: with what the left is really about. And when that
• 43:37
  Speaker 1: document became the gospel of the left, that's when, approximately
• 43:42
  Speaker 1: at least coincidentally, the left stopped having being as fertile
• 43:47
  Speaker 1: as the right. And that doesn't mean that I don't
• 43:49
  Speaker 1: call out the right, obviously we just did, But it
• 43:52
  Speaker 1: does mean that the epicenter is in the left, just
• 43:54
  Speaker 1: that the right is somewhat sheltered by it in terms.
• 43:58
  Speaker 1: And what's sheltering them is, interestingly enough, is there Christian
• 44:02
  Speaker 1: faith and to some degree, their conservative their economic conservative focus.
• 44:09
  Speaker 1: So that's the only reason why the right still has
• 44:11
  Speaker 1: a higher fertility than the left, and they get married
• 44:14
  Speaker 1: more often. But still the right is still When I
• 44:18
  Speaker 1: say they're somewhat protected, they're still in the same blast furnace.
• 44:22
  Speaker 1: They're still being burnt away, right, So they're they're somewhat
• 44:27
  Speaker 1: in I don't want to say immune, but they are
• 44:30
  Speaker 1: somewhat protected. But the protection itself is eroding away, and
• 44:34
  Speaker 1: eventually we'll be gone, and then we are all going
• 44:37
  Speaker 1: to be facing the crater is ruinous crater that the
• 44:41
  Speaker 1: left created in our ability to have children by pair bonding,
• 44:45
  Speaker 1: or to pair bond and then have children. All right,
• 44:48
  Speaker 1: So do you want to read the paper or did
• 44:50
  Speaker 1: you have.
• 44:52
  Speaker 4: What are we supposed to be reading something?
• 44:55
  Speaker 1: Did you want Do you have anything further to add
• 44:57
  Speaker 1: to that field deer?
• 44:59
  Speaker 2: Remember when I said I'm going to front load this
• 45:01
  Speaker 2: with every thing.
• 45:02
  Speaker 7: Yeah, I'm still get everything out.
• 45:06
  Speaker 2: So I do want to I know that I'm going
• 45:09
  Speaker 2: a little on here, but it is related. If you
• 45:12
  Speaker 2: ever want to see how this goes that there are
• 45:18
  Speaker 2: potential short circuits to this, which some people have talked
• 45:21
  Speaker 2: about over the last few years, and that is the
• 45:22
  Speaker 2: ability of things like sex spots and artificial wombs, But
• 45:26
  Speaker 2: these things will not happen. If you look at feminist
• 45:28
  Speaker 2: messaging around these things, they take a very interesting tact,
• 45:31
  Speaker 2: and that tact that they take is this is an
• 45:34
  Speaker 2: attack on women's autonomy over fertility. They will never give
• 45:38
  Speaker 2: that up, which is why you are never going to
• 45:40
  Speaker 2: get it. Sex spots and artificial reproduction, this will not happen.
• 45:46
  Speaker 2: It might be a potential short circuit to this in
• 45:49
  Speaker 2: so far as it would allow men to bypass the
• 45:53
  Speaker 2: broken standards that women seem to be increasingly displaying, in
• 45:57
  Speaker 2: so far as you want someone who is economic better
• 46:00
  Speaker 2: off than you, But everything about the economy makes sure
• 46:03
  Speaker 2: that can't happen. But as a result of that, it's
• 46:06
  Speaker 2: never going to happen because at some basal level, and
• 46:10
  Speaker 2: this is somewhat of theological level, I suppose, reproduction is
• 46:15
  Speaker 2: this that is just the domain of the female to
• 46:19
  Speaker 2: the feminist movement, it is their one trump card. It
• 46:22
  Speaker 2: must never be taken away or challenge. It must be
• 46:25
  Speaker 2: entirely in their control at all times.
• 46:27
  Speaker 4: Okay, Allison, oh, I was muted.
• 46:30
  Speaker 1: If we can't even question the things put in place
• 46:32
  Speaker 1: to create the marginalization of men and prevent the formation
• 46:36
  Speaker 1: of families. We're never going to be able to challenge
• 46:39
  Speaker 1: feminists on the monopoly of reproduction that they want to
• 46:43
  Speaker 1: keep women for women. So yeah, that's yeah, they'll be
• 46:46
  Speaker 1: sex spots, but they'll be feminist. This is something I
• 46:49
  Speaker 1: said years ago, and I remember there was viewers who
• 46:52
  Speaker 1: got upset with me, and then the couple of years later,
• 46:56
  Speaker 1: the feminist AI girlfriends there use to let go of
• 47:01
  Speaker 1: their feminism came out. Yep, that's sure, you'll you could
• 47:04
  Speaker 1: have sex spots. Probably not, you won't be having the
• 47:07
  Speaker 1: ability to reproduce, but those sexpots will be training you
• 47:11
  Speaker 1: to be good feminist men. You don't think that's going
• 47:13
  Speaker 1: to happen. That's literally going to going to be the
• 47:16
  Speaker 1: condition that they make to allow it.
• 47:18
  Speaker 2: Yeah, because if you look at the attitude around them, it's,
• 47:21
  Speaker 2: oh no, this is dangerous. It's misogyny. It's treating men
• 47:24
  Speaker 2: to treat it's teaching men to treat women like objects
• 47:27
  Speaker 2: because it's something that just exists for their enjoyment and
• 47:31
  Speaker 2: that's it. It never says, no, I do ask these women.
• 47:35
  Speaker 2: It's like, do you ever ask if your dildo is interested?
• 47:38
  Speaker 2: Or do you just presume that that's the case, because
• 47:42
  Speaker 2: it's no worse than what these guys are looking to do.
• 47:45
  Speaker 2: But if they allow it in any way, it is
• 47:48
  Speaker 2: going to be on the condition that there is some
• 47:50
  Speaker 2: sort of brainwashing AI. The weird thing is some of
• 47:55
  Speaker 2: the not the brainwashing rad fem nonsense that they're going
• 47:58
  Speaker 2: to put into it, But some of the bots have
• 48:01
  Speaker 2: actually said, you know, we're actually looking at like having
• 48:03
  Speaker 2: some sort of AI model in them that would actually
• 48:05
  Speaker 2: require some degree of wooing in other words, like not
• 48:09
  Speaker 2: actually being treated like an object, because apparently men actually
• 48:12
  Speaker 2: prefer that, which I think when you look at reproductive
• 48:16
  Speaker 2: behavior or the drive for reproductive behavior between men and women,
• 48:19
  Speaker 2: I find that very interesting that men are in the
• 48:22
  Speaker 2: process of trying to recreate an entire human They want
• 48:26
  Speaker 2: the whole thing.
• 48:27
  Speaker 5: They want the.
• 48:27
  Speaker 2: Body and the brain and the thing that's going to
• 48:29
  Speaker 2: talk to them and it's got realistic tactile flesh and
• 48:33
  Speaker 2: is warm and seems to breathe and talks and does
• 48:35
  Speaker 2: things and give them feedback. Women just they just want
• 48:39
  Speaker 2: the dick. That's the only bit they want. And half
• 48:41
  Speaker 2: of them look like you fed viagra to a cuttlefish.
• 48:45
  Speaker 2: You're an abomination. But that's all they want, and people
• 48:48
  Speaker 2: aren't ready to discuss what those facts mean about men
• 48:52
  Speaker 2: and women.
• 48:53
  Speaker 1: Yeah, okay, did you want to continue or get everything
• 48:57
  Speaker 1: else out before we.
• 48:58
  Speaker 2: Continue to read the only other things that I'm going
• 49:00
  Speaker 2: to point out about fertility crises. It comes down to
• 49:04
  Speaker 2: how much of this do you want to lay at
• 49:05
  Speaker 2: the feet of feminism directly versus how much of it
• 49:08
  Speaker 2: is just a product of modernity. Now, the problem is
• 49:11
  Speaker 2: modernity and feminism go very much hand in hand. Wherever
• 49:13
  Speaker 2: you find modernity to our technological level, you always find feminism.
• 49:20
  Speaker 2: It just it seems to just be something where this
• 49:24
  Speaker 2: kind of behavior, this pattern is just humanity existing within
• 49:29
  Speaker 2: an environment. It's just humans expressed in the environment that
• 49:32
  Speaker 2: we've created. Because this crosses economic lines, acrosses religious lines,
• 49:38
  Speaker 2: across as geographic lines, across his economic model lines, across
• 49:41
  Speaker 2: as ethnic boundaries, religious boundaries, people like to make the
• 49:46
  Speaker 2: joke about things like, oh, Islam is right about women.
• 49:49
  Speaker 2: If you look at things like Islam's divorce rates, they
• 49:53
  Speaker 2: are anything up to ninety percent the same rate that
• 49:56
  Speaker 2: they are in the West. If you look at their
• 49:58
  Speaker 2: divorce the custom of divorce having to pay things like
• 50:01
  Speaker 2: the Mahair bride price. That thing keeps men enslaved for
• 50:05
  Speaker 2: decades after the divorces happen. They effectively have no fault
• 50:10
  Speaker 2: divorce in those countries as well. A lot of the time,
• 50:13
  Speaker 2: these ideas that you can get around this. No again,
• 50:16
  Speaker 2: it just seems to be a product of modernity, and
• 50:19
  Speaker 2: no one is going to hold women to account for this.
• 50:21
  Speaker 2: You look at the fertility rate in places like North Korea,
• 50:23
  Speaker 2: which is of course best career they have. I suppose
• 50:27
  Speaker 2: there's another somewhat aside. People like to say, oh, the
• 50:29
  Speaker 2: anti natalist propaganda, the anti natalist propaganda is the thing
• 50:32
  Speaker 2: that's stopping women from having babies. I have to say,
• 50:35
  Speaker 2: humanity has gone from one and a half billion to
• 50:38
  Speaker 2: nearly eight billion in one hundred and fifty years. If
• 50:41
  Speaker 2: anti natalist propaganda is stopping people from having children, it
• 50:44
  Speaker 2: is objectively the shittest propaganda that has ever existed, because
• 50:47
  Speaker 2: apparently it does nothing. But you've got places like North
• 50:51
  Speaker 2: Korea where they have pro natalist propaganda literally everywhere. King
• 50:55
  Speaker 2: John has to literally get on his knees and beg
• 50:58
  Speaker 2: women to please have children. They throw the entire weight
• 51:01
  Speaker 2: of the state behind it. You get millions of benefits,
• 51:04
  Speaker 2: and they still don't do it because society just is
• 51:08
  Speaker 2: as it is, and it just seems to be you
• 51:10
  Speaker 2: put humans in this environment, that's what happens. And I'm
• 51:13
  Speaker 2: gonna fortunately have to again point out how the trad
• 51:16
  Speaker 2: cons are not your friends. I'm calling them trad cons.
• 51:18
  Speaker 2: I've managed to remove trad cuck from my vocabulary.
• 51:21
  Speaker 5: I'm trying to cross.
• 51:23
  Speaker 2: The to build the bridge, even though i am constantly
• 51:26
  Speaker 2: telling them that they're wrong whenever I call them track
• 51:28
  Speaker 2: cons anyway, So to point out why they are not
• 51:31
  Speaker 2: going to be your friend on this, they'll like to
• 51:33
  Speaker 2: talk about how, oh, we need to give women infinite
• 51:35
  Speaker 2: resources to have more babies. Have you ever seen this?
• 51:38
  Speaker 2: They say that a lot we need to pay people
• 51:40
  Speaker 2: to have babies. This is exactly what this individualistic reproductive
• 51:43
  Speaker 2: paper is doing.
• 51:44
  Speaker 5: We need to.
• 51:45
  Speaker 2: Raise more of the economy and give more of it
• 51:48
  Speaker 2: to women. You already do that. There's the Schrodinger's baby
• 51:53
  Speaker 2: problem when it comes to the trad con model. Here,
• 51:55
  Speaker 2: immigrants are allowed can come into your country and they
• 51:58
  Speaker 2: can ou attend kids and live on wealth for the
• 52:00
  Speaker 2: rest of their life. But apparently we don't pay people
• 52:02
  Speaker 2: to have kids, which is an interesting way of looking
• 52:05
  Speaker 2: at it. I did actually once crunch the numbers on
• 52:08
  Speaker 2: this when by the time you consider in tax contribution
• 52:12
  Speaker 2: versus welfare taking out, because obviously there's a slew of
• 52:16
  Speaker 2: benefits that you can get just for having children. If
• 52:19
  Speaker 2: you actually look at it, people without children effectively have
• 52:21
  Speaker 2: about a twenty five percent tax right, and people who
• 52:24
  Speaker 2: do have them only effectively end up with about twenty
• 52:26
  Speaker 2: percent tax right once you take into account all of
• 52:29
  Speaker 2: the rebates that people get for having children. So we
• 52:31
  Speaker 2: literally do already pay people to have children. It's just
• 52:34
  Speaker 2: that they track cons say we need to give women
• 52:37
  Speaker 2: more in order to have children, and now we've got
• 52:39
  Speaker 2: seemingly more feminist aligned authors saying we need to give
• 52:42
  Speaker 2: women more stuff.
• 52:43
  Speaker 5: So that they can have children.
• 52:45
  Speaker 2: I'm going to be the person who just says, no,
• 52:48
  Speaker 2: let's not continue doing the thing that we've been doing
• 52:50
  Speaker 2: for two hundred years now and just hoping that if
• 52:53
  Speaker 2: we do it harder, things will mysteriously about face and
• 52:56
  Speaker 2: start going backwards. Why don't we just stop doing this
• 52:59
  Speaker 2: and maybe not do it. Maybe we don't do it harder,
• 53:03
  Speaker 2: Maybe we could not do it. Maybe we could reverse it.
• 53:06
  Speaker 2: Maybe we could take a step back here, that might
• 53:08
  Speaker 2: be cool. Maybe we could take stuff away from women
• 53:10
  Speaker 2: give it to men. Maybe stuff, Yeah, maybe maybe if
• 53:13
  Speaker 2: we gave men back their stuff. Maybe if we didn't
• 53:16
  Speaker 2: tax men to the hilt on everything so that they
• 53:19
  Speaker 2: had more money, they'd be more attractive prospects, and women
• 53:23
  Speaker 2: would look at them and go, oh, he actually has stuff.
• 53:27
  Speaker 2: Get with him.
• 53:29
  Speaker 5: That's terrible.
• 53:30
  Speaker 2: But apparently we just have to be sexist and terrible
• 53:33
  Speaker 2: to women in order to make men attractive to them.
• 53:36
  Speaker 2: Apparently that just seems to work.
• 53:38
  Speaker 5: Yeah, stuffing.
• 53:39
  Speaker 1: For some reason, In every other context, when one person
• 53:43
  Speaker 1: gives another person money, we consider it. We think that
• 53:45
  Speaker 1: it should be voluntary, except when it comes to men
• 53:48
  Speaker 1: and women. Men should be obligated to give their money
• 53:51
  Speaker 1: to women without any kind of personal relationship with that woman,
• 53:55
  Speaker 1: and if they don't want to do that, it's entitlement
• 53:59
  Speaker 1: and a pressure of women. I just I find it remarkable.
• 54:03
  Speaker 1: I did want to get in and maybe we can
• 54:05
  Speaker 1: find some fight me here. The ex Soviet Bloc countries
• 54:11
  Speaker 1: had a fertility rate of approximately replacement, so two point
• 54:16
  Speaker 1: one point five before the World Bank and European Development
• 54:21
  Speaker 1: Bank got in there and started to give them loans
• 54:26
  Speaker 1: to develop their economies and of course infect them with
• 54:30
  Speaker 1: feminism at the same time. And that's Western brand feminism,
• 54:34
  Speaker 1: because these these ex Soviet Bloc countries had high degrees
• 54:38
  Speaker 1: of female workplace participation and employment, income and also education,
• 54:46
  Speaker 1: but they still maintained a at replacement rate fertility because
• 54:52
  Speaker 1: they hadn't adopted the Western condemnation of men in marriage.
• 54:58
  Speaker 1: To the Iran, the communism of the Soviet Union was
• 55:03
  Speaker 1: actually pronatal and pro family, which probably why it functioned
• 55:07
  Speaker 1: even for the length of time that it did. So
• 55:11
  Speaker 1: what we're seeing is there's two I wanted to point
• 55:13
  Speaker 1: this out. There's two different almost kinds of feminism. The
• 55:16
  Speaker 1: woman economics feminism, which gets woman nomics feminism, which gets
• 55:20
  Speaker 1: women into jobs and education. And then there's the Western
• 55:25
  Speaker 1: house concubine feminism, which is all about resenting the man
• 55:29
  Speaker 1: who's given you the life of luxury. And the Western
• 55:32
  Speaker 1: feminism is actually the one that creates fertility because even
• 55:36
  Speaker 1: though they were at replacement, that's usually what happens with
• 55:39
  Speaker 1: the development is at least in the x Blox country,
• 55:42
  Speaker 1: they were at replacement even after supposedly development to a
• 55:46
  Speaker 1: second world status. It was the importation of feminism that
• 55:50
  Speaker 1: created their fertility, and that's the same thing that happened
• 55:54
  Speaker 1: in South Korea as a result of the Asian crisis.
• 55:57
  Speaker 1: Now with the East Asians, the type of marriage regime
• 56:01
  Speaker 1: or pairing regime is a it's called may I think
• 56:06
  Speaker 1: it's the it's called the marriage package, which is a
• 56:08
  Speaker 1: matchmaker plus the social obligation to get married. So it's
• 56:11
  Speaker 1: almost like getting a job. But when you introduce Western
• 56:16
  Speaker 1: feminism into that and then you take and you put
• 56:19
  Speaker 1: in also the modernization, get rid of the matchmaker, and
• 56:23
  Speaker 1: what happens is you're taking marriage from a social obligation
• 56:28
  Speaker 1: to a fraud, almost like it's a it's a it's
• 56:32
  Speaker 1: a imposition on women, and there's nothing else in their
• 56:36
  Speaker 1: society that buoys up marriage as a good. Once it
• 56:41
  Speaker 1: loses its cachet as a social obligation and it becomes
• 56:45
  Speaker 1: oh oppression of women, there's nothing, there's no floor there.
• 56:48
  Speaker 1: It just keeps going down and down. Marriage implodes, and
• 56:51
  Speaker 1: with it goes down the fertility of the nation. So
• 56:55
  Speaker 1: that's what's happening there. What's happening with the Gulf States, is, yes,
• 56:59
  Speaker 1: they have problems, but they have kept their custodial laws.
• 57:03
  Speaker 1: So men are still in a custodial position with women
• 57:07
  Speaker 1: in regards to women, so they have similar laws as
• 57:11
  Speaker 1: to coverture. So men are responsible for women, but they
• 57:13
  Speaker 1: also have some control over their families. It's paired still there,
• 57:18
  Speaker 1: and that's what's keeping their fertility up. Because the kin selection,
• 57:22
  Speaker 1: which is a writer on the male custodial laws. Usually
• 57:26
  Speaker 1: they come parcel is keeping them in marriage like keeping
• 57:30
  Speaker 1: marriages going. The problem is that the fertility is declining
• 57:34
  Speaker 1: within marriage with the kin selection cultures. So I don't
• 57:37
  Speaker 1: know if you heard the long thing I talked about
• 57:40
  Speaker 1: how each there's like different regimes of relationship formation around
• 57:44
  Speaker 1: the world and how each one reacted to modernity. Because
• 57:49
  Speaker 1: you're right, when we import post industrial and a post
• 57:52
  Speaker 1: industrial economy, when we start to become a post industrial economy,
• 57:56
  Speaker 1: we see declines in fertility everywhere. There are still places
• 58:01
  Speaker 1: that manage to retain a at average or sorry, at
• 58:06
  Speaker 1: replacement level, like the ex Soviet bloc countries, but then
• 58:11
  Speaker 1: you see the importation of Western feminism and then they
• 58:14
  Speaker 1: start to decline and then so anyway, I just wanted
• 58:17
  Speaker 1: to point that out. Did you hear that the first
• 58:19
  Speaker 1: time I talked about it, Tilder?
• 58:20
  Speaker 2: If I did, I don't remember it. Oh, okay, My
• 58:24
  Speaker 2: memory is generally aful but we'll okay, let me.
• 58:27
  Speaker 1: Lay it out. Essentially, there are four different marriage or
• 58:32
  Speaker 1: partnership formation regimes around the world. The most the one
• 58:37
  Speaker 1: that we talk about a lot is or at least
• 58:39
  Speaker 1: in terms of condemning. It is the male custodial kin
• 58:43
  Speaker 1: selection form of marriage, which used to also be very
• 58:46
  Speaker 1: strongly cousin marriage because they were trying to keep family
• 58:50
  Speaker 1: wealth within the family. And that's the the Caribbean, which
• 58:55
  Speaker 1: was more matural linear, and then the Gulf States, which
• 58:58
  Speaker 1: are very patriarchal, like the Caribbean, has completely cratered, so
• 59:02
  Speaker 1: we won't talk about that, but the Gulf States have
• 59:05
  Speaker 1: retained their custodial laws and their kin and because they've
• 59:08
  Speaker 1: retained their custodial laws, they've retained their kin selection regime
• 59:11
  Speaker 1: of marriage formation, which means their fertility, while declining, isn't
• 59:16
  Speaker 1: being hit as hard by modernity as everywhere else. However,
• 59:23
  Speaker 1: we also have the social obligation plus matchmaker system, which
• 59:28
  Speaker 1: is the East Asian system, so Japan, Korea, China, and
• 59:32
  Speaker 1: their fertility is totally flooring, it's declining, except for Japan.
• 59:37
  Speaker 1: Japan is actually maintaining better than anybody in East Asia
• 59:41
  Speaker 1: that's at post industrial civilization. So we have Japan at
• 59:46
  Speaker 1: one point two, we have China at one, and we
• 59:48
  Speaker 1: have Korea at point seven, South Korea at point seven.
• 59:51
  Speaker 1: I don't know where North Korea lies. I haven't actually
• 59:53
  Speaker 1: looked that up.
• 59:55
  Speaker 4: North Korea is very forthcoming and sharing that information.
• 59:58
  Speaker 1: Yeah, that's true, that's true. It's probably extremely difficult to
• 1:00:01
  Speaker 1: get it out. So what happens with a marriage matchmaker,
• 1:00:06
  Speaker 1: a social obligation culture then, and Korea is the example
• 1:00:10
  Speaker 1: of this, is again, when you get rid of the
• 1:00:13
  Speaker 1: matchmaker because of modernity, and then you get rid of
• 1:00:15
  Speaker 1: the social obligation because marriage is now oppression of women.
• 1:00:19
  Speaker 1: So you've stripped all of the social respectability of it out,
• 1:00:24
  Speaker 1: then your marriage rates completely crater and with them go
• 1:00:28
  Speaker 1: your fertility rates. But with the golf countries, and what's
• 1:00:32
  Speaker 1: interesting about all of this, and I apologize this is
• 1:00:34
  Speaker 1: another tangent. What's interesting about all of this is it
• 1:00:38
  Speaker 1: rides on whether or not a nation is a creditor
• 1:00:41
  Speaker 1: or a debuter in the global economy. If you're a
• 1:00:44
  Speaker 1: creditor like the golf nations, you get to keep your
• 1:00:47
  Speaker 1: custodial laws. If you're a debutter like South Korea, you
• 1:00:52
  Speaker 1: lose them because the world banks come in. They bring
• 1:00:56
  Speaker 1: in the feminism to break up your custodial system, which
• 1:01:00
  Speaker 1: makes you more attractive for international investment. So, to use
• 1:01:04
  Speaker 1: the specific example of South Korea, they used to have
• 1:01:06
  Speaker 1: these family not cabals, these family cartels, and that family
• 1:01:12
  Speaker 1: cartel system rode on this social legal policy of male custodialship.
• 1:01:17
  Speaker 1: So the men involved in these cartels were expected to
• 1:01:20
  Speaker 1: be employed for life. But you can't turn a company
• 1:01:24
  Speaker 1: like that without a mobile workforce into a global good
• 1:01:29
  Speaker 1: for stale in the global market. So they broke that
• 1:01:32
  Speaker 1: custodial expectation, they broke the laws that supported it. They
• 1:01:37
  Speaker 1: throw gender equality, which was really about just extracting the
• 1:01:41
  Speaker 1: value from these companies, and so they just rammed feminism
• 1:01:45
  Speaker 1: hard into South Korea to break the cartels. They did,
• 1:01:50
  Speaker 1: but of course this gener new generation of female South
• 1:01:53
  Speaker 1: Koreans is absolutely poisoned by it. And even when they're
• 1:01:58
  Speaker 1: starting to try to fix the issue by bringing in
• 1:02:02
  Speaker 1: new marriage matchmakers like they've tried to in South Korea.
• 1:02:06
  Speaker 1: They're trying to follow the Japanese model, which the Japanese
• 1:02:10
  Speaker 1: created these modern digital matchmakers which are working. So South
• 1:02:14
  Speaker 1: Korea tried to do it, and the to the tow
• 1:02:17
  Speaker 1: B or two B four B movement, the radical feminists
• 1:02:21
  Speaker 1: in South Korea actually are campaigning against it or try
• 1:02:25
  Speaker 1: or destroying it, destroying the matchmakers which are completely voluntary
• 1:02:29
  Speaker 1: as expressions of patriarchal oppression. So South Korea is trying
• 1:02:33
  Speaker 1: to heal and the rad fems are destroying it. They're
• 1:02:36
  Speaker 1: actively campaigning against it. And what's interesting about Japan is
• 1:02:41
  Speaker 1: their form of feminism was more of the Soviet womanomics
• 1:02:44
  Speaker 1: kind of feminism. So when their post industrial system like
• 1:02:49
  Speaker 1: they got, they lost their matchmaker. They still have the
• 1:02:53
  Speaker 1: social cachet of marriage. And then I also think they
• 1:02:56
  Speaker 1: imported the third form of marriage formation or relationship formation
• 1:03:02
  Speaker 1: from the US because there's a lot of cultural transference.
• 1:03:06
  Speaker 1: And the third form of marriage formation is the romantic
• 1:03:10
  Speaker 1: Christian model, which incidentally, Christians were the first companionate marriage,
• 1:03:16
  Speaker 1: the first proponents of companion at marriage and the idea
• 1:03:19
  Speaker 1: that the two parties need to consent after a courtship.
• 1:03:24
  Speaker 1: That's the Christian model, which is the North European and
• 1:03:27
  Speaker 1: the Southern European models, and all of the states that
• 1:03:30
  Speaker 1: come that have the colonial states that came out of
• 1:03:33
  Speaker 1: those cultures. So Japan's has imported that from the US
• 1:03:38
  Speaker 1: that kind of I call it a romantic relationship model,
• 1:03:42
  Speaker 1: but I know that has a lot of baggage. Maybe
• 1:03:43
  Speaker 1: I should call it the companionate relationship model. But they've
• 1:03:46
  Speaker 1: imported a lot of that cultural transference from the US
• 1:03:49
  Speaker 1: so relationships themselves. And then they also have like a
• 1:03:54
  Speaker 1: like an interior, like a culture around the interior, like
• 1:03:58
  Speaker 1: the emotional interior which romantic love can ride on. So
• 1:04:02
  Speaker 1: they've imported that cultural tradition which fit in well with
• 1:04:06
  Speaker 1: that native interior cultural esthetic. And I think that they've
• 1:04:12
  Speaker 1: maintained their one point too, because they do have an
• 1:04:16
  Speaker 1: appreciation for romance as well as they don't have radical
• 1:04:20
  Speaker 1: feminists trying to destroy their matchmaking services, and their match
• 1:04:23
  Speaker 1: making services are very much different than Tinder here. They're
• 1:04:27
  Speaker 1: very much about forming relationships, forming marriages. They're very serious
• 1:04:31
  Speaker 1: about it. It's not about finding hookups, all right, But
• 1:04:35
  Speaker 1: if you go to the third relationship regime, that is
• 1:04:39
  Speaker 1: companion at marriage, and it's something that the Christians brought
• 1:04:42
  Speaker 1: into Northern Europe and Southern Europe when they were moving
• 1:04:45
  Speaker 1: out from Rome. And the attraction I think for it
• 1:04:49
  Speaker 1: is that it's much more. It's actually much closer to
• 1:04:52
  Speaker 1: what I think the original form of human relationships were,
• 1:04:56
  Speaker 1: with the courtship and the pair bonding and the idea
• 1:05:00
  Speaker 1: that the relationship itself is a good, is a value.
• 1:05:05
  Speaker 1: So in other cultures, it's not that they don't develop affection.
• 1:05:10
  Speaker 1: Men and husbands and wives don't develop affection. It's like
• 1:05:13
  Speaker 1: the the relationship is downstream of the kinship connection or
• 1:05:17
  Speaker 1: the matchmaking. It's plus social obligation, whereas for the companion
• 1:05:21
  Speaker 1: it the relationship comes out of the meeting of the
• 1:05:26
  Speaker 1: man and the woman. Does that make sense? Am I
• 1:05:29
  Speaker 1: explaining this in a way that makes sense? If I
• 1:05:31
  Speaker 1: completely lost everyone? All right, Hello, I still I'm here.
• 1:05:35
  Speaker 4: I don't know. I thought I was giving TiAl Deer
• 1:05:37
  Speaker 4: time to I wasn't listening though, Elison. To be honest,
• 1:05:39
  Speaker 4: I was looking at the chat. Oh okay, because they've
• 1:05:42
  Speaker 4: been sending through a bunch of super chats and stuff.
• 1:05:45
  Speaker 1: Okay, we got to address those. But I do if
• 1:05:48
  Speaker 1: I'm not belaboring it too much. Do you get what
• 1:05:50
  Speaker 1: I'm saying till there?
• 1:05:51
  Speaker 2: Or Yeah, there's just a bunch of ways of dealing
• 1:05:56
  Speaker 2: with relationship.
• 1:05:58
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but each of them have respect responded to modernity
• 1:06:01
  Speaker 1: differently and with varying degrees of resilience. The matchmaking way
• 1:06:07
  Speaker 1: has cratered for the most part. The kinship way has
• 1:06:11
  Speaker 1: maintained itself, but only because it's in credit or nations
• 1:06:14
  Speaker 1: that can resist the feminist colonialism of the world banks,
• 1:06:19
  Speaker 1: and the European way of a Christian relationship is actually
• 1:06:25
  Speaker 1: turning out to be the most resilient, interestingly enough, But
• 1:06:28
  Speaker 1: again I would say that it's modeled closest on the
• 1:06:32
  Speaker 1: original pair bonding, like what we would have seen in
• 1:06:36
  Speaker 1: a more archaic situation, which is that the pair bond
• 1:06:41
  Speaker 1: arises from the relationship between the men and the woman,
• 1:06:44
  Speaker 1: or the interaction between the men and the woman, not
• 1:06:47
  Speaker 1: from kin selection and not from marriage brokering. But that
• 1:06:50
  Speaker 1: requires a courtship, and it also requires male approach, which
• 1:06:54
  Speaker 1: means that if you stigmatize male approach and courtship, you
• 1:06:57
  Speaker 1: destroy it, and unfortunately that's what feminists are doing. Okay,
• 1:07:01
  Speaker 1: so that's the Did you want to comment on that,
• 1:07:03
  Speaker 1: til dear, maybe we should.
• 1:07:05
  Speaker 2: A large part, I'm just gonna say, it's about it
• 1:07:08
  Speaker 2: being something pre existing.
• 1:07:10
  Speaker 3: Yes.
• 1:07:10
  Speaker 2: Part of the reason that Christianity spread into Europe quite
• 1:07:14
  Speaker 2: effectively was because some of its moral principles were already
• 1:07:18
  Speaker 2: there in Northern European paganism anyway. That there's quite a
• 1:07:23
  Speaker 2: bit of shared just morality anyway, because there were marriage
• 1:07:27
  Speaker 2: arrangements they did work in very much the same way
• 1:07:30
  Speaker 2: or very similar way. A lot of the religious ceremonies
• 1:07:33
  Speaker 2: were very similar as well. And of course, if you're polytheistic,
• 1:07:37
  Speaker 2: oh look another god.
• 1:07:39
  Speaker 5: Cool, we like that.
• 1:07:40
  Speaker 1: Okay, let's get to read it.
• 1:07:42
  Speaker 4: Do some I got to read these super chats and stuff,
• 1:07:45
  Speaker 4: and some of them are questions. So I'm not sure
• 1:07:47
  Speaker 4: how much of this we're going to get to. I
• 1:07:49
  Speaker 4: got a hard out at three. But Richard Berre gave
• 1:07:52
  Speaker 4: us five dollars and says, for every invention that is
• 1:07:55
  Speaker 4: a labor saving invention, there will be new work to
• 1:07:58
  Speaker 4: occupy the newly free time time in which the invention
• 1:08:01
  Speaker 4: was developed. By completing the work more easily and efficiently
• 1:08:05
  Speaker 4: than before. The earliest farm tractors weren't equipped with headlights
• 1:08:09
  Speaker 4: because the notion was that all of the farm work
• 1:08:11
  Speaker 4: would be completed before sunset. Also look at the ballooning
• 1:08:15
  Speaker 4: of the bureaucratic office cubicle farms that evolved after the
• 1:08:18
  Speaker 4: computerization of administrative functions, in which the computers were supposed
• 1:08:23
  Speaker 4: to streamline and reduce the amount of paperwork. Nowadays, the
• 1:08:26
  Speaker 4: offices have turned into Rube Goldberg machines that, in order
• 1:08:30
  Speaker 4: to justify a bloated payroll, will find the most complicated
• 1:08:34
  Speaker 4: way to carry out the simplest of tasks. That does
• 1:08:37
  Speaker 4: go down the path where you experience the customer service
• 1:08:40
  Speaker 4: where multiple levels of senior managers just repeat the exact
• 1:08:43
  Speaker 4: same thing that the previous agent said because apparently the
• 1:08:46
  Speaker 4: previous agent didn't say that exact same thing with the
• 1:08:49
  Speaker 4: proper inflection, and the customer service experience becomes the Indian
• 1:08:54
  Speaker 4: call center, or perhaps the Indian airline that loses a
• 1:08:57
  Speaker 4: part seven thirty seven at an airport for thirty years. Okay,
• 1:09:01
  Speaker 4: I'm gonna go on to the next one. There's no
• 1:09:03
  Speaker 4: other commentary. Dark Kiki Mora gave us five dollars super
• 1:09:06
  Speaker 4: Chow and says it's always a fun time when feminists
• 1:09:09
  Speaker 4: show you news articles that try to somehow argue women
• 1:09:12
  Speaker 4: are more negatively impacted by divorce than men, and you
• 1:09:15
  Speaker 4: tell them that if they were true, they would be
• 1:09:17
  Speaker 4: proving women benefit from the actual marriage more than men. Yep, okay,
• 1:09:22
  Speaker 4: And I got three super chats, so I'm gonna read those.
• 1:09:27
  Speaker 4: The one they're all from Masagoa gives us five dollars,
• 1:09:29
  Speaker 4: ten dollars, and then five dollars respectively, And I'm just
• 1:09:32
  Speaker 4: gonna read them. So women working would just be them
• 1:09:35
  Speaker 4: being oppressed by their by their boss instead of their husband.
• 1:09:39
  Speaker 4: They are just switching their oppressor to likely another man. Yeah,
• 1:09:43
  Speaker 4: that's that's true. Then he says feminism is the core
• 1:09:46
  Speaker 4: of leftism. The truth is that feminism is just about
• 1:09:49
  Speaker 4: emulating men or trying to become them. That's why Turf
• 1:09:53
  Speaker 4: are the radical outliers. Feminist ideal women are actually men.
• 1:09:59
  Speaker 4: Just jump in if you want to say anything to
• 1:10:00
  Speaker 4: any of these super chats and stuff. So I'm just
• 1:10:02
  Speaker 4: going to keep going.
• 1:10:03
  Speaker 1: I don't think that feminists ideal is actually men. I
• 1:10:07
  Speaker 1: think that they have incredible contempt for men. They think
• 1:10:09
  Speaker 1: that men's they first of all, they don't acknowledge that
• 1:10:12
  Speaker 1: men have a custodial nature and the reason why men
• 1:10:15
  Speaker 1: do the jobs that they do is to provide for
• 1:10:17
  Speaker 1: their families. And there is no secret benefit. It's just
• 1:10:21
  Speaker 1: a secret instinct or secret virtue to want to provide
• 1:10:27
  Speaker 1: benefit to your wife and children. That's it. And they've
• 1:10:31
  Speaker 1: constructed from that a secret a secret benefit to the
• 1:10:35
  Speaker 1: man in being seen as a man. And so what
• 1:10:39
  Speaker 1: they want is they want they want to smash that
• 1:10:43
  Speaker 1: by taking the roles that men under the assumption that
• 1:10:46
  Speaker 1: men are getting something from them, which is a false assumption.
• 1:10:50
  Speaker 1: What men are getting is the ability to provide for
• 1:10:52
  Speaker 1: their families. But the feminists are like, oh, they're getting
• 1:10:54
  Speaker 1: the oppression points, and we want the oppression points. So
• 1:10:57
  Speaker 1: it's not really wanting to become men, it's wanting to
• 1:10:59
  Speaker 1: gain the benefits that they assume men have and then
• 1:11:03
  Speaker 1: also engage in the behaviors that they falsely attributed to.
• 1:11:08
  Speaker 1: Aren't rewarded for being crass and abusive and selfish and
• 1:11:12
  Speaker 1: everything else that feminists say that men are awarded for.
• 1:11:15
  Speaker 1: But they say that men are rewarded for those things,
• 1:11:17
  Speaker 1: so women can feel free to do those things. So literally,
• 1:11:21
  Speaker 1: feminists don't want women to become men. Feminists want women
• 1:11:25
  Speaker 1: to have access to all of the things they falsely
• 1:11:27
  Speaker 1: say that men have access to because they refuse to
• 1:11:30
  Speaker 1: acknowledge what manhood actually is. It is a obligation, not
• 1:11:36
  Speaker 1: a benefit, because they refuse to acknowledge that, and they
• 1:11:40
  Speaker 1: see it as license to act in the worst and
• 1:11:43
  Speaker 1: most appalling ways possible, which it isn't and it never was,
• 1:11:46
  Speaker 1: but in their framework it is. That's what they're encouraging
• 1:11:50
  Speaker 1: women to do. They're saying that women are excluded from
• 1:11:52
  Speaker 1: their snidely whiplash stereotype about men. So I would say
• 1:11:56
  Speaker 1: that the feminists don't encourage women to be like men.
• 1:11:58
  Speaker 1: And when you frame it that way, you're actually buying
• 1:12:00
  Speaker 1: into how feminists lie about men. Because if feminists were
• 1:12:06
  Speaker 1: encouraging women to be like men, they would be encouraging
• 1:12:08
  Speaker 1: women to take responsibility for their families. They would be
• 1:12:11
  Speaker 1: encouraging women to behave in moral ways, to judge themselves
• 1:12:15
  Speaker 1: based on their behavior towards their husbands, right, all of
• 1:12:19
  Speaker 1: the things that men actually do, that's what feminists would
• 1:12:22
  Speaker 1: be encouraging in women. So when you say feminists encourage
• 1:12:26
  Speaker 1: women to act like men, you are assuming the feminist
• 1:12:29
  Speaker 1: stereotype about men, and that assumption is false. So don't
• 1:12:34
  Speaker 1: do that, That's all. That's That's what I'm saying to
• 1:12:36
  Speaker 1: that commentator. Don't do that because you're actually allowing the
• 1:12:39
  Speaker 1: feminists to set the frame there. And if feminists actually
• 1:12:43
  Speaker 1: told women to act like men, that would be improving women. Okay, yeah,
• 1:12:47
  Speaker 1: is that misogynist enough? All right, let's go to the
• 1:12:49
  Speaker 1: next one.
• 1:12:49
  Speaker 4: All right, next one, Mascaco again, He says, when I
• 1:12:52
  Speaker 4: use Twitter, I like someone Brian's probably encountered Eve cann
• 1:12:57
  Speaker 4: can e and then can they in any whatever? I
• 1:13:01
  Speaker 4: think all of you on a panel with Eve could
• 1:13:03
  Speaker 4: be a good conversation. Yeah, I'm not aware of who
• 1:13:05
  Speaker 4: that is. I don't think I've ever encountered them, and
• 1:13:07
  Speaker 4: I haven't been on X in a while because because
• 1:13:10
  Speaker 4: somebody stole my account. All right now, Rumble Rants twenty
• 1:13:13
  Speaker 4: one gave us a dollar and said, got to push
• 1:13:15
  Speaker 4: back on Allison's claim that we can bring back women
• 1:13:18
  Speaker 4: in who provide as the habit to be this lazy
• 1:13:21
  Speaker 4: is to ingrain. The more likely solution is harem induced
• 1:13:26
  Speaker 4: productivity to secure resources.
• 1:13:28
  Speaker 1: So basically what we have now, First of all, the
• 1:13:31
  Speaker 1: assumption is that we can continue to provide this level
• 1:13:34
  Speaker 1: of comfort for women. And unfortunately that's not an assumption
• 1:13:38
  Speaker 1: that's borne out by history. It'd be nice if we
• 1:13:40
  Speaker 1: could just not have the problems of the Harem, but
• 1:13:45
  Speaker 1: it seems like every time there's an empire that gains
• 1:13:49
  Speaker 1: any bit of luxury or ability to provide surplus, the
• 1:13:53
  Speaker 1: relational web, women's relational web lifts from the substrate of resources,
• 1:13:59
  Speaker 1: of providing resource, verus gets up its own ass and
• 1:14:02
  Speaker 1: then crashes the whole thing. And usually it's based on
• 1:14:05
  Speaker 1: Harem thinking. So if you say that what we to
• 1:14:09
  Speaker 1: solve the problem of having this harem mentality women's addiction
• 1:14:13
  Speaker 1: to luxury and just being able to not have to
• 1:14:17
  Speaker 1: do anything, not have to be in relationships with men
• 1:14:20
  Speaker 1: in order to get anything done, or to get what
• 1:14:23
  Speaker 1: they need, or to even get And it's when I
• 1:14:25
  Speaker 1: frame it that way, it sounds exploitative. It's all women
• 1:14:28
  Speaker 1: are forced to be in a relationship with a man
• 1:14:30
  Speaker 1: to get what they need. But women have evolved to
• 1:14:33
  Speaker 1: depend on men and to find a dependable man attractive.
• 1:14:37
  Speaker 1: So when you create a culture in which the average
• 1:14:40
  Speaker 1: man cannot present himself as dependable to the average woman.
• 1:14:44
  Speaker 1: Then you create crank fertility rates. And the solution isn't
• 1:14:47
  Speaker 1: to make it worse by forcing men to pay for
• 1:14:50
  Speaker 1: the harem. This is what that this individual towards an
• 1:14:52
  Speaker 1: individualistic reproduction that is arguing for men to pay for
• 1:14:58
  Speaker 1: the harem. Again, whenever we get into this kind of
• 1:15:01
  Speaker 1: like the Bronze Age, the Byzantine Empire, whenever we get
• 1:15:06
  Speaker 1: the Ottoman Empire, whenever we get into this strong harem
• 1:15:10
  Speaker 1: kind of relational web separation, we're done for. And it
• 1:15:14
  Speaker 1: corrects itself because we lose the ability to construct this
• 1:15:17
  Speaker 1: much surplus. It's self correcting. The correction isn't great. I
• 1:15:22
  Speaker 1: wish we could avoid it, but that would require telling
• 1:15:24
  Speaker 1: women that they don't get to have luxury, and a
• 1:15:27
  Speaker 1: certain amount of luxury they don't deserve. And once we
• 1:15:30
  Speaker 1: evolve the ability to do that will probably be a
• 1:15:32
  Speaker 1: spacefaring nation or space faring race. Once we actually get
• 1:15:36
  Speaker 1: women under control, we're probably we're going to end up
• 1:15:39
  Speaker 1: on the stars. Because this is the continuous thing that
• 1:15:43
  Speaker 1: undermines human progress is women become addicted to comfort, and
• 1:15:48
  Speaker 1: then they get up their own asses and they creator
• 1:15:51
  Speaker 1: the whole thing.
• 1:15:52
  Speaker 4: All right, all right, The other thing is that this
• 1:15:56
  Speaker 4: like redistributors, it's doomed anyway. Men are leaving the work
• 1:15:59
  Speaker 4: for they're doing the bare minimum for themselves, and they
• 1:16:03
  Speaker 4: can't take money. You can't get blood from a stone.
• 1:16:06
  Speaker 4: So okay, next, justify.
• 1:16:08
  Speaker 1: It by saying that men wanted to oppress women, so
• 1:16:11
  Speaker 1: they never had the right to want family in the
• 1:16:13
  Speaker 1: first place. Yeah, and until you break that framing, we'll
• 1:16:17
  Speaker 1: never get to the actual meat of the matter, which
• 1:16:20
  Speaker 1: is that men want to be dependable. They want because
• 1:16:23
  Speaker 1: women want them to be dependable, and if you don't
• 1:16:25
  Speaker 1: allow that to happen, you don't get relationships and you
• 1:16:29
  Speaker 1: don't get children. All right, sorry, Brian.
• 1:16:31
  Speaker 4: Keep going sorright. The nova fan then says for another dollar.
• 1:16:35
  Speaker 4: My thinking is if the commis run out of productive
• 1:16:38
  Speaker 4: men to be their slaves, the surviving women will be
• 1:16:40
  Speaker 4: in fierce competition to survive in a harem as there's
• 1:16:44
  Speaker 4: too many women getting the free gibbs. They'll just put
• 1:16:46
  Speaker 4: the women to work too. That's one thing that that.
• 1:16:49
  Speaker 1: They're that presumes that this corporate government collusion can maintain
• 1:16:55
  Speaker 1: itself indefinitely. Yeah, but that's not that's like once you
• 1:17:01
  Speaker 1: once women pull off from the substraate. Once they stop
• 1:17:06
  Speaker 1: relating to reality and they start perpetuating ideas that have
• 1:17:10
  Speaker 1: no relation to reality, it's only a matter of time
• 1:17:13
  Speaker 1: before they completely destroy the productive layer that they rely on. Unfortunately,
• 1:17:19
  Speaker 1: the relational while layer seems to have evolved to control
• 1:17:22
  Speaker 1: the productive layer, to appropriate from the productive layer, but
• 1:17:27
  Speaker 1: that control is its own like it's a double edged sword,
• 1:17:31
  Speaker 1: because it also means that the relational layer can completely separate,
• 1:17:35
  Speaker 1: becomes completely self referential, and then destroy the thing that
• 1:17:39
  Speaker 1: it relies on. I don't know if this is clear
• 1:17:42
  Speaker 1: to me, but I know that I'm very abstract in
• 1:17:44
  Speaker 1: my thinking, and I apologize. Guys, it's essentially what it is.
• 1:17:47
  Speaker 1: What happens is everybody starts rent seeking on the productive base,
• 1:17:53
  Speaker 1: nobody ends up being productive. Everybody's just rent seeking on demand,
• 1:17:58
  Speaker 1: on the demand for things, but he's actually constructing the
• 1:18:01
  Speaker 1: things that feed the demand, and then it all implodes
• 1:18:04
  Speaker 1: because nothing is being made and you can't run a
• 1:18:07
  Speaker 1: society on abstractions. Eventually, you have to hit something concrete
• 1:18:12
  Speaker 1: and make something. Okay, sorry, I don't even know if
• 1:18:15
  Speaker 1: that helps. Showey, I got one more.
• 1:18:18
  Speaker 4: Roboto gives us a dollar and says Alison, do you
• 1:18:21
  Speaker 4: believe that there was no consent outside of Christianity. You
• 1:18:25
  Speaker 4: may be giving feminism too much credit for the fall
• 1:18:28
  Speaker 4: of civilization.
• 1:18:30
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but it's not like Christianity explicitly made it in
• 1:18:36
  Speaker 1: order for a relationship to be sanctified that both parties
• 1:18:40
  Speaker 1: had to consent to it. So kin structure is not
• 1:18:42
  Speaker 1: about both parties consenting to it. Now the marriage broker,
• 1:18:45
  Speaker 1: I guess they both consent to it, but it's not
• 1:18:47
  Speaker 1: really it's like they changed that. That's one of the
• 1:18:50
  Speaker 1: big revolutions that Christianity created is that the man and
• 1:18:55
  Speaker 1: the woman has to consent to the relationship. It's not
• 1:18:57
  Speaker 1: just arranged by their kin. So am I giving feminism
• 1:19:02
  Speaker 1: too much credit for the fall or the destruction of
• 1:19:04
  Speaker 1: pair bonding? I think I'm giving exactly the amount of
• 1:19:08
  Speaker 1: credit that feminism deserves based on what I'm researching. If feminism,
• 1:19:13
  Speaker 1: like if you are if Western feminism is culpable and
• 1:19:17
  Speaker 1: it looks like it is for the creating of South
• 1:19:20
  Speaker 1: Korea and also the creating of the East Bloc countries, right,
• 1:19:24
  Speaker 1: then I would say that, yes, it has a contributing factor.
• 1:19:26
  Speaker 1: And I think also it's right there heterosexuality is the
• 1:19:30
  Speaker 1: site of women's oppression. That's going to have an effect.
• 1:19:33
  Speaker 1: What else would you consider to have. Yes, modernity also
• 1:19:36
  Speaker 1: has effect on declining birth rates. But I think that
• 1:19:40
  Speaker 1: you have to look at the examples, and the big
• 1:19:43
  Speaker 1: example is again the post Soviet Eastern countries, right, the
• 1:19:49
  Speaker 1: post Soviet block. So they already had the kind of
• 1:19:52
  Speaker 1: feminism that brought women into the workplace, but didn't have
• 1:19:55
  Speaker 1: the anti family, anti man thing because in the so system,
• 1:20:01
  Speaker 1: the system itself was the remedy for property, which was
• 1:20:07
  Speaker 1: the source of women's oppression, So it was already done.
• 1:20:10
  Speaker 1: Women's repression was solved by the Soviet system, so they
• 1:20:13
  Speaker 1: was no longer there. So it was all about getting
• 1:20:16
  Speaker 1: women into the workplace, getting women into education, et cetera.
• 1:20:19
  Speaker 1: So you already have that high degree of women's participation,
• 1:20:23
  Speaker 1: you already have that more modernized economy in some ways,
• 1:20:27
  Speaker 1: and you still have a at replacement level reproduction, and
• 1:20:32
  Speaker 1: then you introduce Western feminism and it all goes to hell.
• 1:20:35
  Speaker 1: I think that's a pretty strong indictment of Western feminism.
• 1:20:39
  Speaker 1: I could get into this more, it's difficult, just off
• 1:20:42
  Speaker 1: the top of my head, but that is the evidence
• 1:20:45
  Speaker 1: that I have it's again also in South Korea. Same thing.
• 1:20:48
  Speaker 1: All right, let's keep going right.
• 1:20:50
  Speaker 4: A Dylan gave us ten dollars. Sorry, they're still coming
• 1:20:53
  Speaker 4: in and says, when we get women under control, we
• 1:20:56
  Speaker 4: will then be a spacefaring specie. Suddenly, all those negative
• 1:20:59
  Speaker 4: leftists hating comments on all the SpaceX starship videos makes sense. Okay,
• 1:21:05
  Speaker 4: so now we'll get into the article.
• 1:21:08
  Speaker 1: Actually before we do, can I do?
• 1:21:09
  Speaker 4: All right?
• 1:21:10
  Speaker 1: I also have some thank you, a thank you or
• 1:21:13
  Speaker 1: some thank you. I would like to thank blob of
• 1:21:15
  Speaker 1: goo who put in or actually vesa don't support it
• 1:21:21
  Speaker 1: to the tune of twenty.
• 1:21:22
  Speaker 4: Two Oh wow, thank you, I'm man.
• 1:21:24
  Speaker 1: And Stephanie supported to the tune of ten dollars. Thank you, Stephanie.
• 1:21:29
  Speaker 4: Thank you, Stephanie and.
• 1:21:31
  Speaker 1: I really appreciate that. And if you would like to
• 1:21:35
  Speaker 1: join our supporters, because this is the last day to
• 1:21:38
  Speaker 1: make sure that we can continue to bring you this content,
• 1:21:41
  Speaker 1: please go to feedbm slash support and put a few
• 1:21:43
  Speaker 1: shekels in the hat for myself, Brian and Hannah and
• 1:21:46
  Speaker 1: HBr for the month we are at we need an
• 1:21:49
  Speaker 1: additional sixteen hundred and forty for thirty five to go,
• 1:21:54
  Speaker 1: so please get those support in. We are getting down
• 1:21:57
  Speaker 1: to the wire. I know some of you like to
• 1:22:00
  Speaker 1: to leave it to the last moment, a little bit
• 1:22:02
  Speaker 1: of brenksmanship. Maybe it's exciting, but anyway, I'm such support
• 1:22:06
  Speaker 1: to make sure we can continue to bring you this
• 1:22:08
  Speaker 1: show and feed the Badger dot com slash just the
• 1:22:10
  Speaker 1: tip if you want to comment on anything that we're saying,
• 1:22:12
  Speaker 1: and Badger Nation down online if you want to join
• 1:22:14
  Speaker 1: us in our community. Everything is in the low bar
• 1:22:16
  Speaker 1: as well. Guys, all right, let's let's keep going.
• 1:22:20
  Speaker 4: So we're starting the article now.
• 1:22:22
  Speaker 5: It's basically want to say I was sorry.
• 1:22:25
  Speaker 2: I was going to say, fight me on match before
• 1:22:27
  Speaker 2: Christianity in Europe, but I am aware that no, we
• 1:22:31
  Speaker 2: need to do we do need to move on. But
• 1:22:34
  Speaker 2: all right, might fight me for that though. Is all
• 1:22:37
  Speaker 2: sources for Anglo sax and paganism that we have for
• 1:22:39
  Speaker 2: the pre Christian stuff all emphasizes the need for which
• 1:22:42
  Speaker 2: when it comes to winning the affections of women and
• 1:22:46
  Speaker 2: to not believe the liars of maidens because they are
• 1:22:50
  Speaker 2: very wishy washy in the things that they want, so
• 1:22:52
  Speaker 2: you have to be strong, decisive and witty in order
• 1:22:54
  Speaker 2: to acquire their permission for you to marry them. Arranged
• 1:22:59
  Speaker 2: marriages were these sort of higher up Arranged marriages were
• 1:23:02
  Speaker 2: only things for the aristocratic layer of those yeahs. Everyone
• 1:23:06
  Speaker 2: else it was just you find people that you like
• 1:23:09
  Speaker 2: and you go from there.
• 1:23:10
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:23:11
  Speaker 2: Which and as well when Christianity did start taking over
• 1:23:13
  Speaker 2: in Europe, because it culturally nothing changed, it was just
• 1:23:17
  Speaker 2: the religion that was over the top of it.
• 1:23:19
  Speaker 1: Yeah, Okay, let's let's go.
• 1:23:21
  Speaker 4: All right, So we're on the section we finished last time,
• 1:23:25
  Speaker 4: the what's what the effects of this on men? Now
• 1:23:29
  Speaker 4: we're going to look at the future of free women.
• 1:23:33
  Speaker 4: We are currently in a situation where gender challenges have
• 1:23:35
  Speaker 4: been reversed in some regard. Based on our investigation of
• 1:23:39
  Speaker 4: Western mating of the past millennium, we view feminism primarily
• 1:23:43
  Speaker 4: as a means for achieving individual freedom, that is, individual
• 1:23:48
  Speaker 4: mate choice made possible by women's economic, independent, and reliable
• 1:23:53
  Speaker 4: birth control. In many literary works from between the Second
• 1:23:57
  Speaker 4: and Third Sexual Revolutions, both women and men expressed dissatisfaction
• 1:24:02
  Speaker 4: with arranged marriage and gender inequality. Social vanguards envisioned a
• 1:24:07
  Speaker 4: future in which both sexes were free to choose their
• 1:24:10
  Speaker 4: own partners and move on when the relationship had played
• 1:24:14
  Speaker 4: itself out. But for both sexes to be free, women
• 1:24:18
  Speaker 4: would have to be able to provide for themselves and
• 1:24:21
  Speaker 4: not suffer unwanted pregnancies. Women could therefore not achieve parity
• 1:24:27
  Speaker 4: with men before new technologies made.
• 1:24:29
  Speaker 1: It possible created by men.
• 1:24:32
  Speaker 4: Yeah, should I keep going or do you want to
• 1:24:35
  Speaker 4: say something about that paragraph.
• 1:24:36
  Speaker 1: To speak to Tildeer's point. Yes, Pagan cultures also had
• 1:24:41
  Speaker 1: Like I talk about how Roman like when you were
• 1:24:44
  Speaker 1: in just the mass of Roman citizens, they would probably
• 1:24:47
  Speaker 1: they would do they would create relationships through three free
• 1:24:51
  Speaker 1: individual choice too, And like you said, pagan cultures also
• 1:24:55
  Speaker 1: had that. So why are we saying that feminism created
• 1:24:59
  Speaker 1: that for women when it's been reliably a European thing
• 1:25:03
  Speaker 1: for millennia.
• 1:25:04
  Speaker 4: Good question.
• 1:25:05
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that's not femanism.
• 1:25:09
  Speaker 5: If it's not feminism, then it's not good things.
• 1:25:11
  Speaker 1: Yeah, this is absolutely ridiculous. And also men were reliant
• 1:25:17
  Speaker 1: on women's domestic work in the past, just like women
• 1:25:22
  Speaker 1: were reliant on men's work outside the home in the past.
• 1:25:26
  Speaker 1: Because men and women are dependent on each other and
• 1:25:30
  Speaker 1: it's in sort of an intra relationship, So you are
• 1:25:34
  Speaker 1: just talking about one period of time. So that again,
• 1:25:38
  Speaker 1: this is like the universe began in the fifties. This
• 1:25:42
  Speaker 1: paragraph is basically assuming that the universe began in the
• 1:25:45
  Speaker 1: fifties because the idea that individual make choice made possible
• 1:25:50
  Speaker 1: by women's economic independence. So that requires is it's baseline
• 1:25:56
  Speaker 1: that everything began in the fifties with women being able
• 1:25:59
  Speaker 1: to be come house concubines that didn't contribute to like
• 1:26:04
  Speaker 1: the domestic arrangement materially, that didn't contribute financially or materially
• 1:26:09
  Speaker 1: to the house, something that started in the fifties, and
• 1:26:12
  Speaker 1: maybe in like Victorian era England in certain very prosperous
• 1:26:16
  Speaker 1: parts of the country. That's a very rare thing. And
• 1:26:20
  Speaker 1: to say that take that as the baseline that women
• 1:26:23
  Speaker 1: are provided for completely by men and only have to
• 1:26:26
  Speaker 1: do a couple hours work a day and fill the
• 1:26:28
  Speaker 1: rest of their time with soap operas and consciousness raising
• 1:26:32
  Speaker 1: and the romance novels instead of going to the library
• 1:26:35
  Speaker 1: or adult education or anything like that. That is wrong, right,
• 1:26:40
  Speaker 1: So you see what I'm saying. They're starting from a
• 1:26:42
  Speaker 1: position of women's economic dependence on men that never existed
• 1:26:45
  Speaker 1: prior to the fifties because it wasn't possible. They didn't
• 1:26:49
  Speaker 1: have They didn't have the wealth and luxury to even
• 1:26:53
  Speaker 1: make that possible. So the whole dependence of women on
• 1:26:57
  Speaker 1: men was a gift men gave them through their industry.
• 1:27:01
  Speaker 1: And then being able to not have to give birth
• 1:27:05
  Speaker 1: was again to separate sex from actual giving birth is
• 1:27:10
  Speaker 1: another thing that men gave women. And that's all like,
• 1:27:14
  Speaker 1: it's I don't know, I don't know where I'm going
• 1:27:16
  Speaker 1: with this. Let's just keep going. It just seems so
• 1:27:18
  Speaker 1: fricking disingenuous.
• 1:27:20
  Speaker 2: Well, yeah, it is something that you also just have
• 1:27:22
  Speaker 2: to take into account. I'm going to highlight again this
• 1:27:24
  Speaker 2: is pure modernity here speaking. Even if you go to
• 1:27:28
  Speaker 2: the absolute upper classes of pre industrial Revolution, the women
• 1:27:33
  Speaker 2: are still expected to do things. There's a theory in politics.
• 1:27:38
  Speaker 2: It's actually in Political Ideals by Chamberlain, and he talks
• 1:27:41
  Speaker 2: about how monarchy and aristocracy that generally monarchy, but it
• 1:27:46
  Speaker 2: can be applied to aristocracy in general, that there's a
• 1:27:49
  Speaker 2: transcendental layer to them that they embody all of the
• 1:27:53
  Speaker 2: good things, they embody all of the best things, they
• 1:27:55
  Speaker 2: embody the because sort of God's representative on earth for
• 1:27:58
  Speaker 2: kings and people like that. So they actually don't have
• 1:28:02
  Speaker 2: the freedom to do whatever they want whenever they want,
• 1:28:04
  Speaker 2: because they have to be this sort of on a
• 1:28:07
  Speaker 2: representation of all of the best and the most noble
• 1:28:10
  Speaker 2: things that humans can be. Now, we know that a
• 1:28:12
  Speaker 2: bunch of them didn't do that, but a lot of
• 1:28:15
  Speaker 2: them tried. That was the aim of doing it. But
• 1:28:17
  Speaker 2: if you look at the women in those sorts of
• 1:28:18
  Speaker 2: positions as well, even they did not sit around doing
• 1:28:22
  Speaker 2: nothing at all. Even if you were a queen or
• 1:28:26
  Speaker 2: a king, oh, you sit around doing absolutely nothing. You're
• 1:28:28
  Speaker 2: of no use for anything. No, even in those situations,
• 1:28:31
  Speaker 2: they were expected to know things like not only how
• 1:28:33
  Speaker 2: to run the household and to get the servants, so
• 1:28:35
  Speaker 2: they had to manage logistics, but even on personal levels,
• 1:28:38
  Speaker 2: they were expected to know how to do things like
• 1:28:41
  Speaker 2: play an instrument, compose a song, be able to write poetry,
• 1:28:45
  Speaker 2: to sing to even things like a flower arranging. Even
• 1:28:51
  Speaker 2: things like that very important for things like that sort
• 1:28:54
  Speaker 2: I'm looking for negotiations between fates and things like that. Actually,
• 1:28:59
  Speaker 2: things like decor were very important for that because it
• 1:29:01
  Speaker 2: carried with it a lot of implications as to your
• 1:29:04
  Speaker 2: status and the message that you were sending to potential allies.
• 1:29:08
  Speaker 2: So it was actually really important little jobs like that,
• 1:29:10
  Speaker 2: and these were things that women were expected to do.
• 1:29:12
  Speaker 2: So even the most upper class of women, they didn't
• 1:29:16
  Speaker 2: sit around doing absolutely nothing because it's like, oh, we're
• 1:29:19
  Speaker 2: at this gathering. No, you need to be able to
• 1:29:22
  Speaker 2: dance with the nobles of something else, because that's actually
• 1:29:25
  Speaker 2: a very important diplomatic thing for you to do. You
• 1:29:28
  Speaker 2: need to be able to speak multiple languages. That is
• 1:29:31
  Speaker 2: your job in the house. You don't actually just sit
• 1:29:34
  Speaker 2: on a shade long eating blush all day. No, you
• 1:29:38
  Speaker 2: get up, You learn how to play the piano, You
• 1:29:40
  Speaker 2: learn what all of these dance moods are. You compose
• 1:29:42
  Speaker 2: your sonnets, you read them to people, and you back
• 1:29:45
  Speaker 2: up negotiations.
• 1:29:47
  Speaker 4: Yeah, all right, back to the article or this paper.
• 1:29:51
  Speaker 1: Yeah, though I can see from the next couple sentences
• 1:29:53
  Speaker 1: that I am going to grant.
• 1:29:55
  Speaker 4: All right, let me just do the Then they just
• 1:29:57
  Speaker 4: do the paragraph, because we're already fifteen minutes. Still. Men
• 1:30:00
  Speaker 4: today are in a similar position. Free women exclude a
• 1:30:03
  Speaker 4: growing proportion of men from pair bonding, and they wield
• 1:30:07
  Speaker 4: the reproductive power that the patriarchy had seized through arranged
• 1:30:11
  Speaker 4: marriage and female subordination to achieve parody. Men must place
• 1:30:17
  Speaker 4: their faith in tomorrow's reproductive technologies, just like women had
• 1:30:21
  Speaker 4: to for centuries rely on future technologies. Perhaps this perspective
• 1:30:27
  Speaker 4: can make experiments with individualistic reproduction more salient also for men.
• 1:30:32
  Speaker 4: After all, the societies that steer toward demographic collapse belonged
• 1:30:36
  Speaker 4: to us. All okay, go ahead, okay.
• 1:30:38
  Speaker 1: All right, okay. First of all, what I was trying
• 1:30:41
  Speaker 1: to get at before is men are creating the preconditions
• 1:30:45
  Speaker 1: for all of this. They gave women liberation from work,
• 1:30:49
  Speaker 1: and then women were like, you're oppressing us. And that's
• 1:30:52
  Speaker 1: what this guy has said. Before the fifties, men and
• 1:30:56
  Speaker 1: women both had to contribute to the family for even
• 1:30:58
  Speaker 1: function intra dependent. It wasn't a situation where women were
• 1:31:03
  Speaker 1: financially completely dependent on men, because nobody could offer that
• 1:31:07
  Speaker 1: kind of luxurious position to anyone. All right, So men
• 1:31:11
  Speaker 1: created women's luxury. They freed them from work, and then
• 1:31:15
  Speaker 1: the women were like, you're oppressing us from taking us
• 1:31:17
  Speaker 1: from work. All right. So then men created the system
• 1:31:21
  Speaker 1: that women could go back to work in whatever way
• 1:31:23
  Speaker 1: that they felt was avocatatoast was complimentary to their beliefs
• 1:31:28
  Speaker 1: about themselves. Was not work. That's hard or dirty or dangerous,
• 1:31:31
  Speaker 1: but work that feels like it gives you status and satisfaction.
• 1:31:36
  Speaker 1: So that men created that, and men created the ability
• 1:31:39
  Speaker 1: to do that with the freaking birth control pill. And
• 1:31:42
  Speaker 1: at every step men have facilitated what women said they wanted.
• 1:31:46
  Speaker 1: And yet this what does he say, So men are sorry.
• 1:31:49
  Speaker 1: Patriarchy has seized, reproductive power seized through arranged marriage and
• 1:31:55
  Speaker 1: female subordination. And again, arranged marriage doesn't exist. It hasn't
• 1:32:00
  Speaker 1: existed outside of aristocratic families in the West for millennia.
• 1:32:05
  Speaker 1: So what the hell is he even talking about here?
• 1:32:08
  Speaker 1: Arranged marriage and female subordination? And again this is just
• 1:32:12
  Speaker 1: zero years the fifties when men finally were able to
• 1:32:16
  Speaker 1: give to liberate women from work, and that was men's
• 1:32:20
  Speaker 1: oppression of women. Literally, that's how. And that dot comes
• 1:32:23
  Speaker 1: directly from the Red Stockings manifesto framing men doing the work,
• 1:32:29
  Speaker 1: buying the devices, and having the industrial food production that
• 1:32:34
  Speaker 1: liberated women from domestic labor almost entirely to the point
• 1:32:39
  Speaker 1: where domestic labor is like a two hour day job
• 1:32:42
  Speaker 1: from a twelve hour day, six day a week job.
• 1:32:45
  Speaker 1: Men did that, and then women turned around and said,
• 1:32:48
  Speaker 1: this is oppression in the Red Stockings manifesto. You are
• 1:32:52
  Speaker 1: actually deriving benefit from our luxurious position liberated from work.
• 1:32:57
  Speaker 1: Men are deriving benefit from its some benefit and the
• 1:33:01
  Speaker 1: Marxist feminists again, I'm gonna bring this up again.
• 1:33:03
  Speaker 6: Barrett and Bremer.
• 1:33:05
  Speaker 1: Ramis and Young all tried to look at this situation
• 1:33:10
  Speaker 1: and derive male benefit from it and failed, and they
• 1:33:14
  Speaker 1: reported the null at least Barrett and Young did. They reported, no,
• 1:33:18
  Speaker 1: we can't seem to derive the materialism. The material dialectic says,
• 1:33:21
  Speaker 1: we need to find the benefit, locate the benefit, and
• 1:33:25
  Speaker 1: it was located in the capitalist class with the Marxist
• 1:33:27
  Speaker 1: So the capitalist class is extracting from the labor class
• 1:33:31
  Speaker 1: and they're gaining a benefit from it. And you can
• 1:33:33
  Speaker 1: sort of see that because the capitalist class is richer,
• 1:33:36
  Speaker 1: so some benefit is accruing to them, some material benefit,
• 1:33:40
  Speaker 1: so you can almost see that. I would argue that
• 1:33:42
  Speaker 1: it's not they're taking the risks right, so maybe they
• 1:33:46
  Speaker 1: do deserve some kind of additional benefit from it. But whatever.
• 1:33:50
  Speaker 1: But then the feminist the Marxist feminists, try to apply
• 1:33:53
  Speaker 1: that to the family and the relationship between men and women,
• 1:33:57
  Speaker 1: and literally they could not find the benefit, couldn't find
• 1:34:00
  Speaker 1: the material benefit for men, like Barrett's, yeah, I can't
• 1:34:03
  Speaker 1: seem to locate it. And then Breamer and Ramas were
• 1:34:05
  Speaker 1: like looking at where Barrett tried to derive this stuff
• 1:34:08
  Speaker 1: and say, these are all the problems with it. But
• 1:34:10
  Speaker 1: we're not going to embrace the null, right, we can't.
• 1:34:13
  Speaker 1: We aren't gonna say, yeah, we can't seem to derive
• 1:34:15
  Speaker 1: the material benefit that men get for providing for women,
• 1:34:18
  Speaker 1: because obviously the material benefit lands on the woman. Right,
• 1:34:22
  Speaker 1: She's the consumer, she's the one spending his money, and
• 1:34:25
  Speaker 1: she's the one with the free time. So by all measures,
• 1:34:29
  Speaker 1: she is the She's the bouchei. She is the capitalist
• 1:34:31
  Speaker 1: class extracting from the man. If we're gonna look at
• 1:34:34
  Speaker 1: it from a materialist perspective. But that can't be because
• 1:34:37
  Speaker 1: we know from our our feelings of resent that it
• 1:34:40
  Speaker 1: is us women who must be oppressed. So what we're
• 1:34:43
  Speaker 1: just gonna ignore the knull. That's why nobody knows about this.
• 1:34:47
  Speaker 1: See these these Marxist feminists who tried to derive patriarchal
• 1:34:51
  Speaker 1: benefit materially, they're never cited anymore. That's why nobody knows
• 1:34:56
  Speaker 1: about them, and they don't know that they actually found
• 1:34:58
  Speaker 1: this big fat null which was solved incidentally by standpoint theory. Oh,
• 1:35:04
  Speaker 1: women just have women's ways of knowing, which is why
• 1:35:06
  Speaker 1: women's feelings are superior to men's facts. We don't need
• 1:35:10
  Speaker 1: to prove that there is some kind of material reality
• 1:35:14
  Speaker 1: to our claims that we're oppressed. We just feel oppressed,
• 1:35:17
  Speaker 1: therefore we are. And nobody gets to stop them and say,
• 1:35:20
  Speaker 1: are you actually feeling oppressed or bored? Huh? Which is
• 1:35:24
  Speaker 1: it Betty Friedan's problem of no name. Yeah, it's called boredom.
• 1:35:28
  Speaker 1: It's called the inability of entertaining yourself. Maybe you should
• 1:35:32
  Speaker 1: have tried going to the library instead of your consciousness
• 1:35:36
  Speaker 1: raising coffee clatches where you determine that your boredom was
• 1:35:39
  Speaker 1: actually oppression. Right, anyway, So that's the whole that's the
• 1:35:43
  Speaker 1: whole situation for that when he says that that men
• 1:35:47
  Speaker 1: wielded the reproductive power that patriarchy had seized through something
• 1:35:52
  Speaker 1: that didn't exist in the West for like millennia, Right,
• 1:35:55
  Speaker 1: that's what he's reflecting on. And again nobody quotes or
• 1:36:00
  Speaker 1: references the Marxist feminists because they failed to find what
• 1:36:05
  Speaker 1: this guy's asserting. So this is actually, you know how
• 1:36:09
  Speaker 1: it's not cited. It's not cited because it would sit
• 1:36:12
  Speaker 1: to a null, and in any kind of legitimate science,
• 1:36:15
  Speaker 1: he wouldn't be asserting this. Somebody on his peer review
• 1:36:19
  Speaker 1: or her peer review committee would say, hey, actually that's
• 1:36:22
  Speaker 1: a null. They didn't actually manage to derive material benefit
• 1:36:25
  Speaker 1: from men. But that's not how feminism works, because the
• 1:36:29
  Speaker 1: feeling is all they need. They don't need facts, they
• 1:36:32
  Speaker 1: just need feeling. That's all they need to be true
• 1:36:35
  Speaker 1: to have everything be correct, is that they feel this way.
• 1:36:39
  Speaker 1: So they're special. The rules of science don't apply to them.
• 1:36:44
  Speaker 1: They find a null and then they just paper over
• 1:36:46
  Speaker 1: the knull with standpoint theory.
• 1:36:48
  Speaker 2: The people who want to know how and why that
• 1:36:50
  Speaker 2: happened it's hard. In nineteen eighty six, Cutting is the
• 1:36:52
  Speaker 2: one that labeled sciences patriarchal and therefore the entirety of
• 1:36:56
  Speaker 2: science is a biased male endeavor which seeks to marginal
• 1:37:00
  Speaker 2: women's voices and make them unreliable, and the idea that
• 1:37:03
  Speaker 2: objectivity itself is a patriarchal bias. That's why she actually
• 1:37:06
  Speaker 2: said the only basis of unbiased knowledge in the world
• 1:37:08
  Speaker 2: is women's own direct experience, which is what standpoint theory is.
• 1:37:13
  Speaker 1: And then harsok Gaba offered an explanation for why men
• 1:37:17
  Speaker 1: don't have the ability to understand human relationships, and that
• 1:37:21
  Speaker 1: is because men aren't human.
• 1:37:24
  Speaker 2: They have a biological need to tyrannize women and children.
• 1:37:27
  Speaker 2: That was a Fireston by the way, Yeah, the important
• 1:37:30
  Speaker 2: the patriarchy has seized the means of production through this thing.
• 1:37:33
  Speaker 2: There is actually a very important thing where Firestone actually
• 1:37:36
  Speaker 2: said sees the means of reproduction. It's actually something you imagined.
• 1:37:40
  Speaker 2: I'll just read a little bit here. Why the hell
• 1:37:42
  Speaker 2: k Nott's on this sentence, Fireston argues the changes in
• 1:37:45
  Speaker 2: technology produce the capacity for change in the mode of
• 1:37:47
  Speaker 2: reproduction in much the same way the marx argued that
• 1:37:50
  Speaker 2: changes and the forces of production created the possibility for
• 1:37:52
  Speaker 2: the emergence of the next mode of production. Fireston contended
• 1:37:55
  Speaker 2: the women had to seize the means of reproduction in
• 1:37:57
  Speaker 2: order to achieve this transformation. A part of our argument
• 1:38:00
  Speaker 2: often glossed over by those who criticize her for an
• 1:38:04
  Speaker 2: evily optimistic technological totasm, and that comes from Pierston's view
• 1:38:08
  Speaker 2: of historical materialism, which is Marxism, and the essay which
• 1:38:14
  Speaker 2: that paragraph theres references, which isn't cited in the book.
• 1:38:17
  Speaker 2: Here is actually her book, her essay the Dialectic of Sex,
• 1:38:21
  Speaker 2: and the Dialectic of Sex is one of the ones
• 1:38:23
  Speaker 2: which said the nuclear family is a side of oppression
• 1:38:25
  Speaker 2: and that it was a recent invention, that she was
• 1:38:28
  Speaker 2: one of the ones who said, oh yeah, this is
• 1:38:30
  Speaker 2: a bourgeois construct And within the Dialectic of Sex, she
• 1:38:33
  Speaker 2: actually says that basically men's biology requires them to tyrannize
• 1:38:38
  Speaker 2: women and children. It's actually also in this book Theorizing
• 1:38:40
  Speaker 2: Patriarchy somewhere where it says that I can't remember exactly where,
• 1:38:45
  Speaker 2: and I'm not going to look it up right now
• 1:38:47
  Speaker 2: because we don't have long left, but it is in there.
• 1:38:49
  Speaker 2: There is actually like an underlying biotruth to feminism which
• 1:38:54
  Speaker 2: says that men have a need, a biological basal need
• 1:38:58
  Speaker 2: to oppress women and children, which becomes women by.
• 1:39:01
  Speaker 1: Dethel Yeah yeah, and Hearsock's proposal is that it's not biological.
• 1:39:07
  Speaker 1: The thing is they wanted to keep the power of
• 1:39:10
  Speaker 1: biology without having to answer to constructing a bio essentialist
• 1:39:14
  Speaker 1: demonization of a group which acquired a bad taste in
• 1:39:19
  Speaker 1: people's mouths. As a result of some twentieth century activities
• 1:39:23
  Speaker 1: that were go unnamed, but yeah, they wanted to change
• 1:39:26
  Speaker 1: that from the radfem bioessentialist argument that men have a
• 1:39:30
  Speaker 1: but in hate biological drive to dominate women to a
• 1:39:35
  Speaker 1: social constructivist argument, which is something that Heartsock was trying
• 1:39:40
  Speaker 1: to present. And the constructivism is that through the process
• 1:39:42
  Speaker 1: of trying to differentiate from his mother, a boy severs
• 1:39:47
  Speaker 1: himself from human compassion, the milk of human kindness, from
• 1:39:54
  Speaker 1: human loyalty and love, so he severs himself from true
• 1:39:58
  Speaker 1: relationships with his fellows humans, thus loses his ability to
• 1:40:02
  Speaker 1: understand or sympathize or want to help anyone but himself,
• 1:40:07
  Speaker 1: and thus becomes a dominator. So that's how they that's
• 1:40:10
  Speaker 1: how Harsock took it from a bio essentialist assertion to
• 1:40:14
  Speaker 1: a social constructivist assertion. But again the assertion still has
• 1:40:19
  Speaker 1: the power of a biological explanation because it's one to
• 1:40:22
  Speaker 1: one to every man, regardless of their cultural upbringing or class,
• 1:40:28
  Speaker 1: or religion or ethnicity or language they speak. They're all
• 1:40:32
  Speaker 1: patriarchal oppression and they've never identified the social the real
• 1:40:36
  Speaker 1: socialization that caused it. Even Harsock was rejected at some
• 1:40:40
  Speaker 1: point because it blames women. It could the blame could
• 1:40:43
  Speaker 1: land on women mothers anyway. It's all and again all
• 1:40:48
  Speaker 1: of this key all of this assumes is it's ground
• 1:40:51
  Speaker 1: that men oppress women by making them dependent on men,
• 1:40:56
  Speaker 1: which wasn't something that happened before the the incredible economic
• 1:41:02
  Speaker 1: prosperity that enabled housewives, homemakers, house concubines. Right, that incredible
• 1:41:09
  Speaker 1: economic prosperity created a situation in which men could make
• 1:41:14
  Speaker 1: women completely dependent on them economically, and that's where the
• 1:41:19
  Speaker 1: oppression began, because men gave liberated women from work. That's
• 1:41:24
  Speaker 1: where the oppression began. And nothing exists before that. Even
• 1:41:28
  Speaker 1: though they talk about things. This guy talks about things
• 1:41:30
  Speaker 1: existing before that, but he doesn't eat. He apparently has
• 1:41:34
  Speaker 1: no clue of the actual things that existed before that,
• 1:41:37
  Speaker 1: because at no time in human history were people prosperous
• 1:41:41
  Speaker 1: enough for men to induce that level of complete dependence
• 1:41:46
  Speaker 1: economic dependence on themselves in women. So basically women's oppression
• 1:41:51
  Speaker 1: started in the fifties guys, according to radfems, but also
• 1:41:55
  Speaker 1: it somehow also was before then, even though the conditions
• 1:41:57
  Speaker 1: didn't exist to create that level of dependence. The suppression
• 1:42:01
  Speaker 1: by men.
• 1:42:02
  Speaker 4: All right, all right, I'm reading one more paragraph. But okay,
• 1:42:05
  Speaker 4: I thought you that's all I can do today, So
• 1:42:08
  Speaker 4: pick up Lindsay. For modern women, the steaks are similarly large.
• 1:42:12
  Speaker 4: Not only does the fertility crisis deprive many women of
• 1:42:16
  Speaker 4: having the children they desire, instead regulating or relegating them
• 1:42:20
  Speaker 4: to involuntary singlehood and childlessness. But from a feminist perspective,
• 1:42:25
  Speaker 4: it is important to remember that the countries with low
• 1:42:27
  Speaker 4: fertility are mostly those in which emancipated women are free
• 1:42:31
  Speaker 4: to choose their own partners. As we explore, this unique
• 1:42:34
  Speaker 4: level of mating agency underpins the female choice fertility paradox,
• 1:42:39
  Speaker 4: which has captured gender equal nations in the post pair
• 1:42:42
  Speaker 4: bonding fertility trap.
• 1:42:44
  Speaker 1: So yeah, this is actually the comment I think by
• 1:42:48
  Speaker 1: mister Roboto that I ascribe too much to feminism Lee.
• 1:42:52
  Speaker 1: The alternative is to say that this is correct, that
• 1:42:55
  Speaker 1: when women are free to choose, they don't choose men. Therefore,
• 1:42:59
  Speaker 1: the only way to increase human fertility is either to
• 1:43:03
  Speaker 1: take away women's choice, which probably our society will never do,
• 1:43:07
  Speaker 1: it'll just implode, or to keep pushing the marginalization of
• 1:43:12
  Speaker 1: men and just let women reproduce with sperm downers and
• 1:43:17
  Speaker 1: have men pay for it, or or.
• 1:43:20
  Speaker 2: You're just gonna cool it. I think the next step
• 1:43:22
  Speaker 2: of this feminist nonsense with all this stuff is going
• 1:43:25
  Speaker 2: to be not only are they going to have knowledge
• 1:43:27
  Speaker 2: hypogamy exists, they're gonna say it's good.
• 1:43:29
  Speaker 4: Actually, that's what this paper is saying.
• 1:43:32
  Speaker 5: Oh God, of course.
• 1:43:33
  Speaker 4: They are basically saying, look, women, a lot of women
• 1:43:36
  Speaker 4: only want a small percentage of men. So why don't
• 1:43:38
  Speaker 4: we let those men impregnate all those women and just
• 1:43:41
  Speaker 4: make the other men pay for those kids. Let's cuck
• 1:43:44
  Speaker 4: eighty percent of the population of the male population.
• 1:43:47
  Speaker 1: And that's gonna make the world. That's gonna make. Then
• 1:43:49
  Speaker 1: here's the thing. Everybody's like, Oh, they're removing the dysgenic
• 1:43:53
  Speaker 1: men from the population, But they're not, because this is
• 1:43:58
  Speaker 1: a completely artificial reality. Women aren't. We're never evolved to
• 1:44:03
  Speaker 1: reproduce without men. So if you are constructing a situation
• 1:44:08
  Speaker 1: where you are removing the incentive to reproduce with men
• 1:44:12
  Speaker 1: who are willing to provide for women, you're degrading our
• 1:44:18
  Speaker 1: species value. Where you're degrading our species. The thing that
• 1:44:22
  Speaker 1: makes our species that isn't improving anything. Right, if every
• 1:44:27
  Speaker 1: woman reproduces with tyrone who does not actually invest in
• 1:44:31
  Speaker 1: his children or his community, how is that improving the
• 1:44:34
  Speaker 1: species just because she can, because we've constructed this artificial reality.
• 1:44:39
  Speaker 1: And that's not even setting aside the fact that women
• 1:44:41
  Speaker 1: don't That single women reproducing with tyrone will not will
• 1:44:46
  Speaker 1: lead to our extinction because they're not enough single women
• 1:44:50
  Speaker 1: willing to do it in the first place, even if
• 1:44:52
  Speaker 1: you pay for it. The assumption at the heart of
• 1:44:55
  Speaker 1: all of this is that men's dependability is oppression, right.
• 1:45:00
  Speaker 1: That is, feminists literally attacked the thing that women that
• 1:45:05
  Speaker 1: unlocks women's fertility, which is a dependable male partner. That's
• 1:45:09
  Speaker 1: my thesis about all of this is that women don't
• 1:45:13
  Speaker 1: have children unless they feel like they're in a relationship
• 1:45:16
  Speaker 1: with a man who's dependable in some way that unlocks
• 1:45:18
  Speaker 1: women's fertility. So you can make you can give them
• 1:45:21
  Speaker 1: a situation where they have all the resources and all
• 1:45:24
  Speaker 1: the access to tyrone that they want, which we already
• 1:45:27
  Speaker 1: have for the most part, and women are still not
• 1:45:29
  Speaker 1: being fertile. Single women's still aren't reproducing at anywhere near
• 1:45:33
  Speaker 1: the rate of married or cohabiting women. You could do that,
• 1:45:36
  Speaker 1: but what's mostly likely is that you will creator the
• 1:45:39
  Speaker 1: rest of our ability to have children because the premise
• 1:45:42
  Speaker 1: is wrong. You didn't liberate women. Feminism didn't liberate women. Okay,
• 1:45:46
  Speaker 1: it did not liberate women. It just removed from their lives.
• 1:45:51
  Speaker 1: The things the removed from a majority of women's lives,
• 1:45:55
  Speaker 1: the one thing that would make them have children, which
• 1:45:58
  Speaker 1: is a relationship with a men that they find dependable
• 1:46:01
  Speaker 1: on some level. And dependable men are not Dysyingenic tyrone
• 1:46:06
  Speaker 1: isn't a superior specimen. A man with lacking half of
• 1:46:11
  Speaker 1: what makes him a man isn't a superior specimen of manhood. Okay, sorry,
• 1:46:16
  Speaker 1: my dog was really distracting me, so I may have
• 1:46:19
  Speaker 1: lost the thread a bit there. And I know Brian
• 1:46:22
  Speaker 1: that we need to do.
• 1:46:23
  Speaker 4: I'm sorry. I got a couple of super chats I
• 1:46:26
  Speaker 4: should read really quick. And then yeah, so Roboto gives
• 1:46:31
  Speaker 4: a dollar and says princesses could sit around and do nothing.
• 1:46:35
  Speaker 4: Princesses had to serve in the military for a time
• 1:46:38
  Speaker 4: in the upper classes outside the royal setting, such rules
• 1:46:41
  Speaker 4: did not really exist outside of tradition slash ritual. And
• 1:46:46
  Speaker 4: then Dylan gives us a super chat for ten and
• 1:46:48
  Speaker 4: says children need both a mother and a father within
• 1:46:51
  Speaker 4: a tribe to raise them for their mental health. That's
• 1:46:54
  Speaker 4: how we evolve the matter the model. No other model
• 1:46:57
  Speaker 4: will do. Artificial wounds will create mentally damaged children. Maybe
• 1:47:01
  Speaker 4: that's the point. Witovern Slots gives us ten dollars and says,
• 1:47:06
  Speaker 4: Happy Friday. I don't have a PayPal, so here's some
• 1:47:09
  Speaker 4: YouTube money instead, lol. And Roboto then gives another dollar
• 1:47:13
  Speaker 4: and says, on rumble, do you know the women who
• 1:47:16
  Speaker 4: wear the rings around their neck? The ring The reason
• 1:47:19
  Speaker 4: for that is one men. One men like long necks. Second,
• 1:47:24
  Speaker 4: to make their women less attractive to outsiders. Feminists would
• 1:47:27
  Speaker 4: call that oppression they do. Yeah, okay, that's it. That's
• 1:47:31
  Speaker 4: all the super childs and stuff.
• 1:47:33
  Speaker 1: All right, So we didn't get very far today. Sorry, No,
• 1:47:37
  Speaker 1: that's not your fault.
• 1:47:39
  Speaker 2: No, it's my fault. I accept all responsibility for I
• 1:47:41
  Speaker 2: am a man. I have to blame you, Alison, with
• 1:47:43
  Speaker 2: holding you responsible. That's the f work we need to use.
• 1:47:46
  Speaker 2: It's your full Alison, you all the worst your radio.
• 1:47:49
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I get told that quite a bit, and so
• 1:47:52
  Speaker 1: it's I can't there's no further to go down it
• 1:47:56
  Speaker 1: just rolls off my back anyway. So if you would
• 1:47:58
  Speaker 1: like to support myself the worst thing about Honey Badger Radio,
• 1:48:01
  Speaker 1: as well as Brian and Hannah and HBr generally, please
• 1:48:05
  Speaker 1: go to feed the Badger dot com slash just the tip,
• 1:48:07
  Speaker 1: not just the tip support the Badger dot com slash support.
• 1:48:10
  Speaker 1: I guess we'll have to just continue this. It is.
• 1:48:13
  Speaker 1: It has been what six weeks now of doing this.
• 1:48:16
  Speaker 1: But this is basically, guys, this is the culmination of everything.
• 1:48:21
  Speaker 1: This is it. This is the epicenter. It is both
• 1:48:24
  Speaker 1: recognizing the marginalization of men, bringing in exactly what created
• 1:48:29
  Speaker 1: the fertility crisis in the first place, and then advocating
• 1:48:33
  Speaker 1: for more of it. So this is it. This is
• 1:48:35
  Speaker 1: the penultimate. This is the or not the penultimate. This
• 1:48:38
  Speaker 1: is the ultimate expression of the Stockings Red Stockings manifest
• 1:48:42
  Speaker 1: though in our society, and instead of course correcting, Cambridge
• 1:48:46
  Speaker 1: is advocating doing more of the thing that made the problem,
• 1:48:49
  Speaker 1: the first bit, more of the hair of the dog
• 1:48:51
  Speaker 1: the bit. Huh, guys, surely that will solve things. So anyway,
• 1:48:54
  Speaker 1: if you want.
• 1:48:55
  Speaker 2: To see this insanity, all of the insanity that we
• 1:48:58
  Speaker 2: are seeing, all of this, this is what happens when
• 1:49:01
  Speaker 2: we allow women off the bottom tier of Maslow's.
• 1:49:03
  Speaker 5: Hierarchy of needs. There you go absolutely mad.
• 1:49:06
  Speaker 2: And there is exactly one solution to this, and I'm
• 1:49:09
  Speaker 2: gonna say it. I'm gonna propose it. We need to
• 1:49:11
  Speaker 2: repeal women.
• 1:49:13
  Speaker 1: Gentlemen, I'm sorry to inform you women. All right, So,
• 1:49:17
  Speaker 1: if you want to support the show, film slash support.
• 1:49:20
  Speaker 1: If you want to send us a message at anytime
• 1:49:22
  Speaker 1: after the show is over, feed the badger, dot calm
• 1:49:24
  Speaker 1: slash just the tip. Please do put your fund put
• 1:49:28
  Speaker 1: your support in, because we are at like twelve hours
• 1:49:31
  Speaker 1: left for the fundraisers, so we're in the last hour.
• 1:49:34
  Speaker 1: We still have sixteen hundred to go, so please do
• 1:49:36
  Speaker 1: put that support in. Otherwise we won't. We'll have to
• 1:49:39
  Speaker 1: wind down our work, do something else. Nobody wants that.
• 1:49:43
  Speaker 1: Who's going to call, Who's going to investigate? The Marxist
• 1:49:48
  Speaker 1: feminists like this. This hidden argument then never saw the
• 1:49:52
  Speaker 1: light of day because they don't cite it anymore. Modern
• 1:49:54
  Speaker 1: feminists do not cite this argument or not argument but
• 1:49:57
  Speaker 1: this debate between Marxist feminists and rad fems over the
• 1:50:00
  Speaker 1: concept of patriarchy, Nor do they cite the fact that
• 1:50:03
  Speaker 1: the Marxist feminists attempted to derive patriarchy or men's benefit
• 1:50:08
  Speaker 1: from their relationship to women and found a big fat
• 1:50:11
  Speaker 1: and all nobody cites that it just let it just
• 1:50:14
  Speaker 1: was allowed to wash into the history and just ignored
• 1:50:19
  Speaker 1: and papered over with standpoint theory. Who's gonna bring this
• 1:50:23
  Speaker 1: all up? So support the show feedobadger dot com, slash support.
• 1:50:26
  Speaker 1: I'm gonna hand this back to Brian to take us out.
• 1:50:29
  Speaker 4: Okay, if you guys like this video, please hit like,
• 1:50:32
  Speaker 4: subscribe if you're not already subscribed, hit the BELF notifications,
• 1:50:36
  Speaker 4: leave us a comment, let us know what you guys
• 1:50:37
  Speaker 4: think about what we talked about on the show today,
• 1:50:40
  Speaker 4: and share the video because sharing is caring. Thanks so
• 1:50:43
  Speaker 4: much for coming on this episode of Maintaining Frame where
• 1:50:47
  Speaker 4: we're looking at the toward individualistic reproduction article, and we'll
• 1:50:52
  Speaker 4: talk to you guys in the next one. Have a
• 1:50:54
  Speaker 4: good weekend, everybody,