Latest / Honey Badger Radio / Existential Crises and the need for Cyber Feminism Part 3 with TL;DR

Transcript

Existential Crises and the need for Cyber Feminism Part 3 with TL;DR · Honey Badger Radio

• 0:01
  Speaker 1: All right, and we're live. Hello everybody, sorry for the delay.
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: Welcome back to honey Badger Radio. My name is Brian.
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: I'm here with Allison and Teal Deer and this is
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: maintaining frame with Teal Deer. We're gonna we're gonna be
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: talking about more. Well, this probably will be the last
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: video on this maybe at least from this, from this
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: particular video that we're looking at existential crises and the
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: need for cyberfeminism. Which, wow, it's it's been a while,
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: but I'm already getting like gobbledegook flashbacks. But before we start,
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: I guess Alison wanted to say a few words. All right,
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: maybe maybe not? Are you there?
• 0:44
  Speaker 2: Mute with the mute?
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: All right?
• 0:47
  Speaker 2: So if you would like to send a message and
• 0:51
  Speaker 2: a tip with that message, you can do so at
• 0:52
  Speaker 2: feedbadger dot com slash just a tip. It's the very
• 0:55
  Speaker 2: best way for you to send us a tip and
• 0:58
  Speaker 2: to send us message because it doesn't go through YouTube's
• 1:01
  Speaker 2: comment would chipper And if you would, well, actually the
• 1:05
  Speaker 2: support isn't open yet and the plugin issue with the
• 1:09
  Speaker 2: blog is an ongoing problem. Looks like I'm probably going
• 1:13
  Speaker 2: to just have to go with a completely different setup.
• 1:16
  Speaker 2: So that's uh, I'll announce that when it's available. When
• 1:19
  Speaker 2: it is available, it will be at feedbadger dot com,
• 1:21
  Speaker 2: slash support and we and if you're interested in seeing
• 1:28
  Speaker 2: my additional notes related to the stuff that I talk about,
• 1:32
  Speaker 2: modality's analysis of studies, that kind of thing, go to
• 1:37
  Speaker 2: Badger nation dot online and take part in our join
• 1:40
  Speaker 2: our community and you can see that stuff. All right,
• 1:44
  Speaker 2: did you want me to just because there's a there's
• 1:46
  Speaker 2: something that I I think is related to this.
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: Yeah. First of all, before we do that, I just
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: want to say, steel there, how are you well?
• 1:56
  Speaker 3: I was not aware that this was happening until shortly ago.
• 1:59
  Speaker 3: I think gardening a lot today. So I'm going to
• 2:02
  Speaker 3: be kind of tired and woefully underprepared, which means I'm
• 2:07
  Speaker 3: probably going to be quiet and uninformative, which I'm sure
• 2:10
  Speaker 3: leaves a lot of people in the audience sitting there thinking,
• 2:13
  Speaker 3: so business as usual for your contributions.
• 2:15
  Speaker 1: Then oh no, no, Actually, if you're operating with a
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: handicapped then we're probably now going to be at the
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: same level exactly. It's fun. Thanks for taking the time.
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: It won't be a long show.
• 2:33
  Speaker 3: That's fine, And I still have my Woman text Book
• 2:37
  Speaker 3: for slightly silly feminist nonsense that comes out every so often.
• 2:42
  Speaker 3: I can check some things. There are some interesting things
• 2:45
  Speaker 3: in here which may or may not come up in
• 2:48
  Speaker 3: relation to the talk. Because I haven't pre watched this
• 2:51
  Speaker 3: little bit. I would have done that today had I
• 2:53
  Speaker 3: had a bit more time, but I haven't, so I
• 2:57
  Speaker 3: am assuming that this is now going to be Cyborgs
• 3:00
  Speaker 3: aren't what you actually think they are? And why men
• 3:02
  Speaker 3: are the cause of everything wrong in the world? Which
• 3:05
  Speaker 3: is a tale as old as time?
• 3:08
  Speaker 1: Yes?
• 3:08
  Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, as old as time, which is I have
• 3:13
  Speaker 3: an example of that, but I don't know. It might
• 3:16
  Speaker 3: not be appropriate to go into. Okay, classical literature, Go ahead,
• 3:24
  Speaker 3: I know. I digress from things, and this one feels
• 3:28
  Speaker 3: a little bigger.
• 3:32
  Speaker 1: Are you familiar with our channel honey Badger radio.
• 3:38
  Speaker 3: Familiarity? But it might be interesting. Have you ever read
• 3:45
  Speaker 3: Madeia by Euripides? M?
• 3:50
  Speaker 2: Yeah, probably no, I will say.
• 3:52
  Speaker 3: No, okay, okay. Now, Madeia was the wife of Jason
• 3:57
  Speaker 3: as in Argonauts Golden Police Jason, he was one of
• 4:01
  Speaker 3: his wives and madea by Euripides. It starts with Madeia,
• 4:07
  Speaker 3: his former wife, being very very upset because Jason as
• 4:11
  Speaker 3: a solar hero. He has two women in his life
• 4:14
  Speaker 3: as the sun tracks across the sky. He has his
• 4:17
  Speaker 3: dawn woman and dusk woman, because this is the archetypes
• 4:21
  Speaker 3: of how these sorts of stories work. And so he
• 4:26
  Speaker 3: has left this woman Madea for some other princess of
• 4:30
  Speaker 3: some kingdom whose name I can't remember, in forming the
• 4:34
  Speaker 3: military necessary military alliance. So Madea is quite unhappy about this.
• 4:40
  Speaker 3: Anyone who knows how Jason's story ends. He's depressed and
• 4:43
  Speaker 3: gets drunk and the master of his ship falls on
• 4:46
  Speaker 3: him and kills him. He is drunk and depressed because
• 4:50
  Speaker 3: his wife, the princess of the form of the kingdom
• 4:55
  Speaker 3: that he needed to form this alliance with Madeia as
• 4:59
  Speaker 3: his previous wife, went to their wedding and gave his
• 5:03
  Speaker 3: wife a dress which she put on. Little did she
• 5:06
  Speaker 3: know it was enchanted and caused her to burst into flames.
• 5:10
  Speaker 3: And Medea also murdered his two sons, So you know,
• 5:14
  Speaker 3: typical typical woman behavior really for when they don't get
• 5:18
  Speaker 3: what they want. But the opening of this play is
• 5:22
  Speaker 3: madea wailing, crying, gnashing of teeth. Oh how dare my
• 5:27
  Speaker 3: husband leave me? I'm so miserable woe is me, the
• 5:29
  Speaker 3: world is ending, etc. And the two other characters that
• 5:33
  Speaker 3: are around is her slave and a doctor. You know,
• 5:37
  Speaker 3: doctor's been summoned because she's being hysterical and miserable and
• 5:41
  Speaker 3: all of that stuff. And there's a wonderful line in
• 5:45
  Speaker 3: that opening chapter which I think kind of summarizes like
• 5:50
  Speaker 3: just the general attitude that women seem to have always
• 5:52
  Speaker 3: had towards society and men in general. And that is
• 5:55
  Speaker 3: something along the lines of men have created all of this.
• 5:59
  Speaker 3: Look at all of the society, all of these buildings,
• 6:01
  Speaker 3: everything around us. They have created such marvels, such a
• 6:04
  Speaker 3: beautiful poetry, such is statues, and all of this stuff,
• 6:08
  Speaker 3: and yet I can still be unhappy they haven't fixed that.
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: Yep.
• 6:19
  Speaker 3: I just found that hilarious. When I read that, I
• 6:21
  Speaker 3: was like that that is just such a summary of
• 6:26
  Speaker 3: things that we now deal with, Like we can do
• 6:28
  Speaker 3: anything and all of this stuff, but you know, I
• 6:31
  Speaker 3: can still be kind of sad sometimes. So we need
• 6:33
  Speaker 3: to destroy all of society.
• 6:36
  Speaker 1: Yes, things are not absolute bliss all the time. Therefore
• 6:40
  Speaker 1: it's not good enough.
• 6:41
  Speaker 2: The utopia is here. Oh therefore, yeah, therefore everybody needs
• 6:46
  Speaker 2: to lose their rights until the utopia happens. Yeah, that's
• 6:51
  Speaker 2: a okay. So the study that I wanted to bring up,
• 6:55
  Speaker 2: which I think does apply to Tieldeer's anecdote never being
• 7:01
  Speaker 2: happy or having hostility at.
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: The timeprepared, I think not go.
• 7:16
  Speaker 2: Ahead, all right, So this this paper is called Ideological
• 7:22
  Speaker 2: Differences in the Expanse of the Moral Circle. It's by Wyatt's,
• 7:28
  Speaker 2: Young hYP and Graham, and it's from twenty nineteen. And
• 7:33
  Speaker 2: if you guys don't know what this study is, you'll
• 7:36
  Speaker 2: probably remember all of the memes on it because it
• 7:39
  Speaker 2: had this heat map, So it had these series of
• 7:42
  Speaker 2: concern concentric circles, and a kind of heat map of
• 7:47
  Speaker 2: conservative versus liberals, distribution of compassion and essentially the liberals,
• 7:57
  Speaker 2: so that the concentric circle started with at the center
• 8:01
  Speaker 2: would be the self, and then progressively at each stage,
• 8:04
  Speaker 2: so each circle would represent a step further, so immediate family,
• 8:10
  Speaker 2: nuclear family, spouse, children, extended family, friends, community, city, state, country,
• 8:24
  Speaker 2: you know, progressively, and then it would go to the earth,
• 8:30
  Speaker 2: the moon, you know, it would go progressively out Martian soil,
• 8:35
  Speaker 2: that kind of thing. As you go out, you're getting further,
• 8:39
  Speaker 2: you're expanding the border, right, yeah, okay, And so it
• 8:44
  Speaker 2: was basically immediate and extended family, friends and communities, strangers
• 8:47
  Speaker 2: and distant humans, animal, insects and simple organisms, paramesia and microbes,
• 8:53
  Speaker 2: plant life, ecosystems, alien life forms, all things in existence
• 8:58
  Speaker 2: including rocks and inanimate are objects and what back here, Yeah,
• 9:03
  Speaker 2: back there is underpart microbes. Right, that's that's even for
• 9:06
  Speaker 2: that's even closer. You know, you might be a you
• 9:10
  Speaker 2: might be a life not not transphobic, but but uh,
• 9:17
  Speaker 2: inanimate matter phobic there, Brian, if you just stopping your
• 9:21
  Speaker 2: compassion at things that perceive and have chemical reactions according
• 9:26
  Speaker 2: to things, Yeah, that's a that that sounds very exactly
• 9:36
  Speaker 2: all right. So that was the kind of so these
• 9:39
  Speaker 2: cocentric circles, and as you go outward, the things become
• 9:44
  Speaker 2: less human, I suppose, a more a less animal, less
• 9:50
  Speaker 2: life and just and then it just becomes everything. And
• 9:54
  Speaker 2: the heat map indicated that conservatives concern at least what
• 9:59
  Speaker 2: they expressed about their concer are and clustered in the immediate.
• 10:02
  Speaker 2: So it was immediate and extended family, friends and community,
• 10:07
  Speaker 2: stranger and distant humans, animals, and then and then it
• 10:10
  Speaker 2: starts to drop off at insects and simple organisms. You know,
• 10:14
  Speaker 2: plant life, paramesia, eCos that kind of thing. They started
• 10:16
  Speaker 2: to drop off. They still had a little bit of concern,
• 10:19
  Speaker 2: but it wasn't quite as a salient for them, Whereas
• 10:25
  Speaker 2: the liberals showed the opposite. Their heat met centered well
• 10:31
  Speaker 2: outside of the human envelope and plant life, ecosystems, alien
• 10:37
  Speaker 2: life forms, rocks, and inanimate matter. So they they're they're
• 10:43
  Speaker 2: caring about things that have no internal metabolism to really
• 10:48
  Speaker 2: care about, which is interesting. It's a rich it's an
• 10:51
  Speaker 2: interesting approach. And the way that this this is uh,
• 11:00
  Speaker 2: the way that this was described, yeah, okay, so is
• 11:07
  Speaker 2: that maybe the liberal pattern expressed more compassion. But there
• 11:11
  Speaker 2: were some confounds that I saw in this that would
• 11:15
  Speaker 2: suggest that maybe something else is happening. All right, So
• 11:20
  Speaker 2: here's where my summary begins. In Landmic's study, wyatt set
• 11:24
  Speaker 2: all asks participants to distribute moral units across sixteen categories
• 11:28
  Speaker 2: of being from immediate family outward to animals, insects, microbes,
• 11:32
  Speaker 2: plant life, rocks, alien life forms, and all things in existence.
• 11:35
  Speaker 2: Liberals distributed concern further outward than conservatives. The study may well,
• 11:41
  Speaker 2: I might have implied that this is greater compassion, but
• 11:43
  Speaker 2: I have to confirm that, so don't take that as gospel.
• 11:46
  Speaker 2: The data doesn't necessarily support the idea that liberals are
• 11:51
  Speaker 2: more compassionate because they're more compassionate. To think all things
• 11:54
  Speaker 2: in existence, the total moral allocation was identical between groups.
• 11:58
  Speaker 2: The liberal signal spread across sentient and non sentient, living
• 12:02
  Speaker 2: and inanimate, real and hypothetical categories, approaches zero per entity
• 12:07
  Speaker 2: at the outer rings, like if you care about everything,
• 12:09
  Speaker 2: you're caring about nothing. You cannot feel sacrificial compassion for
• 12:14
  Speaker 2: a rock. Something else possibly is happening the something else
• 12:20
  Speaker 2: oxytocin research Drew Dedrew at all establishes that the hormone
• 12:25
  Speaker 2: doesn't just generate in group warmth, it produces a boundary
• 12:28
  Speaker 2: with hostility on the other side. The standard assumption is
• 12:31
  Speaker 2: that the in group is the point, but if the
• 12:33
  Speaker 2: in group is defined by ideological performance rather than kinship
• 12:37
  Speaker 2: or proximity, the boundary can be constructed and expanded infinitely
• 12:43
  Speaker 2: and unilaterally. Every category added to the circle of required
• 12:47
  Speaker 2: concern micros, rocks, alien life forms adds an everyone who
• 12:51
  Speaker 2: won't perform concern for it to the pool of legitimate
• 12:55
  Speaker 2: targets for hostility. The objects of compassion are selected specifically
• 12:59
  Speaker 2: for being unreachable, that make no actionable claim, require no
• 13:02
  Speaker 2: real sacrifice, and cannot hold anyone accountable maximum moral identity return,
• 13:08
  Speaker 2: zero delivery obligation. The wider the circle, the larger the
• 13:13
  Speaker 2: outgroup the hostility can legitimately target.
• 13:17
  Speaker 1: So the liberal.
• 13:17
  Speaker 2: Distribution extends meaningful allocation and nonsensient, non living and hypothetical
• 13:22
  Speaker 2: entities you can and you can't. Actually you don't do
• 13:26
  Speaker 2: and you can't do anything for them, like how do
• 13:28
  Speaker 2: we how do we protect Martian Rocks?
• 13:33
  Speaker 1: Right?
• 13:33
  Speaker 2: How do we how do we protect things outside of
• 13:39
  Speaker 2: the ort cloud?
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: Right? How?
• 13:41
  Speaker 2: How we don't even know really what's there? But you
• 13:45
  Speaker 2: have to perform compassion for those things. And if you
• 13:47
  Speaker 2: don't do it properly, you're you're the bad person. So
• 13:51
  Speaker 2: what this is functionally doing is creating the maximal targets
• 13:56
  Speaker 2: for hostility, outgroup hostility. And it's essentially the category. The
• 14:03
  Speaker 2: way that liberals see compassion is performative and performative in
• 14:07
  Speaker 2: a way that they can construct the absolute largest category
• 14:11
  Speaker 2: about group hostility and also feel really good doing it.
• 14:15
  Speaker 2: And conservatives and I hate to make this like a
• 14:18
  Speaker 2: like a ideot, like a political breakdown, because I'm sure
• 14:23
  Speaker 2: conservative is doing a lot of work here conservatives and
• 14:27
  Speaker 2: liberals isn't because we all know what they're they're they're
• 14:30
  Speaker 2: getting more and more, more and more concentrated. Conservatives think
• 14:35
  Speaker 2: about compassion in terms of what would I personally sacrifice for?
• 14:39
  Speaker 2: What can I be made accountable for? Whereas liberals are thinking, oh,
• 14:43
  Speaker 2: maximum virtue signaling in order to create maximum hostility outgroup hostility.
• 14:49
  Speaker 2: And that was my interpretation of this, and uh this
• 14:54
  Speaker 2: this Donna heroic Halfway Harroway Haroway right, heroic Donna Harroway
• 15:00
  Speaker 2: cyber Feminism manifesto is another way of essentially doing that,
• 15:05
  Speaker 2: creating a situation where she has expresses compassion or a
• 15:11
  Speaker 2: system of expression expressing compassion that is so attenuated that
• 15:16
  Speaker 2: it makes no claims on your actual Like any kind
• 15:20
  Speaker 2: of expectation that you feel compassion you have, you feel
• 15:23
  Speaker 2: the drive to do something right, to make something, to
• 15:26
  Speaker 2: help something, to go volunteer at the soup kitchen, to
• 15:29
  Speaker 2: make sure your family is provided for, stuff like that.
• 15:32
  Speaker 2: If you do something because the compassion makes you and
• 15:35
  Speaker 2: and people with properly functioning moral you know, uh, loadstones
• 15:43
  Speaker 2: like moral guidance, you know, you feel compassionate compels you
• 15:46
  Speaker 2: to want to do something, so you do. So you
• 15:50
  Speaker 2: constrain that to things you can do something about. In
• 15:53
  Speaker 2: her case, again, she's attenuating the compassion into categories where
• 15:57
  Speaker 2: you can't logically really do anything right, but it.
• 16:01
  Speaker 1: Makes you look good, so you do it. Yes, so
• 16:05
  Speaker 1: I can say, Oh, I love me some Plutonians out there.
• 16:10
  Speaker 1: I think that they're they have it so bad and
• 16:13
  Speaker 1: we should really care about their plight and talk about
• 16:16
  Speaker 1: it and raise awareness. But I've never met a plutonium before,
• 16:21
  Speaker 1: and I don't know how they would treat me and
• 16:22
  Speaker 1: I have There's no way that I could actually ever
• 16:25
  Speaker 1: encounter one in my lifetime, ye, you know, or we
• 16:28
  Speaker 1: expected to and they can. Yeah, But but I can
• 16:32
  Speaker 1: say it and it makes me a better person than you.
• 16:36
  Speaker 3: So yeah, we make Pluto planet again.
• 16:41
  Speaker 1: We do need to make Pluto a planet. Yes, they
• 16:46
  Speaker 1: prefer the term Plutarch's. Oh I didn't know. I'm sorry.
• 16:49
  Speaker 1: Betty Adams is a better pro Pluto person than I am,
• 16:52
  Speaker 1: because she knows the appropriate nomenclature to like describe them.
• 16:59
  Speaker 1: I made the tear the Pluton, but they're Plutarch. Yeah,
• 17:04
  Speaker 1: I'm done. I'm I'm I'm canceled, I'm losing my job.
• 17:06
  Speaker 2: Now you're no longer a node in the web.
• 17:11
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I heard it.
• 17:16
  Speaker 2: But that's that's exactly it you can do. It's maximally
• 17:20
  Speaker 2: performative with absolutely no claim on and and again it
• 17:24
  Speaker 2: also maps to UH social relational versus operational moded modality.
• 17:30
  Speaker 2: For relational modality, the signaling is the point I am
• 17:33
  Speaker 2: signaling being compassionate, and also I am identifying the out group,
• 17:39
  Speaker 2: because the out group is anyone who won't join me
• 17:42
  Speaker 2: in signaling compassion over things that have absolutely no claim
• 17:46
  Speaker 2: on me and I have I don't feel any any
• 17:49
  Speaker 2: desire to do anything for aside from signal for and
• 17:53
  Speaker 2: then uh. And then of course this is immediately anybody
• 17:57
  Speaker 2: who's an operative thinker, which is really what I think
• 17:59
  Speaker 2: this is dividing between the conservative side is more operative,
• 18:05
  Speaker 2: the liberal side is more relational. Anyone as an operative
• 18:08
  Speaker 2: thinker looks at that and says, I'm not going to
• 18:10
  Speaker 2: signal compassion because I consider it to be a claim
• 18:13
  Speaker 2: on my time and my resources. So if I'm going
• 18:16
  Speaker 2: to signal compassion, it's going to be constrained to those
• 18:19
  Speaker 2: things that I can actually give time and resources too. Realistically,
• 18:24
  Speaker 2: So the way that the conservatives we're looking at this
• 18:29
  Speaker 2: was what what are the things that I can realistically
• 18:32
  Speaker 2: expend my time and energy and resources on? What could
• 18:40
  Speaker 2: what could I realistically allow to have a claim on
• 18:43
  Speaker 2: my compassion? And the liberals were like, well, let's let's
• 18:47
  Speaker 2: signal compassion, and we want to have compassion towards things
• 18:53
  Speaker 2: that will have absolutely no claim on us and also
• 18:57
  Speaker 2: conveniently will exclude anybody who thinking about these things in
• 19:01
  Speaker 2: terms of having a claim. Right. So it's the it's
• 19:05
  Speaker 2: that and that was my theory of what's actually had
• 19:07
  Speaker 2: or a hypothesis. Sorry, I don't know if has predictive
• 19:10
  Speaker 2: value at this point. That's my hypothesis. It's a little different.
• 19:14
  Speaker 2: And I think that this is what Donna Harroway is
• 19:16
  Speaker 2: doing too. She is constructing a sphere of things that
• 19:22
  Speaker 2: you should care, that you should perform care about, which
• 19:26
  Speaker 2: functionally you have no ability to do anything about really
• 19:32
  Speaker 2: or no, or even if you do have an ability,
• 19:33
  Speaker 2: of no intent to do it. It's all about signaling.
• 19:36
  Speaker 2: It's all about your intent, right. And also it's the
• 19:42
  Speaker 2: in the negative, it clearly identifies a out group that
• 19:47
  Speaker 2: you can express legitimate hostility towards you know, I'll leave
• 19:52
  Speaker 2: it as an exercise to the viewer how she's constructed
• 19:55
  Speaker 2: her out group, Like, what are the components of that
• 19:58
  Speaker 2: out group? You know, I'm I think that I think
• 20:02
  Speaker 2: people can make a rough guess. But anyway, so shall
• 20:07
  Speaker 2: we get into it?
• 20:08
  Speaker 1: Yeah?
• 20:09
  Speaker 2: Is this helpful?
• 20:10
  Speaker 1: Like yeah, no, no, I mean it well, I mean
• 20:14
  Speaker 1: I think so, but I mean it also isn't surprising.
• 20:17
  Speaker 1: I mean you and you and I talked a little
• 20:18
  Speaker 1: bit about it earlier, and it's all about, well, it's
• 20:23
  Speaker 1: sort of like the inverse of what Mike describes as oikophobia.
• 20:27
  Speaker 1: It's this or not the inverse, but the flip side
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: of it, where you know, okophobia is like the hatred
• 20:33
  Speaker 1: of your own the people closest to you, your own culture,
• 20:36
  Speaker 1: as it were. This is like the almost a fetishization.
• 20:42
  Speaker 1: Yeah yeah, yeah, but it's not really like it Yeah yeah,
• 20:47
  Speaker 1: oh no, I was gonna say, but it's not really
• 20:48
  Speaker 1: like a love or protective instinct of the foreign. It's
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: more because it's not really there's no sacrifice involved, there's
• 20:57
  Speaker 1: no risk. You're just you're just saying, you know, I'm
• 21:00
  Speaker 1: going to talk about this place that is really far
• 21:03
  Speaker 1: away from me. That doesn't affect me, right, So all right, anyway,
• 21:08
  Speaker 1: let's uh yeah, let's continue the video. I'm not even
• 21:11
  Speaker 1: I don't remember where we left off, but well it
• 21:13
  Speaker 1: remembered where we left Am I reading the thing? I
• 21:18
  Speaker 1: have that? Okay, okay, okay, cyber manifesto, ye, I have it.
• 21:23
  Speaker 2: We could do video tips.
• 21:24
  Speaker 1: I don't know. I don't know. I just don't remember
• 21:26
  Speaker 1: what we did last. I just looked at I opened
• 21:28
  Speaker 1: up the video, and I have a document too, but
• 21:31
  Speaker 1: it's less interesting to look at.
• 21:33
  Speaker 4: So let's do a bit of video then, all right,
• 21:38
  Speaker 4: Tom in various of the worlds that I care about,
• 21:41
  Speaker 4: But basically I insist just as situated knowledge is does
• 21:46
  Speaker 4: not mean local and it does not mean perspective companion.
• 21:49
  Speaker 4: Species does not mean pets, which isn't to say that
• 21:53
  Speaker 4: pets isn't an honorable job for the other entities who
• 21:57
  Speaker 4: live with us, be they plant or animal.
• 22:01
  Speaker 5: Animals.
• 22:01
  Speaker 1: So she's doing exactly the thing you were saying. So
• 22:04
  Speaker 1: she's saying, she's saying that pets is like, it's not
• 22:08
  Speaker 1: it's like a slave term because they're beneath you, like
• 22:12
  Speaker 1: we should treat them as our peers. Even if you
• 22:15
  Speaker 1: have plants in your house right there. You know, if
• 22:19
  Speaker 1: you if you find that there's like a wasp's nest
• 22:22
  Speaker 1: on your porch, well, guess what those guys are your
• 22:25
  Speaker 1: equal You know, you should coexist with them, like as
• 22:28
  Speaker 1: much as like that's kind of what she's doing. She's
• 22:30
  Speaker 1: basically she doesn't think that human beings are on a
• 22:33
  Speaker 1: different level, or that there's any hierarchies that are not
• 22:37
  Speaker 1: man made, that are not man made. Well, there is,
• 22:41
  Speaker 1: go ahead, there is.
• 22:42
  Speaker 2: The hierarchy is that if you're not willing to perform
• 22:47
  Speaker 2: the semiotics of the wasp or whatever, if you're not
• 22:51
  Speaker 2: willing to express virtue signal about your compassion for wasps,
• 22:58
  Speaker 2: then you are part of the outgroup and you just
• 23:00
  Speaker 2: of maximal hostility.
• 23:02
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 23:02
  Speaker 2: That's this is the and this is the point. It's
• 23:05
  Speaker 2: not about the compassion, because if it was, they would
• 23:08
  Speaker 2: constrain their objects of compassion to things you can actually
• 23:11
  Speaker 2: do something about. When you feel compassion, I don't know,
• 23:16
  Speaker 2: maybe I'm weird because I'm some kind of bizarre android,
• 23:20
  Speaker 2: but when I feel compassion, I feel compelled to do
• 23:23
  Speaker 2: something right, Like I don't want to feel compassion, like
• 23:28
  Speaker 2: when I feel like something is wrong, I feel compelled
• 23:32
  Speaker 2: to try to correct it. And so this, this just
• 23:37
  Speaker 2: sitting in your truth about how compassionate you are, is
• 23:42
  Speaker 2: really alienating. And so if they want me to express
• 23:46
  Speaker 2: compassion for wasps, I'd be like, yeah, fine, in their
• 23:49
  Speaker 2: own environment where they belong. But uh, but that would
• 23:55
  Speaker 2: be like the that would be like the content of
• 23:57
  Speaker 2: that like constraining it. All right, So why doing their
• 24:01
  Speaker 2: thing out in the forest is fine. Wasps being a
• 24:05
  Speaker 2: danger to humans is not fine? Okay, all right, So
• 24:08
  Speaker 2: that's how I would express my concern over that thing.
• 24:10
  Speaker 2: Let's not let's not you know, let's not exterminate the wasps.
• 24:14
  Speaker 5: They can exist.
• 24:17
  Speaker 1: They should be in my area, but they can exist
• 24:20
  Speaker 1: far away from me. Sure, I guess you could have
• 24:24
  Speaker 1: like a human like that just means we're territorial and
• 24:29
  Speaker 1: maybe we should be seat chilled. So yeah, yeah, But
• 24:32
  Speaker 1: the point.
• 24:33
  Speaker 2: Is that they want they don't. It's not about expressing compassion,
• 24:37
  Speaker 2: because all right, if you feel compassion for something but
• 24:44
  Speaker 2: you don't feel any desire to do anything, I mean,
• 24:50
  Speaker 2: I guess you're maybe a Buddhist monk and you're just
• 24:52
  Speaker 2: practicing you know, universal love, which fair, But I don't
• 24:56
  Speaker 2: think that's what this is. It's like, there's no constraint
• 25:00
  Speaker 2: on what you supposedly virtue signal your compassion over. But
• 25:05
  Speaker 2: then again, that's not the point. The point is to
• 25:09
  Speaker 2: create the maximum circle of outgroup targets that you can
• 25:14
  Speaker 2: feel hostility for.
• 25:17
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 25:17
  Speaker 2: That's so it's not about who you care about, it's
• 25:20
  Speaker 2: about who you care about allows you to hate. Yeah, okay,
• 25:26
  Speaker 2: all right, let's show me. I just want to say
• 25:30
  Speaker 2: I just want to say, yeah, it's wonderful being right again.
• 25:34
  Speaker 1: Yep. I don't know if Tilda wants to add anything
• 25:37
  Speaker 1: now or wait.
• 25:38
  Speaker 3: A bit, Yeah, no, I'm I'm in agreement with what's
• 25:45
  Speaker 3: been said.
• 25:46
  Speaker 1: It was.
• 25:47
  Speaker 3: It was actually one of the things that really annoyed
• 25:48
  Speaker 3: me when that study came out, because people kept putting
• 25:51
  Speaker 3: up the heat meme w and they were just like, oh, look,
• 25:54
  Speaker 3: liberals only care about all of this far away stuff.
• 25:59
  Speaker 3: That's not how it was. The point of the heat
• 26:01
  Speaker 3: map is basically where you put your line for cutoff point.
• 26:07
  Speaker 3: So it's it's where you put your line and everything
• 26:09
  Speaker 3: below that. So if you put your mark on like five,
• 26:12
  Speaker 3: it means you care about one, two, three, four, and five.
• 26:15
  Speaker 3: If you put it at ten, it means you care
• 26:16
  Speaker 3: about one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine
• 26:18
  Speaker 3: and ten. It wasn't like if I put my mark
• 26:22
  Speaker 3: on ten, that means I care about like eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve,
• 26:26
  Speaker 3: like within that area. That That's not how it worked.
• 26:28
  Speaker 3: I think a lot of people got confused by the
• 26:31
  Speaker 3: heat map nature of it, and they thought that the
• 26:36
  Speaker 3: liberal side being out there meant preference for the outgroup
• 26:39
  Speaker 3: with no preference for the in group, which is not
• 26:41
  Speaker 3: what happened in that study. And it did just show
• 26:47
  Speaker 3: that you've got these people who will say that they
• 26:50
  Speaker 3: have this compassion, that this like all expanding compassion for everything.
• 26:56
  Speaker 3: It's quite obvious that actually in their day to day
• 26:58
  Speaker 3: life they don't, but it's just something that they like
• 27:01
  Speaker 3: to be able to say. Like you ever deal with
• 27:05
  Speaker 3: leftists online and all of this stuff, you always see
• 27:08
  Speaker 3: them they'll always talk about, oh, well, I have this
• 27:11
  Speaker 3: thing called empathy. I'm sure you've experienced that phrase several
• 27:16
  Speaker 3: times when you talk to them. They'll always like to
• 27:19
  Speaker 3: talk about how they care about these things because they
• 27:22
  Speaker 3: have some emotion that you don't have. Because I guess
• 27:26
  Speaker 3: they think that if you're not politically on the left.
• 27:29
  Speaker 3: You lack mirror in neurons I suppose, which you would
• 27:34
  Speaker 3: die if you didn't have them. But yeah, whatever that
• 27:38
  Speaker 3: that's all other aside. Yeah, the time when I saw
• 27:42
  Speaker 3: that study, apart from all of the people horribly misrepresenting it,
• 27:46
  Speaker 3: I just looked at it and thought, well, yeah, like,
• 27:50
  Speaker 3: we know that people on the left like to virtue
• 27:53
  Speaker 3: signal about how wide spread their caring is, but we
• 27:57
  Speaker 3: also know that it's not because push comes you actually
• 28:00
  Speaker 3: confront them on it. In any sort of manner in
• 28:04
  Speaker 3: which they have to put their money where their mouth is,
• 28:07
  Speaker 3: that falls away very quickly. Why do we have the
• 28:10
  Speaker 3: concept of the nimby why so heavily associated with the
• 28:18
  Speaker 3: left now? But it's because they.
• 28:23
  Speaker 2: I think there might be a Britishism. Then you'll need
• 28:26
  Speaker 2: to have to find a nimby.
• 28:27
  Speaker 3: Oh not in my backyard. I think that's an.
• 28:29
  Speaker 2: American Oh is it? Well?
• 28:31
  Speaker 5: I have never heard of that, but.
• 28:34
  Speaker 3: We we don't tend to refer to things as yards
• 28:37
  Speaker 3: the normal normally gardens or fields or something. It is
• 28:42
  Speaker 3: a britishism, my.
• 28:44
  Speaker 1: Nimb or nimb it doesn't work as well.
• 28:50
  Speaker 2: Nimby. Oh no, but I'm glad that you explained it
• 28:53
  Speaker 2: because I was confused, which is my usual state. But
• 28:58
  Speaker 2: we continue.
• 28:59
  Speaker 3: Yeah, it's that's why that that sort of nimbiism has
• 29:02
  Speaker 3: become very associated with these virtue signaling leftists, because as
• 29:08
  Speaker 3: soon as push comes to show okay, let's do, let's
• 29:11
  Speaker 3: let's put you on the spot and say do the
• 29:13
  Speaker 3: thing that you're saying you're going to do, and that's
• 29:17
  Speaker 3: when it shuts down. Like you've seen this hundreds of
• 29:19
  Speaker 3: times online. The man on the street goes to left
• 29:23
  Speaker 3: wing pro immigrant protests with a clipboard and high vizvest
• 29:28
  Speaker 3: On and is like, oh, hi, I work for a
• 29:30
  Speaker 3: charity looking to house like like find emergency housing for
• 29:34
  Speaker 3: people who have fled war and have entered this country,
• 29:38
  Speaker 3: perhaps illegally. Can you put one of them in your home.
• 29:42
  Speaker 3: We're looking for anything with these people that are very
• 29:45
  Speaker 3: vulnerable and in need. Can you help? And every single
• 29:49
  Speaker 3: time all of them say nah, so no, nah, not
• 29:52
  Speaker 3: right now, No I don't have the space. And you
• 29:55
  Speaker 3: can really push them on it as well, and it
• 29:56
  Speaker 3: will always be noticed, like, well, it doesn't actually have
• 29:58
  Speaker 3: to be a bedroom, it just has to meet the
• 30:00
  Speaker 3: legal requirement of a bedroom. So anything where there is
• 30:02
  Speaker 3: only one door and not part of a hallway sort
• 30:05
  Speaker 3: of arrangement like that that counts as a bedroom, Like
• 30:09
  Speaker 3: you might think that a room that you're not using
• 30:10
  Speaker 3: as it isn't, No, it is, we can it can
• 30:13
  Speaker 3: hit the legal definition of one, and they'll just say no, now, now,
• 30:18
  Speaker 3: can't do that. And of course that one's particularly relevant
• 30:22
  Speaker 3: at the moment in the UK because we recently had
• 30:25
  Speaker 3: one of our up and coming political parties, Reform UK,
• 30:29
  Speaker 3: announced that they are planning on opening these migrant hotels.
• 30:35
  Speaker 3: They're planning to attempts to commandeer as many hotels as
• 30:39
  Speaker 3: possible in predominantly left wing voting areas to move them
• 30:44
  Speaker 3: to there in some sort of you get what you
• 30:45
  Speaker 3: vote for kind of stunt. I have written an entire
• 30:49
  Speaker 3: script for a video about that. As a different topic.
• 30:51
  Speaker 3: That's that's a whole other thing for another time. Whether
• 30:54
  Speaker 3: I get around to doing that or not, who knows,
• 30:56
  Speaker 3: But that is kind of hitting a similar thing. They're saying, Okay,
• 31:01
  Speaker 3: we're going to hold you accountable for the virtues that
• 31:03
  Speaker 3: you signal, and you're getting the inevitable pushback of no, no, no,
• 31:09
  Speaker 3: we we know we don't want this, Why would you
• 31:12
  Speaker 3: make us live to our principles?
• 31:16
  Speaker 2: That sounds terrible, Yeah, because this is it's not about
• 31:21
  Speaker 2: it's not about actual compassion. It's just about signaling compassion.
• 31:26
  Speaker 2: And furthermore, it's not even about signaling compassion. It's about
• 31:31
  Speaker 2: describing compassion in order to figure out who we hate.
• 31:36
  Speaker 2: So really, yeah about hatred.
• 31:40
  Speaker 1: Really, finally we're getting there. We're getting there. Okay, all right,
• 31:47
  Speaker 1: let me let's play some more.
• 31:49
  Speaker 4: Our pets have a difficult job, in no small part
• 31:52
  Speaker 4: because members of our species are especially bad at learning
• 31:56
  Speaker 4: what they care about as opposed to what we want learn.
• 32:00
  Speaker 2: Know what you know?
• 32:00
  Speaker 1: You know how easy pets have it? Do you have
• 32:03
  Speaker 1: any idea Like if I just let Jojo off the
• 32:06
  Speaker 1: leash and I say go, you're free now, he would
• 32:09
  Speaker 1: be dead by tomorrow. It would be dead by tomorrow.
• 32:13
  Speaker 1: He lives to be twenty because he lives with me.
• 32:15
  Speaker 1: I'm sorry, it's just ridiculous for her to say that.
• 32:19
  Speaker 1: Maybe you're terrible to your plante, but I don't know
• 32:24
  Speaker 1: your fish. She would drown her fish, that's how bad
• 32:28
  Speaker 1: she is with pets.
• 32:29
  Speaker 2: Oh no, she has a Collie dog, so she must
• 32:32
  Speaker 2: and they do so maybe in that narrow, that narrow
• 32:36
  Speaker 2: part of her life, she's an actual human being. But
• 32:40
  Speaker 2: but okay, so there are some people who don't treat
• 32:43
  Speaker 2: their pets. Well, that is understandab like that calling them
• 32:47
  Speaker 2: out is understandable. But for the most part, there's a
• 32:49
  Speaker 2: reason why cats and dogs colonized are parental instincts, because
• 32:56
  Speaker 2: that's basically what they did.
• 32:58
  Speaker 1: You know, an Islami trees there. They don't like dogs
• 33:02
  Speaker 1: right like as pets they she would she like sympathize
• 33:06
  Speaker 1: more with that position just age. Yeah, probably it's foreign.
• 33:11
  Speaker 1: It's foreign. So there's that.
• 33:13
  Speaker 2: But well, we're we're gonna find out what her out
• 33:17
  Speaker 2: group is. I think definitely she does it in the
• 33:20
  Speaker 2: in the cyber manifesto. So Kaylesa, Okay, I'm done.
• 33:27
  Speaker 5: Learning how my dogs actually.
• 33:30
  Speaker 4: Think about, what they actually care about, what they like
• 33:32
  Speaker 4: to do, what frightens them is at frankly a lifelong undertaking,
• 33:37
  Speaker 4: and the mistakes that are made are both funny and shaming.
• 33:41
  Speaker 4: The kinds of violence that we perpetrate on those who
• 33:44
  Speaker 4: live closely with us as pets. So in no way
• 33:47
  Speaker 4: do I want to dishonor the job of pets. But
• 33:49
  Speaker 4: I want to insist the companion species does not mean pets.
• 33:53
  Speaker 1: Okay, it's interesting that she frames what pets do as
• 33:57
  Speaker 1: a job. It's interesting because it reminds me what why
• 34:02
  Speaker 1: I say that is because pets, obviously people have them
• 34:06
  Speaker 1: because they they get something out of it. They get
• 34:10
  Speaker 1: a companion, right, But it's not like a human where you, like,
• 34:14
  Speaker 1: you have a human companion to talk to them and
• 34:16
  Speaker 1: do human things with. But pets are a little bit
• 34:19
  Speaker 1: like they're like a step below in a way, like
• 34:22
  Speaker 1: you can, you know, cuddle with them, and that's it really.
• 34:26
  Speaker 1: I mean, you basically just enjoy their company. Maybe you
• 34:28
  Speaker 1: teach them things and you do activities with them, you
• 34:31
  Speaker 1: go on walks or whatever. But what pets do would
• 34:36
  Speaker 1: not normally be considered work unless you unless you are
• 34:41
  Speaker 1: like you're you do use your pets specifically for work,
• 34:44
  Speaker 1: like if you own a bunch of livestock and you
• 34:47
  Speaker 1: need like a herding dog to do that, or if
• 34:50
  Speaker 1: you're a hunter, or you know, you work in some
• 34:53
  Speaker 1: kind of like I don't know, law enforcement and you
• 34:57
  Speaker 1: maybe I don't know if canine's canine units own like
• 35:01
  Speaker 1: they basically take their darts home. But unless they like
• 35:04
  Speaker 1: they serve a specific function and that's like a job.
• 35:08
  Speaker 1: But I think in most cases people have pets because
• 35:10
  Speaker 1: they like having pets. Well, the reason why I'm saying
• 35:13
  Speaker 1: all this is because it reminds me of when when
• 35:16
  Speaker 1: women say that being a wife and a mother is work,
• 35:21
  Speaker 1: like it's emotional labor, like it's unpaid labor. They describe
• 35:25
  Speaker 1: it as a kind of work. It's a very interesting
• 35:29
  Speaker 1: worldview because I see this being sort of like described
• 35:32
  Speaker 1: in the same way.
• 35:33
  Speaker 3: Does that make sense, Yeah, it's I think it's exactly
• 35:37
  Speaker 3: what she's setting up. It's also a wife. She uses
• 35:40
  Speaker 3: the term the violence that we perpetrated against her pets.
• 35:43
  Speaker 3: I don't think she's actually talking about people who like
• 35:46
  Speaker 3: beat to their animals or something. She's just setting up
• 35:51
  Speaker 3: your pet doesn't live in a utopia like granted to
• 35:54
  Speaker 3: them by you, Therefore you are committing violence.
• 35:58
  Speaker 1: Right, So I'm seeing that's what I'm saying. I'm like
• 36:00
  Speaker 1: these parallels, Like she's using the same kind of language
• 36:03
  Speaker 1: that someone like Manifestel would use to describe being like
• 36:08
  Speaker 1: in a relationship with a man, like it's risk and
• 36:11
  Speaker 1: it's labor. And so she's saying the same thing. Having
• 36:14
  Speaker 1: a pet pets are at risk of violence, and they
• 36:18
  Speaker 1: do a job, which means they're getting you know there,
• 36:22
  Speaker 1: And she might even say it's unpaid, even though we
• 36:25
  Speaker 1: house them and we feed them and we clean them
• 36:27
  Speaker 1: and we give them shots and take them to the
• 36:30
  Speaker 1: vet and everything else. But I'm just saying, I don't
• 36:33
  Speaker 1: know if you guys see that, like this kind of
• 36:34
  Speaker 1: look goes in line with what Alison was saying too
• 36:39
  Speaker 1: and til Deer were saying about, you know, the sort
• 36:42
  Speaker 1: of heat map thing where she's basically making it all
• 36:46
  Speaker 1: about I guess, about as equal as she can even
• 36:49
  Speaker 1: and she would say that, Remember she would say this
• 36:51
  Speaker 1: about a plant, you know, if there was a plant
• 36:53
  Speaker 1: in the house. The plants are treated poorly and we're
• 36:57
  Speaker 1: violent to them and they.
• 36:58
  Speaker 2: Have a job, right, Yeah, we should probably also say
• 37:01
  Speaker 2: it about the microbes in our intestines.
• 37:05
  Speaker 1: In.
• 37:07
  Speaker 2: You know, the emotional labor of the E. Coli and uh,
• 37:12
  Speaker 2: and probably also the geography geological formations underneath your house.
• 37:19
  Speaker 2: And I mean, I wanted to just deep back into
• 37:24
  Speaker 2: what Tielder was saying, that that the liberals are assigning
• 37:28
  Speaker 2: equal compassion and concern for you know, every like the
• 37:34
  Speaker 2: the their immediate family, their friends and family, uh, paramesa
• 37:38
  Speaker 2: ecology space rocks. So the the what I wanted to
• 37:44
  Speaker 2: drill down on that is when you do that, when
• 37:47
  Speaker 2: you assign equal con wait to your your wife and
• 37:53
  Speaker 2: paramesa in the dirt, how do you operationalize that?
• 37:57
  Speaker 3: Like?
• 37:58
  Speaker 2: How do you express equal concern to those things? And
• 38:03
  Speaker 2: basically the you know you're concern for your wife has
• 38:08
  Speaker 2: like behavioral content, It has specific actions, specific costs, specific
• 38:11
  Speaker 2: failures that are legible and accountable. Concern for paramesia has
• 38:16
  Speaker 2: no behavioral content by definition, and there's no action that
• 38:20
  Speaker 2: constitutes helping a paramesium in any moralful more like any
• 38:24
  Speaker 2: meaningful sense. So if you sign moral equivalent moral units
• 38:28
  Speaker 2: to both, you're not equalizing them. It inflates the paramesia
• 38:32
  Speaker 2: allocation to a number that sounds meaningful, while the wife
• 38:35
  Speaker 2: allocation gets crowded by categories that make no real claim.
• 38:39
  Speaker 2: The number assigned to your wife now shares a scale
• 38:41
  Speaker 2: with rocks, so the scale is broken. And the practical
• 38:45
  Speaker 2: whole effect is that if someone asks how much do
• 38:47
  Speaker 2: you care about your wife versus a stranger versus a microbe,
• 38:50
  Speaker 2: and you assign similar numbers to all three, you haven't
• 38:53
  Speaker 2: demonstrated equal concern. You've demonstrated that the measurement instrument has
• 38:57
  Speaker 2: been detached from every behavioral referent. The number means nothing
• 39:03
  Speaker 2: because the categories aren't comparable units of moral obligation. So
• 39:06
  Speaker 2: the real question is they've discovered this finding and what
• 39:11
  Speaker 2: they actually have discovered is that liberals do not use
• 39:15
  Speaker 2: the term the way conservatives do. Conservatives use it in
• 39:19
  Speaker 2: reference to behavior. Liberals don't seem to conceive of compassion,
• 39:25
  Speaker 2: like if you can literally say yes, I treat I
• 39:28
  Speaker 2: am as compassionate to my wife as I am to
• 39:32
  Speaker 2: the microbes in the ground, what does that mean behaviorally? Right,
• 39:38
  Speaker 2: So they've divorced the idea of compassion from realistic appraisal
• 39:43
  Speaker 2: of behavior. So a conservative who assigns high concern to
• 39:48
  Speaker 2: family near zero to paramesia is reporting something operationally real.
• 39:52
  Speaker 2: A liberal assigning substantial concern to both is either reporting
• 39:55
  Speaker 2: something false or reporting something that has no operational meaning. Okay,
• 40:00
  Speaker 2: so this is either junk science or it's saying something
• 40:04
  Speaker 2: very unflattering about liberals, which means that they use the
• 40:09
  Speaker 2: term compassion and they do not know what it means.
• 40:13
  Speaker 2: It's doing something completely like something that should be fairly
• 40:17
  Speaker 2: unrecognizable to any human being with any kind of custodial architecture,
• 40:22
  Speaker 2: which should be most of us except for the sociopaths. Like,
• 40:26
  Speaker 2: we should all have an understanding that compassion requires a
• 40:29
  Speaker 2: behavioral reference and realize that we cannot do that towards
• 40:35
  Speaker 2: everything in existence, and everything in existence doesn't really want
• 40:39
  Speaker 2: it from us, so why would we even presume. So Yeah,
• 40:43
  Speaker 2: but I just wanted to address that because I feel
• 40:46
  Speaker 2: like maybe when I read out what my summary that
• 40:49
  Speaker 2: I created, that there was the implication that I was
• 40:52
  Speaker 2: saying that liberals don't also feel compassion for friends and family,
• 40:59
  Speaker 2: or at least say they do. But the point is
• 41:02
  Speaker 2: that when you actually drill down into that, you realize
• 41:05
  Speaker 2: that the word that they're using doesn't have a behavioral component,
• 41:10
  Speaker 2: Otherwise they wouldn't use it in this way. Most people
• 41:13
  Speaker 2: don't don't demonstrate equal concern for their immediate family members
• 41:20
  Speaker 2: or whatever their polycule, the liberal polycule. They don't expressiate
• 41:26
  Speaker 2: the same immediate concern for their gender fluid trans other
• 41:31
  Speaker 2: can as they do for random microbes in a clump
• 41:37
  Speaker 2: of dirt, and the fact that they don't have that
• 41:41
  Speaker 2: constraint on their thinking implies something about how they're using
• 41:44
  Speaker 2: the term. That's what I meant. Okay, sorry for the digression. Okay,
• 41:56
  Speaker 2: that said, I'm going to talk about my pets.
• 42:01
  Speaker 5: In particular.
• 42:01
  Speaker 4: I'm going to talk about Cayenne, my agility companion of
• 42:05
  Speaker 4: about a dozen years. She died about ten years ago,
• 42:09
  Speaker 4: and there we are studying together. I have a dog
• 42:13
  Speaker 4: on positive clicker I have a book on positive clicker
• 42:16
  Speaker 4: training in my hand while Cayenne naps.
• 42:19
  Speaker 2: This is literally I just want to point out, this
• 42:22
  Speaker 2: is literally the sum total of her positive contribution to humanity.
• 42:27
  Speaker 2: And you know, like if she was just a dog trainer,
• 42:31
  Speaker 2: I think.
• 42:32
  Speaker 1: That the does she invent the clicker thing?
• 42:35
  Speaker 2: No, I don't think she did invent it. Maybe she
• 42:37
  Speaker 2: she created a system of clicker training and I.
• 42:42
  Speaker 3: Was reading a book about it.
• 42:44
  Speaker 1: Oh yeah, uh sorry, sorry, go ahead.
• 42:49
  Speaker 3: Read her own book, which I mean, I wouldn't put
• 42:51
  Speaker 3: that that's true.
• 42:54
  Speaker 2: But her her work as a dog trainer is literally
• 42:58
  Speaker 2: the only operative thing she does with her life. Everything
• 43:01
  Speaker 2: else appears to be social web signaling with no actual
• 43:05
  Speaker 2: contribution to anyone. I'm sorry, social web signalers, but constantly
• 43:10
  Speaker 2: sitting around signaling your importance to other people and being
• 43:13
  Speaker 2: seen gets nothing done.
• 43:16
  Speaker 1: Here's the thought I just had, now that you are
• 43:19
  Speaker 1: mentioning this, are we living at a time where we actually, like,
• 43:24
  Speaker 1: not just where we value social web signaling more than
• 43:30
  Speaker 1: operative thinking and operative behavior, and not just like in
• 43:34
  Speaker 1: our you know, social space, but even the way that
• 43:37
  Speaker 1: we run our society.
• 43:41
  Speaker 2: The answers do you want the answer?
• 43:44
  Speaker 1: Yes, like our infrastructure is you know, slowly eroding in
• 43:51
  Speaker 1: the background.
• 43:52
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I have been tracking the veins of this throughout
• 43:56
  Speaker 2: Western society through this this mode. But yes, this this,
• 44:02
  Speaker 2: This pops up in infrastructure maintenance, It pops up in
• 44:06
  Speaker 2: US naval procurement, actually pops up in silver like as
• 44:10
  Speaker 2: I've gone through at length. It probably pops up in
• 44:13
  Speaker 2: all commodities markets. This kind of thinking is everywhere, and
• 44:18
  Speaker 2: it is destroying the lean mass of every society that
• 44:24
  Speaker 2: that has allowed it to overgrow. Shall we say, I'm
• 44:28
  Speaker 2: not going to say that it's completely useless or it's
• 44:32
  Speaker 2: completely destructive, but it is now because it's acting like
• 44:35
  Speaker 2: an invasive species, and everywhere it overgrows, it chokes out
• 44:40
  Speaker 2: any kind of circulation to any kind of muscle. So
• 44:44
  Speaker 2: the things that a society needs to run a military
• 44:47
  Speaker 2: that isn't that can actually procure things for itself, right
• 44:53
  Speaker 2: a and can can focus on operational metrics rather than
• 44:57
  Speaker 2: DEI metrics. An infant structure that can repair itself because
• 45:03
  Speaker 2: it's not social web signaling green technology while it allows
• 45:08
  Speaker 2: its pipes to degrade beyond two to degrade beyond safety measures,
• 45:16
  Speaker 2: beyond capacity to keep pumping barrels of oil right and
• 45:21
  Speaker 2: other issues with infrastructure projects. So everything becomes social signaling.
• 45:26
  Speaker 2: The operative the operative layer. And this is the big
• 45:28
  Speaker 2: problem with the social web network social web. It just
• 45:33
  Speaker 2: assumes the operative layer is infinite, infinitely durable and does
• 45:40
  Speaker 2: not need to be maintained. It just assumes it's in
• 45:43
  Speaker 2: the back. This is the big toxicity about it. And
• 45:48
  Speaker 2: there are I mean, there are some relational thinkers, like
• 45:52
  Speaker 2: we were talking to them on Wednesday, uh Daria and
• 45:56
  Speaker 2: uh Red Pilled Darbie, and they can come to the
• 46:00
  Speaker 2: same conclusions that we do. I'm like, I'm more I'm
• 46:03
  Speaker 2: actually in the middle honestly, and uh they can come
• 46:08
  Speaker 2: to the same conclusion as somebody is working in an
• 46:09
  Speaker 2: operative frame through social reading. But the problem is that
• 46:13
  Speaker 2: women who do that are constantly being preyed upon and
• 46:17
  Speaker 2: destroyed by the spiders, like the sociopathic women who use
• 46:23
  Speaker 2: social web web signaling to destroy other women, to torment
• 46:28
  Speaker 2: them and to silence them. We were talking to a
• 46:31
  Speaker 2: spider on Wednesday. I won't say anymore, but yeah, she's
• 46:37
  Speaker 2: But that's what they do. And so the women who
• 46:40
  Speaker 2: can actually use social web reading to come to an
• 46:44
  Speaker 2: understanding that oh wait, the operative dimension needs or the
• 46:48
  Speaker 2: operative layer needs, needs to be heard too, needs to
• 46:52
  Speaker 2: be seen, they get silenced by the predatory extractors and
• 46:59
  Speaker 2: so yeah, but and because of that, it's not just
• 47:02
  Speaker 2: social web it's the fact that this current arrangement means
• 47:10
  Speaker 2: that the social webs we're dealing with have no accountability.
• 47:15
  Speaker 2: So if you have accountability for the women in the
• 47:17
  Speaker 2: social web, you have ways of controlling the spiders. That's
• 47:21
  Speaker 2: why spiders always go after accountability, because they don't want
• 47:25
  Speaker 2: to have to answer to anyone, right, and they can
• 47:29
  Speaker 2: just keep doing their thing, keep creating consensus through their
• 47:34
  Speaker 2: manipulations without any control, any kind of custodial control over
• 47:40
  Speaker 2: their behavior, so that it comes incredibly destructive. So it's
• 47:43
  Speaker 2: not just social webs or relational webs. They're poisoned relational
• 47:48
  Speaker 2: webs that are actively destructive because they're not being controlled
• 47:52
  Speaker 2: by I don't know, the Christian grammar who goes and
• 47:56
  Speaker 2: volunteers at the soup soup kitchen every Sunday or whatever.
• 48:01
  Speaker 2: They're being controlled by socia paths who don't care about anybody.
• 48:08
  Speaker 2: And that's what happens when you don't have any accountability
• 48:11
  Speaker 2: for women at all. And yeah, and then they seem
• 48:16
  Speaker 2: to pair up with their counterpart among men, and we
• 48:20
  Speaker 2: get extractive regimes that financialize everything and destroy all right, Okay,
• 48:28
  Speaker 2: I'm off my podium. I hope that you can get
• 48:31
  Speaker 2: something valuable out of that.
• 48:33
  Speaker 1: But yeah, that's good. Yeah, that's what I thought. It's
• 48:37
  Speaker 1: a good way to talk about like this because you're
• 48:41
  Speaker 1: seeing as a pattern, you know, people can be on
• 48:43
  Speaker 1: the lookout for.
• 48:44
  Speaker 4: I will try to put into action what I've learned
• 48:46
  Speaker 4: in this book, and she will embarrass me mightily by
• 48:50
  Speaker 4: having entirely different ideas about what I thought I had
• 48:53
  Speaker 4: just said.
• 48:54
  Speaker 1: So you're basically violent and cruel to your dog. I understand.
• 48:58
  Speaker 4: So we are trying to learn to communicate in that
• 49:01
  Speaker 4: early picture, and then then the subsequent picture. I would
• 49:05
  Speaker 4: like to say we are something at the height of
• 49:07
  Speaker 4: our achievements in the sport of agility. We trained for
• 49:11
  Speaker 4: thousands of hours in agility in order to have what
• 49:14
  Speaker 4: we call in the sport a good run, which is
• 49:17
  Speaker 4: to say, why do you.
• 49:18
  Speaker 2: Have to what?
• 49:20
  Speaker 1: What if your what if your dog didn't want to
• 49:22
  Speaker 1: do that?
• 49:23
  Speaker 3: Was it?
• 49:24
  Speaker 1: Did you just like like if it sounds like you're
• 49:26
  Speaker 1: basically just like some Arab slave owner that forced his
• 49:30
  Speaker 1: kenyon to like run a marathon. I'm just I'm just
• 49:35
  Speaker 1: but anyway, I mean no, I'm just using endless looking
• 49:41
  Speaker 1: at her logic, She's you know, how can the dog
• 49:45
  Speaker 1: know what if the dog just wants to like lay
• 49:47
  Speaker 1: around and eat snacks and you know, Cheesy's dog. Yeah,
• 49:52
  Speaker 1: what the dog doing? Anyway? I'm sorry, go ahead, Alison,
• 49:55
  Speaker 1: what were you gonna say? Well?
• 49:58
  Speaker 2: This is this is probably the content that's the least offensive.
• 50:01
  Speaker 2: Like I said, if she had just kept herself to
• 50:03
  Speaker 2: dog trainer, she would probably be a net a net
• 50:07
  Speaker 2: benefit to humanity, but unfortunately she didn't. Uh, do we
• 50:13
  Speaker 2: want to go through the cyber manifesto because this is
• 50:15
  Speaker 2: well we can Yeah.
• 50:16
  Speaker 1: She's just talking about her dogs. Well, do you do
• 50:19
  Speaker 1: you remember what paragraph we left off at the Cyber Manifesto.
• 50:23
  Speaker 2: I thought, did we even start reading it?
• 50:25
  Speaker 1: No, we did, we did, we did right til here,
• 50:28
  Speaker 1: we did read.
• 50:30
  Speaker 3: I know, we just said this exists and we should
• 50:36
  Speaker 3: do something about it. I don't remember reading any of it.
• 50:40
  Speaker 1: All right, well, this is oh, you know what I'm
• 50:43
  Speaker 1: looking at, psychoanalytic feminism, not the cyber Feminism Manifesto. That's
• 50:49
  Speaker 1: the thing. Okay, let me get that out. Yeah, go ahead,
• 50:55
  Speaker 1: Feminist Manifesto, the Cyberg Manifesto.
• 50:59
  Speaker 5: I can.
• 50:59
  Speaker 2: I can read some stuff out while you're doing that,
• 51:01
  Speaker 2: if you want, or we can do this after the
• 51:03
  Speaker 2: Freme framework analysis.
• 51:06
  Speaker 3: All right, talk about feminist dog training because that exists.
• 51:10
  Speaker 3: Feminist sorry, feminist.
• 51:12
  Speaker 1: Dog training, feminist dog training that gave me that dog
• 51:21
  Speaker 1: park rape. You know, oh yeah, you know that.
• 51:26
  Speaker 3: Well it's a few years ago now. There was actually
• 51:29
  Speaker 3: an article published in Catalyst. Feminism Theory and Techno Science
• 51:35
  Speaker 3: is a journal about that. And the article is Feminism,
• 51:38
  Speaker 3: Fuzzy Science is and Intospecies, Intersectionalities, the Promise and Perils
• 51:42
  Speaker 3: of Contemporary dog Training. It's by someone called Harlan Eugene
• 51:47
  Speaker 3: Weaver and it is literally like, we need feminist dog training.
• 51:51
  Speaker 3: You need to better understand the needs and the wants
• 51:54
  Speaker 3: of your dog, and you have to truly understand if
• 51:58
  Speaker 3: the dog actually wants to be trained, which this paraway
• 52:03
  Speaker 3: woman has obviously completely sidestepped. She just went in trained
• 52:08
  Speaker 3: the dog actually had no she committed violence against the dog.
• 52:12
  Speaker 3: She didn't actually know if the dog wanted to be trained.
• 52:14
  Speaker 1: Yeah, we have to have a conversation about consent.
• 52:17
  Speaker 3: Yeah, she just presumed that the dog wanted to be trained,
• 52:20
  Speaker 3: and because the dog responded to the training, she I
• 52:22
  Speaker 3: guess she just took that as a non affirmative, non
• 52:27
  Speaker 3: verbal consent, which, as we all know, you're not allowed
• 52:29
  Speaker 3: to go with anymore. Apparently, the dog does actually have
• 52:33
  Speaker 3: to tap the would you like to know more button
• 52:36
  Speaker 3: in order to signal its desire to be trained to
• 52:39
  Speaker 3: do certain things. But yeah, this is actually something that
• 52:43
  Speaker 3: feminists have been doing. Like, you actually have to try
• 52:47
  Speaker 3: to somehow figure out if the animal is consenting to training,
• 52:53
  Speaker 3: because otherwise you are committing violence upon it and engaging
• 52:58
  Speaker 3: in class warfare the same way that the feminists defined it.
• 53:01
  Speaker 3: You know, men and women extracting wealth, extracting money, violence
• 53:08
  Speaker 3: against women, and they use the rape and the violence
• 53:11
  Speaker 3: to extract wealth from women who sit around pressing buttons
• 53:15
  Speaker 3: on the automated white goods that oppress them. It's the
• 53:18
  Speaker 3: exact same thing is if you train a dog without
• 53:21
  Speaker 3: getting it to somehow press the consent button, that means
• 53:25
  Speaker 3: that you're committing class warfare against the animal because you're
• 53:28
  Speaker 3: extracting wealth. You're extracting wealth or extracting resources, extracting productivity
• 53:35
  Speaker 3: from the dog.
• 53:37
  Speaker 2: You have a we have a vote for feminist dog training.
• 53:42
  Speaker 2: I'm really hoping it it's not as horrifying as I think.
• 53:48
  Speaker 2: It might.
• 53:48
  Speaker 1: Be.
• 53:49
  Speaker 3: A stream about it eight years ago, you can go
• 53:52
  Speaker 3: and look at it. It is just called TILDR Feminist
• 53:55
  Speaker 3: Dog Training. It's a research stream, so it's not fantastic
• 53:58
  Speaker 3: in quality. It's just me reading it. I do lose
• 54:01
  Speaker 3: my mind a little bit some way through it because
• 54:04
  Speaker 3: the author just keeps using the word fuzzy. It just
• 54:07
  Speaker 3: defines everything. There are fuzzy boundaries, there is fuzzy. This,
• 54:10
  Speaker 3: this thing is fuzzy, and all of these things are fuzzy.
• 54:13
  Speaker 3: And throughout this entire thing, I just keep saying, I
• 54:16
  Speaker 3: can see why you're using the term fuzzy. I know
• 54:18
  Speaker 3: where this is going. And then the other shoe drops
• 54:22
  Speaker 3: and does and the author does actually right, these things
• 54:25
  Speaker 3: are fuzzy, and this is way, and there's a delightful
• 54:27
  Speaker 3: irony in the fact that dogs are also fuzzy. And
• 54:31
  Speaker 3: I lost my fucking mind when I read that, like
• 54:34
  Speaker 3: it would, I really just lost my shit at the
• 54:38
  Speaker 3: paper as just like I knew, this is.
• 54:40
  Speaker 1: Why you were using the word fuzzy. You are not witty.
• 54:45
  Speaker 3: I've lost my fucking mind, get it? Why does this exist?
• 54:51
  Speaker 3: Why are these people allowed to write in the way
• 54:53
  Speaker 3: that they do. But we could look that up feminist
• 54:58
  Speaker 3: dog training if you've if you really wanted to, that
• 55:01
  Speaker 3: could be another thing. But it is slightly horrifying and
• 55:04
  Speaker 3: very frustrating.
• 55:05
  Speaker 1: Well, I have something on the screen here at Gale
• 55:06
  Speaker 1: Academic one file, Feminism's Fuzzy Sciences and Interspecies Intersectionalities, The
• 55:13
  Speaker 1: Promises and Perils of Contemporary Dog Training by Harlan Eugene Weaver,
• 55:20
  Speaker 1: Spring twenty seventeen.
• 55:23
  Speaker 3: Uh, yeah, that's the one.
• 55:25
  Speaker 1: That's probably the one. Yeah it is. Yeah, so there
• 55:31
  Speaker 1: it is. We have it. I mean I and then
• 55:35
  Speaker 1: I also have the Cyborg Manifesto by Donna Harroway. We
• 55:40
  Speaker 1: could do that one and and save this gem for later,
• 55:46
  Speaker 1: I would need to.
• 55:47
  Speaker 3: Dog training needs its own thing, because yeah, it's definitely
• 55:52
  Speaker 3: far afeel from what we're doing, only vaguely related by
• 55:55
  Speaker 3: the fact that Donna Harroway likes dogs and has trained dogs.
• 56:00
  Speaker 2: The feminist manifest or the cyber Manifesto is fifteen thousand words.
• 56:06
  Speaker 1: We don't have to read the whole thing. Maybe there's
• 56:07
  Speaker 1: like a holy what do you want some say? Are
• 56:13
  Speaker 1: there any choice quotes? You know? You know why? Okay?
• 56:18
  Speaker 1: Do you guys know why? These kinds of things are
• 56:22
  Speaker 1: always extremely long? Like I've noticed that when people make
• 56:27
  Speaker 1: videos about a topic. Let's say they're talking about writing.
• 56:30
  Speaker 1: It could be about writing, and you have someone write
• 56:33
  Speaker 1: about like how to tell I don't know good stories.
• 56:36
  Speaker 1: Maybe they're pushing back on more progressive elements. That video
• 56:41
  Speaker 1: is like maybe fifteen minutes long, twenty minutes long, and
• 56:44
  Speaker 1: then the responses to it from leftists are like an hour.
• 56:47
  Speaker 1: Do you know why they're so long? Do you know why?
• 56:50
  Speaker 1: And I'm not asking because I don't know, because I
• 56:52
  Speaker 1: think I do, But do you know why it takes
• 56:54
  Speaker 1: so long for them to make their argument, if any argument?
• 56:59
  Speaker 3: I'm just asking in the audible Okay, yeah, yeah, yeah,
• 57:03
  Speaker 3: intellectual gifts galloping to make themselves appear very smart. Yeah,
• 57:07
  Speaker 3: they are not overcomplicate things in order to make them
• 57:10
  Speaker 3: appear impenetrable when they're actually not. They seem to think
• 57:14
  Speaker 3: that everyone getting bored by their repetitive nonsense is them
• 57:17
  Speaker 3: winning the argument.
• 57:20
  Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly. It's like they either put you to sleep
• 57:24
  Speaker 1: or confuse they dazzle you with their word craft, or
• 57:28
  Speaker 1: they piss you off, and when you get angry and
• 57:31
  Speaker 1: like mute them, they declare victory because they got you
• 57:34
  Speaker 1: mad because they've been so up to since, so frustrating
• 57:38
  Speaker 1: and vague, and they you can't actually have a conversation,
• 57:41
  Speaker 1: and that's frustrating.
• 57:43
  Speaker 3: So all right, we need to make our domestic violence
• 57:49
  Speaker 3: laws because there are there there isn't a spate an
• 57:53
  Speaker 3: epidemic of violence of leftists beating bushes, and it needs
• 57:58
  Speaker 3: to end.
• 58:02
  Speaker 1: Alison, what were you going to suggest?
• 58:04
  Speaker 2: Okay, I can I can find three areas that we.
• 58:07
  Speaker 1: Can come about choice choice quotes or something like.
• 58:11
  Speaker 2: That's a little more difficult, but well, the.
• 58:12
  Speaker 1: Thing is, yeah, because I want to take this gigantic.
• 58:16
  Speaker 1: This isn't a word salad, This is a word salad bar.
• 58:20
  Speaker 1: This is this is a word all you can eat
• 58:23
  Speaker 1: buffet and uh. And it's all slop too. It's like
• 58:27
  Speaker 1: all porridge, all right.
• 58:30
  Speaker 2: So it lacks meat, Yes, it lacks any meat, all right.
• 58:39
  Speaker 2: So we could go to Fractured Identities, which is the
• 58:41
  Speaker 2: purest moral circle material. So it relates most to the
• 58:45
  Speaker 2: moral circle that I talked about, and it contains the
• 58:48
  Speaker 2: explicit construction of the in group by a loyalty test,
• 58:52
  Speaker 2: the dismantling of prior feminist categories, the sand of all
• 58:57
  Speaker 2: women of color passages where actual women function as rhetorical
• 59:01
  Speaker 2: instrument with zero behavioral outputs towards them. So we really care,
• 59:06
  Speaker 2: we really care about the brown women. We don't do
• 59:08
  Speaker 2: anything for them except care about them of a category
• 59:14
  Speaker 2: woman argument is the loyalty test. Okay, So that's got
• 59:17
  Speaker 2: the biggest amount of moral circle contents, which would be
• 59:22
  Speaker 2: would relate to the liberal versus conservetive how they construct
• 59:29
  Speaker 2: I would I could give you the other options I got.
• 59:33
  Speaker 2: We got thematic domination, which is the best like cognitive
• 59:37
  Speaker 2: mortalities material, which apparently it contains an infamous binary chart
• 59:44
  Speaker 2: that could be that could be fascinating, And I'm just
• 59:46
  Speaker 2: giving you the tour options, Brian. The charts left column
• 59:51
  Speaker 2: items are interchangeable, the right column items are interchangeable, and
• 59:54
  Speaker 2: the chart is sub substituted later by other taxonomies. So basically,
• 1:00:00
  Speaker 2: the informatics of domination is her just making taxonomies, all right?
• 1:00:07
  Speaker 2: And uh, and then there's the Cyborgs, a myth of
• 1:00:10
  Speaker 2: political identity contains not of woman born, the explicit refusal
• 1:00:17
  Speaker 2: of mother infant bonding, and the prescriptive program for cyborg sexuality.
• 1:00:25
  Speaker 2: H Uh. This is where the uh, the disillusion dis
• 1:00:31
  Speaker 2: dissolving of male, female and family is stated as a
• 1:00:35
  Speaker 2: positive program. All right, So yeah, that those are the
• 1:00:41
  Speaker 2: those are the three Those are the three potential tour options.
• 1:00:45
  Speaker 2: I guess the informatics of not the informatics of domination,
• 1:00:48
  Speaker 2: but fractured identities, which which has the content related to
• 1:00:54
  Speaker 2: what we were talking about initially?
• 1:00:57
  Speaker 1: Yeah, so I should search that term then, Although.
• 1:01:00
  Speaker 3: Three tour options all within the Cyborg Manifesto, yes, ah,
• 1:01:06
  Speaker 3: I see, perhaps be a little controversial. Because I am
• 1:01:11
  Speaker 3: still tired from doing stuff today, Might it be an
• 1:01:15
  Speaker 3: idea to postpone the Cyborg Manifesto until like next week
• 1:01:19
  Speaker 3: or the week after because I'd like to read it
• 1:01:23
  Speaker 3: in totality before going through that. If it's okay, we
• 1:01:26
  Speaker 3: can still do a little bit of it. But I
• 1:01:28
  Speaker 3: just I like to try and be as informative as
• 1:01:31
  Speaker 3: I can, and I think I can do that better
• 1:01:33
  Speaker 3: if I read the whole thing, because I can reference
• 1:01:36
  Speaker 3: other bits throughout the paper as we do.
• 1:01:39
  Speaker 2: Okay, fair enough, Do you want to do the auzzy? No?
• 1:01:42
  Speaker 2: We can't, all right, should we just? Uh? We just
• 1:01:47
  Speaker 2: call this this this this, this this show a squib. Well,
• 1:01:50
  Speaker 2: we laid out I laid out the the oxytocin the
• 1:01:54
  Speaker 2: moral circles idea.
• 1:01:55
  Speaker 1: No, yeah, we definitely talked about that.
• 1:01:58
  Speaker 3: Yeah, and continue with the Harraway video.
• 1:02:01
  Speaker 1: Oh yeah, we'll do that. That's true. We are okay,
• 1:02:06
  Speaker 1: let's go back to this. We'll we'll do Cyborg Manifesto
• 1:02:09
  Speaker 1: proper then next time. Yeah. Divine duck Divine Divina Duckworth says,
• 1:02:15
  Speaker 1: never accept that their distortions of the English language. I
• 1:02:19
  Speaker 1: have a series on that. But anyway, how you.
• 1:02:23
  Speaker 5: Have somehow learned the discipline, learned your game.
• 1:02:29
  Speaker 4: Yourself, the discipline of the game sufficiently that you can
• 1:02:34
  Speaker 4: run and release something new in the world that it
• 1:02:37
  Speaker 4: can flame into the open. It can flame into something
• 1:02:40
  Speaker 4: that is more than comfortable, something you didn't and couldn't train,
• 1:02:44
  Speaker 4: but also didn't and couldn't do without the training, So
• 1:02:48
  Speaker 4: that the way the discipline enables the flaming run into
• 1:02:52
  Speaker 4: what I call the open, not Heideggers open, but the
• 1:02:55
  Speaker 4: open of play and of invention and of letting happen
• 1:02:58
  Speaker 4: in the world what was truly not in the world before.
• 1:03:02
  Speaker 5: I would like to say that once in a great while, Kaya,
• 1:03:06
  Speaker 5: how many.
• 1:03:06
  Speaker 3: Mushrooms did this woman do in this?
• 1:03:09
  Speaker 1: Yeah? I know, remember, guy, she's talking about trading her dog.
• 1:03:13
  Speaker 1: This is like what anybody who owns a dog has
• 1:03:16
  Speaker 1: to spend some time doing. I don't know if you know,
• 1:03:19
  Speaker 1: did you know you were actually inflaming your dog or whatever?
• 1:03:22
  Speaker 1: She said, No, but her but her audience is dazzled, dude, dazzled.
• 1:03:32
  Speaker 3: Okay, well, she's.
• 1:03:36
  Speaker 2: She's performing being in but out at the same time.
• 1:03:41
  Speaker 2: It's very fair.
• 1:03:42
  Speaker 1: I mean, this is what Lovecraft referred to when he
• 1:03:44
  Speaker 1: was talking about cosmic horrors that would drive you insane.
• 1:03:47
  Speaker 1: It wasn't like some kind of like, you know, an
• 1:03:50
  Speaker 1: indescribable thing coming out of the of the furthest reaches
• 1:03:55
  Speaker 1: of the galaxy. It was like a hippie chick from
• 1:03:58
  Speaker 1: the sixties talking about tree dogs run.
• 1:04:01
  Speaker 3: It's just such a weird way of phrasing it. It's like,
• 1:04:04
  Speaker 3: oh it it bursts forth into the flames, the flame,
• 1:04:07
  Speaker 3: the things that were not here before that were greater
• 1:04:10
  Speaker 3: than the Okay, so you train an animal, right, the
• 1:04:13
  Speaker 3: animal can do things on command that it previously wouldn't
• 1:04:18
  Speaker 3: have because you've educated it. Okay, Right, there's something to
• 1:04:23
  Speaker 3: be said for being greater than the sum of its
• 1:04:28
  Speaker 3: parts there in so far as you've expanded the ability
• 1:04:31
  Speaker 3: of both the animal and therefore yourself. But do we
• 1:04:36
  Speaker 3: have to do this, pseudo intellectual? The flame is coming forth,
• 1:04:39
  Speaker 3: you are infleming everything it is, So.
• 1:04:42
  Speaker 1: Do we really need to do this like Prometheus? Yeah?
• 1:04:50
  Speaker 3: Yeah, It's just again, this just seems to you know,
• 1:04:53
  Speaker 3: pseudo intellectual, semi philosophical, hippie dippy bollocks, just trying to
• 1:04:57
  Speaker 3: make things sound incredibly profound, meaningful when they're actually not.
• 1:05:02
  Speaker 1: Yes, and she's speaking probably getting paid thousands of dollars
• 1:05:06
  Speaker 1: to stand in front of an audience and spew this stuff.
• 1:05:10
  Speaker 3: And yet though I will say I do prefer my
• 1:05:13
  Speaker 3: dog trainers to be absolutely flaming, just like Caesar. They
• 1:05:20
  Speaker 3: are the men trainers.
• 1:05:23
  Speaker 5: Like it even an arcasm?
• 1:05:26
  Speaker 1: What did you just what? What is this woman dog pilled?
• 1:05:29
  Speaker 1: Let me go back. She said something about.
• 1:05:33
  Speaker 4: Once in a great while, Kaya and I had a
• 1:05:37
  Speaker 4: good run, and there is nothing in the world like it,
• 1:05:40
  Speaker 4: even an arcasm.
• 1:05:41
  Speaker 1: Ah, now it is.
• 1:05:43
  Speaker 5: There's also nothing in the world like it.
• 1:05:45
  Speaker 2: Oh God, I know it's gonna go there. I knew it.
• 1:05:50
  Speaker 2: I could feel it, the instant.
• 1:05:52
  Speaker 3: Oh cool, dog training is better than sex when it
• 1:05:58
  Speaker 3: goes right.
• 1:06:00
  Speaker 1: I'm sorry, but okay.
• 1:06:07
  Speaker 2: In fact, the.
• 1:06:09
  Speaker 3: Husband is apparently very under skilled, although you're not wearing
• 1:06:13
  Speaker 3: a wedding ring, so that might explain something.
• 1:06:15
  Speaker 1: Oh yeah, I feel like there's a reason you have
• 1:06:17
  Speaker 1: all those dogs. Hm hmm.
• 1:06:21
  Speaker 2: Can we not like, can we just have like sex
• 1:06:27
  Speaker 2: and pets, just keep them completely separate.
• 1:06:30
  Speaker 1: Yeah, they can be two different things. I like the
• 1:06:33
  Speaker 1: idea of that.
• 1:06:34
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and yet I knew that watching this as soon
• 1:06:39
  Speaker 2: as she brings up for dogs, there would be some
• 1:06:43
  Speaker 2: cross contamination between those two categories.
• 1:06:47
  Speaker 1: And it's almost like these feminist types they they just
• 1:06:53
  Speaker 1: I don't know, it seems like they sexualize everything all
• 1:06:56
  Speaker 1: the time. Like they see that, they see women as
• 1:06:59
  Speaker 1: nothing more than that, and they do it and they
• 1:07:02
  Speaker 1: blame men for doing it, even though men don't do
• 1:07:05
  Speaker 1: it to the same degree in my opinion. Anyway, I
• 1:07:11
  Speaker 1: know that she's.
• 1:07:11
  Speaker 3: Just saying that, Oh, it feels really good, like when
• 1:07:14
  Speaker 3: you get something. But did you really have to just
• 1:07:17
  Speaker 3: compare it to something sextual? Was that necessary?
• 1:07:20
  Speaker 2: No?
• 1:07:21
  Speaker 1: No, unless, of course, again, you have no other no
• 1:07:26
  Speaker 1: other means to do it, and especially at your age,
• 1:07:29
  Speaker 1: too extra weird.
• 1:07:31
  Speaker 3: But okay, I'm aware that I make horrendous sex puns
• 1:07:35
  Speaker 3: and terrible masturbation jokes very frequently. I was withholding one
• 1:07:40
  Speaker 3: earlier about doing US as a means of declaring war
• 1:07:44
  Speaker 3: against the bacteria in your large intestine, and then doing
• 1:07:50
  Speaker 3: a little bit where I said, I went with sit
• 1:07:51
  Speaker 3: ups because of the other one, because the other option
• 1:07:54
  Speaker 3: of that war was an oversized dildo. I was just
• 1:07:57
  Speaker 3: urged to do that. But she just went there anyway,
• 1:08:03
  Speaker 3: and and in in in a.
• 1:08:04
  Speaker 2: In a situation where you just like, like I said,
• 1:08:08
  Speaker 2: you have the category pets, we have the category sex.
• 1:08:13
  Speaker 2: Let's just keep a nice wide chasm between them.
• 1:08:16
  Speaker 1: Give it a wide berth.
• 1:08:18
  Speaker 5: Yeah, give it a.
• 1:08:20
  Speaker 2: Let's just keep them separate, all right, Just that's good.
• 1:08:25
  Speaker 2: You know that that that would be my preference. Uh,
• 1:08:29
  Speaker 2: but you know yeah, uh And again I knew that
• 1:08:32
  Speaker 2: this was going to happen. But let's let's uh, I
• 1:08:35
  Speaker 2: think I've I've stated my concern.
• 1:08:37
  Speaker 1: Let's yes, let's see, let's see.
• 1:08:40
  Speaker 4: Yeah, there's a miscommunication and it all falls apart.
• 1:08:45
  Speaker 5: And there you are looking like each other, like you idiot.
• 1:08:48
  Speaker 4: You know, when I get in her got in her
• 1:08:51
  Speaker 4: way in an entry to the weaveholes, when she somehow,
• 1:08:54
  Speaker 4: when I somehow, my shoulder was saying one thing, my
• 1:08:57
  Speaker 4: feet were saying another, my mouth was saying a third,
• 1:09:00
  Speaker 4: and Kayen had a fourth idea.
• 1:09:02
  Speaker 5: And we were toast on the course.
• 1:09:05
  Speaker 4: We were ripped apart, and you felt the rip in
• 1:09:08
  Speaker 4: the fiber of your being. It's that kind of playing
• 1:09:12
  Speaker 4: the game with passion and intensity with each other.
• 1:09:16
  Speaker 5: It's not an innocent sport. There's plenty of there's failure.
• 1:09:20
  Speaker 4: Of course, there's also the kind of mistake in which
• 1:09:23
  Speaker 4: you harm each other, more likely the human harms the dog.
• 1:09:26
  Speaker 4: But agility was one of the places where I learned
• 1:09:29
  Speaker 4: what I meant by the open and that experience of
• 1:09:33
  Speaker 4: somehow flaming with each other into something that didn't exist
• 1:09:38
  Speaker 4: on the planet before.
• 1:09:39
  Speaker 5: Call it the joy of play.
• 1:09:42
  Speaker 1: Didn't exist on the planet before. Oh my god, Okay,
• 1:09:45
  Speaker 1: I think we're I think we're moving away from the
• 1:09:48
  Speaker 1: dog thing. She was using it to make another argument.
• 1:09:51
  Speaker 1: And I see that she's got the clicker, so maybe
• 1:09:53
  Speaker 1: she's going to change topics.
• 1:09:54
  Speaker 4: Now, okay, So the companion species are my litter mats.
• 1:10:02
  Speaker 4: We are moving right along, honest to God.
• 1:10:05
  Speaker 5: Okay. Now, also in my litter.
• 1:10:10
  Speaker 4: Are the creatures of contemporary bio molecular biology. And I
• 1:10:17
  Speaker 4: introduced them through Lynn Randolph's paintings. Remember she did Cyborg,
• 1:10:23
  Speaker 4: the Cyborg painting that I showed before. She also did
• 1:10:26
  Speaker 4: the Annunciation of the Second Coming.
• 1:10:28
  Speaker 1: What, oh god, this fucking modern art. I hate this
• 1:10:32
  Speaker 1: stuff so much. What is that? Is that? A rat
• 1:10:35
  Speaker 1: wearing a crown of thorns in a room full of
• 1:10:39
  Speaker 1: eye I'm just describing this for people who might be listening.
• 1:10:41
  Speaker 1: So there's two paintings. One is a rat in a
• 1:10:48
  Speaker 1: box it looks like with a crown of thorns, and
• 1:10:53
  Speaker 1: they're in the box are like walls, and there are
• 1:10:55
  Speaker 1: little slits open and there are eyes looking at the
• 1:10:59
  Speaker 1: rat like almost like the rats being watched by multiple
• 1:11:04
  Speaker 1: human eyes. And then the other painting is of a
• 1:11:09
  Speaker 1: statue looks like it's supposed to be a man and
• 1:11:14
  Speaker 1: there's a woman holding his arm, an angel of some kind,
• 1:11:20
  Speaker 1: perhaps because she has wings, and they're standing on I
• 1:11:23
  Speaker 1: don't know, like a farm, like they're giants. I have
• 1:11:26
  Speaker 1: no idea what's going on. So this is called modest witness.
• 1:11:32
  Speaker 1: At second, female man meets on co mouse.
• 1:11:38
  Speaker 3: Okay, okay, yeah, the only thing that I can bring
• 1:11:45
  Speaker 3: to that is on co mouse is a thing. But
• 1:11:47
  Speaker 3: it's like a it's like a specific strain of lab mouse.
• 1:11:54
  Speaker 3: That's all I really know about it. That's probably what
• 1:11:58
  Speaker 3: that is. With all of the eyes and some sort
• 1:12:00
  Speaker 3: of reference to the the mouse being watched.
• 1:12:04
  Speaker 1: Why do we even know?
• 1:12:06
  Speaker 3: Why do we even know what long house is? It's
• 1:12:08
  Speaker 3: just a really stupid bit of trivia to have somewhere
• 1:12:10
  Speaker 3: in my brain.
• 1:12:11
  Speaker 1: It looks like the mouse has like arms and legs
• 1:12:14
  Speaker 1: that are human.
• 1:12:15
  Speaker 3: Yeah, there's probably some bizarre pseudo intellectual, semi philosophical, waffle
• 1:12:22
  Speaker 3: based bollops going on there, of course. Yeah, welcome to
• 1:12:27
  Speaker 3: modern art, where the people can do like modern art
• 1:12:31
  Speaker 3: is not art anymore. Modern art is creative writing because
• 1:12:34
  Speaker 3: of the massive essay that explains what the fuck is
• 1:12:37
  Speaker 3: going on on the canvas because you need it.
• 1:12:40
  Speaker 1: Yes, well, if it even involves a canvas, it often
• 1:12:44
  Speaker 1: is like, you know, did you see that one art
• 1:12:47
  Speaker 1: piece which is like a naked woman that's hanging inside
• 1:12:51
  Speaker 1: of a giant bell. She's acting as the part of
• 1:12:54
  Speaker 1: the bell that makes that hits the sides and makes
• 1:12:58
  Speaker 1: the makes the bell ring. And it's a real woman.
• 1:13:01
  Speaker 1: She's hanging upside down inside of a bell and she's
• 1:13:03
  Speaker 1: swinging around in there. And I guess it's some kind
• 1:13:07
  Speaker 1: of like women are the objects type of message because
• 1:13:11
  Speaker 1: like if because these things are essays, they have to
• 1:13:15
  Speaker 1: say the right things. So they're almost always like you know,
• 1:13:19
  Speaker 1: leftist fucking talking points, feminism, capitalism, bad whatever, Like it's
• 1:13:26
  Speaker 1: always the same stuff, and they're just finding new ways
• 1:13:29
  Speaker 1: to say the same thing. And they completely saturate art
• 1:13:33
  Speaker 1: to the with all that shit, to the point where
• 1:13:35
  Speaker 1: no one knows what's beautiful anymore. And and because all
• 1:13:38
  Speaker 1: of it's garbage, and so they think that's where art
• 1:13:40
  Speaker 1: is and I have to tell them, no, there's you know,
• 1:13:43
  Speaker 1: go to a museum and go to like the old sections,
• 1:13:45
  Speaker 1: you'll find the good stuff. So, oh, it's just it's hell,
• 1:13:50
  Speaker 1: she's the clapper of the bell. Okay, it's called a clapper,
• 1:13:54
  Speaker 1: you know that. Then you say you know that one?
• 1:13:56
  Speaker 3: Okay, Okay, So that that art piece is just a
• 1:13:59
  Speaker 3: woman in leve old suspension BDSM fetish that she wants
• 1:14:04
  Speaker 3: to inflict on the rest of the world. That's what.
• 1:14:06
  Speaker 1: Yeah, Yeah, it's an attention thing. Yeah, Alison, what we're
• 1:14:09
  Speaker 1: gonna say whenever?
• 1:14:10
  Speaker 2: Whenever you're ready. I could probably go through this the
• 1:14:12
  Speaker 2: the actual purpose of this lecture in terms of social
• 1:14:16
  Speaker 2: web signaling and what she's really doing.
• 1:14:20
  Speaker 1: Sure, but well no, I want to listen to the rest.
• 1:14:25
  Speaker 1: I want to know what this is about these paintings
• 1:14:27
  Speaker 1: since I.
• 1:14:28
  Speaker 2: Described them, do you do you do we have a
• 1:14:30
  Speaker 2: time constraint at all?
• 1:14:31
  Speaker 1: Or yeah? It should be done by three So because
• 1:14:35
  Speaker 1: I gotta go pick up lindsay, so like I got
• 1:14:36
  Speaker 1: about forty minutes.
• 1:14:37
  Speaker 2: Well, le's okay, all right, then lah let's continue all right?
• 1:14:43
  Speaker 4: And uncle mouse. Both of these paintings are figurations. Are
• 1:14:49
  Speaker 4: are depictions of the barely secularized Judeo Christian that is
• 1:14:55
  Speaker 4: to say, Christian narratives that inform most of our politics,
• 1:14:59
  Speaker 4: most of our philosophy, and most of our sciences.
• 1:15:02
  Speaker 5: Perhaps slightly overstated, but not by much. Okay, the.
• 1:15:09
  Speaker 4: Sense that our science is somehow issue in issue, issue
• 1:15:13
  Speaker 4: into the issue, convey us into the future, issue, the
• 1:15:17
  Speaker 4: bring the future into being, that our sciences are those
• 1:15:21
  Speaker 4: almost transcendent practices for future creation and in the mode
• 1:15:26
  Speaker 4: of human exceptionalism, for resourcing all the world into the
• 1:15:29
  Speaker 4: projects of man. Both of these paintings the denunciation of
• 1:15:34
  Speaker 4: the Second Coming in relation to digital culture and oncome mouse.
• 1:15:38
  Speaker 1: In wait, this is the annunciation of the Second Coming.
• 1:15:41
  Speaker 1: The angel with the statue and oh, that's like a
• 1:15:45
  Speaker 1: circuit board at the bottom. I see. If you hadn't
• 1:15:49
  Speaker 1: told me what it was called, I wouldn't have put
• 1:15:50
  Speaker 1: it together, of course. Okay, yeah, that's okay.
• 1:15:58
  Speaker 4: Relation to biomedical culture. Sure we have there, the first
• 1:16:02
  Speaker 4: first patented animal in the world.
• 1:16:05
  Speaker 5: She she is patented. It's not the process that was patented.
• 1:16:09
  Speaker 2: It was good Lord, that's ugly. What well, that arn't work?
• 1:16:16
  Speaker 1: How dare you, Allison? How dare you? It's subjective? You
• 1:16:19
  Speaker 1: have no right to call it ugly?
• 1:16:23
  Speaker 2: All Right, Well, I'm not particularly fond of surrealist artwork.
• 1:16:26
  Speaker 2: But the composition is just terrible.
• 1:16:30
  Speaker 1: Well, I don't even know that it's trying to be surreal.
• 1:16:32
  Speaker 1: I mean I guess in a way like maybe that
• 1:16:34
  Speaker 1: person was a fan of like yeah, but.
• 1:16:39
  Speaker 2: At least had good compositions, composing the parts in a
• 1:16:43
  Speaker 2: way that that was interesting. What what what I'm seeing
• 1:16:47
  Speaker 2: there is bad design?
• 1:16:50
  Speaker 4: Okay, keep going, Okay, model for breast cancer, breast cancer research.
• 1:16:58
  Speaker 4: And she is of course a suffering survey and in
• 1:17:00
  Speaker 4: the mode of Isaiah or in the mode of the Christ,
• 1:17:03
  Speaker 4: she wears the crown of crown of foreigns. She's in
• 1:17:06
  Speaker 4: a kind of culting and observation chamber.
• 1:17:08
  Speaker 2: I don't think people who get breast cancer are suffering
• 1:17:11
  Speaker 2: for anybody.
• 1:17:12
  Speaker 1: Though, No, Well, but again they're they're the animals are
• 1:17:17
  Speaker 1: on the same level as us. So basically a lab
• 1:17:21
  Speaker 1: rat is essentially Jesus Christ.
• 1:17:23
  Speaker 2: So okay, But but but the the women with breast cancer,
• 1:17:29
  Speaker 2: like just because you say it's suffering, that that's such
• 1:17:32
  Speaker 2: cargo cult thinking, Oh, this this entity is suffering, therefore
• 1:17:36
  Speaker 2: it is equivalent to Jesus Christ. It's like, no that
• 1:17:40
  Speaker 2: I think the there's there's more components to that than
• 1:17:45
  Speaker 2: just the suffering as a lay like as something you know, again,
• 1:17:48
  Speaker 2: a filthy secularist, I suspect. Okay, let's continue.
• 1:17:54
  Speaker 3: Yeah, why exactly? Okay, So lab mice so that the
• 1:17:58
  Speaker 3: new Messiah?
• 1:17:59
  Speaker 2: I guess, yes, yes, now they're suffering for us?
• 1:18:07
  Speaker 3: Yes, okay, they are as such, they are the new
• 1:18:12
  Speaker 3: Messiah figures, because of course they are. Have you heard
• 1:18:16
  Speaker 3: about our Lord and Savior? Two four seven dash beta
• 1:18:19
  Speaker 3: three mm?
• 1:18:24
  Speaker 2: Is that a space rock?
• 1:18:27
  Speaker 3: That's that's a mouse reference somewhere. I guess there's probably
• 1:18:30
  Speaker 3: some means of categorizing mice.
• 1:18:33
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:18:33
  Speaker 2: No.
• 1:18:34
  Speaker 1: I also think the artist was not inspired by salvad
• 1:18:37
  Speaker 1: Or Dolly, but by Renee Marguerite mcgree, the guy, the
• 1:18:42
  Speaker 1: guy who painted the it's like the guy in the
• 1:18:44
  Speaker 1: bowler hat with the apple in front of his face,
• 1:18:46
  Speaker 1: you know those paintings, and I mean mcgreet is. I
• 1:18:50
  Speaker 1: like his paintings that they are. I think they're well made.
• 1:18:53
  Speaker 1: I think this person is a not good.
• 1:18:56
  Speaker 5: But anyway of many colors, the kind of global observation.
• 1:19:02
  Speaker 1: Yeah, Jesus died of breast cancer. That's right. Yes, the
• 1:19:07
  Speaker 1: mouse was killed because he told the truth, not because
• 1:19:13
  Speaker 1: they needed to test secure for cancer chamber.
• 1:19:18
  Speaker 3: All I'm going to say is just remember they hated
• 1:19:23
  Speaker 3: the rats first.
• 1:19:24
  Speaker 1: Yes, both of.
• 1:19:29
  Speaker 4: These are paintings that exhibit I think the outrage on
• 1:19:32
  Speaker 4: the scandal of human exceptionalism, that all of the world
• 1:19:37
  Speaker 4: is made is resource for the projects of humanity.
• 1:19:42
  Speaker 1: No, I don't so so she is anti human, That's
• 1:19:45
  Speaker 1: what that sounds like. I mean she would call it
• 1:19:48
  Speaker 1: like live treating humans as just as expendable or just
• 1:19:54
  Speaker 1: as you know, I guess, valuable as any other life anywhere,
• 1:20:00
  Speaker 1: or even on life. I mean, she did talk about
• 1:20:03
  Speaker 1: the planet itself earlier.
• 1:20:06
  Speaker 4: So I think of myself as either a humanist or
• 1:20:10
  Speaker 4: a posthumanist. I do think of myself as a post
• 1:20:14
  Speaker 4: human exceptionalist in that sense. What I try to affirm
• 1:20:20
  Speaker 4: is the living and non living, multi species, living and
• 1:20:23
  Speaker 4: non living reciprocal induction that brings into being, what is,
• 1:20:28
  Speaker 4: what can be, what still can be, what might be
• 1:20:31
  Speaker 4: a kind of post human exceptionalism that is relentlessly finite,
• 1:20:36
  Speaker 4: committed to not knowing, to making mistakes, to falling apart,
• 1:20:40
  Speaker 4: to tearing apart, and to staying with the trouble.
• 1:20:43
  Speaker 5: The kind of post human.
• 1:20:45
  Speaker 4: Exceptionalism that we need within which frankly, the discourses and
• 1:20:49
  Speaker 4: disciplines of humanism like international law, courts, and the rest
• 1:20:54
  Speaker 4: are absolutely necessary ongoing apparatuss.
• 1:20:58
  Speaker 5: So it's not anti humanist. Is is anti human exceptionalist.
• 1:21:14
  Speaker 1: Post human exceptionalism. I'm sorry, but like and and she
• 1:21:21
  Speaker 1: literally says, this is not something I am saying because
• 1:21:25
  Speaker 1: we need to do something about it that we I
• 1:21:28
  Speaker 1: have no interest in a solution. I just want to
• 1:21:32
  Speaker 1: talk about the problem that I have identified. And I'm
• 1:21:37
  Speaker 1: telling you it's like her job is not even to
• 1:21:39
  Speaker 1: identify a problem. Her job is to create one and
• 1:21:43
  Speaker 1: then convince you that it's real, but then stop you
• 1:21:45
  Speaker 1: from actually saying okay, So then what do we do,
• 1:21:48
  Speaker 1: because that would be that's we can't go there. That's
• 1:21:51
  Speaker 1: why she said it's okay that we have like things
• 1:21:54
  Speaker 1: like like laws and courts, because otherwise, you know, because
• 1:21:58
  Speaker 1: no other creature on earth has legal systems and constitutions
• 1:22:03
  Speaker 1: and magna cartas and you know, concepts of property and such,
• 1:22:08
  Speaker 1: no other organism. They're all just like tribal and they're
• 1:22:12
  Speaker 1: eating each other or they're fucking each other, and that's it.
• 1:22:15
  Speaker 1: And what it would whoever survive survives. So since we
• 1:22:17
  Speaker 1: don't operate that way, then we have no business thinking
• 1:22:21
  Speaker 1: that we're better. But we need all the stuff that
• 1:22:24
  Speaker 1: we've made to keep going. And I think it's okay
• 1:22:28
  Speaker 1: that we don't know why that is, but we should
• 1:22:31
  Speaker 1: know that that's something we shouldn't really be happy about.
• 1:22:36
  Speaker 1: Take that. Humans, I'm not against you, but I offer nothing.
• 1:22:41
  Speaker 1: And it's like, look, maybe it's because I'm a dude,
• 1:22:44
  Speaker 1: but if you don't have like if you don't want
• 1:22:48
  Speaker 1: to talk about solutions or something to do, I can't.
• 1:22:54
  Speaker 1: I can't work with that like it. Yeah, I'm sorry,
• 1:22:57
  Speaker 1: go ahead.
• 1:22:58
  Speaker 2: No, it is literally because you're a man, Yeah.
• 1:23:03
  Speaker 1: It is.
• 1:23:04
  Speaker 2: Yeah, there's there, there's fundamental differences. And I this is
• 1:23:08
  Speaker 2: this is one of the most consistent findings. So I've
• 1:23:10
  Speaker 2: been I've been going through literature for over four centuries
• 1:23:15
  Speaker 2: and as many of you may know, and if you're
• 1:23:18
  Speaker 2: interested in reading more badgerination done online. And I've been
• 1:23:22
  Speaker 2: going through literature and consistently, men sort into men and
• 1:23:25
  Speaker 2: women sort into two cognitive modalities, operational and relational reading
• 1:23:32
  Speaker 2: or relational modality. So operational as these are the inputs.
• 1:23:35
  Speaker 2: This is the mechanism these are the outputs. That's what
• 1:23:37
  Speaker 2: men usually think. They want deliverables, They want actions. They
• 1:23:41
  Speaker 2: want to know what what A, what A causes? What
• 1:23:45
  Speaker 2: you know? You know, what follows from a what creates outcomes?
• 1:23:50
  Speaker 2: See what you know that operations on reality or even
• 1:23:55
  Speaker 2: like mental material like philosophy. Women read the social information,
• 1:24:03
  Speaker 2: so people's positions, hierarchy, the social relational web readers are
• 1:24:09
  Speaker 2: very hierarchy is very important to them. Authority, signifiers of
• 1:24:14
  Speaker 2: authority very important to them. Emotional states, people's personal alliances,
• 1:24:20
  Speaker 2: what resources they have access to, also very important, what
• 1:24:23
  Speaker 2: resources they don't have access to. And they take all
• 1:24:26
  Speaker 2: of this kind of social relational information and from it
• 1:24:30
  Speaker 2: they map a relational topography or you know, we use
• 1:24:34
  Speaker 2: the term social web just as like a simpler way
• 1:24:36
  Speaker 2: of different but it is a relational topography and they
• 1:24:41
  Speaker 2: have fundamentally different processes that they're engaging in with outcomes
• 1:24:48
  Speaker 2: that you know, aren't I don't think are as legible
• 1:24:52
  Speaker 2: to people who operate in an operative modality. And as
• 1:24:55
  Speaker 2: to get back to the literature, this is completely bimodal,
• 1:24:58
  Speaker 2: Like I think bimodals right way of putting it, Men
• 1:25:01
  Speaker 2: cluster very strongly inoperative. Women cluster very strongly and relational.
• 1:25:07
  Speaker 2: So far, there have only been two men who get
• 1:25:10
  Speaker 2: to social relational or so a relational web, and that
• 1:25:14
  Speaker 2: is Henry James and Praus I think are prout p
• 1:25:20
  Speaker 2: r o U s T. I don't know how to
• 1:25:22
  Speaker 2: pronounce that. I apologize, guys. And there has been one
• 1:25:26
  Speaker 2: woman who's published who isn't social reader. That's Anne Rand,
• 1:25:33
  Speaker 2: and she occupies a completely third category of philosophy.
• 1:25:36
  Speaker 5: Wonk.
• 1:25:37
  Speaker 2: So they're completely on their own little island. They're not
• 1:25:41
  Speaker 2: a lot of them, but yeah, so it sorts very cleanly.
• 1:25:46
  Speaker 2: And there's another diagnostic that I've been looking at, which
• 1:25:48
  Speaker 2: is custodial monitoring, and that sorts everybody. Women do not
• 1:25:51
  Speaker 2: custodially monitor men do. I don't know if you guys
• 1:25:55
  Speaker 2: are interested, that's beyond again. You want more information badger
• 1:25:59
  Speaker 2: nation dot online. Do you want no understand custodio monitoring?
• 1:26:03
  Speaker 2: Or am I taking you to squirreled swirling too much?
• 1:26:07
  Speaker 2: Squirreling too close.
• 1:26:08
  Speaker 1: To the well. I mean, I should get through some
• 1:26:11
  Speaker 1: more of this, but I feel like at least what
• 1:26:15
  Speaker 1: you're saying has like some kind of foundation of reality.
• 1:26:19
  Speaker 1: And this woman is just.
• 1:26:22
  Speaker 2: What I'm doing is I'm translating the activities of the
• 1:26:27
  Speaker 2: social of the social web thinker into language that I
• 1:26:33
  Speaker 2: hope an operational thinker can understand and then comprehend what
• 1:26:38
  Speaker 2: it is they're actually doing. Because the project that this
• 1:26:42
  Speaker 2: is that Donna Harroway is engaging in is simply identifying
• 1:26:46
  Speaker 2: out group targets.
• 1:26:47
  Speaker 3: That's it she is.
• 1:26:49
  Speaker 2: She's basically painting targets on people, institutions, ideas. I don't
• 1:26:57
  Speaker 2: know if she also extends this to non human life,
• 1:27:00
  Speaker 2: but whatever, she's just painting targets on it and being like, yeah,
• 1:27:03
  Speaker 2: let's blow these fuckers up. That's all she's doing at
• 1:27:06
  Speaker 2: the end of the day, and all of the u
• 1:27:10
  Speaker 2: the posturing about who she cares about is just justification
• 1:27:15
  Speaker 2: for why it's moral. And that's one of the like,
• 1:27:18
  Speaker 2: that's one of the big functions, or at least one
• 1:27:20
  Speaker 2: of the things that social web does, is it identifies
• 1:27:24
  Speaker 2: the outgroup and then elicits enough aggression and hostility towards
• 1:27:29
  Speaker 2: it to annihilate it. And that's what they're basically playing
• 1:27:33
  Speaker 2: at right now. And I know it's funny, but when
• 1:27:36
  Speaker 2: you understand what's underlying it, it's a little less funny,
• 1:27:39
  Speaker 2: it's more sinister. Yeah, But I mean I could go
• 1:27:41
  Speaker 2: through the analysis of all that, or we could listen
• 1:27:44
  Speaker 2: to her some more. I guess I just really want
• 1:27:46
  Speaker 2: to get this out so people understand what it is
• 1:27:50
  Speaker 2: she's doing and why it's not a good thing, because again,
• 1:27:54
  Speaker 2: when she identifies these targets, these targets get silenced. And
• 1:27:59
  Speaker 2: when you're and she's well beyond silencing, says cis het
• 1:28:03
  Speaker 2: white men, but when you silence that category of person,
• 1:28:08
  Speaker 2: and I might want to add to that that it's
• 1:28:11
  Speaker 2: not just cis het white men that end up getting
• 1:28:14
  Speaker 2: silence silenced, because black men are the cis het white men,
• 1:28:18
  Speaker 2: and black people and Latino men are the cis het
• 1:28:21
  Speaker 2: white or men of Latinos. So it's everybody that ends
• 1:28:25
  Speaker 2: up in that category, which is could be potentially anyone,
• 1:28:29
  Speaker 2: but mostly's men. And when she put paints a target
• 1:28:34
  Speaker 2: on men, although she's not specifically doing it, she's basically
• 1:28:38
  Speaker 2: she's basically using that as a foundational move. And now
• 1:28:41
  Speaker 2: she's adding out groups to men, but they're basically because
• 1:28:45
  Speaker 2: she's she's essentially saying this is how this relates to men.
• 1:28:49
  Speaker 2: Therefore they're an out group. Yes so, But when you
• 1:28:54
  Speaker 2: actually target men for silencing, you get things like the
• 1:28:57
  Speaker 2: deep Water Horizon disaster, which is a direct result of
• 1:29:02
  Speaker 2: the corporate structure not listening to men because of this
• 1:29:08
  Speaker 2: firewall that women like her construct between the C suite
• 1:29:13
  Speaker 2: and the line. And I could get more into that.
• 1:29:18
  Speaker 2: Just trust me on this, guys. This is how it works.
• 1:29:21
  Speaker 2: She creates the ability to not feel like you have
• 1:29:25
  Speaker 2: to listen to the people who are actually the men
• 1:29:27
  Speaker 2: who are actually producing stuff, and she does it through
• 1:29:31
  Speaker 2: this relational web thinking. You can listen to the men
• 1:29:33
  Speaker 2: on top because they're signaling right. They're all they're doing
• 1:29:35
  Speaker 2: the ESG and the DEI, and they're getting big bonuses
• 1:29:38
  Speaker 2: because they've increased the female workforce by point zero one percent.
• 1:29:44
  Speaker 2: You know that CEOs get bonuses for pursuing ESG and
• 1:29:47
  Speaker 2: DEI initiatives, not being productive, not making sure that the
• 1:29:53
  Speaker 2: pipes aren't eroded, pipe walls un eroded to the point
• 1:29:56
  Speaker 2: where they're about to burst. No, making sure that they
• 1:29:59
  Speaker 2: have more women in seats. That's what they get bonuses for.
• 1:30:02
  Speaker 2: It's why they earn now about one hundred times more
• 1:30:05
  Speaker 2: than they did in the fifties. But anyway, She is
• 1:30:09
  Speaker 2: the reason why because she put paints the target and
• 1:30:13
  Speaker 2: then silences the people, and then the extractors go in
• 1:30:16
  Speaker 2: and extract, and this is all about creating out groups,
• 1:30:22
  Speaker 2: and on that level it's actually pretty sinister. So we
• 1:30:27
  Speaker 2: can continue if you want.
• 1:30:29
  Speaker 1: Okay, Yeah, let's keep going.
• 1:30:33
  Speaker 4: So that no technology is in and of itself forbidden.
• 1:30:36
  Speaker 4: But the narrative frame, the frame of worlding in which
• 1:30:39
  Speaker 4: we do these things, is what matters.
• 1:30:43
  Speaker 5: Now where am I in this talk? Good question?
• 1:30:46
  Speaker 2: The narrative frame is what matters, guys.
• 1:30:49
  Speaker 5: S Well, let me for some.
• 1:30:51
  Speaker 1: Yes, yes, yes, she used world She said world as
• 1:30:56
  Speaker 1: a verb, she said worlding.
• 1:30:58
  Speaker 6: I'm just okay, Gory, I'm still just trying to work
• 1:31:03
  Speaker 6: out what this nonsense about I'm a post human exceptionalist is,
• 1:31:09
  Speaker 6: which just seems to be the basis for.
• 1:31:11
  Speaker 1: All of this.
• 1:31:12
  Speaker 3: Okay, So I am beyond thinking that humans have some
• 1:31:16
  Speaker 3: sort of brilliance within nature and then some nonsense about
• 1:31:21
  Speaker 3: how we have to accept that with the ecology of
• 1:31:27
  Speaker 3: nature and all of the failings and everything going horribly
• 1:31:31
  Speaker 3: wrong and exploding. I'm still just trying to understand what
• 1:31:38
  Speaker 3: on earth nonsense she's spouting there. Like I said, all
• 1:31:48
  Speaker 3: the mushrooms, all of the mushrooms for sure.
• 1:31:51
  Speaker 2: Okay, I got it, I got it. It's Herowy's self
• 1:31:55
  Speaker 2: coined position. Mid lecture, she rejects humanist and posthumanist and
• 1:31:59
  Speaker 2: ste he's posthumanist exceptionalists. When what state what she states,
• 1:32:06
  Speaker 2: it means humans are not exceptional and kind, but humans
• 1:32:11
  Speaker 2: are exceptionally responsible. So basically humans are men.
• 1:32:15
  Speaker 1: Guys. There we go.
• 1:32:19
  Speaker 2: She's basically just tied humans to men, and men are bad,
• 1:32:22
  Speaker 2: uniquely capable of mistakes, finitudes, staying with the trouble, and
• 1:32:26
  Speaker 2: obligated to multi species care, which you don't operationalize, so
• 1:32:29
  Speaker 2: you don't actually care. You don't actually do anything.
• 1:32:32
  Speaker 1: You just care.
• 1:32:35
  Speaker 3: Yea.
• 1:32:35
  Speaker 2: What is structurally is it preserves the loyalty test. Pure
• 1:32:39
  Speaker 2: posthumanism flattens the moral field. If humans aren't special, the
• 1:32:44
  Speaker 2: non innocent test loses its targets. So the non innocent
• 1:32:49
  Speaker 2: reference here is something that she put in her nineteen
• 1:32:52
  Speaker 2: eighty five manifesto where she's basically saying that women are
• 1:32:57
  Speaker 2: not an innocent category. She's the scent. What she's doing
• 1:33:01
  Speaker 2: is she's seeing women are also men, right, Yeah, women
• 1:33:05
  Speaker 2: are also part of the black category and they can't
• 1:33:09
  Speaker 2: just be so you can't actually consider women. So that
• 1:33:12
  Speaker 2: it's too it's too fixed to just give women to
• 1:33:16
  Speaker 2: get out a jail free card. They also need to
• 1:33:20
  Speaker 2: display this kind of loyalty to space rocks, compassion like
• 1:33:27
  Speaker 2: compassion for space rocks. So they have to they have
• 1:33:29
  Speaker 2: to demonstrate compassion for space rocks or they're part of
• 1:33:32
  Speaker 2: the outgroup. And by outgroup, I mean that women are men.
• 1:33:36
  Speaker 2: So that's that's the non innocence test. It's basically saying
• 1:33:39
  Speaker 2: women have to comply with my brand of in group
• 1:33:43
  Speaker 2: outgroup and now out in group outgroup heuristic, or they
• 1:33:50
  Speaker 2: are men thus bad, thus deserve to be thrown from
• 1:33:55
  Speaker 2: the social web to wheremever men are?
• 1:33:58
  Speaker 1: You know the.
• 1:34:02
  Speaker 2: Ace rich vul obligation humans, Oh, multi species care. Most
• 1:34:06
  Speaker 2: these species do not heal oh humans anything. This is
• 1:34:11
  Speaker 2: the moral circle structure. Restated outer rings receive concern inner
• 1:34:15
  Speaker 2: rings humans supplies it and is judged by supply. And
• 1:34:19
  Speaker 2: that's the other thing. Like in conjunction with other liberal beliefs,
• 1:34:24
  Speaker 2: the inner ring actually is considered more responsible by liberals. Right,
• 1:34:29
  Speaker 2: so the humans are more responsible than the space rocks. Therefore,
• 1:34:33
  Speaker 2: the humans take responsibility for the space rocks and don't
• 1:34:36
  Speaker 2: actually deserve their own compassion. All right, I'll leave it there.
• 1:34:41
  Speaker 2: We can listen to some more if you want.
• 1:34:43
  Speaker 1: Let's do one more bit of this and then I'll
• 1:34:45
  Speaker 1: let you close out with your thoughts and tiel Deer, So.
• 1:34:48
  Speaker 4: All the beings in my litter for the purposes of
• 1:34:51
  Speaker 4: this talk, cyborgs, animals of all kinds, especially pets, and
• 1:34:56
  Speaker 4: the molecular biological entities of the world that are really
• 1:35:00
  Speaker 4: critical to flourishing. Think, for example, of the kinds of
• 1:35:05
  Speaker 4: health apparatuses that we now feel should be available to everybody.
• 1:35:10
  Speaker 4: Think for a minute about the fact that Scott's eco
• 1:35:14
  Speaker 4: evo DEVO could not have been formulated without the tools
• 1:35:18
  Speaker 4: of advanced molecular biology. There is no way that we
• 1:35:21
  Speaker 4: could answer the questions we have about how it is
• 1:35:24
  Speaker 4: that the world comes into being, what kinds of interactions
• 1:35:28
  Speaker 4: between the geological and hydrological worlds, for example, are occurring.
• 1:35:33
  Speaker 5: There is no way that we could conduct conduct modern science.
• 1:35:37
  Speaker 4: Without up to the minute digitalized scientific apparatuses and processes,
• 1:35:44
  Speaker 4: including those of molecular biology. So if the apparatus of
• 1:35:47
  Speaker 4: human exceptionalism that I'm arguing defeats us not the tools themselves.
• 1:35:52
  Speaker 1: Okay, how did we develop the tools if there was
• 1:35:58
  Speaker 1: no human exception? List? Lady? Okay, remember remember.
• 1:36:06
  Speaker 2: That relational reader thinkers don't do. This is the input,
• 1:36:13
  Speaker 2: this is the mechanism, this is the output. The tools
• 1:36:16
  Speaker 2: always existed, Brian, they existed in the back. They never
• 1:36:23
  Speaker 2: they never were created. They just exist. And what's important
• 1:36:30
  Speaker 2: is how they are used, not whether or not they're maintained,
• 1:36:34
  Speaker 2: but how they are used as resources. It's it's it's
• 1:36:41
  Speaker 2: hard to wrap your mind around, isn't it. She she
• 1:36:43
  Speaker 2: does not understand that tools get built.
• 1:36:49
  Speaker 1: Bear, all right, Alison, do your thing maybe maybe uh yeah,
• 1:36:54
  Speaker 1: I'll do your thing and I'll give Tildea the last word.
• 1:36:58
  Speaker 2: All right, Okay, So this is obviously a relational web
• 1:37:04
  Speaker 2: activity that we've just been watching, so and again it's
• 1:37:08
  Speaker 2: about creating an outgroup. We're identifying an outgroup, and the
• 1:37:14
  Speaker 2: relational modality activities that are involved are or sorry, the
• 1:37:22
  Speaker 2: reasons why this is a relational modality activity is the
• 1:37:27
  Speaker 2: object is medium is native. Using moths to signify migrant solidarity,
• 1:37:33
  Speaker 2: lemurs to signify decolonization, monarchs to signify ancestors. This is
• 1:37:38
  Speaker 2: just normal cognition for the reading modality. An operative thinker
• 1:37:41
  Speaker 2: would notice the moths are doing no moth specific work,
• 1:37:45
  Speaker 2: and the swap test failure would expose the operation. So
• 1:37:48
  Speaker 2: essentially the moths are not really relevant, and the operational
• 1:37:53
  Speaker 2: thinker would be like, well, what what what are we
• 1:37:56
  Speaker 2: supposed to do for the moths? And what the moth's doing?
• 1:37:59
  Speaker 2: It doesn't matter. You could substitute moths for caterpillars. Well,
• 1:38:05
  Speaker 2: I guess caterpillars sort of become nope, nope, they become butterflies.
• 1:38:08
  Speaker 2: You could substitute moths for anything that migrates, and it
• 1:38:12
  Speaker 2: wouldn't matter. Hidden intention, detection, non innocence, complicity, fascism, inside us,
• 1:38:18
  Speaker 2: performing concern correctly, are all readings of interior position. So
• 1:38:25
  Speaker 2: what relational web readers spend a lot of time doing
• 1:38:30
  Speaker 2: is trying to figure out the difference between the surface
• 1:38:34
  Speaker 2: and the interior of people. So it's like the surface
• 1:38:39
  Speaker 2: behavior in codes or hides something deeper, and they're trying
• 1:38:44
  Speaker 2: to figure it out. So she has all these categories
• 1:38:47
  Speaker 2: of I am the one who has figured out the substrate.
• 1:38:52
  Speaker 2: I am the wise witch or whatever she would call herself.
• 1:38:56
  Speaker 2: I'm I got the knowledge of what people actually are.
• 1:39:01
  Speaker 2: The operative modality has no native apparatus for assessing where
• 1:39:06
  Speaker 2: someone has correctly performed an interior state. Yeah, topology is
• 1:39:12
  Speaker 2: the content in out web position who's connected to whom.
• 1:39:16
  Speaker 2: The moral circle is a topology constructing and policing. It
• 1:39:20
  Speaker 2: is the relational web modality's default activity applied to politics.
• 1:39:26
  Speaker 2: All right, So that's what she's up to. And again,
• 1:39:29
  Speaker 2: these are the kind of things that she's attending to
• 1:39:34
  Speaker 2: in order to construct this in group out group. And
• 1:39:39
  Speaker 2: in her nineteen eighty five cyber magnifesto, she was sort
• 1:39:43
  Speaker 2: of laying down the groundwork for switching the in group
• 1:39:48
  Speaker 2: outgroup heuristic from women, right, because that was like the
• 1:39:53
  Speaker 2: second wave feminism is essentially women are the ones who
• 1:39:58
  Speaker 2: are innocent when and are the ones who are the
• 1:40:01
  Speaker 2: center of the web and upon which everybody should be judged.
• 1:40:05
  Speaker 2: And she's saying no. Her argument was, no, women are
• 1:40:08
  Speaker 2: not innocent. We should subject women also to the loyalty test.
• 1:40:13
  Speaker 2: And the loyalty test is, of course demonstrating compassion for
• 1:40:19
  Speaker 2: it's not even specific things. It's just demonstrating compassion with
• 1:40:24
  Speaker 2: object to be determined, Like I might as well just
• 1:40:28
  Speaker 2: call it that. She says, we must demonstrate compassion for
• 1:40:32
  Speaker 2: object to be determined, and that's what she does over
• 1:40:35
  Speaker 2: and over again. You can insert these objects with anything else.
• 1:40:39
  Speaker 2: She's not talking about moths in terms of oh, we
• 1:40:42
  Speaker 2: need to preserve their migratory roots, we need to make
• 1:40:45
  Speaker 2: sure they have the right whatever moths eat or no,
• 1:40:49
  Speaker 2: she's just saying we need to demonstrate compassion towards the moth,
• 1:40:52
  Speaker 2: and the moth is an interchangeable animal. It could be anything,
• 1:40:56
  Speaker 2: because the idea is that you demonstrate compassion towards whatever
• 1:41:01
  Speaker 2: she says you should, because she is the wise one
• 1:41:04
  Speaker 2: at the center of the web. And okay, so just
• 1:41:13
  Speaker 2: give me a second. I'm gonna find the rest of this,
• 1:41:16
  Speaker 2: all right. So the behavioral asymmetry is the diagnostic to this,
• 1:41:20
  Speaker 2: because what I'm going to talk about now is how
• 1:41:22
  Speaker 2: she's signaling compassion, but it translates into nothing. The compassion
• 1:41:27
  Speaker 2: side produces no deliverables. Lemurs get a children's book she
• 1:41:30
  Speaker 2: didn't write. Butterflies get a painting she didn't make. The
• 1:41:32
  Speaker 2: Wakan student gets u named once, zero output towards the
• 1:41:35
  Speaker 2: stated objects of concern. The hostility side produces specific named targets,
• 1:41:42
  Speaker 2: specific institutions, specific populations, and a deliberately inflammatory closing phrase.
• 1:41:49
  Speaker 2: She flags it inflammatory before delivering. The litter exists to
• 1:41:53
  Speaker 2: make the targeting legible as moral. The ring enumerates the
• 1:41:57
  Speaker 2: mechanism for generating new failure conditions. The web of cited
• 1:42:02
  Speaker 2: colleagues authorizes the speaker. She is the one in the center.
• 1:42:06
  Speaker 2: Strip those three layers, and what remains is target acquisition.
• 1:42:11
  Speaker 2: All right, the constract, okay, the system is organized around
• 1:42:16
  Speaker 2: producing legitimate hostility, and the universal concern performance is the
• 1:42:21
  Speaker 2: apparatus that makes hostility legible as care. So all of
• 1:42:28
  Speaker 2: this is about identifying the correct targets for violence. Now
• 1:42:34
  Speaker 2: what that violence scales to I couldn't say, just probably
• 1:42:39
  Speaker 2: in her case, social censor. If it gets a little
• 1:42:44
  Speaker 2: bit more hairy, maybe maybe increasing levels of actual physical violence.
• 1:42:50
  Speaker 2: But that's what she's doing. She's identifying targets of violence.
• 1:42:53
  Speaker 2: In this case, it's more of a path. I think
• 1:42:55
  Speaker 2: it's more passive. You just don't you just censor them,
• 1:42:57
  Speaker 2: you don't listen to them, you disregard their opinions. And
• 1:43:01
  Speaker 2: she is presenting herself as the spider at the center
• 1:43:04
  Speaker 2: who can tell everybody what everybody is actually thinking, what
• 1:43:10
  Speaker 2: objects of compassion what they should be directing their compassion to,
• 1:43:13
  Speaker 2: which will probably change constantly, and also offers them a
• 1:43:18
  Speaker 2: narrative that their aggressive targeting behavior is actually is actually care.
• 1:43:25
  Speaker 5: They care about you.
• 1:43:26
  Speaker 2: That's why they need the thumb screws because they care. Right, Okay,
• 1:43:32
  Speaker 2: does I'm good?
• 1:43:34
  Speaker 1: All right, fielder, Do you have any final thoughts on this?
• 1:43:44
  Speaker 3: I need to take a lot more mushrooms and I
• 1:43:48
  Speaker 3: will understand this.
• 1:43:51
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Probably. I would imagine that one of the problems
• 1:43:56
  Speaker 2: with understanding this is that it just doesn't come natively
• 1:44:00
  Speaker 2: to people who are who are meant well men I
• 1:44:02
  Speaker 2: don't want to say men because that sounds very derogatory,
• 1:44:05
  Speaker 2: but operative thinkers, people who understand the world in terms
• 1:44:09
  Speaker 2: of inputs machine outputs, because this doesn't make sense on
• 1:44:13
  Speaker 2: that level. This isn't about this isn't about accomplishing anything.
• 1:44:18
  Speaker 2: It's about identifying people's positions in the web. And yeah,
• 1:44:26
  Speaker 2: and and for women that's sort of critical because their
• 1:44:29
  Speaker 2: position determines how close they get to resources, and resource
• 1:44:33
  Speaker 2: acquisition is like it seems to be one of the
• 1:44:35
  Speaker 2: central drivers of women's cognition. But yeah, so it's like
• 1:44:41
  Speaker 2: it's I think it's just more difficult, but that's what
• 1:44:44
  Speaker 2: she's up to. All right, I'm is there anything that
• 1:44:49
  Speaker 2: anybody send a message?
• 1:44:51
  Speaker 1: Like, No, we didn't get any super channels or anything,
• 1:44:53
  Speaker 1: but there was a lot of people watching. I mean
• 1:44:55
  Speaker 1: we had like seventy at one point, no, two hundred
• 1:44:59
  Speaker 1: and fourteen and ady on the vertical, but no one
• 1:45:03
  Speaker 1: sent any super chats or super Chow's.
• 1:45:05
  Speaker 2: So okay, all right, you guys were quiet today. Yeah, well,
• 1:45:12
  Speaker 2: aside from the chatting, the chatting was was okay. And again,
• 1:45:18
  Speaker 2: if you want any expansion on any of the stuff
• 1:45:20
  Speaker 2: that I've talked about, like relational versus operational thinking, the
• 1:45:24
  Speaker 2: moral circle research I've been doing, or even like more
• 1:45:29
  Speaker 2: of my analysis of Donna Hathaway. And to answer your question,
• 1:45:33
  Speaker 2: til Deer, yes, those sections are in her cyber manifesto.
• 1:45:39
  Speaker 2: But if you, if you want to, and I guess
• 1:45:41
  Speaker 2: Tilder want will be reading the cyber Manifesto and then
• 1:45:45
  Speaker 2: we'll go through it on next week. Maybe the plan fine.
• 1:45:49
  Speaker 1: By me, Fine by me. So let's let well, hoping
• 1:45:54
  Speaker 1: that Tildeer feels up to it.
• 1:45:56
  Speaker 2: Well, yeah, exactly, this has been sort of a surprise,
• 1:46:00
  Speaker 2: and again I apologize, Yeah, definitely, Yeah, it was entirely
• 1:46:06
  Speaker 2: my fault.
• 1:46:06
  Speaker 3: Well, the worst thing about Honey Badger Radio I have
• 1:46:11
  Speaker 3: always been.
• 1:46:14
  Speaker 2: I have always been the worst thing about Honey Badger Radio.
• 1:46:16
  Speaker 2: It's true. Okay, I'm the I am the out group.
• 1:46:22
  Speaker 1: Yes, all right, Alison, and then we'll do the things,
• 1:46:26
  Speaker 1: all right.
• 1:46:27
  Speaker 2: So oh so, miss mister Newbe said, my brain shuts off.
• 1:46:31
  Speaker 2: I cannot grasp the web because it's an eternal process, right,
• 1:46:37
  Speaker 2: It's just it. You're never completely sure of where you
• 1:46:40
  Speaker 2: where you sit in the web. It's always something that
• 1:46:45
  Speaker 2: it never ends and it never results in anything. And
• 1:46:48
  Speaker 2: I think that really confounds men in particular, that they're
• 1:46:52
  Speaker 2: just there's nothing, there's nothing that comes out of this process.
• 1:46:56
  Speaker 2: There's no there's no hole in the beach, no, you know,
• 1:47:00
  Speaker 2: like Doug no, uh hold dug through the sand in
• 1:47:04
  Speaker 2: the beach. There's no stick found, there's no plant operating,
• 1:47:09
  Speaker 2: there's no new invention. It's just this constant, endless processing
• 1:47:13
  Speaker 2: of where you stand in relation to others. And it's
• 1:47:18
  Speaker 2: main in this case. Don Donna hat Harroway's main output
• 1:47:22
  Speaker 2: of her web is of course targeting specific institutions, specific things,
• 1:47:27
  Speaker 2: specific people, and uh you know, specific I guess maybe
• 1:47:34
  Speaker 2: I mean, I guess, I guess it.
• 1:47:36
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 1:47:36
  Speaker 2: Basically that just specific specific specificity, infinite malleability and what
• 1:47:42
  Speaker 2: you feel compassion for acute specificity in what you hate
• 1:47:47
  Speaker 2: and want to destroy it. That's what she's doing, all right.
• 1:47:49
  Speaker 2: So if you find this interesting and you want to
• 1:47:53
  Speaker 2: read more badgination, don online and if you get go
• 1:47:58
  Speaker 2: into the discord the I put my stuff in Allison's thoughts.
• 1:48:02
  Speaker 2: And if you want to support the show and send
• 1:48:05
  Speaker 2: us a message, you can go to feed Thebadger dot
• 1:48:07
  Speaker 2: com slash just the tip. That's feed the Badger dot
• 1:48:10
  Speaker 2: com slash just the tip, and when it's available, you
• 1:48:12
  Speaker 2: can support us directly Feed the Badger dot com slash
• 1:48:16
  Speaker 2: support all right.
• 1:48:19
  Speaker 1: Okay, Well, if you guys liked this video. If you
• 1:48:23
  Speaker 1: guys like this video, the web must flow. If you
• 1:48:28
  Speaker 1: guys liked this video, please don't like subscribe If you're
• 1:48:30
  Speaker 1: not already subscribed to the Belfaldifications, leave us a comment,
• 1:48:33
  Speaker 1: let us know what you guys think about this, and uh,
• 1:48:39
  Speaker 1: if you guys understand this web business, I know there
• 1:48:42
  Speaker 1: are some females that watch us as well, so maybe
• 1:48:45
  Speaker 1: they have a better grasp uh, and share the video
• 1:48:48
  Speaker 1: because Share is caring. Thank you guys so much for
• 1:48:50
  Speaker 1: coming to the show. Thank you to Tiel Dear for
• 1:48:53
  Speaker 1: making you know, making this work out for us. We
• 1:48:55
  Speaker 1: weren't really sure what we're gonna do for a second there.
• 1:48:58
  Speaker 1: Uh so yeah, appreciate you so much. And uh yes
• 1:49:02
  Speaker 1: you guys in the next video. Have a good weekend, everybody.
• 1:49:06
  Speaker 1: I don't want