Latest / Honey Badger Radio / How did Women's Studies rely on men? | HBR Talk 297

Transcript

How did Women's Studies rely on men? | HBR Talk 297 · Honey Badger Radio

• 0:00
  Hello in Welcome to HBr Talk to ninety seven. How did women studies rely
• 0:06
  on men? I'm your host Hannah Wallen here with nonsense annihilator Lauren Brooks and
• 0:12
  the personification of perceptivity Mike Stevenson, and tonight we're going to have a little
• 0:18
  history lesson on the funding of feminism's academic spread. As always, Honey Badger
• 0:24
  Radio dishes out a some Morgas board of thought provoking discussions, and we got
• 0:29
  to talk about that before we get into our details. Speaking of funding,
• 0:34
  right as experiences long past and recent have demonstrated the provoked thoughts are fighting back,
• 0:42
  they made it clear that for people like us, relying on third party
• 0:45
  payment platforms like Patreon to fund our work is treading on thin ice or building
• 0:51
  our house in the path of a rapidly growing wildfire. And you might understand
• 0:56
  a little bit more about that after today's article. Actually, but in light
• 1:02
  of all this, we strongly encourage our supporters to switch at least their support
• 1:07
  for us to feed the Badger dot Com the most stable way to help us
• 1:10
  out, And if you want to tip us directly instead of relying on any
• 1:14
  social media platforms, tip jar the link for that is feed the Badger dot
• 1:18
  com slash just a tip and as always, the same risk applies to our
• 1:23
  social media platforms, which is why you should further provoke the thought police by
• 1:26
  tracking our thought provoking discussions on Honeybadger Brigade dot com, where you can find
• 1:32
  your way to all of our content, as well as a link to feed
• 1:34
  the Badger dot com in the drop down menu at the top of the page.
• 1:38
  So before we get started, I should also talk a little bit about
• 1:42
  the publication we're looking at today. Its title Heterodoxy gets misrepresented by feminists when
• 1:49
  their attention is drawn to this article. It is not about sexuality. This
• 1:55
  isn't a straight people's magazine against LGA, g B, t Q, quiltbag
• 2:02
  alphabet soup issues, right, it's but feminists do like to treat it like
• 2:07
  that's what it is. The term heterodoxy simply means deviation from accepted or orthodox
• 2:14
  standards or beliefs, So essentially it's you know, going going against the norm,
• 2:21
  right, going against the grain, going against the flow of politics at
• 2:27
  the current time. And they did, uh, they criticized essentially pop politics
• 2:36
  during their time period. They talked about a lot of different issues, including
• 2:42
  the capitalism communism conflict. They talked about They did talk about gender and sexuality
• 2:49
  issues, They talked about racial issues, all of the different things that were
• 2:54
  designing factors, and how people voted for various politicians at the time or in
• 3:00
  peace, you know, all the same things that we're still talking about today,
• 3:04
  right, And then the publication essentially tracked what was going on in politics,
• 3:12
  what was going on in academia, what was going on in the establishment
• 3:19
  institutions in the business world, who was donating to whom, how things were
• 3:23
  being promoted, and so on. So there there was quite a bit of,
• 3:28
  uh, looking into the long march through the institutions, which is kind
• 3:35
  of what we're we're looking at tonight, was a long march through the academic
• 3:39
  institutions. And feminists can't really dispute the things that are talked about in this
• 3:46
  article in regard to how feminism really got its funding, how how feminism was
• 3:57
  kind of promoted by men, not necessarily just any men, but the most
• 4:05
  powerful, the men that feminists call the patriarchy like funded funded their academic movement.
• 4:16
  So that's where we're starting out with this this publication. When you look
• 4:23
  for this. This is on the wayback machine because the publication has been out
• 4:28
  of out of print for quite a long time, and this is a PDF
• 4:33
  of something that was There wasn't an online representation of this. This is from
• 4:41
  nineteen ninety two. This is actually something that was published on paper and mailed
• 4:50
  out to people. So this was not this wasn't something that would have originally
• 4:58
  been seen outside of people who were interested in this subject and the subject of
• 5:06
  heterodoxy to begin with political heterodoxy. The article title is Women's Studies Imperialists.
• 5:16
  Apologies for the image, but it's this. I'm going to tell you right
• 5:20
  now. I love the armpit, hair, I know it really does it.
• 5:27
  This is this from nineteen ninety two. Okay, so this is not
• 5:30
  commentary on modern gender issues, not commentary on the the The Trands and Turf
• 5:41
  were there at all because that that was kind of a newer thing at the
• 5:46
  time, and they these guys were these two pictures here you could see sort
• 5:51
  of one's not very visible because it's behind us, but you can see the
• 5:58
  face of the academic on the left there, and then you can see the
• 6:00
  face of the butcher on the right. There. They were in cahoots at
• 6:05
  the time. There was no war going on there until later when you started
• 6:12
  seeing more like these are both representations of butch women and nerdy women, not
• 6:19
  women biological women and trans women, believe it or not. So yeah,
• 6:28
  she has the biceps of a man in a bodybuilder. Yes, it's back
• 6:32
  in the back in the early nineties was when we started seeing this anti femininity
• 6:43
  push of feminism sort of getting ramped up. You could say they put it
• 6:49
  on steroids, which I know it's a bad joke with that image, but
• 6:55
  in any case, we also have our first super chow for Meredith g who
• 7:00
  gives us five dollars and says, HBr talk two ninety seven, honey for
• 7:02
  the Badgers, And thank you very much for that, Meredith. So let's
• 7:06
  get into the article and see what they have to say about the sort of
• 7:15
  history and funding of women's studies. And again, you know, we were
• 7:20
  looking at this from a twenty twenty four perspective, so we're talking decades later
• 7:30
  after this. I was a freshman in college. I had just graduated high
• 7:33
  school the year before this spring before this was published, and this is looking
• 7:40
  back at the seventies and a progression from the seventies to about that time period,
• 7:48
  So about twenty years nineteen or twenty years of feminist progress through the institutions
• 7:58
  is being discussed here. And obviously since then it's been another thirty years.
• 8:05
  And so when we look at this, we can look at this through through
• 8:11
  sort of a portal in time back at well, we're what we're seeing thirty
• 8:15
  years later, what's happened over the last thirty years that traces directly back to
• 8:22
  this in nineteen ninety two, Like it really did feel like twenty twenty four
• 8:28
  was not just the future but the long distant future where all sorts of impossible
• 8:33
  things could happen, not just like flying cars, but back to the future
• 8:37
  too. And RoboCop was set in twenty fifteen, yeah, and we yeah,
• 8:43
  yeah, well, and Quantum Leap was set in nineteen ninety nine,
• 8:48
  and even they had flying cars, and you know, to go ahead and
• 8:50
  do the meme, people thought we'd have flying cars by then. But what
• 8:56
  we have is, well, we have we have something rough pictured in the
• 9:01
  cartoon we're looking at right now. We have seventy two genders, which one
• 9:07
  of them is going to help me get to work tonight. So to start
• 9:13
  the article. The goal, says University of Washington professor Janella Butler, about
• 9:20
  the future of women's studies has grown from balancing mainstream and integration especially addition to
• 9:30
  transferring or radical paradigm shifts. So initially they're already talking about like in the
• 9:37
  in the seventies, it was about providing a an alternative view to what they
• 9:45
  thought was the norm. They're they're heterodoxy, and now it's about a radical
• 9:52
  paradigm shift. It's about changing, uh, the changing the world, essentially
• 9:58
  changing the way everybody thinks, changing the way academia works, and so on.
• 10:01
  That's that's what this starts out with the paradigm shifts Butler is talking about,
• 10:09
  are away from the eurocentric, male based, heterosexist, sexist, racist,
• 10:16
  and classist orientation of college and university curricula. So they said, all
• 10:22
  all of those terms, all those buzzwords that we're used to seeing on Twitter,
• 10:28
  we're used to seeing all over those those were in use back then.
• 10:31
  We're talking, you know, thirty years ago. This was the language of
• 10:37
  feminism, and it probably was the language of feminism twenty years before that.
• 10:46
  Women's studies, even Trump's ethnic studies, which need to be transformed because they
• 10:52
  are generally male centered in scholarship, sexism and heterosexism. It's interesting got this
• 11:00
  in the middle, sandwiched in among all these they are male centered, which
• 11:03
  doesn't really matter. They're sexism and heterosexism. But scholarship they objected to that.
• 11:15
  I think about what scholarship is. They objected to it until they controlled
• 11:20
  it. Well, much like you know, they they call everything racist until
• 11:28
  they control it. They call everything sexist until they control it. And they
• 11:35
  called they called scholarship scholarship as though it was a dirty word until they controlled
• 11:39
  it. Yeah, and now they're all about you have to listen to scholars
• 11:43
  because now now we control it. So we're in the right, and we're
• 11:48
  still and every and still everything we don't like and we want to control we're
• 11:52
  going to call sexist and racist until we control it. It's quite an interesting
• 11:58
  objection there, because academic study, scholarship, the gathering and and and study
• 12:09
  of information, the gathering and evaluation and memorization, you know, analysis and
• 12:16
  and understanding of information. They objected to that. Right, So what does
• 12:22
  scholarship become Now It's no longer about gathering information and seeking to understand it.
• 12:33
  It's about being told what to think. Mm hmm. It's not about knowledge,
• 12:37
  it's about marching orders. Now they call knowledge, which they call knowledge
• 12:48
  women's ways of knowing. Well, yeah, I mean, you don't have
• 12:52
  to be educated if you're can be their slave. True, you just have
• 12:58
  to be you just have to be instructed. And there's a huge difference between
• 13:03
  the synonyms educated and instructed. Is what Justin Trudeau calls a series of facts
• 13:11
  that can be agreed upon. Yeah, that these conspiracy theorists are trying to
• 13:16
  take away from the mainstream media. A series of facts to be agreed upon.
• 13:22
  Yeah, a series of narratives that can be agreed upon. That's what
• 13:26
  you mean, isn't it? So? According to Paula Rothenburg, Oh,
• 13:35
  Rothenberg, sorry, another women studies guru, it's not just college curriculum that
• 13:39
  needs transformation, but reality. So clear back in nineteen ninety two, probably
• 13:48
  clear back in nineteen seventy two, feminists were trying to push through university the
• 13:54
  ability to transform, transform the way you think, so that they could trans
• 14:00
  form the culture you live in. The Marxist feminist Rothberg puts the word in
• 14:07
  quotes itself. Mind was male, nature was female, and knowledge was created
• 14:13
  as an act of aggression. The fuck, that's what she says. Mind
• 14:18
  was male, nature was female. So nature is mindless and mind is unnatural,
• 14:26
  and knowledge was created as an act of aggression. So if I know
• 14:35
  my van is outside my apartment, that's aggressive. I'm aggressive. What we
• 14:41
  are doing, says philosopher Elizabeth Minnick, is comparable to Compernicus shattering our geocentricity,
• 14:52
  and the change is a fundamental as dangerous and exciting. She I think
• 14:58
  it's supposed to be as fundamental, and that was a type as dangerous and
• 15:01
  exciting. That's one of the bad things about publishing on paper is you can't
• 15:07
  go back and re edit. Typo's Mary Mary ellen Kpek. And surely,
• 15:13
  surely Copernicus was just was just one random kuk who was going against the science.
• 15:20
  The science. Don't dunt dun. You can't go You can't go along
• 15:26
  with some random kuk who who you saw in some random publication. You have
• 15:33
  to side with the consensus, right Neil. Of course, if it's a
• 15:39
  feminist academia, would that be the count census? It would o sad Mary
• 15:50
  ellen Kpek of the National Council for Research on Women calls it one of the
• 15:54
  most significant revolutions that's taken place in the history of knowledge over the last couple
• 15:58
  of hundred years. The revolution guys totally a revolution, one of the most
• 16:07
  significant. Now it is has been pretty significant because what they did, what
• 16:11
  they went through and did is started out with just women's studies as a class.
• 16:18
  Right, Women's studies was a I think five days a week, so
• 16:23
  it was a five hour class. Basically you would get you would get five
• 16:30
  credits for it for taking it, which is pretty good. You might need
• 16:36
  only take two other classes that that quarter or that semester in order to get
• 16:42
  the number of credits you needed, but in any case, that was it.
• 16:49
  Once you took it, you had taken Women's studies. That was the
• 16:52
  extent of the entire academic reach at that time, and over the last thirty
• 17:03
  years it has stretched from a class to a course of study, an area
• 17:15
  of academia where you could take the first course and then go on to the
• 17:22
  next one and the next one and they would all fall under the category of
• 17:26
  women's studies. And then they expanded a little bit more and started calling it
• 17:30
  gender studies. And added LGBTQ issues and also more ways to demonize men.
• 17:37
  And then they started branching it out into psychology, business and other education,
• 17:49
  little other areas where you might find the coursework wasn't called Women's studies, but
• 18:00
  had the influence of the Women's Studies department on these other departments, where the
• 18:08
  people that were writing the books that the professors were using to teach the courses
• 18:15
  were former Women's Studies graduates or Women's Studies minors or had taken enough Women's Studies
• 18:26
  courses that it influenced their outlook on their particular field. And that's sort of
• 18:33
  this was the start of that. So clearly the apothesis, I don't know
• 18:42
  if I'm saying, yeah, apotheosis of women's studies has arrived, a moment
• 18:48
  whose grandiose tomorrow the world rhetoric might provide laughter if it did not accurately capture
• 18:56
  the temper of the times. In fact, how it has been a swift
• 19:00
  and amazing trip for women's studies from what some quick critics regard as a jerry
• 19:07
  built discipline to dominatrix of the contemporary university. Unknown prior to nineteen sixty nine,
• 19:14
  when the first official program began at San Diego State University, which I
• 19:21
  will point this out too, that was the first in the United States.
• 19:25
  Women's studies actually originated in Australia. Women's studies has in slightly more than twenty
• 19:33
  years grown, like Topsy, a character in one of the books that has
• 19:38
  insisted be accorded a central place in the cannon. At the end of the
• 19:45
  seventies, there were over one hundred women's studies programs at schools across the country.
• 19:48
  By nineteen seventy seven, there were two hundred and seventy six. The
• 19:52
  number shot a three hundred and fifty programs and over thirty thousand different courses by
• 19:56
  nineteen eighty two, and continue to grow during the Reagan years, supposedly the
• 20:03
  dread era of oppression and cutbacks. Would everyone likes to count the number of
• 20:10
  men's studies courses. I believe it's still zero, but that's because every study
• 20:18
  is men's studies, right right. You have to use feminist math, Mike,
• 20:22
  you have to take that class as well. I'm sure it's under the
• 20:25
  gender studies of umbrella se Chemistry is actually men's studies, Physics is actually men's
• 20:32
  studies. Music, and fine art and liberal are everything is everything except women's
• 20:37
  studies is men's studies, and we need to dominate everything until everything is women's
• 20:44
  studies. And they've made some headway in that long slow most of the institution.
• 20:51
  Now, feminists did create coursework that they called men's studies, but it's
• 20:56
  not about uh, like feminism is about how oppressed women are and how the
• 21:04
  history of being a woman in civilization and modern civilization is one of of uh,
• 21:11
  disadvantage and discrimination and all that men's studies is not like that. Men's
• 21:15
  studies is about how men went wrong and need to be feminized in order to
• 21:22
  fix them. Like that's the whole focus of men's studies, what's wrong with
• 21:26
  men? And now it's all under the rubric of gender studies, which right,
• 21:30
  which the same thing, and so we have both both of them,
• 21:33
  women's studies and men's studies really their main focus as well, what's wrong with
• 21:40
  men and how is it hurting women? Like that's their their whole outlook.
• 21:45
  And yeah, it's all under the rubric of gender studies or now they're calling
• 21:51
  it interdisciplinary studies because they're they're absorbing ethnic studies, which was its own thing.
• 22:00
  In the mid twentieth century, at the time that women's studies started coming
• 22:07
  about, and and they've made they pretty much have managed to eclipse introduce ethnic
• 22:15
  studies with interdisciplinary studies by making ethnic studies a part of their department. Like
• 22:25
  it's still in a lot of a lot of universities, they'll still have an
• 22:30
  ethnic studies department, but it'll be run by women for the most part,
• 22:37
  or if it's not run by women, it'll be, you know, ostensibly
• 22:41
  run by a few men and dominated by women. And the professors with the
• 22:48
  most say so in you know, what are we gonna what are we going
• 22:51
  to add to the curriculum or dump from the curriculum this year? What's no
• 22:56
  longer okay for us to say, what did we teach in the past that's
• 23:00
  wrong now, you know, blah blah blah. That's all controlled for the
• 23:04
  most part by women. Heart take ethnic studies is a euphemism for racism.
• 23:14
  Yes you can. You can study other cultures. A lot of it is
• 23:21
  called history or geography or even religious studies. You could you could call it
• 23:30
  cultural studies and that wouldn't be racist. But there's a very thin wedge you
• 23:37
  can draw between ethnicity and race. I mean, ethnicity is just somewhere in
• 23:44
  between nationality and race. It's it's sort of hard to draw the line.
• 23:52
  I don't think anyone's been able to draw an objective line between the two.
• 23:56
  Interestingly, these also, I remember eight started out as African studies and then
• 24:03
  grew Yeah, and if I tried to make this point in nineteen ninety two,
• 24:10
  they might have said, no, of course it's not racism. Ethnicity
• 24:12
  isn't the same as racism. But in the cold light of day, with
• 24:17
  hindsight, now in twenty twelve, in twenty twenty four, we can say,
• 24:19
  yeah, it was racism. Look what it is. Now they're literally
• 24:23
  segregating students based on what they're learning in these athletic studies classes, which are
• 24:30
  now just an extension of gender studies. As this article is revealing, they
• 24:36
  always intended to well colonize ethnic studies, and under under the agenda of gender
• 24:48
  studies they most certainly did. In fact, I think I would say they
• 24:59
  want to unite as a means of, you know, presenting a unified front
• 25:07
  that you know, if you criticize one, the other comes to its defense
• 25:11
  by saying, oh, that's racist and if you criticize the other, the
• 25:15
  one comes to there to oh that's sexist. You know, you're just a
• 25:19
  a patriarchal, imperialist colonizer. That's that's trying to shut down the voices of
• 25:30
  the oppressed. How dare you? We're going to have our whole little indoctrination
• 25:33
  program here and there is nothing you can do about it. And it worked.
• 25:37
  It worked very well. And there's a reason why it worked very well.
• 25:41
  It wasn't just a bunch of women coming in and making proclamations and demands.
• 25:49
  There was there was more to the situation. So yeah, even even
• 25:55
  during the Reagan years when we're told that our federal government was suppressing feminism and
• 26:03
  uh gender and sexuality issues, you know, the the LGBT community, the
• 26:11
  uh racial communities that that you know, we're trying to get rid of affirmative
• 26:17
  action, which was really kind of ramped up in the nineties so after after
• 26:23
  the Reagan era. But it did exist as a thing during the Reagan era.
• 26:30
  Uh, It's it's contrary to their whole narrative. It expanded during that
• 26:37
  time, right like that, that's like them just like the getting a fucking
• 26:45
  a world tour Jesus Christ, three hundred and thirty thousand different courses that it
• 26:49
  does. That's that's that's not little. This that's big time right there,
• 26:56
  thirty different courses about how women are oppressed, right and then putting it that
• 27:04
  way. It's so fucking hilarious. But yeah, and not only did that,
• 27:11
  but like it kept increasing and it's still I'm sure increasing, you know,
• 27:18
  turning, they're like merging and turning into one clob of insane rhetoric.
• 27:26
  But funny yep. And on. On the discipline's twentieth anniversary. In nineteen
• 27:37
  eighty nine, my junior year, end of my sophomore year, beginning of
• 27:45
  my junior year in high school, there were five hundred and thirty programs,
• 27:52
  which has since increased to over six hundred and twenty. And that again,
• 27:56
  this is written in nineteen ninety two, so crazy. That's like it's like
• 28:03
  getting signed to death jam back then, you know what I mean. Yep,
• 28:10
  Artists come out and signed contracts that aren't as good as that of these
• 28:15
  slightly more than three thousand accredited colleges and universities in the United States, which
• 28:21
  that has grown exponentially as well, because it's big business talking high school kids
• 28:29
  into thinking that they need some sort of certification in order to get a job,
• 28:33
  and talking employers into thinking that they need some sort of certification in order
• 28:41
  to demonstrate that somebody is going to actually be a good worker. And they
• 28:45
  eliminated pretty much the concept of it used to be, you get a job
• 28:51
  and you would get trained, you would get different you know, you'd work
• 28:57
  with different managers. You might actually take a class before you went out onto
• 29:04
  the sales floor or the manufacturing floor, or you know, whatever you were
• 29:10
  doing in your workplace. You know, they might you might get you might
• 29:15
  get trained on machines, you might get taught a set of rules and policies
• 29:21
  that you have to follow. Like when I became a nurse's AID, I
• 29:23
  had a three week course and they still do the three week course work for
• 29:27
  nurses aid training. But now you can actually go to a trade school and
• 29:33
  get that. You don't actually get it necessarily from your employer. You can
• 29:37
  A lot of employers do still have their specific institutional training because one of the
• 29:45
  things that they discovered is you don't get your institutional philosophy toward how care is
• 29:53
  provided to your patients taught to your future employees if they go to Apollo Career
• 30:03
  Center to learn how to be a nurse's aid instead of the Valley Nursing Home
• 30:10
  where they get hired, and then they take the Valley Nursing Homes three week
• 30:14
  course and get the same testing. You have to take a test from the
• 30:19
  state. It's like a medical Board test, except it's like a really miniaturized
• 30:25
  version of it because you're only being tested on the things that you have to
• 30:29
  know to be a nurse's aide. You don't even have to get tested on
• 30:33
  anatomy and physiology for that at all. Like you you could actually not know
• 30:40
  the term leg and probably pass that test. You could not speak English very
• 30:45
  well and pass that test you if you were in an English speaking country or
• 30:51
  you know, Spanish in a Spanish speaking area as well. But yeah,
• 30:59
  I wonder if all of those people are going to get the student loans paid
• 31:00
  off by Biden. I wonder if people who studied gender studies in nineteen ninety
• 31:04
  two a retrospective student loans paid off by Biden is what. You can't do
• 31:11
  it because the Supreme Court told him he can't do You're fucking going to do
• 31:15
  it anyway. Yeah, that's not an a peaceable offense. I'm not a
• 31:18
  dictator. That other guy is louly lululu where am I. I think it's
• 31:22
  only going to extend to people who are currently in debt. So for instance,
• 31:27
  you know my husband paid off all of his debt. He won't he
• 31:30
  won't get anything out of it. But it's it's definitely going to pay millennials
• 31:38
  and zoomers for their votes, right, which is going to be interesting because
• 31:48
  there's half the time I talk to millennials about politics and stuff, one of
• 31:52
  the things I hear from them is that they don't vote because vote is a
• 32:00
  scam. It doesn't make a difference, like your vote is just one vote,
• 32:04
  and blah blah blah. It's exactly the opposite of what gen xers were
• 32:09
  told about voting and what Zoomers are getting told about voting. So what the
• 32:15
  result of that is going to be is that millennials, I think a lot
• 32:20
  of them, their voices are just not going to be heard in politics,
• 32:23
  like everybody else is going to make the decisions for them, and the millennials
• 32:28
  are essentially left out in the cold because such a small percentage of them is
• 32:35
  voting. Unless of course, the impression that I'm getting from from talking to
• 32:38
  real people is not representative of though the generation, and perhaps maybe pulling can
• 32:47
  say differently that a higher percentage of them than I'm encountering are actually voting,
• 32:53
  which I hope, you know, I hope a higher percentage is actually voting.
• 32:58
  But in the mean time, you know, if Biden buys their votes,
• 33:01
  maybe it's not a good not a good thing if they start voting.
• 33:06
  But your vote shouldn't be for sale in any case. So of these slightly
• 33:15
  more than three thousand at the time, accredited colleges and universities, over two
• 33:21
  thousand of them, according to the American Council and Education, offer some form
• 33:24
  of women's studies. At the time this was published, I was attending a
• 33:30
  university that was not one of those two thousand. My university had been around
• 33:36
  for about like one hundred and twenty years or something like that. At that
• 33:39
  point. It was founded by the Mennonite Church. You didn't have to be
• 33:45
  Mennonite or any special belief system to go there. It just happened to be
• 33:52
  the place to go in the area. If you were thinking about being a
• 33:54
  school teacher, which I was at the time, and they didn't have women's
• 34:00
  studies program. I was. I was actually joking with Lauren before the show.
• 34:05
  The homech department was our women's studies because that's that's about us. If
• 34:10
  you had a coursework, an area of coursework that was dominated by women on
• 34:15
  that campus, it was that everything else was pretty much integrated. Men and
• 34:21
  women were both, uh there were there were male and female professors and uh,
• 34:27
  you know, they they work. The students were pretty much there was
• 34:30
  a balance of male and female students and nobody cared about gender issues on campus.
• 34:36
  Really, But I suppose homec is always going to be a little out
• 34:40
  of balance there. Yeah, now it's now it's home wreck. Yeah,
• 34:49
  home wreck. Oh my god, it really is. Camille Paglia might deride
• 34:55
  the disciplineist, institutionalized sexism, sexism, and unchallenged group think, but over
• 35:00
  two thirds of all universities, nearly half of all four year colleges, and
• 35:06
  about one fourth of all two year institutions, which a lot of those are
• 35:09
  tech schools, remember, offer women's studies courses. There are also over seventy
• 35:16
  five centers or institutions for women's studies research, with three or four of these
• 35:24
  being added each year. How to account for this triumph? Okay, so
• 35:30
  before we go on to the next thing, I just want to point out
• 35:34
  it was during the eighties when all this was expanding, the late latter part
• 35:37
  of the eighties. This article was published a few years after Mary P.
• 35:46
  Kosse's iconic study. I hate calling it a study because it's really her survey,
• 35:55
  from which she concluded at the time that one in eight students, one
• 36:00
  in eight women of university age had been raped by the time they got graduated
• 36:09
  from university campus. It was it wasn't It wasn't a study so much as
• 36:15
  properly propaganda, right, and and then you know, remember her methodology was
• 36:22
  to ask questions other than were you raped, and then conclude from the answers
• 36:30
  that yes, they were. And some of those included things like did you
• 36:36
  ever have sex when you didn't want to because a man gave you alcohol?
• 36:40
  Like you could answer yes to that if you had initially when you when you
• 36:49
  went out, you hadn't planned specifically that, oh, I'm going to go
• 36:52
  out and have sex tonight, but you had changed your mind because somebody bought
• 36:58
  you would drink and you headed off. Right, Did you ever have sex
• 37:01
  when you didn't want to because the men bought you alcohol. Right, That's
• 37:06
  that's pretty much the question. So yeah, there there was that going on.
• 37:14
  And then the next year after this was published, we started seeing articles
• 37:19
  about this new law that was this new bill that was under consideration at the
• 37:24
  federal level called the Violence Against Women Act, that was passed in ninety three
• 37:31
  and became law in ninety four. This article is from ninety two. So
• 37:37
  when we talk about, you know, how this this is progressing in universities
• 37:42
  and everything, it's not in a vacuum. This was a concerted effort.
• 37:45
  This was part of a a coordinated attack on them, on the culture that
• 37:54
  was last place at the time. Closely thanks to the current Vice president,
• 38:00
  righty, oh yeah, Joe Biden wrote the Violence Against Women Act. He
• 38:06
  will tell you that if you ask, and he will tell you that if
• 38:08
  you if he remembered it when he was running for office, he remembered it
• 38:15
  multiple times and bragged about it multiple times. And the Violence Against the Women
• 38:20
  Act, I will I will remind you the Violence Against Women Act did not
• 38:23
  criminalize violence against women. It was already criminal. It was already criminal to
• 38:31
  assault somebody. It was already criminal to assault somebody who lived with you.
• 38:38
  It was already criminal to assault somebody who was your family member, and it
• 38:43
  was criminal regardless of whether that individual was male or female, but it was
• 38:47
  more enforced if that individual was female. It was already illegal to commit rape.
• 38:54
  Rape has been on the books since before America existed. It was in
• 39:00
  English common law so long ago that in the thirteenth century, when the average
• 39:08
  lifespan was far shorter and it was more normal to marry as a teenager and
• 39:15
  start a family, the age of consent was set. It was much lower
• 39:22
  than what we would expect today, but it was consistent with the lifestyles of
• 39:30
  the people at the time, where you know, you were kind of an
• 39:32
  adult by the time you were thirteen. You might get married at fourteen or
• 39:38
  fifteen and start a family, and so they set the age of consent.
• 39:43
  I think you were essentially guilty of statutory rape, although I don't think they
• 39:51
  called it then if you took advantage of somebody who was twelve at the time,
• 39:57
  so a couple of years younger than at the young end of when people
• 40:01
  were getting married and starting families, especially among the poor, and it was
• 40:07
  really again only enforced against men who took advantage of upper class girls. But
• 40:17
  yeah, so these things were not Violence against Women Act didn't pioneer anything in
• 40:24
  regard to protecting women against violence. People act like it did, but it
• 40:30
  wasn't revolutionary in that way at all. What it did was gender the issue.
• 40:36
  It polarized the issue, and it was already a little gendered. It
• 40:38
  was already more difficult to say, get somebody prosecuted for beating up a man
• 40:45
  that they lived with, unless it was elder abuse or child abuse. You
• 40:50
  know, a boy or a man, an old man, but not a
• 40:53
  woman who beat on her husband nineteen eighty. In nineteen eighty four, Congress
• 41:02
  passed the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act, which created a twenty four hour
• 41:08
  hotline, started funding shelters. It was gender neutral, so it basically made
• 41:15
  it so that you couldn't discriminate at the shelter level. So whether it was
• 41:22
  whether it was you know, Joe or Josephine that came in and said,
• 41:28
  I'm being abused in my home, this shelter had to provide some sort of
• 41:31
  help, and whether it was Joe or Josephine, the police had to make
• 41:37
  some sort of arrest, whether it was Joe or Josephine. The law afforded
• 41:43
  the individual who was abused some recourse, and the prosecutor was expected to prosecute
• 41:52
  the abuser, and there was expected to be some sort of perpetrator program that
• 42:00
  the abuser would attend, and there were perpetrator programs for both sexes. Nineteen
• 42:06
  ninety four that changed everything. Right, Violence Against Women Act comes along and
• 42:13
  suddenly it is legal for these shelters to discriminate against men, to kick out
• 42:20
  women with sons that are entering their teenage years, to eliminate their perpetrator programs
• 42:28
  for abusive women and their victim programs for male victims, and to promote the
• 42:35
  idea that this is something that men do to women and not something that women
• 42:40
  ever do. And they did. They did exactly that, and it worked,
• 42:45
  and it started with this this academic progress. During this time that all
• 42:53
  this was taking place, during this twenty year span, you had the Deluthe
• 43:00
  model formed. You had the creation of multiple programs intended to convince politicians and
• 43:10
  the public that domestic violence was something that was a tool of the patriarchy,
• 43:19
  something that men did as part of the patriarchy. With the intention of dominating
• 43:24
  and controlling the female population. So that's what we're in the timeframe we're in
• 43:32
  as all of this is happening. So, yeah, women's studies courses all
• 43:38
  over seventy five centers or institutes for women's studies research, with three or four
• 43:44
  of these being added each year at that time. How to account for this
• 43:51
  triumph? Partisans of women's studies, of course, feel that the discipline has
• 43:58
  succeeded simply because of its intellectual power. Others say that it's growing influence has
• 44:04
  been created, not earned, that the power of and we have to go
• 44:07
  to the next page here, which if you're if you guys in the stream,
• 44:12
  are not watching the stream, it's you just need to go to the
• 44:17
  left side of the page and scroll down to eleven and open that. But
• 44:22
  I'm going to flip over to it. So we had the power of women's
• 44:30
  studies is political rather than intellectual, and that this is a synthesized revolution brought
• 44:37
  into being by the big bucks of philanthropic organizations like the six point one billion
• 44:47
  dollar that's back then, by the way, six point one billion dollar Ford
• 44:52
  Foundation. I would expect the Ford Foundation probably has more than that now quite
• 44:59
  quite a bit exponentially. Again, like the increases that we have seen throughout
• 45:07
  throughout our time have been just unbelievable in terms of how much money is involved
• 45:14
  in this so called grassroots revolution that has been taking place. Let's see,
• 45:22
  make sure I'm caught up with the chat here too, so we have some
• 45:29
  superchows that are applicable. Richard Pierre gave us five dollars and said, I
• 45:34
  have a disagree degree in entered disciplinary slash gender slash winds women's studies. Now
• 45:38
  would you like fries with that? You misogynistic stuff? But they get The
• 45:45
  sad thing is that's not the way it works, right, you get Yeah,
• 45:50
  and they all jobs at human resources or in the domestic violence victims advocacy
• 45:57
  industry or industrial complex, or they're they're working as gender studies professors and other
• 46:07
  universities. Then he gave us another five dollars and said, just how much
• 46:10
  difference is there between ethnic slash African studies curricula and a certain type of war
• 46:15
  propaganda related to a regime led by a failed artist with an odd mustache.
• 46:21
  Again, actually, that's that's not far off. There's quite a bit in
• 46:28
  ethnic studies that is fairly similar to the propaganda of that particular war. The
• 46:36
  only prominent difference I see is that the logical logistical mobilization to carry out the
• 46:40
  same thing but directed at a different demographic hasn't been spun up yet. Am
• 46:46
  I wrong about this? Well, there are people talking about it on social
• 46:51
  media, but of course it's that actually is grassroots, so it gets quashed
• 46:57
  very easily. Richard Beier gave us another five dollars and said, what kind
• 47:00
  of degrees slash qualifications have been obtained by certain degenerate artists who contributed to their
• 47:07
  employer losing their special autonomous status for their employers certain property? Again? Uh,
• 47:13
  yeah, that's that's another one. Gender studies heavily affected the art departments,
• 47:20
  the arts and the humanities. They actually had the capability if they so
• 47:23
  desired to actually construct a nuclear power plant their district. Yeah, the legal
• 47:30
  capability, I don't. I don't think they would have been able to.
• 47:34
  They wouldn't have understood. They would have been shouting at the building to manifest
• 47:40
  it's uh, it's nuclear properties and demanding that it follow the science. Yeah,
• 47:50
  Richard, you do have a point, though, they they probably are
• 47:58
  all brainwashed. Then let's see packard excellence. So Tom says, currently the
• 48:06
  Ford Foundation is over ten billion. Ten billion. Yeah, I mean not
• 48:13
  that that's not a lot, but I would think that it had had grown
• 48:16
  a bit more than that, but I guess not. Well, among other
• 48:20
  things, you know, they give away a lot of money. So but
• 48:22
  at the same time, like they're funding shit like this, stright, they're
• 48:25
  funding this, They've been funding shit like this for decades. What they haven't
• 48:35
  been funding is efforts at changing culturally, changing the economic situation of the bottom
• 48:45
  ranks of the economic spectrum. People. Yeah, people who are just incapable
• 48:53
  of either earning a living because they don't have the skills, the knowledge,
• 49:00
  understanding the personality whatever, or managing their money. And they're not they're not
• 49:07
  helping with that at all because they're busy with shit like this. Most of
• 49:13
  those billions go into the pockets of the zealots who are teaching these courses.
• 49:16
  Yep. A lot of money gets made working in that academic department. And
• 49:23
  if you're not on board with that academic department, they will do everything they
• 49:30
  can to get rid of you from your academic department. So that that's another
• 49:37
  another aspect of the issue. And then we also, I think this is
• 49:44
  a comment on the image. Catherine Scully gave us five dollars and said pair
• 49:49
  character lifting some weights, saying keep it up. Comment on that image from
• 49:53
  the beginning of the stream there. So yeah, it's it's political rather than
• 49:59
  intellectual. The notion that women studies should have sprung full blown from the head
• 50:04
  of it of such an organization might tap a villain a fallocentric myth, but
• 50:12
  the carer the career of Miriam Chamberlain in the network whose invisible strands this career
• 50:19
  highlights, suggests that this view might be the correct one. The founding President
• 50:24
  Resident Scholar of the National Council for Research on Women, Chamberlain was formerly a
• 50:32
  program officer in the Ford Foundation's powerful Department of Education and Culture. The Foundation
• 50:38
  had a Department of Education and Culture. And why didn't spend the amount of
• 50:45
  money that it spent on feminism helping people be better able to earn their own
• 50:52
  living and support themselves in society. That's not where their money went. Their
• 51:04
  money went to shit like this, just just pointing that out again. She
• 51:10
  admits that many of the Women's studies programs were part of my portfolio quote unquote
• 51:16
  part of my portfolio in her days at the Foundation. Chamberlain recently teamed with
• 51:22
  Alison Bernstein, a former Princeton dean who now holds Chamberlain's old job at Ford,
• 51:30
  to chart the short march of women's studies to prominence in philanthropy and the
• 51:37
  emergence for women's studies, which appeared in Columbia University's Teacher College Record, a
• 51:43
  publication basically for educators. So what we just saw there was a description of
• 51:51
  the institutional promotion of women's studies as coursework. Women's studies proponent vents did not
• 52:00
  have to fight their way in. They just had to grab the handholds and
• 52:07
  footholds that were handed to them were put in place for them by the establishment,
• 52:19
  as Chamberlain and Bernstein tell it. In nineteen sixty nine, a group
• 52:22
  of faculty at Cornell organized a conference to examine issues raised by the women's movement.
• 52:30
  They found a pattern of neglect and often distortion in the academy, which
• 52:36
  clearly called for a remedy. Administrators proved cooperative and pilot programs for women's studies
• 52:44
  were planted by coastally at Cornell and San Diego State planted like a garden or
• 52:52
  like you know, a spy like evidence like evidence. So essentially that like
• 53:01
  this, this was a very very legitimate revolution with with totally legitimate institutional,
• 53:12
  corporate and government sponsors. Very organic, right, guys, it's not It's
• 53:16
  not that academia pushed this on women and on the culture in which they were
• 53:24
  pushing it on women. It's that women were just so fed up that they
• 53:30
  they decided on this in mass and and just started doing it totally. Well,
• 53:36
  I'll tell you what's organic. That would be the pattern of neglect and
• 53:42
  often distortion. Yeah, it's like it's organic in that bullshit is organic,
• 53:51
  right, bullshit, bullshit is definitely organic. Bullshit. Magic mushrooms can grow
• 53:59
  from bill ship. Nothing from this ship but more ship. Well no,
• 54:04
  no, that that whatever does grow from this does cause hallucinations at least,
• 54:10
  So there is there is that we could we could you know, expand on
• 54:15
  if we wanted to. If you eat enough ship, you'll probably hallucinate.
• 54:21
  Yeah, as let's see you already read that as if describing Sorry, I
• 54:30
  was gonna just say, depending on where you live, if you drink it
• 54:32
  enough tab water, you might hallucinate as well. Yeah, actually we we
• 54:37
  don't drink tap water here because of that. Yeah, just I'm in Ohio,
• 54:44
  you know, like you you you can't drink the water here. It's
• 54:46
  like Mexico. Especially that thing that happened a year ago. Yeah, that
• 54:52
  that thing that suddenly vanished out of the news that that you know, doesn't
• 54:58
  doesn't exact place that doesn't exist in Ohio, you know. But yeah,
• 55:02
  our our climate here at Ohio is a train wreck. We'll just say that.
• 55:12
  Oh, there's aweful. So as if describing the discovery of DNA,
• 55:16
  Chamberlain, Chamberlain and Bernstein breathlessly characterized the prime movers of the women's movement as
• 55:23
  a small group of committed feminist scholars who risked their tenure, possibilities, and
• 55:29
  careers to develop the new courses, often without compensation those poor tiers. It
• 55:39
  was at this stage, they add, that Ford entered the picture, giving
• 55:43
  the brave pioneers a sympathetic reception uh huh when they asked for seed money to
• 55:51
  grow their revolution. The first stage of Ford support for women's studies came in
• 55:55
  the awards or in awards to key individuals. Nineteen seventy two, the year
• 56:00
  I was born. By the way, Ford President McGeorge Bundy. Wow.
• 56:10
  Ford president like not George mcbundy. McGeorge Bundy appointed and I forgot about that
• 56:20
  an interdivisional task force on women. The same year, Ford announced a national
• 56:27
  fellowship program for faculty and doctoral dissertation research on the role of women in society
• 56:32
  and women's studies broadly construed. Ford gave six hundred and fifty five thousand dollars
• 56:42
  for faculty fellowships in nineteen seventy two, a public school teacher earned less than
• 56:50
  ten thousand dollars a year hikes. Ford gave six hundred and fifty five dollars
• 57:00
  for faculty fellowships, three hundred and seventy five thousand for doctoral dissertations, and
• 57:06
  sixty five thousand, three hundred and ninety six dollars rather specific there for individual
• 57:12
  scholars involved in one hundred and thirty projects. Ford consultant Beverly Guy Shiftall,
• 57:22
  I think that's chef Tall, could be sheep, sheaf tall, but it's
• 57:28
  Chef Tall says that the significance of Ford's early support cannot be overstated because it
• 57:32
  lent legitimacy to the newly emergent field. In other words, nobody would have
• 57:38
  taken these bitches seriously if the Ford Foundation hadn't thrown a shit ton of money
• 57:45
  in behind them. So what we're looking at here is essentially the corporate sponsorship
• 57:58
  of the revolution. Like the Ford Foundation, Yeah, is not a money
• 58:04
  making corporation. It's a foundation, foundational institution intended to do charitable work,
• 58:14
  or at least ostensibly intended to do charitable work. But yeah, this is
• 58:21
  definitely pushed by the establishment. At that point. The Ford Foundation was part
• 58:28
  of the establishment one hundred and three projects, so that's even that. Dividing
• 58:39
  that by one hundred and thirty, that's still quite a bit of money per
• 58:44
  project for the individuals involved well, also providing financial assistance. But it was
• 58:55
  more than just infrastructure. Ford Ford made women who would have labored in the
• 59:01
  vineyards, according to the usual rhythms of academic career building into overnight superstars.
• 59:07
  So laboring in the vineyards means, you know, you're a professor for years
• 59:12
  and years and years. Maybe you write a book, maybe if your institution
• 59:16
  approves it. You know, you write a book about your particular class that
• 59:25
  you teach. Say, if you're a calculus teacher and a calculus professor,
• 59:31
  and your class is essentially on how to use a graphing calculator and how to
• 59:38
  understand the equations that you're using the calculator to graph. That you write a
• 59:45
  book about that particular type of calculator and those equations that you're teaching, those
• 59:52
  formulas that you're instructing the students on how to use, and the universe.
• 1:00:00
  He says, yes, you can teach from that book. That book is
• 1:00:01
  approved, you know, or the accreditation system approves it. Right, then
• 1:00:07
  you've you've really made something of yourself. And maybe after that you get tenure,
• 1:00:12
  or it might happen the other way around. You get tenure, and
• 1:00:14
  then you get to write your own book and the book becomes the standard.
• 1:00:22
  But in the meantime, you know, twenty thirty years of a career has
• 1:00:29
  passed and you get your recognition. Except these women, these women were newbie
• 1:00:35
  professors. Some of them might even have been adjunct professors without degrees in anything
• 1:00:39
  like I was. And all of a sudden they're superstars in academia because the
• 1:00:47
  Ford Foundation just you know, put up a fountain of money underneath them,
• 1:00:53
  and it boosted them up in the air like a cartoon when they when they
• 1:01:00
  were searching for a for a metaphor involving labor that women do. I guess
• 1:01:07
  the most laborious thing they could find was vineyards. I think that's kind of
• 1:01:12
  an academic phrase really for career building, like taking care Europe, like IVS.
• 1:01:20
  Okay, I get it. Yeah, it's there's there's there's something ironic
• 1:01:24
  about any metaphor about women laboring. Yeah, other other than in pregnancy labor.
• 1:01:35
  Yeah, considering if if you look at the century in which this is
• 1:01:40
  taking place, women did less and less labor over the years, even as
• 1:01:47
  they increased their presence in middle class workplaces. Uh. It used to be
• 1:01:53
  in the nineteenth century and before, a significant part of the work done within
• 1:02:00
  a given culture involved a strenuous, manual labor that was dirty and dangerous.
• 1:02:09
  A lot of it was dismal and boring. You know, there were a
• 1:02:13
  lot of there was a lot of repetition, There was a lot of you
• 1:02:16
  know, kind of gambling on whether or not you actually achieved anything, you
• 1:02:22
  know, and so on. And it was when women were involved in that.
• 1:02:28
  It was usually women who were working because their families didn't have enough money
• 1:02:32
  to live on from one income. So women in the lower end of the
• 1:02:39
  income spectrum whose husbands were not education educated and who were doing more menial tasks,
• 1:02:46
  the tasks more likely to get them killed, the tasks more likely to
• 1:02:52
  send them home too exhausted to eat and filthy and and pain. Right,
• 1:02:59
  and then women would get jobs doing things like working in textile mills, or
• 1:03:05
  cleaning other people's houses, or raising other people's kids, doing other people's laundry.
• 1:03:10
  And prior to that, you know, you had women working in working
• 1:03:15
  in fields doing something called gleaning, which is basically, after the harvest,
• 1:03:20
  there's some there's stuff left on the ground that is still usable that it's not
• 1:03:24
  worth it to the farmer to go out there by hand and pick it up,
• 1:03:30
  but it is worth it to the poor because they have nothing. And
• 1:03:35
  you know, those kind of jobs. Women did stuff like that, And
• 1:03:37
  there were jobs women did in the coal mines until Queen Victoria got upset that
• 1:03:42
  women were doing dirty jobs and put the cabash to that. It's funny communists
• 1:03:49
  pandered to the workers and pretended to speak for the workers back in the old
• 1:03:53
  days when women were actually workers. Yeah, and then when technology the advice
• 1:04:00
  to the point where the only industrial workers or indeed agricultural workers left were men.
• 1:04:05
  Communism shifted its focus into the middle class and the upper class and until
• 1:04:15
  there weren't even any women doing those jobs, and then they went, fuck
• 1:04:19
  it, will just pander to women, even if they're not doing jobs anymore.
• 1:04:23
  Communism has always pandered to women. Anyone else get this feeling? Anyone
• 1:04:28
  else have that inkling that it's that it's always it's always pandered to not workers
• 1:04:34
  whatsoever, but whoever has the most emotional clout in any given society, which
• 1:04:42
  is and always will be women. You know. The sad thing is like
• 1:04:47
  that. It's It's true. If you want to undermine a culture and bring
• 1:04:53
  about a change of fundamental change in the way people live in that culture,
• 1:04:59
  that provides it's you with the power to run that culture and financially, exploit,
• 1:05:05
  economically exploit that culture. You start by persuading women to agree to your
• 1:05:15
  your ideals and your changes that you want. Because if you try to fool
• 1:05:21
  men, if you try to pull the wool over men's eyes, men are
• 1:05:26
  accustomed to doing what is working, and they don't want to stop doing what
• 1:05:30
  is working. They want to continue doing what is working. And if you
• 1:05:34
  come along and tell them that the results that they are seeing aren't real and
• 1:05:43
  that they are, they're the bad guys for trying to achieve those results.
• 1:05:48
  And you need to change. They need to change everything they're doing because belief
• 1:05:55
  systems and philosophies and isms and phobias and shit. Men will tell you to
• 1:06:00
  fuck write the hell off, you know, unless you can provide them with
• 1:06:03
  some concrete evidence that lives will be improved by making the changes you're demanding,
• 1:06:12
  men will just tell you to fuck write the hell off right. Women,
• 1:06:15
  on the other hand, women will listen to a beautifully stated lie and just
• 1:06:21
  buy everything about it and be like, yes, yes, take my brains,
• 1:06:29
  shape them into what you want. I will be the instrument of your
• 1:06:34
  change in society. And it's a lot harder to get women to critically evaluate
• 1:06:46
  this kind of political you know, double talk the feminists have come up with,
• 1:06:51
  the communists have come up with than it is to get There are men
• 1:06:56
  that will fall for that shit too, And obviously there are women who won't,
• 1:06:59
  or there wouldn't be women at Honey Badger Radio, all right, But
• 1:07:02
  there wouldn't be a honey Badger radio because it was. It was started by
• 1:07:06
  three women who are not like that. But but the fact is that,
• 1:07:14
  you know, in terms of the majority, in terms of the average,
• 1:07:15
  in terms of the norm, what I just described, that's it, and
• 1:07:20
  women women will go right along with it. And if there's a war and
• 1:07:25
  one culture wins, that war dominates the other culture, what ends up happening
• 1:07:31
  is the men get killed and the women join the new culture. Women are
• 1:07:35
  more malleable that way. The overwhelming majority of women will just morph into members
• 1:07:45
  of the new culture. So that's just a fact of life. It's not
• 1:07:53
  a good fact, but it is a fact. Let's see, as one
• 1:08:00
  authoritative history of the women's studies movement notes, fifty percent of the senior people
• 1:08:06
  at Ford supported became prominent in women's studies, as did at least one third
• 1:08:15
  of the people in the dissertation program. So the people they paid to write
• 1:08:19
  dissertations packard. That's a good way to put it. Women's acceptance of sweet
• 1:08:27
  sounding lies is why the devil approached Eve in the garden, Because what would
• 1:08:31
  Adam have done. Adam would have told him to fuck write the hell off
• 1:08:38
  but yeah, so these women. The backbone of the women's studies academic invasion
• 1:08:47
  came from the Ford Foundation. It was sponsored, it was establishment promoted,
• 1:08:55
  it was not grassroots, and where Ford led. Of course, other foundations
• 1:09:03
  soon followed. In the early nineteen eighties, I was gonna say, all
• 1:09:11
  they needed is that that one domino to fall, yep, and that was
• 1:09:15
  it. YEP. In the early nineteen eighties, Ford commissioned Katherine Simpson Stimpson,
• 1:09:21
  a Rutgers dean, to write a monograph called Women's Studies in the United
• 1:09:26
  States, which shows that the with the possible exception of the Jerry Lewis Telethon,
• 1:09:31
  every other philanthropy involved in education heavy hitters like the Rockefeller Brothers Fund,
• 1:09:41
  the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the Helena Ruberstein Foundation, the Russell Sage
• 1:09:46
  Foundation, the Exxon Foundation, the this is the name everybody should be familiar
• 1:09:54
  with now, the Eli P. Lilly Foundation on the who Eli Lily is
• 1:09:59
  now right, and the Reverson Foundation jumped on the bandwagon Ford set in motion.
• 1:10:10
  So here we have Originally the backbone of the start of the women's studies
• 1:10:15
  invasion of academia came from the establishment, the Ford Foundation, and then they
• 1:10:21
  got their steroids. This stellar lineup alone would have been impressive enough, but
• 1:10:30
  private philanthropic funds attracted public funds as well. Soon the governmental agencies funding women's
• 1:10:36
  studies included the National Endowment for the Humanities right, the Fund for the Improvement
• 1:10:45
  of post Secondary Education. These obviously were blanket things that funded other things that
• 1:10:53
  expanded their funding to women's studies, the National Institute for Education. And then
• 1:11:00
  this last thing, the Women's Education Equity Act. Whah, all right,
• 1:11:08
  so what is that? That is an act of Congress, an act of
• 1:11:14
  Congress to fund the feminist invasion, the feminist seepage. I guess you could
• 1:11:28
  say into academia, right, the roots of the tree of feminism that branched
• 1:11:38
  out into every area of academia over the next twenty or thirty years, to
• 1:11:45
  where you couldn't take any course of study without having some part of your coursework
• 1:11:51
  influenced by feminist ideology. This so called grassroots revolution is so called rebellion of
• 1:12:04
  everyday average women, of the general female population against the evil patriarchy. Was
• 1:12:15
  funded by the patriarchy, was funded by the their they're so called enemies,
• 1:12:23
  the government. They the Act of Congress that was passed to fund this.
• 1:12:30
  The Women's Education Equity Act created funding for this as the next grassroots movement.
• 1:12:39
  Grassroots movements don't start happening in universities, folks. I don't know who needs
• 1:12:45
  to hear this or why the fuck you would need to hear it. Grassroots
• 1:12:49
  movements start with the working class. Hello, communists, are you hearing it?
• 1:13:00
  Doesn't start with white collar TAFSID universities. That's the exact opposite of what
• 1:13:04
  you're talking about. It's not like I'm expecting communists to be at all consistent
• 1:13:11
  with their beliefs. They never have. It's always been a doctrine writer of
• 1:13:15
  upside downland. Yeah, yep. It's It's amazing how people think this happened
• 1:13:25
  organically, How people think this was just something that you know, manifested over
• 1:13:30
  time because women were oppressed. Women were so oppressed, you know, during
• 1:13:36
  during especially during the twentieth century, right, women were so oppressed that all
• 1:13:43
  of the network of big philanthropic organizations might read this money laundering organizations in the
• 1:13:53
  United States, and the federal government, through an Act of Congress, funded
• 1:13:58
  its growth. Totally totally oppressed. Uh, you know, obviously because every
• 1:14:06
  oppressed group gets money from the government to fund the growth of their revolution against
• 1:14:14
  the government. As the network was established, a revolving door was built linking
• 1:14:21
  government foundation in academia, that the room of their own built by the vanguard
• 1:14:29
  of women's studies had no glass ceiling is proved by the career of someone like
• 1:14:32
  Joan Strominus, a one time administrator at Let's go up here. Let me
• 1:14:43
  see if I got this right, the right flat yep. Okay, administrators
• 1:14:46
  straighter at women's programs over a three year period to nineteen million dollars. That's
• 1:14:55
  not right. There's more above this, okay, one at Kenyon College,
• 1:14:59
  where the effort mainstream feminism created chaos during the UH during the late nineteen eighties.
• 1:15:05
  Stramanis is now a program director at the Fund for the Improvement of post
• 1:15:11
  Secondary Education, which has an annual budget of fifteen million dollars and a mandate
• 1:15:15
  to improve post secondary education through a broad range of reforms and innovations. So
• 1:15:21
  she goes from we are we going to acknowledge the nightmare field that is that
• 1:15:27
  picture. Yeah, we're gonna we're gonna acknowledge that. She goes from administrator
• 1:15:34
  at a single university to a program director at a an organization that is specifically
• 1:15:44
  about education, uh, to you know, to benefit multiple universities. And
• 1:15:48
  yeah, this is a this is Catherine Stimson. Look at that shit.
• 1:15:56
  Not a good picture to begin with, but she does. She looks like
• 1:16:01
  she's about to eat you. No, that's rocky from the mask. Oh
• 1:16:09
  god, no, she does. She looks like a zombie in that picture.
• 1:16:12
  It's and it's it isn't. One of the problems with a lot of
• 1:16:15
  these publications, like I think this publication may have printed that picture a little
• 1:16:23
  too dark. And uh, every bad feature in the face is emphasized by
• 1:16:30
  the the photographer chose a bad place to photograph her. She was obviously photographed
• 1:16:35
  outdoors in bright sunlight, and so every every shadow and every highlight emphasizes like
• 1:16:47
  how the cheekbones stand out, where the wrinkles, smile wrinkles are in her
• 1:16:50
  face. It makes her look garish. Where if the photographer had simply used
• 1:17:00
  flash and and allowed a little light to hit her in the face from directly
• 1:17:06
  on instead of up above where the sun was, the dark shadows under her
• 1:17:11
  eyes wouldn't have been so dramatic. The dark shadows under her cheek wouldn't have
• 1:17:14
  been cheeks, wouldn't have been so dramatic, and then you also would have
• 1:17:18
  seen less contrast in the image is overly contrasty. So this woman looks way
• 1:17:25
  worse in that image than she probably does in real life. But just just
• 1:17:30
  to say, just saying, yeah, you can. You can make somebody
• 1:17:34
  look really bad with imagery. We saw that also with with the images from
• 1:17:44
  what's his name, the guy that brought the pedophile to the first Yeah,
• 1:17:49
  GQ magazine. No, they did that on purpose. This is just photo
• 1:17:54
  Copying's just it might have been on purpose as well. It might have been
• 1:17:59
  on purposes. Well, like, you don't know how these people viewed this
• 1:18:02
  woman and what they were trying to do. And it's always been a thing
• 1:18:11
  right between political factions that, you know, whether they have legitimate arguments or
• 1:18:17
  not, people with perfectly legitimate arguments would still try to uglify their opponents.
• 1:18:25
  And it's just I don't like it. I think it detracts from the arguments
• 1:18:30
  from people taking the arguments seriously because it's immature. But it is a thing.
• 1:18:33
  The other it is possible that it's this was due to incompetence due to,
• 1:18:40
  you know, lack of professionalism, lack of understanding of the technology they
• 1:18:44
  were using and everything. But either way, I'm largely going by the way
• 1:18:50
  feminists pose for photographs even to this day. Oh yeah, they grinned like
• 1:18:55
  a chesha cat like butts. It wouldn't melt in their ass. It's called
• 1:18:59
  douper's delight. Yeah, oh my gosh. Yeah. But yeah. So
• 1:19:05
  she goes to being in charge of a fifteen million dollar budget in the eighties
• 1:19:13
  when teaching careers were like twenty and thirty thousand dollars. She claims that women's
• 1:19:24
  studies has never been a primary focus of fipsee but the numbers suggest otherwise.
• 1:19:30
  As early as nineteen seventy three to seventy five, the organization was allocating two
• 1:19:34
  point three million the for projects about women. That's pretty vague, very vague.
• 1:19:42
  And again, this is going to academics. And remember in nineteen seventy
• 1:19:48
  three to nineteen seventy five, we're still at or under ten thousand a year
• 1:19:56
  for their annual salary. The money they make isn't that much, So if
• 1:20:02
  they can get a piece of that two point three million dollars, that's a
• 1:20:10
  big, big, bonus for them, right, somebody, somebody gets handed
• 1:20:15
  five hundred dollars in nineteen seventy three. Uh, that's that's like, that's
• 1:20:23
  more than a month's worth of groceries. That's uh, you know, maybe
• 1:20:28
  two or more months rent depending on where they live, or a mortgage payment.
• 1:20:32
  That's that's quite a nice You could actually buy a pretty good used car
• 1:20:38
  for that much. And yeah, non, not a bad little chunk of
• 1:20:44
  money. It is not inaccurate to say that Fips he carries the ball which
• 1:20:50
  Ford inflated. By nineteen seventy nine, Ford had granted more than thirty million
• 1:20:58
  dollars to quote, advocacy, research, and curriculum projects in women's studies.
• 1:21:04
  Beverly guy Cheftahl says that as a result of its own Women in the World
• 1:21:12
  Report, Ford more than doubled its finding for women's program or its funding for
• 1:21:16
  women's programs over a three year period to nineteen million dollars. The stage of
• 1:21:24
  the revolution had arrived. Yeah, revolution, it's a revolution against the establishment
• 1:21:30
  that is paying for the revolution then paved with cash. I mean, how
• 1:21:38
  can you call it a revolution when the people you're revolting against are paying the
• 1:21:45
  bills? Right, here attack us, kick our asses God. In nineteen
• 1:21:59
  seventy four, felt Ford funded the Institute for Research on Women and Gender at
• 1:22:03
  Stanford. Stanford University, another big vern Shakers, where they did the prison
• 1:22:10
  experiment. Yes Yes, Susan Fluti would eventually write her book Backlash at the
• 1:22:17
  center, showing how the agenda of women's studies involved outreach from academ to popular
• 1:22:23
  culture. Over the next six years, Ford provided core support for women's research
• 1:22:29
  centers at Berkeley, Columbia University, Harvard, and the University of Michigan the
• 1:22:38
  University of Wisconsin. By nineteen eighty three, twelve more centers got Ford money.
• 1:22:45
  These institutions, yeah, say, Bernstein and Chamberlain provided models for the
• 1:22:53
  rapid expansion of campus based research centers that followed, you know, like the
• 1:22:59
  one at Kent State University. Yeah. Packard says, in nineteen seventy four,
• 1:23:06
  I could have bought a nice nineteen sixty five old Cutlass convertible for six
• 1:23:13
  hundred dollars. That would have been That would have been nice, you know,
• 1:23:16
  like we had an in the eighties, We had a Plymouth Grand Fury
• 1:23:26
  three. Look, it would have looked similar to the old Crown Victoria's that
• 1:23:30
  the Blues Brothers drove through them all the cop cars. It had the two
• 1:23:35
  headlights side by side on the front. It was a real boxy. But
• 1:23:42
  I think my I think my dad paid like two or three hundred dollars for
• 1:23:45
  that car, and we we must have drove it for like fifteen years,
• 1:23:56
  drove the shit out of it. Actually I missed that car. That was
• 1:23:59
  a great car. But yeah, nineteen sixty five old Cutlass in nineteen seventy
• 1:24:04
  four would have been a nice car for six hundred dollars. Can you believe
• 1:24:14
  has small they're making cars now, mantreme, Yeah, give me, give
• 1:24:18
  me a break, man, It's not my fault. I'll tell you what.
• 1:24:23
  The leg room is disappearing. That's that's something I'm noticing. Let's see
• 1:24:30
  included in this category. Included in this category are the Southwest Institute for Research
• 1:24:40
  on Women at the University of Arizona, which services a four state region,
• 1:24:45
  and other centers at the universities of Washington. Duke. Everybody remembers what Duke
• 1:24:49
  was famous for in the men's rights movement. Right the Duke would cross falls
• 1:24:55
  alligation ordeal uh North Carolina and State in nineteen eighty two, Ford and the
• 1:25:02
  Charles Stewart Mott Foundation helped establish the Spelman College Women's Center that was I think
• 1:25:11
  the first women's center in the United States. Stage three of the Ford Blueprint
• 1:25:17
  for Women's Studies. Remember this, this is a revolution, guys of Ford's
• 1:25:23
  running it now at this point, right. It's a blueprint for women's studies,
• 1:25:28
  not something that the grassroots is running. Stage three of the Ford Blueprint
• 1:25:33
  for Women's Studies consisted of support for publications and associations. Ford was a major
• 1:25:42
  funder of Florence Howe's Feminist Press, which Miriam Chamberlain and Bernstein call one of
• 1:25:48
  the most influential advocates of women's studies. The omnipresent Chamberlain herself is herself a
• 1:25:56
  member of the board of directors. Howand are Associates used a Ford grant to
• 1:26:00
  produce Who's Who and Where in Feminists or in Women's Studies, which listed some
• 1:26:06
  three thousand feminist teachers and five thousand courses in over two thousand colleges, and
• 1:26:14
  enabled the troops in this war on curriculum to coordinate their efforts. So we
• 1:26:23
  now have Ford calling the shots. We have Ford funding the shots. We
• 1:26:27
  have Ford firing the shots in this totally grassroots, very legitimate, organic women's
• 1:26:38
  revolution. And by the way, in the middle of a woman hating patriarchy
• 1:26:48
  where women have what, no power and no influence, just these a little
• 1:26:58
  bit more, just a little bit more, and things will be okay.
• 1:27:04
  The patriarchy will be defeated if you just give us some more money. A
• 1:27:13
  network congealed around the journals, the growth of which Say Bernstein in Chamberlain has
• 1:27:19
  been phenomenal. Women's Studies and Feminist Studies appeared in nineteen seventy two, while
• 1:27:26
  Signs, the Journal of Women in Culture and Society, made his debut in
• 1:27:30
  nineteen seventy five under the leadership of Captain or Captain Catherine Stimpson. These are
• 1:27:36
  academic publications. We also in the eighties saw Miss magazine, which was founded
• 1:27:45
  by Gloria steinem Cia operative Ford helped launch Signs. Say Bernstein in Chamberlain,
• 1:27:56
  while the Carnegie, Rockefeller and Lily foundations have funded special issues. The feminist
• 1:28:01
  press puts out Women's ah dan it get back up to the top of the
• 1:28:08
  article. This is horribly somatic, guys, and this is well, this
• 1:28:15
  was pages of a magazine. So the feminist press puts out women's Women's Studies
• 1:28:25
  quarterly, which I think is still in publication. Another key, they'd probably
• 1:28:30
  call it something else now though, Interdisciplinary Studies quarterly or some shit. Another
• 1:28:35
  key step towards institutionalization of the revolution was the nineteen seventy seven establishment of the
• 1:28:43
  National Women's Studies Association in WSA, an organization designed to further the social,
• 1:28:48
  political, and professional development of women's studies throughout the country and the world.
• 1:28:56
  The Ford Foundation made what Chamberlain and Bernstein call a Strati grant that enabled the
• 1:29:01
  founders of the organization to meet and prepare working papers and plans for the founding
• 1:29:06
  convention. So they basically had a big meeting with academics from all over the
• 1:29:15
  world to spread this cancer to the UK, to Canada, to South America,
• 1:29:24
  further around in Australia, you know, try to spread it around Asia
• 1:29:29
  like this everywhere, right all over Europe. Does any of this countless colonialism?
• 1:29:34
  Nah? Nah, definitely not colonialism, Like they're just trying to spread
• 1:29:41
  their message. The Ford Foundation made what oh I read that part a lobbying,
• 1:29:50
  an organization that made sure that women's studies continues to thrive. The NWSA
• 1:30:00
  a membership that includes not only scholars and administrators, community activists and other women
• 1:30:04
  studies practitioners that should be but community activists. So basically they have a card
• 1:30:13
  carrying grassroots movement that is totally organic and totally not existing just because they were
• 1:30:21
  paid to be there. The nwsa's yearly income is currently and again we're looking
• 1:30:30
  at nineteen ninety two, so thirty years ago, currently in the three hundred
• 1:30:35
  and fifty thousand dollars range. And in fiscal year nineteen ninety two, when
• 1:30:40
  educational cuts from government were commonplace across the country, the Fund for the Improvement
• 1:30:46
  of post Secondary Education provided NWSA with a grant of eighty one thousand, one
• 1:30:53
  hundred and fifty seven dollars. The government was funding this organization a flatter.
• 1:30:59
  I'm going to find a way to say in every single stream from now you
• 1:31:02
  can say that as many times as you want in this stream. This is
• 1:31:06
  This is the theme song of the HBr Talk, the HDR Talk live stream.
• 1:31:15
  Ford was also the biggest funder of the National Council for Research on Women,
• 1:31:20
  according to NCRW documents, since its beginning in nineteen eighty one. There
• 1:31:27
  have also been grants from such obscure entities as Prudential, Rockefeller and American Express,
• 1:31:33
  Pew Charitable Trust, at NA, Chevron, IBM, Mobile, Pacific,
• 1:31:43
  Bell, and the US Department of Labor, Sears, Metropolitan Life,
• 1:31:49
  Apple Computers, Ballantine Books, Philip Morris, and Xerox, among others,
• 1:31:58
  funded the National Council for re Search on Women. How many? How many
• 1:32:02
  of these organizations do you need? Can you tell me what one of these
• 1:32:08
  does any different than the other? I mean, I don't understand. They
• 1:32:14
  just slapped a different acronym on it, and you know, just fund a
• 1:32:17
  bunch of bitches in there doing whatever women's studies is and studying and researching women.
• 1:32:25
  What the as progress come on as the current year, progress must progress,
• 1:32:30
  guys. The first three stages of the revolution in women's studies were wholly
• 1:32:36
  effective. Individuals were handsomely supported to create a demand for the discipline. Research
• 1:32:43
  centers were established to institutionalize it, so that would be, uh, what
• 1:32:51
  do they say about discrimination? Something institutionalized discrimination? But yeah, it's yea.
• 1:33:01
  Then journals were created to give it a familiar crum of intellectual respectability at
• 1:33:10
  the time, At the same time that professional lobbying organizations were built to protect
• 1:33:17
  its gains. And remember professional lobbying included lobbying for the Violence Against Women Act
• 1:33:27
  that provides more funding for this shit. There is funding and the Violence Against
• 1:33:33
  Women Act for research done by these organizations on domestic violence. They funded,
• 1:33:43
  They paid academia to put a feminist spin on this particular social ill, on
• 1:33:49
  this family problem that affects both sexes. Yet in a way, all all,
• 1:34:00
  all three of these stages were only to only a prologue for what comes
• 1:34:03
  next, sort of a booster rocket for the ultimate payload. The payload is
• 1:34:12
  transformation. Under the current plan, women's studies will no longer simply be localized
• 1:34:17
  in separate departments on campuses like other disciplines. This is again remember this was
• 1:34:25
  decided thirty years ago. Now it will be integrated and mainstreamed into every nook
• 1:34:31
  and cranny of the university. So the prediction is it's going into everything else,
• 1:34:36
  transforming the entire curriculum of higher education. Once again, Ford has been
• 1:34:43
  instrumental in what its advocates hope will be the last stage of permanent revolution.
• 1:34:48
  As early as March of nineteen eighty five, Ford launched a project designed to
• 1:34:55
  enable these women's centers to collaborate with minority scholars and raci ethnic studies programs in
• 1:35:00
  planning and implementing projects to incorporate research and teaching about women of color into the
• 1:35:08
  undergraduate curriculum. For Ford, projects at institutions including UCLA, Bernard College,
• 1:35:20
  Metropolitan State College, and Minnesota Should Be Paying Attention To Minnesota and the University
• 1:35:29
  of Puerto Rico are calculated to achieve the same end. In nineteen eighty nine,
• 1:35:36
  Ford also funded the work of the mainstreaming Minority women's Studies program. As
• 1:35:44
  in other stages of the revolution, other foundations have joined the effort at transformation
• 1:35:48
  as the government agencies, as have government agencies like the Fund for the Improvement
• 1:35:54
  of post Secondary Education, which currently makes grants ranging from fifteen dollars to one
• 1:36:00
  hundred and fifty thousand dollars per year for such projects. Karen mctigue Musil,
• 1:36:06
  former director of the National Women's Studies Association, was how many, okay,
• 1:36:15
  how much networking you need? There was recently the recipient of a recent three
• 1:36:21
  year FIPS grant to assess the progress of women's studies in transforming the curriculum all
• 1:36:27
  over the country. So this is where in the late eighties, this is
• 1:36:31
  where they started seeding out like IVY, like the roots of IVY growing on
• 1:36:39
  a brick wall, into other areas of academia and trying to insert and inject
• 1:36:50
  women's studies and feminist dogma, feminist ideology into these other areas of academic Steed,
• 1:37:01
  you know how government was obviously a mistake, and we're reaching the point
• 1:37:08
  where where it seems like democracy in general was almost certainly a mistake. I'm
• 1:37:14
  starting to wonder if universities in general were always a mistake, and that goes
• 1:37:18
  back a long way, like Oxford University is a thousand years old. Oxford
• 1:37:24
  University is older than the Aztec civilization, and I'm starting to wonder if even
• 1:37:28
  that was a fucking mistake, because this seems to be where it was always
• 1:37:32
  destined. Like is there any university course that couldn't be done with an apprenticeship,
• 1:37:41
  even if it's something lofty like like like the high sciences or something like
• 1:37:45
  what's stopping from a private company from having a physics based scholarship? I mean,
• 1:37:55
  or you know, apprenticeship, I don't I don't quite know what the
• 1:37:58
  difference is between a scholarship and apprenticeship. It's it's just a matter of of
• 1:38:02
  of the vocabulary. Yeah, it's just it's just a matter of what you
• 1:38:08
  call it. Like, like, what, why why can't you separate these
• 1:38:12
  these different courses to different private institutions that can do this without government interference?
• 1:38:19
  Well, what's interesting did universities ever really need to exist? What's interesting is
• 1:38:25
  how is the difference in how it's handled? Right, there are two types
• 1:38:30
  of apprentice type ah, means of training that that your job can do,
• 1:38:41
  your employer can do. One they will call you an apprentice or an unpaid
• 1:38:45
  intern and or or a trainee, and you don't get paid for it.
• 1:38:53
  The other they will call you an apprentice or a paid in turn or a
• 1:38:58
  trainee, and you do get paid for it. There isn't one where you
• 1:39:02
  pay the company, but universities either you pay or someone else pays on your
• 1:39:14
  behalf. And it's not Yeah, it's not so that people doing the teaching
• 1:39:24
  get paid because companies pay their trainers. So so that is a good point.
• 1:39:31
  Why not have this be what what companies? You know, they handpicked
• 1:39:36
  people and say, yeah, you you can learn this we're going to teach
• 1:39:40
  you this and you're going to do it for us. I guess the feminist
• 1:39:44
  argument would be, well, if if there was nothing but apprenticeships, that'd
• 1:39:47
  be no such thing as a feminist apprenticeship. Uh, that's right, that's
• 1:39:54
  right, that would be perfect. So yeah, the university system embraced this.
• 1:40:04
  The establishment embraced it. This was not in any way like you can
• 1:40:14
  see from what we've talked about here. Although we keep getting told over and
• 1:40:19
  over again that during the middle of the nineteenth century, women just in mass
• 1:40:29
  got fed up with how they were being treated and rebelled against it, not
• 1:40:34
  true. It is a bald faced lie. Right. This is something that
• 1:40:41
  has been pushed by the establishment throughout the last couple of centuries, and you
• 1:40:49
  can trace the funding of it during from the middle of the twentieth century on
• 1:40:58
  in this manner. And I will tell you there is an organization called Capital
• 1:41:02
  Research Center that I became aware of this article from reading their article on how
• 1:41:12
  the spread of feminism was funded, and they talked about they traced through feminist
• 1:41:18
  organizations like the MS Foundation and the National Organization for Women and multiple multitude of
• 1:41:27
  other little feminist organizations that do lobbying and protesting and so on get their funding
• 1:41:35
  from institutions like this, and from banks, from big big companies, from
• 1:41:44
  wealthy individuals, and so on. And this is pretty much par for the
• 1:41:50
  course with the funding of feminism. And they actually have a book on this
• 1:41:57
  subject. I don't have it next to me, so I can't remember that
• 1:42:00
  title, but the it's Capital Research Center's book about the funding of feminist organizations,
• 1:42:08
  and it might just be called the funding of feminist organizations, because that's
• 1:42:13
  that's what it's about, and it is. There's so much information in regard
• 1:42:20
  to this that it is worthy of publication as a book and not just a
• 1:42:26
  pamphlet. So we're definitely talking, you know, a completely not organic movement.
• 1:42:34
  Nothing about feminism has been organic, and it's something I think it's important
• 1:42:40
  for people to understand because, you know, early on in the men's rights
• 1:42:44
  movement, or at least my experience with the men's rights movement and reading like
• 1:42:47
  older writing of the twentieth century, the latter part of the twentieth century men's
• 1:42:57
  rights movement not the not the time of Ernest Belfort backs, but the time
• 1:43:04
  period when a national Coalition for men was started and when doctor Warren Ferrell sort
• 1:43:13
  of found himself kicked out of the feminist movement for not hating men and not
• 1:43:20
  pretending that feminists were simultaneously power women girl bosses and completely lacking in any progress.
• 1:43:31
  Right, Like, during that time period, it was understood there was
• 1:43:36
  a lot of writing about the fact that this movement was not just this organic
• 1:43:44
  revolution, grassroots revolution. But I've seen a lot of people talking about it
• 1:43:47
  now like, well, you know this needed to happen because women were oppressed
• 1:43:53
  in society and women had to fight back against this oppression and it was a
• 1:43:57
  hard battle that when you know, women's advances are hard one and blah blah
• 1:44:00
  blah, that narrative is complete utter bullshit, and you shouldn't promote it.
• 1:44:04
  You shouldn't believe it, shouldn't agree with it, shouldn't accept it, shouldn't
• 1:44:09
  let people tell you that because it is false. It is it was one
• 1:44:15
  hundred percent a institutionalized, systematic, institutionalized revolution. In scare quotes, it
• 1:44:26
  was a systematic institutionalized cultural change, a coup, a cultural coup. Just
• 1:44:34
  so that people understand that we are not talking about something that happened because it
• 1:44:42
  was needed by women who were oppressed and held back in society. It was
• 1:44:50
  an exercise of female power. And it wasn't women complained and then they got
• 1:45:00
  rights. It was women had rights, and they complained within a system that
• 1:45:10
  catered to women economically, academically, socially, and legislatively, and they didn't
• 1:45:24
  get more rights. They took men's rights away. So it goes on.
• 1:45:33
  It is something like perpetual motion. In an era of declining budgets, there
• 1:45:39
  is money to start women's studies programs, money to keep them going, and
• 1:45:43
  money to monitor how effaciously and revolutionary at the revolutionary ends are being achieved.
• 1:45:51
  In versities should be in the business of revolution, in the business of education.
• 1:46:00
  You would think in the beginning it was a revolution imposed from above and
• 1:46:08
  without Now it has become wholly intrinsic to the university, a guilt and trendiness
• 1:46:15
  project, forcing individual campuses to climb aboard and pay up. The University of
• 1:46:24
  Maryland hired Betty Schmidtz, author of Integrating Women's Studies in the Curriculum, published
• 1:46:30
  by the Feminist Press, to do curricular transformation at a nineteen eighty nine panel
• 1:46:40
  discussion on the National Network of Women's campuses on the subject of transforming the knowledge
• 1:46:44
  base and a nineteen eighty nine, by the way, was if I remember
• 1:46:49
  it when, like nineteen eighty seven was when Costs first did her study.
• 1:46:58
  In nineteen eighty nine was when MS magazine published it. I would have to
• 1:47:03
  actually be looking at it to be sure if that's correct, but it was
• 1:47:05
  a ah, it was pretty much around that same couple of years' time period.
• 1:47:20
  Oh, I think I didn't put the link in the low bar,
• 1:47:24
  did I? Guys? Okay, so Jen Bottle and Derek Workman are asking
• 1:47:28
  for a link. I will really quick add that to the low bar on
• 1:47:32
  YouTube. Actually, I think I can add it to the low bar everywhere
• 1:47:38
  here if I update the titles. Do is it just me? Or was
• 1:47:46
  it in and around nineteen eighty four whenever it changed? Yep, it was
• 1:47:50
  pretty close to nineteen eighty four low So this is going to be an arch
• 1:48:00
  I have link because again this this is a paper publication that is out of
• 1:48:11
  print and uh so they don't have a website or anything like that. It's
• 1:48:18
  just yeah, cancel that. There we go. So it's it's it's a
• 1:48:26
  PDF file that has been uploaded, so that should show up in hopefully that
• 1:48:32
  should show up in uh the low bar for the YouTube video and several others,
• 1:48:41
  and I will now put it if I can figure out how to freaking
• 1:48:45
  there we go. I gotta edit uh rumble separately because it's it doesn't work
• 1:48:55
  the same with the system, the restream system I'm using. So let me
• 1:49:05
  I mean, don't check here and make sure I can there we go edit
• 1:49:10
  there we are, so you guys can have this. This is something that
• 1:49:15
  actually you should be able to share. Just remember when somebody you know reads
• 1:49:20
  it and they're like, oh, it's in something called heterodoxy, that that
• 1:49:26
  makes it, you know, genetic fallacy and whatever. Just remember what heterodoxy
• 1:49:31
  actually means. As we pointed out at the beginning of the stream, it
• 1:49:35
  doesn't have anything to do with gender and sexuality. It's just you know,
• 1:49:41
  today today feminists have everybody associating the word hetero with only that. Right,
• 1:49:50
  it's the opposite of homo. Uh, therefore it's the opposite of homosexual.
• 1:49:57
  Right, and that's that's it. Sorright. I've added that, and when
• 1:50:01
  I get an opportunity, I'll make sure and add it to the blog post
• 1:50:04
  as well. Just in case. But so the publication is called Heterodoxy,
• 1:50:13
  the article is called Women's Studies Imperialists, and the issue is November of nineteen
• 1:50:27
  ninety two. So we are looking back at a little history here to talk
• 1:50:32
  about this funding. Let's see you do do curricular in nineteen eighty nine.
• 1:50:42
  At a nineteen eighty nine panel discussion, Yeah, I read that part.
• 1:50:47
  Schmidtz spoke enthusiastically about the university's willingness to put five hundred thousand dollars half a
• 1:50:54
  million dollars of its own money into a curriculum transformation project and enhancement of women's
• 1:51:00
  studies. All right, in let's see in nineteen eighty nine, I think
• 1:51:12
  at the a at a more prestigious than state level university, at a private
• 1:51:18
  university, I think students were spending about ten thousand a year and at the
• 1:51:25
  state schools like six thousand. So to get half a million bucks of its
• 1:51:32
  own money, we're talking. We're not talking student students being able to fund
• 1:51:40
  this by themselves, right. Universities get grants all the time from donors that
• 1:51:46
  went to school there, donors that liked what the university is doing, Donors
• 1:51:49
  that have an agenda like the Ford Foundation and so on. So when they
• 1:51:54
  say its own money, it's actually half a million dollars of donor money and
• 1:52:00
  sent student tuition money, government money. And in that time period, in
• 1:52:10
  nineteen eighty nine, you already were filling out a financial aid form a FASTPA
• 1:52:15
  to get funding to go to university. You would be telling telling your parents'
• 1:52:20
  income, telling your academic achievements. You're already able to get money for school
• 1:52:28
  for having different ethnic backgrounds than just being white. There was already money earmark
• 1:52:35
  just for girls. So that's where that money was coming from. It wasn't
• 1:52:43
  you know the university made these investments and got to return on their investments and
• 1:52:46
  so on. This is all money that is. Universities don't have their own
• 1:52:49
  money. They get money from all over the place and then they spend it.
• 1:52:59
  So yeah, to a curriculum transformation project. She pointed out that Maryland
• 1:53:03
  was the let me see, this goes down here to the next page,
• 1:53:06
  page twelve, the first research institution or comprehensive university that has done this,
• 1:53:15
  certainly the first campus to put that amount of money into this effort. Schmitz
• 1:53:20
  was particularly glad to see that the effort was funded without having to go to
• 1:53:26
  the campus senate. Let me repeat that Schmitz was particularly glad to see that
• 1:53:36
  the effort was funded without having to go to the campus senate. In other
• 1:53:43
  words, the students didn't have any say over this, because if it had
• 1:53:46
  gone to the campus senate, it would not have come out with five hundred
• 1:53:49
  thousand dollars. How did Schmidz pull off the trick of bagging a cool half
• 1:53:56
  million, well, avoiding the democratic process. It was simple. The administration
• 1:54:02
  right, the patriarchy was in her corner all along. Schmid's brags that President
• 1:54:09
  William Kerwin took the heat. She and her colleagues and Women's Studies apparently see
• 1:54:14
  themselves as ventriloquists as well as revolutionaries. It is wonderful, Schmid says,
• 1:54:18
  to be able to sup the supply appropriate words to the head of an institution.
• 1:54:27
  They got the president of the university to just unilaterally make this decision.
• 1:54:34
  God, ventriloquist that necessarily has a puppet or some kind of object into which
• 1:54:43
  they are throwing their stomach vice. That's what ventriloquist means. It means stomach
• 1:54:48
  talker. So who is the vessel into which you are throwing your voice,
• 1:54:55
  is it I guess it's the students or is it the funders? At university
• 1:55:00
  is like a microcosm of a government, isn't it. Yeah. They don't
• 1:55:04
  pay for anything themselves. They extract money from I guess, sometimes willing victims,
• 1:55:14
  but usually a critical mass of unwilling victims. Yep. Then they throw
• 1:55:21
  their voices into into those victims, and and and pretend that their voice is
• 1:55:28
  bigger than it is, and they get away with it for an absurdly long
• 1:55:33
  time. Ah, good times. Yeah, it's interesting the way that this
• 1:55:40
  has been phrased in regard to this university. These women are stupid, like
• 1:55:47
  they've they've made a lot of money, They've gotten a lot of benefits out
• 1:55:50
  of this right, and and they they probably feel like they are the exploiters,
• 1:55:58
  like they have capitalized on these these poor stupid men's altruism. And yet
• 1:56:09
  the whole time, you know, like this was a goal for for the
• 1:56:14
  people in in uh these higher places, for these administrators of these these organizations
• 1:56:21
  that gave them all this funding, and people within government, and and and
• 1:56:27
  the reason is this right you look at as a microcosm of the consequences of
• 1:56:39
  feminist academia, feminist lobbying, and and the resulting legislation. You look at
• 1:56:46
  the Violence Against Women Act as a microcosm, right. It created a whole
• 1:56:51
  new government department that employed a whole new set of government bureaucrats. It created
• 1:57:05
  funding that needed to be managed by that department, and it created policy that
• 1:57:14
  needed to be managed by that department. It created inroads against your due process
• 1:57:20
  rights to increase the power level of government at every level of government power from
• 1:57:30
  the federal level all the way down to your beat coop in your neighborhood.
• 1:57:42
  What's not to like if you're a government bureaucrat or a government powermonger looking to
• 1:57:47
  increase your control over the citizen. That's what the Violence Against Women Act was
• 1:57:57
  really about. Has very little to do with women's protections and women's needs and
• 1:58:02
  women's benefits, and everything to do with expanding the power of government. That's
• 1:58:09
  all it was really for. Right, These women ushered that bullshit in over
• 1:58:20
  and over and over again, with new piece of legislation after new piece of
• 1:58:27
  legislation, changes to funding after changes to funding, and now we have this
• 1:58:39
  cancer within the systemic cancer within our federal government, within our state governments,
• 1:58:46
  within our local governments, within our education system, within our philanthropic system,
• 1:58:50
  within our journalistic system. We're extracting it, curing it. Killing it is
• 1:58:57
  not just a matter of shutting one thing down. It's it's like it'd be
• 1:59:06
  like trying to trying to cure systemic intocrine cancer or blood cancer. You know,
• 1:59:17
  you need some sort of radiation, some sort of uh poison, you
• 1:59:25
  know, to kill it, some sort of systematic institutionalized injection of change.
• 1:59:34
  Like that's that's gonna be a hard one fight if we if we win it.
• 1:59:43
  But yeah, uh so that's that's basically we're gonna probably pick this up
• 1:59:47
  again in two weeks. Next week, we will be back on Twitter in
• 1:59:51
  a live space, so we aren't going to we won't be looking at this
• 1:59:58
  article, although we might we might be doing some recap of this, and
• 2:00:03
  we're going back to discussing reproductive issues a little bit with uh brain fart,
• 2:00:13
  dang it, with Jewel Eldorra, Yeah, and hoping, hoping to get
• 2:00:17
  a special guest. We're going to try to nag him into coming on,
• 2:00:20
  but we don't know. It's a very very long shot. So I'm not
• 2:00:25
  gonna say but we will be discussing further a bit of in sort of the
• 2:00:30
  context of all of this funding and all these changes and everything. This kind
• 2:00:34
  of puts the the systemic legislation and push to blame men for women's sexual choices
• 2:00:45
  into context as well. So we'll pick back up in a in a couple
• 2:00:54
  of weeks at women's Studies has grown at a prodigious rate, and we'll finish
• 2:01:00
  the article and maybe add a little more discussion two weeks from now. So
• 2:01:08
  with that, let me look and see if there I think there might be
• 2:01:12
  some more super shows and I'm just in the wrong. There we go chat,
• 2:01:19
  all right, So the last thing we read was about a nuclear the
• 2:01:27
  thing about the nuclear power plant. Okay, So Richard Beer gave us five
• 2:01:33
  dollars and said, how much of the trope of women getting institutionalized slash medicated
• 2:01:38
  for mental disorders is a propaganda ploy from a feminist perspective movies where the female
• 2:01:43
  protagonist is either lobotomized or medicated into practically a vegetable slash zombie. So,
• 2:01:48
  just for the record, something that people this has been kind of erased from
• 2:01:53
  the internet. You don't really see much about it on the internet. What
• 2:01:56
  people don't understand is that families could do this to other family members regardless of
• 2:02:00
  gender. Right, women might have been less likely to use this against men
• 2:02:06
  who whose income came from a salary, not salaried work, but hourly paid
• 2:02:15
  work or a daily wage work, because if you institutionalized that guy, then
• 2:02:23
  he wasn't going to be able to do his job and he wouldn't be getting
• 2:02:26
  paid anymore. Right, But upper class women whose whose husband's had you know,
• 2:02:34
  didn't need a source of income but actually had money to draw from might
• 2:02:40
  do it. And that's it's that you could have your partner, your spouse
• 2:02:45
  institutionalized basically just on your word. And you could have you know, your
• 2:02:53
  if you had your parents living with you, or your brother or your sister,
• 2:02:56
  your children, your cousin dependent on you because they had some disabling condition
• 2:03:03
  or they'd been down in their luck, you could if as long as you
• 2:03:08
  had the money to pay the institution to house them, you could just have
• 2:03:12
  them incarcerated in a mental health institution against their will. And there was no
• 2:03:18
  due process for the individual in that circumstance, So as long as the institution
• 2:03:24
  was willing to take them and take your money, it was, the individual
• 2:03:30
  had no recourse to stop this from happening, and of course feminists subject to
• 2:03:38
  it having been used against women, but they never say anything about the fact
• 2:03:44
  that wives could also do it to their husbands. And the only thing that
• 2:03:48
  might have made it the least bit more common for husbands to do it to
• 2:03:53
  their wives is that wives were not the bread winner of the family and husbands
• 2:03:58
  were. So a woman financially dependent on her husband's labor would be shooting herself
• 2:04:05
  in the foot by doing that, whereas a guy living with a woman who
• 2:04:11
  was difficult to live with, or you know, maybe he wanted to cheat
• 2:04:15
  on her or whatever, if he put her away, it just he just
• 2:04:18
  had to pay a maintenance fee to make sure that the institution would continue to
• 2:04:25
  house her. Right, But yeah, the feminists do exaggerate that quite a
• 2:04:31
  bit. Bitches to be crazy, am I right? Boys? Yep?
• 2:04:39
  Richard Beer also gave us another five dollars and said, isn't lobbying simply a
• 2:04:44
  euphemism for her hookers and plow And with that type of lobbying the visitors to
• 2:04:48
  a certain island, oh, excuse me, we're more likely We're likely more
• 2:04:54
  worried about losing their access to party favors than they were about getting exposed.
• 2:04:58
  There's different types of a lot being. Some lobbying groups engage in bribery,
• 2:05:03
  some use pressure campaigns. You know, it's a nice career you got there.
• 2:05:08
  It'd be a shame if somebody made you look like a misogynist in public
• 2:05:13
  and got you out of the favor of the public. Richard Bier gave us
• 2:05:20
  five dollars and said creating bureaucracy is a welfare system. Yep. It financially
• 2:05:26
  supports people who are otherwise useless in any other way and keeps them from starving
• 2:05:30
  to death. Change my mind, So you're asking the wrong person to change
• 2:05:33
  your mind if you're sending me that super child. If you look at bureaucrats
• 2:05:40
  and I think I did that video on the bureaucratic mind virus, they are
• 2:05:45
  some of the dumbest people in society. And I don't just mean low iq.
• 2:05:51
  I mean because there's two kinds of dumb. There's people who are legitimately
• 2:05:58
  incapable of analyzing things on the same level as everybody else. That's that's one
• 2:06:03
  thing. Like if they are, you know in any way just disadvantaged.
• 2:06:09
  That's not their fault. They can't they can't help that. They can actually
• 2:06:12
  try to overcome it, but there's a limit to what you can do about
• 2:06:16
  that, right. You got people who are fully capable, like structurally,
• 2:06:24
  their brain works just fine. They have they have every tool in the toolbox,
• 2:06:29
  they just don't use them. They don't bother. Everything is patterned to
• 2:06:34
  them, and they use the least amount of thought process possible to get the
• 2:06:42
  job done. So everything has to be fill in the blank. Nothing can
• 2:06:45
  be fa in other words, in life like those are bureaucrats and they are
• 2:06:50
  useless in any other way. They could if they put themselves to it,
• 2:06:59
  if they put their minds to it and put effort into it. They could
• 2:07:02
  work in the private sector, they could do other jobs. But it's you
• 2:07:11
  know, a much lazier, much lazier pathway to get a job in government,
• 2:07:18
  where you don't have to think about what you're doing, you don't have
• 2:07:23
  to care. Let's see, I think that's it. I don't have any
• 2:07:28
  super chats left that we didn't read. I don't think I'm nsa scroll back
• 2:07:32
  up, double check. I mean, look and see if I copy pasted
• 2:07:41
  one before I say, for sure, wrong page. There we go.
• 2:07:50
  Nope, the last thing I see is the pair character lifting some weights.
• 2:07:55
  We read that one. So yeah, and we don't have any rumble rumble
• 2:08:00
  rants that I can see. I don't see any paid rumble ants. So
• 2:08:07
  yeah, now that's it. That's all of our super chats and super chows
• 2:08:11
  and super duper communications. So so there you go. Like I said,
• 2:08:16
  next next week we will be doing. We'll still be you can still listen
• 2:08:22
  to us on whatever platform you listen to us normally what you're listening to us
• 2:08:26
  on now, because I'll go through obs like I did last week, but
• 2:08:31
  we will also be streaming from from Twitter from x so you can look forward
• 2:08:41
  to that. We'll have that image up where you can see who is talking
• 2:08:48
  in the in the live stream and who is who is listening I think shows
• 2:08:52
  two and with that, I will thank everybody for listening. This is kind
• 2:08:58
  of a dry sausage, but I think it's a necessary one because I'm hearing
• 2:09:05
  more and more that stupid ass narrative of organic feminism happening because it was needed
• 2:09:15
  and yeah, but but yeah, so thanks to thanks for listening to the
• 2:09:22
  dry sausage. Thanks to my two co hosts for listening to and participating in
• 2:09:26
  the making of the dry sausage. Thanks to everybody who works in the background
• 2:09:28
  to make HBr talk happen in good Idol. Yes see you next Thursday. Yes