Latest / Honey Badger Radio / Internet blood sports! Wilson vs feminists! Are you not entertained? | Maintaining Frame 162

Transcript

Internet blood sports! Wilson vs feminists! Are you not entertained? | Maintaining Frame 162 · Honey Badger Radio

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Hello, good morning, good afternoon, good evening, wherever you may be,
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: and welcome to Honey Badger Radio. My name is Brian.
• 0:05
  Speaker 1: I'm here with Allison and this is maintaining frame number
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: one sixty two Internet Blood Sports, Wilson versus Feminists. Are
• 0:12
  Speaker 1: you not entertained? I made a little bit of adjustments
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: because your title had too many it was too long.
• 0:18
  Speaker 2: So for you too, I gave you a lot of title.
• 0:21
  Speaker 2: I figured you might prune it a bit. Yeah, turn
• 0:24
  Speaker 2: it into a title bondzie.
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: To make it work. So we are going to be
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: I want to make sure the chat is working. Oh yeah,
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: it's working. Okay, good, So the chat is there. I
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: see you guys. Welcome to the stream. We're going to
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: be live responding to a video. Oh shit, wait hold on,
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: Oh yeah, it's a big kick.
• 0:47
  Speaker 2: Shut up.
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: Yeah, we're gonna be live reacting to a debate on
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: and Well. It's not Andrew Wilson's channel. It's a channel
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: called Raging Tomato. I guess she debates or something. Okay,
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: and so she is going to be hosting the debate.
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: It's not starting for another fifteen minutes or so.
• 1:11
  Speaker 2: It looks like maybe twelve minutes if they get one
• 1:13
  Speaker 2: you much like us. Yeah, maybe it's a it's a
• 1:18
  Speaker 2: it's a moving target the time that we start, but
• 1:20
  Speaker 2: we always usually at least get a stream done.
• 1:23
  Speaker 3: There.
• 1:23
  Speaker 2: There are some streamers who don't even do that, you know,
• 1:26
  Speaker 2: they just are like, yeah, not today, Yeah, go ahead,
• 1:32
  Speaker 2: well with with with no plans to well, at least start,
• 1:37
  Speaker 2: you know, at least we start. You got to give
• 1:40
  Speaker 2: us that. At least we do it, you know, we
• 1:42
  Speaker 2: don't just wander off and not stream for weeks or
• 1:46
  Speaker 2: months at a time.
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: Who does that?
• 1:48
  Speaker 2: I don't know somebody. I just made it streamer that
• 1:51
  Speaker 2: I made up in my own head, okay, okay, that
• 1:54
  Speaker 2: that will make us look better by comparison.
• 1:58
  Speaker 1: Yeah, so I thought I would share with you guys
• 2:01
  Speaker 1: this specific this specific debate and why I thought it
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: was interesting.
• 2:09
  Speaker 2: So just because.
• 2:11
  Speaker 1: Well that's part of it. But like, so, okay, I'm
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: I'm very much interested in finding out, like what are
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: the strongest possible arguments for any case is. I think
• 2:25
  Speaker 1: it's just important to like keep an open mind on
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: you know, maybe there's something I'm missing, maybe there's a
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: blind spot, whatever it is. And the title of this
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: debate is Andrew and Rachel. That's Andrew and Rachel Wilson
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: are representing a distorted version of Orthodox Christianity. But the
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: reason why it's relevant to us is because Natty thinks
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: that at least I caught this on a debate I
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: saw they had on X like a couple of weeks ago.
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: She basically accused Andrew and Rachel Love being like, you know,
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: closet fundies that are really good friends with Peter Wright.
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: And so because Peter Wright is the guy who runs
• 3:06
  Speaker 1: guinocentrism dot com, which is like one of the places
• 3:11
  Speaker 1: where we get a lot of our well, it's not
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: really where we get it from, but there's a lot
• 3:16
  Speaker 1: of like let's say, parallels or connections. I mean, like
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: Hannah is, you know, friends with Peter Wright. I think
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: they talk frequently. Peter Wright talk to me a lot too,
• 3:28
  Speaker 1: and I don't know if he's spoken to you, Allison.
• 3:30
  Speaker 1: But for whatever reason, Natty has like a b in
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: her bonnet about Peter Wright, and she thinks that she
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: thinks that Andrew and Rachel Wilson are like in cohoots
• 3:44
  Speaker 1: with Peter Wright to subvert the Orthodox Church or something,
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: because they they they believe in a distortive version of reality,
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: which is the gynocentric worldview, which she wholeheartedly rejects, okay,
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: as not not gynocentrism. She rich x that the world
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: is ginocentric or that we live in a time of ginocentrism.
• 4:05
  Speaker 1: And so I want to know, for a few things
• 4:07
  Speaker 1: I want to get out of this is one, what
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: is she talking about? Like, what is the strongest argument
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: that she can make for that? Too? What does Andrew
• 4:15
  Speaker 1: think about that? Because you know he doesn't he's not
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: necessarily a men's rights advocate, but he does debate against
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: feminism a lot, and know, yeah, he knows a lot
• 4:29
  Speaker 1: of the talking points too. So I want to know, like,
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: you know, where where he stands on that. And I
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: wonder if they're going to get to what the what
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: because I think I actually understand what ginocentrism is in
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: terms of like how it should be seen and how
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: people get it wrong is that they think it's some
• 4:52
  Speaker 1: kind of like unavoidable biological truth and I don't think
• 4:58
  Speaker 1: it is. But I wonder if that's going to be
• 5:01
  Speaker 1: addressed as well. I wonder if Natty even understands what
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: it is, you know. Yeah, So I'm curious to see
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: where people stand on this stuff, That's all I'm saying.
• 5:09
  Speaker 2: Yeah, my personal I mean, she's accuse me of being
• 5:14
  Speaker 2: in Cahoot's regards to ganocentrism with Peter right. In fact,
• 5:18
  Speaker 2: I think that's just her general go to is that
• 5:20
  Speaker 2: we're all pawns of Peter Wright. Yeah, and even though
• 5:24
  Speaker 2: I've gotten into arguments with him, well not arguments, but
• 5:26
  Speaker 2: debates over the nature of what he's terming ginocentrism, and
• 5:31
  Speaker 2: his particular position is that ginocentrism is not evolutionary, it's
• 5:36
  Speaker 2: not biological, it's actually social. And so I'm not even
• 5:41
  Speaker 2: sure why Natty has it out for him, in particular
• 5:46
  Speaker 2: because a lot of other people think that ginocentrism is
• 5:49
  Speaker 2: something that's unavoidable, it's a biological inevitability, right or right?
• 5:54
  Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, I think that's miss That's the thing. Like,
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: I I think that I really don't like it when
• 6:02
  Speaker 1: ideas are misrepresented, but possibly I'm open to the idea
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: that they are misunderstood. So I want to see if
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: there's going to be some clarity. And I think, because
• 6:12
  Speaker 1: like this is likely going to be getting watched by
• 6:15
  Speaker 1: a lot of people, it's like it's going to be
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: a trending thing because, like I said, the issue of
• 6:20
  Speaker 1: men and women is everywhere now, it's like a topic floaded.
• 6:25
  Speaker 2: They're starting to realize. I think what's happened as I
• 6:28
  Speaker 2: talked about this a long time ago, about the chasm
• 6:31
  Speaker 2: of actually like accepting new ideas. And it takes a
• 6:37
  Speaker 2: lot of pain for people to start integrating new ideas
• 6:42
  Speaker 2: into their conversations, you know, and start to look at
• 6:46
  Speaker 2: them not in terms of something alien and untested, but
• 6:49
  Speaker 2: something that's possible or something that might fix a problem
• 6:52
  Speaker 2: that they have. And I think what's happening now is
• 6:55
  Speaker 2: our society is going into the pain, as I call it,
• 6:59
  Speaker 2: the chasm of pain because of the particular narrative, the
• 7:04
  Speaker 2: particular framework or relationship between men and women that it's
• 7:07
  Speaker 2: embraced and institutionalized and spread everywhere, and that has is
• 7:12
  Speaker 2: starting to bear fruit in terms of pain like economic failure,
• 7:19
  Speaker 2: like this issue with the government debt. This is all connected. Yeah,
• 7:24
  Speaker 2: And and then and then we're also talking about, you know, dating,
• 7:27
  Speaker 2: We have now a larger and larger population of men
• 7:31
  Speaker 2: who I don't think are they are have given up
• 7:37
  Speaker 2: I don't I don't want to use the term given up.
• 7:38
  Speaker 2: They have chosen to man. They made a rational decision
• 7:44
  Speaker 2: to stop focusing on relationships with women as a central
• 7:50
  Speaker 2: part of their life. And I know there are men
• 7:52
  Speaker 2: who can't do that, and and they they they continue
• 7:54
  Speaker 2: to believe that if they don't have a relationship with
• 7:57
  Speaker 2: a woman that their life is incomplete. That's fine talking
• 8:00
  Speaker 2: about the men who have made a rational decision to
• 8:04
  Speaker 2: just not pursue women as a central part of their life.
• 8:08
  Speaker 2: And that is having lots of effects. It's having effects
• 8:11
  Speaker 2: politically because we're now seeing that body have like a
• 8:15
  Speaker 2: political clout that is getting things done. Regardless of what
• 8:20
  Speaker 2: you think of what Trump is doing, He's in power
• 8:25
  Speaker 2: because of that group of men, because that group of
• 8:28
  Speaker 2: men did not respond to while both conservative and liberal
• 8:31
  Speaker 2: women saying if you don't vote the way we want,
• 8:35
  Speaker 2: you're gonna get nuokie. You're not gonna get nooki, and
• 8:37
  Speaker 2: these guys are like, well, we're not gonna get in
• 8:38
  Speaker 2: any way. We may not want it, or we may
• 8:41
  Speaker 2: recognize that we are, as Poe Math would say, not people.
• 8:45
  Speaker 2: So I mean, you're basically threatening us with something we
• 8:48
  Speaker 2: already don't have. So good luck to you, ladies. We're
• 8:51
  Speaker 2: going to vote in terms of what we think is
• 8:55
  Speaker 2: the interests of our nation in ourselves. And we're seeing
• 8:59
  Speaker 2: that the rise of that like a rise of a
• 9:02
  Speaker 2: male political voting base that is completely uncontrolled by feminism,
• 9:08
  Speaker 2: uncontrolled by women's expectations. So it's almost like an anti
• 9:12
  Speaker 2: gunocentrism group, like an anti guinocentrism UH voting block and
• 9:20
  Speaker 2: uh and and honestly, they they have every right to
• 9:22
  Speaker 2: look at what women are saying to men.
• 9:24
  Speaker 4: Now.
• 9:24
  Speaker 2: I just recently read a medium article by a woman
• 9:27
  Speaker 2: who refers to average men as potatoes and they're completely unattractive,
• 9:33
  Speaker 2: uninteresting to her. And yet she says that any woman
• 9:36
  Speaker 2: who is uh is expressing an interest in a potato
• 9:41
  Speaker 2: just wants to tear his head off and suck out
• 9:43
  Speaker 2: his wallet. And I'm like, this is this is This
• 9:46
  Speaker 2: kind of rhetoric is pervasive in like the uh, the
• 9:51
  Speaker 2: sexual marketplace, shall we say, And I think it's having Yeah,
• 9:55
  Speaker 2: it's it's it's getting men to to basically check out
• 10:00
  Speaker 2: more and more and more. The more women do this,
• 10:02
  Speaker 2: the more men check out, and the more men check out,
• 10:05
  Speaker 2: the more their politics becomes more about themselves and their
• 10:10
  Speaker 2: interests in the greater world and what they think is
• 10:12
  Speaker 2: important as opposed to being controlled by women, you know.
• 10:16
  Speaker 2: So it's it's fascinating to watch, and I think it's
• 10:18
  Speaker 2: become the next topic of conversation simply because eventually we're
• 10:23
  Speaker 2: going to have to ask, well, what does this body
• 10:25
  Speaker 2: of men really want, and then we're going to have
• 10:27
  Speaker 2: to give it to them or they are not going
• 10:30
  Speaker 2: to be participating in whatever system we want them to
• 10:33
  Speaker 2: participate in. That you can push back on anything I've said.
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: There, Oh, I know the thing is about to start,
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: So I just want to explain to people what how
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: this is going to work. This is a live debate,
• 10:47
  Speaker 1: so we're live reacting to a live debate, so I'm
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: not pausing it. I'm just going to let you Yeah,
• 10:54
  Speaker 1: we're streaming the stream and we're reacting to it, so
• 10:57
  Speaker 1: I'm not going to pause it. So what what but
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: I do? What I do have in place is a
• 11:02
  Speaker 1: ducking audio ducking mechanism, so when we talk, the audio
• 11:06
  Speaker 1: of the video we're looking at is going to drop
• 11:08
  Speaker 1: down so that you can hear us. So basically, with
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: that said, I think that we're gonna do any super
• 11:15
  Speaker 1: chats or superchows I'll do in a batch. I don't
• 11:18
  Speaker 1: know how long the debate is going to be, obviously,
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: there's no way of knowing. Lindsey says she thinks it
• 11:23
  Speaker 1: might be short. We'll see if there's a crash out
• 11:27
  Speaker 1: or whatever, a rage quit. But I don't know what's
• 11:30
  Speaker 1: gonna happen. So just let you guys know what's going on.
• 11:33
  Speaker 1: If you want to send us a message at any
• 11:34
  Speaker 1: time during the show, you can send a super chat,
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: you can send a rumble ramp, but the best way
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: is to go to feed Thebatcher dot com forward slash
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: just the tip so that you know, you get to
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: post whatever you want. You won't get censored, and you
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: can go long if you wish, and we'll get more
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: of what you give instead of Google taking like, you know,
• 11:52
  Speaker 1: half or more of the superchows super.
• 11:56
  Speaker 2: Chats rather can I also point out that I think
• 11:59
  Speaker 2: that the debate with philosophy philosoicat.
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: Philosoph philosophic cat.
• 12:05
  Speaker 2: Is sounds like it's more interesting really than the debate
• 12:08
  Speaker 2: with uh Natty, Because Natty I've noticed just sort of
• 12:13
  Speaker 2: shotguns her particular whatever thing that she's got caught in
• 12:19
  Speaker 2: her craw, you know, like the Peter Wright kinocentrism thing,
• 12:24
  Speaker 2: and or lately she's been accusing me of being a
• 12:27
  Speaker 2: theosophist because I yeah, because I because the thing is theosophism.
• 12:34
  Speaker 2: I had to look it up. Is apparently they believe
• 12:36
  Speaker 2: that androgyny is ascendency, and I mean, yeah, when we
• 12:42
  Speaker 2: move beyond physical form, I'm sure that we become something
• 12:46
  Speaker 2: that is not as defined by our physical form, but
• 12:50
  Speaker 2: that's sort of irrelevant. But she believes that I have
• 12:53
  Speaker 2: that view because I say that men and women can
• 12:57
  Speaker 2: learn something from each other. In specific, men can learn
• 13:00
  Speaker 2: from men. It's called fatherhood. You know, girls can learn
• 13:05
  Speaker 2: something very important from men, and when they don't have fathers,
• 13:08
  Speaker 2: they fail to learn it. That's really what I was
• 13:10
  Speaker 2: getting at. But apparently fatherhood is introgyny. Men teaching children
• 13:16
  Speaker 2: how to how to do in a masculine sense is introgyny,
• 13:20
  Speaker 2: and theo theosophie, so theosophy. Yeah, so I'm just I'm
• 13:26
  Speaker 2: just pointing out that Natty just seems to, like I said, shotgun,
• 13:30
  Speaker 2: whatever weird thing is on her mind and accuses everyone
• 13:33
  Speaker 2: else of it.
• 13:35
  Speaker 1: Yeah, all right, well, I mean, but like the philosophic
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: hat thing is at four o'clock.
• 13:40
  Speaker 2: So yeah, we probably won't make it. Well, maybe we can.
• 13:43
  Speaker 2: We can pick it up as like a again a
• 13:49
  Speaker 2: show topic later, you know, if anything that comes out
• 13:52
  Speaker 2: of it.
• 13:52
  Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, yeah.
• 13:53
  Speaker 2: So I guess we're just going to be play by
• 13:56
  Speaker 2: playing this.
• 13:57
  Speaker 1: Well, I mean I can I can leave this on
• 14:02
  Speaker 1: until it starts. In the meantime I can show you
• 14:05
  Speaker 1: guys something else and when it goes live, I'll let
• 14:07
  Speaker 1: you know. Okay, So I have this. This is Dean Withers,
• 14:12
  Speaker 1: the bro whisperer him.
• 14:20
  Speaker 2: Well, I was gonna say, I got into an argument
• 14:22
  Speaker 2: with someone I don't even understand this with who this
• 14:23
  Speaker 2: individuals on the comments section to when we were responding
• 14:27
  Speaker 2: to the Dean Wither's bro whisperer thing, and he was
• 14:31
  Speaker 2: like saying, you're making it us firstus them. I'm like, well,
• 14:34
  Speaker 2: this is this is the demoprat you.
• 14:35
  Speaker 1: Mean, us versus them? What does that mean? Yeah?
• 14:38
  Speaker 2: What does that mean? This is the Democrat Party's selection
• 14:43
  Speaker 2: to try to, I guess, build a bridge to the
• 14:47
  Speaker 2: voting the male voting block that they that they know
• 14:51
  Speaker 2: they need to attract in order to win another election now.
• 14:54
  Speaker 2: And uh, and this is what he says about men.
• 14:58
  Speaker 2: He says that the failure of the left is to
• 15:00
  Speaker 2: explain to or to get men to realize that their
• 15:03
  Speaker 2: problems are simply privileged leaving their body. It's yeah, and
• 15:09
  Speaker 2: I don't know what to say. That's what he said.
• 15:11
  Speaker 2: That's who the left is presented, or the Democrats have
• 15:14
  Speaker 2: presented as their ambassador to men, and like, it just
• 15:19
  Speaker 2: it's it is And you're you're telling me that pointing
• 15:24
  Speaker 2: this out is making it us versus them.
• 15:27
  Speaker 1: It was just, well, I don't know who is us
• 15:29
  Speaker 1: and who is them? That's what I want to know.
• 15:31
  Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly, because he's a.
• 15:33
  Speaker 1: Man that we're supposed to just like because like I
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: you know, yeah, I don't I don't know who the
• 15:38
  Speaker 1: Who's us and who's them?
• 15:39
  Speaker 2: That's what I Yeah, that's a good point. Yeah, who's
• 15:41
  Speaker 2: us and who's them?
• 15:42
  Speaker 1: Yeah? Okay, So this is Dean Withers going viral for
• 15:48
  Speaker 1: allegedly basically, well not even allegedly, just let's just look,
• 15:52
  Speaker 1: he's talking to somebody's father and uh, let's just watch this.
• 15:57
  Speaker 5: I was dumb enough to send my kid in. It's
• 16:00
  Speaker 5: no different than the baby commercial.
• 16:01
  Speaker 6: For Can you answer my question? Do you think that
• 16:04
  Speaker 6: you have the right to consent to sixty five year
• 16:06
  Speaker 6: old men looking at your son while he's naked.
• 16:09
  Speaker 5: I wouldn't allow it.
• 16:11
  Speaker 6: Do you think that you have the right. Do you
• 16:13
  Speaker 6: think that you have the right to allow it. Do
• 16:15
  Speaker 6: you think if you did allow it, that you would
• 16:17
  Speaker 6: be violating the consent of your child?
• 16:20
  Speaker 5: They have no choice in the matter whatsoever.
• 16:22
  Speaker 2: Okay, just can I ask a question. What is the
• 16:25
  Speaker 2: context of the sixty five year old men looking at
• 16:28
  Speaker 2: her his child.
• 16:31
  Speaker 1: I don't know the full context, but essentially the idea
• 16:34
  Speaker 1: is the dad is saying I don't want to subject
• 16:37
  Speaker 1: my children to queer theory teachers basically, or something like
• 16:43
  Speaker 1: drag queen story are or pride a pride parade or
• 16:46
  Speaker 1: whatever it is. But essentially it's a father saying this
• 16:50
  Speaker 1: is my kid. I have authority over my kid, and
• 16:53
  Speaker 1: Dean is saying, you're not getting the child's consent. So
• 16:57
  Speaker 1: the argument is about whether an not children have like
• 17:04
  Speaker 1: authority over their own consent, even beyond their parents. Okay, well,
• 17:08
  Speaker 1: father is saying, no, it's my kid, I get to decide.
• 17:11
  Speaker 2: Well, but here's the problem with that. How can children
• 17:14
  Speaker 2: consent to the lgbt Q plus curriculum. If they can't,
• 17:20
  Speaker 2: they can't consent to that.
• 17:22
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but who gets.
• 17:24
  Speaker 2: To determine if if children can't get sent, then who
• 17:27
  Speaker 2: gets to determine? Well, he's what's in their environment?
• 17:31
  Speaker 1: Well what? No, but Deana is suggesting that children should
• 17:34
  Speaker 1: be able to consent, so like he's giving them the
• 17:38
  Speaker 1: authority of consent as though they are adults essentially, And
• 17:42
  Speaker 1: the father is saying, no, I'm the dad, like this
• 17:44
  Speaker 1: is like my children. Okay, but that's not the part
• 17:48
  Speaker 1: about this that's interesting. So I'm gonna go back a
• 17:50
  Speaker 1: little bit. Notice his shocked expression at the at the
• 17:53
  Speaker 1: thought that a dad actually has authority over his children.
• 18:00
  Speaker 1: They have a little low.
• 18:02
  Speaker 5: I can't raise it, and I wouldn't put my kid
• 18:04
  Speaker 5: in that situation. That's why I think pageants are weird
• 18:07
  Speaker 5: in the first place. I would never.
• 18:11
  Speaker 2: I don't think we need to do twenty seconds for
• 18:12
  Speaker 2: this one.
• 18:15
  Speaker 1: Why is it paused? There's more that happens. He just
• 18:18
  Speaker 1: he just puts his hand over his mouth.
• 18:20
  Speaker 2: Oh god, I hate that gesture.
• 18:23
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but look he gets on his phone, hold on.
• 18:27
  Speaker 6: And then.
• 18:29
  Speaker 5: Okay, so here's what we're gonna do.
• 18:32
  Speaker 6: I think that you don't deserve to have any custodial
• 18:36
  Speaker 6: rights of your child. So uh, for those watching, their
• 18:40
  Speaker 6: handle is good? Nine one zero nine six.
• 18:44
  Speaker 2: Wait, so you deserved of custodial rights over the child, like,
• 18:47
  Speaker 2: so you make the decisions.
• 18:49
  Speaker 1: That's good.
• 18:50
  Speaker 6: It has like facial recognition software or.
• 18:55
  Speaker 5: Nothing I said was wrong, Okay, I just said that
• 18:58
  Speaker 5: the kid doesn't get to make it's your name? Would
• 19:00
  Speaker 5: never put them in that situation. Okay, what's your name?
• 19:04
  Speaker 5: And why are you trying to adopt people?
• 19:05
  Speaker 6: Do?
• 19:05
  Speaker 5: That's weird?
• 19:06
  Speaker 6: Because I want to find who you are so I
• 19:07
  Speaker 6: could call CPS and.
• 19:09
  Speaker 2: Because he thinks he has more authority over this man's kid, Yes,
• 19:12
  Speaker 2: I would than he does.
• 19:14
  Speaker 5: That's the best part. Okay, I would take the part.
• 19:17
  Speaker 6: And I have a witnessing here who's heard me say
• 19:20
  Speaker 6: I would never put my child in that situation.
• 19:22
  Speaker 5: So what's your name? So don't worry. Move the goal
• 19:24
  Speaker 5: polls too.
• 19:24
  Speaker 6: By the way, so you said that you think that
• 19:26
  Speaker 6: parents have every right to exploit and traffic their children.
• 19:29
  Speaker 5: So no, that's not what I said.
• 19:31
  Speaker 6: So I'm not going to debate it with you.
• 19:32
  Speaker 5: That is what you said.
• 19:34
  Speaker 6: So I just putting this out there for anybody feel
• 19:36
  Speaker 6: free to, like, you know, take his profile picture.
• 19:39
  Speaker 2: Maybe what the hell is it? So because he doesn't
• 19:41
  Speaker 2: want children to be exploited.
• 19:43
  Speaker 1: He's his.
• 19:45
  Speaker 2: Children to be exploited. He thinks that that parents should
• 19:49
  Speaker 2: have the right to sexually traffic their children. All right, Well,
• 19:54
  Speaker 2: here's the thing.
• 19:56
  Speaker 7: Parents.
• 19:57
  Speaker 2: Of all the people involved in a child's life, parents
• 20:01
  Speaker 2: tend to be the ones with the greatest desire for
• 20:05
  Speaker 2: that child's wellbeing, right full stop. It's why CPS Child
• 20:11
  Speaker 2: Protective Services hesitates to take children away from their parents,
• 20:15
  Speaker 2: because they know that putting them in the foster system,
• 20:19
  Speaker 2: in the care of essentially government bureaucrats, is probably going
• 20:22
  Speaker 2: to be a worse outcome, So unless the child is
• 20:25
  Speaker 2: in immediate physical danger, they try to avoid that. This
• 20:28
  Speaker 2: is because there is no group of people more concerned
• 20:33
  Speaker 2: about the well being of their children than their parents,
• 20:36
  Speaker 2: and all of these so called activists who are interested
• 20:40
  Speaker 2: in children's consent need to understand that, right, you guys
• 20:44
  Speaker 2: don't have as much concern for the well being of
• 20:49
  Speaker 2: children as the parents of those children. You have concern
• 20:53
  Speaker 2: for your ideologies and turning those children into vectors for
• 20:58
  Speaker 2: your ideologies. That's not concerned for the children and I
• 21:04
  Speaker 2: don't like. This is insane. And the thing is that
• 21:08
  Speaker 2: it makes perfect sense because individuals like this don't have children,
• 21:11
  Speaker 2: So how do they reproduce their ideologies and their religions.
• 21:15
  Speaker 2: They have to appropriate other people's children, and then they
• 21:19
  Speaker 2: have to delegitimate those parents' authority over their children, and
• 21:25
  Speaker 2: of course they do that by all this child abuse narrative,
• 21:28
  Speaker 2: and child abuse is actually not that prevalent. And furthermore,
• 21:35
  Speaker 2: people who are part of the state, So the relationship
• 21:38
  Speaker 2: between a child and somebody who's part of the state
• 21:41
  Speaker 2: is never is a much more dangerous relationship than child
• 21:45
  Speaker 2: and parents. And I don't know how we got to
• 21:47
  Speaker 2: the point where we think that the state has more
• 21:50
  Speaker 2: interest in the child, more of the child's interests in
• 21:54
  Speaker 2: mind than the parents. That's ridiculous. And anybody who considers
• 21:59
  Speaker 2: themselves an avatar or a representative of the state has
• 22:02
  Speaker 2: more of the child's interests in mind than that child's
• 22:05
  Speaker 2: father and mother. Ridiculous.
• 22:08
  Speaker 1: Okay, uh, it's surprised that you missed like the main
• 22:13
  Speaker 1: takeaway though, Oh okay, this guy is supposed to be
• 22:18
  Speaker 1: the answer to like why men like the oh, the
• 22:22
  Speaker 1: answer to why men are like not you know, moving
• 22:25
  Speaker 1: left as it were. It's really ultimately what we're talking about.
• 22:28
  Speaker 1: He's supposed to be the guy that's supposed to appeal
• 22:32
  Speaker 1: to the to male support and he is trying to
• 22:35
  Speaker 1: alienate a father from his child.
• 22:37
  Speaker 2: Mm hmm.
• 22:38
  Speaker 1: This is the bro whisperer. This is this is the left,
• 22:43
  Speaker 1: this is what it is. So this is what they do.
• 22:46
  Speaker 1: Like as soon as he gets he stepped out of line,
• 22:48
  Speaker 1: he said, no, I'm not letting my kid do that.
• 22:51
  Speaker 1: But whatever, it doesn't matter what it is. It doesn't
• 22:53
  Speaker 1: matter what it is. It could be, it could be
• 22:55
  Speaker 1: completely innocent. Ultimately, a father has authority over his children
• 22:59
  Speaker 1: and if someone tries to interfere with that, that person
• 23:02
  Speaker 1: does not give a shit about men. He doesn't. It's impossible.
• 23:07
  Speaker 1: So he is already like just by stepping in and saying,
• 23:10
  Speaker 1: I'm gonna call CPS on you. It doesn't matter if
• 23:12
  Speaker 1: it works or not. It probably won't, I hope. But
• 23:16
  Speaker 1: the fact that he would try to use that, and
• 23:18
  Speaker 1: if you look at like countries like Canada where people
• 23:21
  Speaker 1: have men have lost their children because they would not
• 23:25
  Speaker 1: affirm those kids discovered gender or whatever it is because
• 23:29
  Speaker 1: of Bill C sixteen Okay, so Dean is the face
• 23:35
  Speaker 1: of this is the guy they're putting forward. This is
• 23:37
  Speaker 1: our guy, and this is what he does to men
• 23:40
  Speaker 1: who care about their dads.
• 23:42
  Speaker 2: Okay, yeah, No, she told me that the.
• 23:45
  Speaker 1: Debate is starting. She just told me the debate is starting,
• 23:47
  Speaker 1: So why is it not. I'm not seeing it. M
• 23:52
  Speaker 1: I'm I'm I'm waiting to see where it is. But
• 23:56
  Speaker 1: Lindsay's saying that it's starting.
• 23:58
  Speaker 2: Okay, Well, it's supposed to be an hour.
• 24:01
  Speaker 1: Okay, that he's supposed to be an hour. I'll read.
• 24:02
  Speaker 2: I'm going to, uh, I'm going to I'm just gonna
• 24:05
  Speaker 2: point this out. It's because also he feels entitled to
• 24:09
  Speaker 2: this because of a narrative, like he said that men
• 24:12
  Speaker 2: are inherently damaging to the people and their family, like
• 24:17
  Speaker 2: fathers are damaging. The idea of a father having authority
• 24:20
  Speaker 2: over his family is bad because he's going to use
• 24:23
  Speaker 2: that authority to oppress them and put them into slavery
• 24:27
  Speaker 2: and do all of this other things. And ultimately the
• 24:30
  Speaker 2: end goal of that of that narrative is to get
• 24:33
  Speaker 2: men out of their families entirely and have the state
• 24:37
  Speaker 2: replace that authority. Is it is it starting yet.
• 24:43
  Speaker 1: Okay. So Lindsay told me that it's on she sees
• 24:47
  Speaker 1: it on the Crucible, So I'm gonna go to the
• 24:49
  Speaker 1: Crucible and here is the show. So here we go.
• 24:54
  Speaker 1: All right, I'm gonna change it. Here we go.
• 24:58
  Speaker 8: Right, I'm going to put you both backstage. The intro
• 25:01
  Speaker 8: video is about two minutes.
• 25:02
  Speaker 1: We'll look at that super Child's later.
• 25:04
  Speaker 8: Okay, they were at about thirty seconds before start. I
• 25:07
  Speaker 8: will put you back on stage, and that's just your
• 25:09
  Speaker 8: cue that you're about to be on screen. So you're
• 25:11
  Speaker 8: not doing anything silly. Okay, all right, good luck to
• 25:16
  Speaker 8: you both.
• 25:17
  Speaker 2: Thanks. Okay, Well, I.
• 25:21
  Speaker 1: Guess we are uh well, god, yeah, they're they're warming up.
• 25:23
  Speaker 1: That's okay, It's okay.
• 25:25
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean so, I'm not quite sure how much
• 25:27
  Speaker 2: more we can say about the bro whisper.
• 25:30
  Speaker 1: I just I use it as filler. He's just taking away.
• 25:34
  Speaker 2: The most I'm sorry, I'm under siege by a kiddie.
• 25:38
  Speaker 2: The most state orientated narrative is the feminist narrative. It excuses,
• 25:49
  Speaker 2: it excuses all state intervention into the family, into the community,
• 25:55
  Speaker 2: and the one cure for the feminist narrative is, of course,
• 26:00
  Speaker 2: men's rights activism. That's why we're the first in the hole.
• 26:06
  Speaker 2: And it doesn't matter if you call them left or
• 26:09
  Speaker 2: right or well not, it's a status versus not status.
• 26:15
  Speaker 1: Okay, all right, well it's still warming up right now,
• 26:21
  Speaker 1: there's an intro playing.
• 26:22
  Speaker 3: Sorry, yeah, you can't verify.
• 26:26
  Speaker 2: Let me know if this is maybe we could read
• 26:28
  Speaker 2: that superchow really quick quality.
• 26:31
  Speaker 1: I think it's gonna start pretty soon, but okay. Grim
• 26:34
  Speaker 1: eighty four gave us twenty bucks and says, have you
• 26:36
  Speaker 1: guys heard of Alison Armstrong yet? If not, you should
• 26:39
  Speaker 1: look into her. She's from a completely different space online
• 26:42
  Speaker 1: but has come to the same conclusions about men and
• 26:44
  Speaker 1: women as the people in this corner of the web.
• 26:47
  Speaker 1: The way she conveys the information seems to be a
• 26:49
  Speaker 1: lot more palatable to more women than the average red pill.
• 26:53
  Speaker 1: She also she's also written a book, The Queen's Code,
• 26:57
  Speaker 1: that may interest our Allison. You guys rock thanks for
• 27:00
  Speaker 1: doing what you do. Thank you Grim eighty four for that.
• 27:03
  Speaker 1: We'll look at I'll look it up. And the missis
• 27:05
  Speaker 1: playlist Man gave us twenty bucks in a super chat
• 27:08
  Speaker 1: and said, hello, honey, Brett Bagels, did you see Andrew
• 27:12
  Speaker 1: Wilson shout you out at two twenty five forty five. No,
• 27:15
  Speaker 1: I don't. I don't watch streams for that long during
• 27:18
  Speaker 1: his conversation on Raging Tomato stream on Tuesday. Great work,
• 27:22
  Speaker 1: that's cool. Yeah, he's shouted us out a couple of times.
• 27:25
  Speaker 1: I guess. So, okay, here we go. This should be greens.
• 27:38
  Speaker 8: Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening to everyone out there.
• 27:43
  Speaker 8: I am Sarah the Raging Tomato here.
• 27:45
  Speaker 2: Wow, it's really low. I'm gonna have to the volume here.
• 27:48
  Speaker 8: But three debates today for the Andrew Wilson The Crucible
• 27:53
  Speaker 8: two hundred thousand subscriber Marathon. I am pleased to host
• 27:57
  Speaker 8: the debates for the day, plus a bonus panel. We're
• 28:01
  Speaker 8: going to kick off right and early with miss Natty
• 28:04
  Speaker 8: and Andrew. The debate topic today is Andrew and Rachel
• 28:08
  Speaker 8: are representing a distorted version of Orthodox Christianity.
• 28:13
  Speaker 3: Natty, you are most welcome to begin with your opening statement.
• 28:16
  Speaker 7: Please, thank you, Sarah. Okay, So the Wilsons are representing
• 28:22
  Speaker 7: a distorted version of Orthodox Christianity. Like you said, so,
• 28:28
  Speaker 7: if the problem is women, Andrew, then the solution is
• 28:31
  Speaker 7: the theaskos.
• 28:34
  Speaker 1: Last solution, the theo Tokoswich is the virgin Mary.
• 28:38
  Speaker 7: Of what is causing his and his wife's representation of
• 28:42
  Speaker 7: Orthodoxy to be distorted. In his tweets, he reacts to
• 28:46
  Speaker 7: Stephan Molnyu who says the problem is not women. The
• 28:50
  Speaker 7: problem is not men. The problem is political power. Men
• 28:53
  Speaker 7: blaming women and women blaming men misses the entire point.
• 28:57
  Speaker 7: He responded by saying, nat problem is definitely women. Thank
• 29:08
  Speaker 7: you are saying, I hate the expectation of some of
• 29:11
  Speaker 7: this ying.
• 29:11
  Speaker 1: Yeah, bes bullshit sometimes the world Actually that's Peter Wright
• 29:16
  Speaker 1: said that.
• 29:17
  Speaker 2: Where okay freaking.
• 29:20
  Speaker 7: Like a trifecta of total okay.
• 29:25
  Speaker 2: The only thing you can do with this is just
• 29:27
  Speaker 2: hold the line.
• 29:29
  Speaker 7: First, women like this are going to be his image
• 29:34
  Speaker 7: of the Father or.
• 29:35
  Speaker 2: Higher abnormal anomalies.
• 29:38
  Speaker 7: Which I think is self explanatory. Then we have to
• 29:41
  Speaker 7: Massy the hardly splirrit or the Fluid said that Father
• 29:47
  Speaker 7: of the Red Pill is based on estrogen pills and
• 29:51
  Speaker 7: a gnostic like transhumanist lens of gender inversion, because if
• 29:56
  Speaker 7: you didn't realize it by now, the manisphere was started
• 30:01
  Speaker 7: by gender hating transhumanists. And last but not least, we
• 30:06
  Speaker 7: have Mollymeme. I like to call him Mollymeme the original
• 30:09
  Speaker 7: gen x Lolbert libertarian if you don't know what Lolbert means,
• 30:14
  Speaker 7: the man in the flesh, the individual, the sun who
• 30:17
  Speaker 7: is here to give us order. As a former men's
• 30:21
  Speaker 7: rights activist, sorry, everyone, I have listened and studied the veterans.
• 30:26
  Speaker 1: She's apologizing for it, not Andrew, of course.
• 30:29
  Speaker 7: Well, well, because she's even said, surprise me that despite
• 30:35
  Speaker 7: their divisions, they all share the same essence.
• 30:38
  Speaker 2: Yes, they blame women. Deal with it, Naddy.
• 30:42
  Speaker 7: The view that our culture is women centered at the
• 30:44
  Speaker 7: expense of men.
• 30:48
  Speaker 2: Once again scientifically proven.
• 30:50
  Speaker 7: Theory that, if you accept it, is based on the
• 30:53
  Speaker 7: Protestant West and more recently, Peter Wright's deep resentment towards.
• 30:58
  Speaker 4: The mother of our God, Peter Ray.
• 31:00
  Speaker 9: Virgin Mary, the author of the theory.
• 31:04
  Speaker 2: She thinks everybody is Peter Wright's puppet.
• 31:08
  Speaker 4: I am Peter Wright, Where I am Peter Wright?
• 31:13
  Speaker 7: Dualistic to of ying versus yang or ying slash yang.
• 31:18
  Speaker 2: Okay? Is there any fucking content to this, Allison?
• 31:22
  Speaker 1: This is live. I don't know, it doesn't exist. Is
• 31:25
  Speaker 1: it a rhetorical question?
• 31:28
  Speaker 2: Get to the point, Nattie, stop insulting people.
• 31:31
  Speaker 1: And it is a minute and a half to sling ship.
• 31:35
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I just sling ship. That's all she's doing.
• 31:37
  Speaker 7: When we were in union with God's will through Christ,
• 31:39
  Speaker 7: we see good, we multiply good, and eventually we become
• 31:43
  Speaker 7: all good. The Orthodox Church describes it as a disease
• 31:47
  Speaker 7: that the church is the hospital for I am sure
• 31:51
  Speaker 7: that Andrew will say he agrees with my Christian worldview,
• 31:54
  Speaker 7: but as long as he continues to trying his prescriptions
• 31:57
  Speaker 7: about what the problem is, he will forever be tainted.
• 32:02
  Speaker 7: His message will forever be tainted.
• 32:03
  Speaker 2: Okay, do you just got to ignore women like.
• 32:05
  Speaker 7: This trifector of the right wing culture war totems like
• 32:08
  Speaker 7: Molly Meme and.
• 32:09
  Speaker 2: To Massy Okay, she's just being insulting again.
• 32:12
  Speaker 7: Gary Island with Rachel catching fish for.
• 32:15
  Speaker 2: Them, Why is he going to be tainted.
• 32:17
  Speaker 7: There on that island? Maybe he'll yell at us, telling
• 32:21
  Speaker 7: me and others that his definition of dinos centris and
• 32:24
  Speaker 7: theory is different to pizza rights. He believes in biological
• 32:27
  Speaker 7: or gender essentialist view. So let us get back to
• 32:30
  Speaker 7: where the term first was used. In eighteen ninety seven,
• 32:35
  Speaker 7: Europeans observed social set up in America using this term
• 32:39
  Speaker 7: to reflect on how women were the idealized as moral
• 32:43
  Speaker 7: guardians in American society. And what do you expect when
• 32:47
  Speaker 7: you have a Protestant nation rooted in the rejection of
• 32:50
  Speaker 7: the wiser patriarchy of the Roman Catholic Church. What the
• 32:54
  Speaker 7: later development do you think.
• 32:55
  Speaker 2: The patriarchy of the Roman Catholic Church doesn't actually hold
• 32:58
  Speaker 2: women accountable?
• 32:59
  Speaker 7: Natty placed on them. Blame women for expecting them to
• 33:03
  Speaker 7: be the adult.
• 33:03
  Speaker 2: Yes, that is called holding women accountable.
• 33:06
  Speaker 7: Blame women insufficient replacement for Mary, and this compartmentalize that
• 33:10
  Speaker 7: women did not cent to them at the expense of men.
• 33:13
  Speaker 7: It placed the burden morality solely on women's shoulders, which
• 33:16
  Speaker 7: is at odds with Orthodox teaching, because Adam fruit wilfully
• 33:20
  Speaker 7: and his will is what needs healing first in man.
• 33:24
  Speaker 2: Okay, that's essentially means that women don't have to take
• 33:26
  Speaker 2: responsibility because men need to lead.
• 33:28
  Speaker 4: Today, I get to show you an archetype that I
• 33:31
  Speaker 4: particularly enjoy debating, and they're called the never learned this
• 33:34
  Speaker 4: their fucking lesson archetype. With Natty, I can actually outline
• 33:38
  Speaker 4: my entire debate strategy up front. But she really likes this,
• 33:42
  Speaker 4: and she'll still fall prey to it because she debates
• 33:45
  Speaker 4: the same way. She debates the same way that the
• 33:48
  Speaker 4: never learns their fucking lesson archetype always debates. She's going
• 33:52
  Speaker 4: to make a ton of accusations, and you saw she did,
• 33:55
  Speaker 4: but never give us any proof of any of them, which,
• 33:58
  Speaker 4: as you saw, she didn't. I'll simply keep requesting the proof.
• 34:02
  Speaker 2: And ironically, she's leaning on the very thing that she
• 34:05
  Speaker 2: says doesn't exist, which is women's the perception Thatch.
• 34:10
  Speaker 4: Will have a distorted view of Orthodoxy, but never gave
• 34:12
  Speaker 4: us the proof of what this distorted view is. Where's
• 34:15
  Speaker 4: the condemnation from any of the Orthodox Church fathers there
• 34:19
  Speaker 4: they Where's the condemnation from Orthodox priests on the Wilsons.
• 34:24
  Speaker 4: Where where does Natty get the authority to even say
• 34:27
  Speaker 4: this to me? Nowhere? Right? But where's the proof, Natty?
• 34:31
  Speaker 4: Where's the proof? She starts by referencing a tweet, a
• 34:35
  Speaker 4: literal joke, a meming joke with Stefan Mullineu. And what
• 34:41
  Speaker 4: led let me tell you, what led up to that
• 34:42
  Speaker 4: tweet was a sequence of dms going back and forth
• 34:46
  Speaker 4: with me and Stephan where we agreed on some of
• 34:48
  Speaker 4: these things. We agreed on some of these things where
• 34:51
  Speaker 4: it came to cultural issues which intersect and the responsibility
• 34:55
  Speaker 4: of men in some of these cultural issues and women.
• 34:58
  Speaker 4: I was taking the contrary of you you because it
• 35:00
  Speaker 4: was fucking hilarious. It was hilarious, Okay, that's why it
• 35:04
  Speaker 4: was literally funny, and my proof that it was really
• 35:08
  Speaker 4: funny was underneath it. Tons and tons and tons of
• 35:11
  Speaker 4: people put laughy emojis, including feminists, because obviously they knew
• 35:15
  Speaker 4: it was a joke. They obviously, But here's Natty, there's
• 35:20
  Speaker 4: a holy spirit trifecta with Dotty Rowley THOMASI with his
• 35:23
  Speaker 4: fucking beady hat or some shit, along with Rachel's catching
• 35:27
  Speaker 4: fish on some issle. I don't even know what the
• 35:29
  Speaker 4: fuck she just said, and neither does anybody else criticisms.
• 35:35
  Speaker 4: Her criticisms actually had see how she can't.
• 35:38
  Speaker 2: Take Why are you flirting with this dude, Natty? Why
• 35:43
  Speaker 2: do you look like you want him to take you
• 35:45
  Speaker 2: roughly in a closet.
• 35:46
  Speaker 4: What she did bring proof of was some guy named
• 35:50
  Speaker 4: Peter Wright whose name is not Andrew Wilson. I just
• 35:53
  Speaker 4: want to I just want to point this out. Andrew
• 35:55
  Speaker 4: Wilson is a different name than Peter Wright. She goes
• 35:59
  Speaker 4: on to talk about the beliefs of guy named Peter Wright,
• 36:03
  Speaker 4: not the beliefs of guy named Andrew Wilson. Rather, she
• 36:07
  Speaker 4: gives me tons of criticisms about some other guy that
• 36:10
  Speaker 4: I don't give a flying fuck about and don't know
• 36:13
  Speaker 4: anything about and never have. In fact, the most hilarious
• 36:17
  Speaker 4: part of this, I will continuously ask Natty to present
• 36:21
  Speaker 4: proof of any connection between myself, my wife and this
• 36:24
  Speaker 4: guy Peter Wright. And guess what, She's never gonna give
• 36:27
  Speaker 4: you any because there isn't any to give. There's none
• 36:31
  Speaker 4: to give. In fact, I don't even think I ever
• 36:33
  Speaker 4: would have heard of this guy if it wasn't for Natty.
• 36:36
  Speaker 4: I don't even think I would have ever heard of
• 36:38
  Speaker 4: him if it wasn't for Natty. In fact, I would
• 36:41
  Speaker 4: say that Natty's continual spurging on X probably gets this
• 36:46
  Speaker 4: guy's message out there far more than he ever could
• 36:51
  Speaker 4: get his message out there, because people like me, I've
• 36:54
  Speaker 4: never even fucking heard of him. People like me, with
• 36:56
  Speaker 4: massive platforms with huge audiences, we don't even know the
• 36:59
  Speaker 4: fuck guy is right, or at least I don't, you
• 37:03
  Speaker 4: know what I mean, and I don't care, so what
• 37:05
  Speaker 4: you can't do is you can't say, ah, the Wilsons
• 37:09
  Speaker 4: are this, and here's all my criticisms of people who
• 37:11
  Speaker 4: aren't them. Well, that's nice. Can you just stick with
• 37:15
  Speaker 4: what your criticisms are of me? Is it that I
• 37:18
  Speaker 4: make jokes on X a ship posting site which is
• 37:21
  Speaker 4: designed literally for ship posting, literally designed for it. It
• 37:25
  Speaker 4: has a character limit? I agree, because you're supposed to
• 37:30
  Speaker 4: go there. That's ship post and it's really funny. It's
• 37:34
  Speaker 4: called engagement baiting. It's hilarious. I don't know what the
• 37:37
  Speaker 4: fuck is wrong with you. You've always been one of these
• 37:39
  Speaker 4: mentally ill whack jobs, also kicked out of most of
• 37:42
  Speaker 4: these orthodox communities for a reason. The reason is is
• 37:46
  Speaker 4: everywhere she goes, she causes maximum.
• 37:48
  Speaker 2: But she really likes being, thankfully with.
• 37:50
  Speaker 4: The conspiracy theories of trying to tie every fucking body
• 37:53
  Speaker 4: who exists in with this guy Peter Wright. So here's
• 37:57
  Speaker 4: all I'm gonna say is this.
• 37:58
  Speaker 1: I don't know what Peter Wright did to.
• 38:00
  Speaker 4: Tymology of word doesn't matter, word meaning changes.
• 38:02
  Speaker 2: I don't even think that Peter Wright version of like
• 38:06
  Speaker 2: Nat does with he hasn't even to understand it.
• 38:10
  Speaker 4: That doesn't mean that you're right, because meanings change over time.
• 38:14
  Speaker 4: That's one. And the second thing is I'd actually like
• 38:17
  Speaker 4: to hear the criticisms of Andrew Wilson, not of Peter Wright.
• 38:23
  Speaker 4: That would be great, and I'd like to see it
• 38:25
  Speaker 4: ship to back it up instead of speculation.
• 38:29
  Speaker 1: Damn, he did it under the time too.
• 38:31
  Speaker 8: I appreciate the both of you a kind reminder to
• 38:35
  Speaker 8: the audience. We are actually not going to go into
• 38:38
  Speaker 8: open panel for this debate. We've got a lot ahead
• 38:41
  Speaker 8: of us, so I'm.
• 38:42
  Speaker 2: Sorry, Brian, that was a lot of grinning on her part.
• 38:45
  Speaker 3: We will take time this.
• 38:47
  Speaker 1: I think that it's just like her poker face. She's
• 38:51
  Speaker 1: trying to appear more confident. I'm going she's making the
• 38:55
  Speaker 1: I'm winning face.
• 38:56
  Speaker 3: Two minute time sessions to kick off with.
• 39:00
  Speaker 2: It reads much more like that I would do him
• 39:02
  Speaker 2: face to me than you.
• 39:05
  Speaker 7: So notice how Andrew did not address a single point
• 39:08
  Speaker 7: that I made.
• 39:11
  Speaker 1: What the point did she make?
• 39:13
  Speaker 2: Yeah? What point did you make? Aside from Andrew Wilson
• 39:16
  Speaker 2: is Peter Wright's puppet?
• 39:20
  Speaker 7: And then goes, well, no, I don't I think he should.
• 39:22
  Speaker 2: Stand behind blaming women. I hope he does in place,
• 39:27
  Speaker 2: and it's more than just blaming women until we're as
• 39:30
  Speaker 2: comfortable blaming women as we are men. It's also when
• 39:33
  Speaker 2: women take responsibility, society has a massively.
• 39:38
  Speaker 7: Forward Andrew actually does believe that the West is gynocentric,
• 39:43
  Speaker 7: and pretty much everything he says about.
• 39:46
  Speaker 2: Well, what did you talk about Peter Wright then.
• 39:50
  Speaker 7: Is actually rooted in this theory because it's like a
• 39:53
  Speaker 7: presupposition if you're going to take the position.
• 39:56
  Speaker 2: I hope he doesn't get sucked into this like just
• 39:58
  Speaker 2: say yes, it's ginocentric.
• 40:01
  Speaker 1: So I don't know if Andrew has looked into it
• 40:04
  Speaker 1: too much.
• 40:05
  Speaker 7: Peter Wright, who is pretty much the thinker to the
• 40:10
  Speaker 7: speaker if anybody knows about men's rights movement, which Andrew
• 40:14
  Speaker 7: does because he's followed it as well all this time,
• 40:17
  Speaker 7: he is the one who comes out and he's like, tough.
• 40:20
  Speaker 10: Love, ladies, you need to maybe we'll get a shout out.
• 40:23
  Speaker 7: And be atone for your sins. But it's actually Peter
• 40:27
  Speaker 7: that was the one who wrote the theory that he
• 40:29
  Speaker 7: uses in his thinking. And what he claims is that
• 40:32
  Speaker 7: since the medievil period in Europe we have been dinocentric.
• 40:38
  Speaker 2: He says, and you know, Baddie, that there are other
• 40:43
  Speaker 2: as night class conjecturers can believe that centrism women started
• 40:47
  Speaker 2: with the human race the time.
• 40:49
  Speaker 1: Yeah, some people think it's biological, some people think it's cultural,
• 40:54
  Speaker 1: a combination.
• 40:55
  Speaker 7: He doesn't have that definition. I would like to hear
• 40:57
  Speaker 7: what Andrew's definition is.
• 40:58
  Speaker 3: Thank you, m Andrew.
• 41:02
  Speaker 4: Yeah, so, uh. Notice no criticisms about Andrew, More criticisms
• 41:07
  Speaker 4: about a guy named Peter Wright whose name is not Andrew,
• 41:10
  Speaker 4: And how guynocentric theory is orchestrated and archetype by Peter Wright,
• 41:15
  Speaker 4: and what Peter Wright wants and Peter right, Peter Wright,
• 41:17
  Speaker 4: Peter Wright.
• 41:18
  Speaker 2: Just tell her to stop.
• 41:20
  Speaker 4: Is that she asked me a question. You don't get
• 41:23
  Speaker 4: to come to a debate and ask me what I think.
• 41:26
  Speaker 4: Your job is to come in and show the proof
• 41:29
  Speaker 4: and evidence, show the evidence that whatever you think I
• 41:33
  Speaker 4: believe ginocentrism is, that's what it is. Show any evidence
• 41:38
  Speaker 4: of this. Your job is to build a case for
• 41:40
  Speaker 4: your stupid, fucking crazy worldview, not for me to answer
• 41:44
  Speaker 4: your dumb ass questions to try to build your worldview
• 41:46
  Speaker 4: for you. I didn't address make any points here, and
• 41:53
  Speaker 4: this is how you debate. This is why Andrew won't
• 41:55
  Speaker 4: answer the question your fucking lesson archetype. I'm not here
• 41:58
  Speaker 4: to come in and give you your points for you
• 42:00
  Speaker 4: so that you can then use a bunch of Q
• 42:03
  Speaker 4: and A to try to get to the roots of
• 42:05
  Speaker 4: the thing that you think is problematic with me. You
• 42:07
  Speaker 4: can do the Socratic method later in the debate, I suppose,
• 42:10
  Speaker 4: But right now your job is to actually expound on
• 42:13
  Speaker 4: a case that you make.
• 42:16
  Speaker 1: Again, I can't understand her way.
• 42:18
  Speaker 4: Showing actual evidence, And right now I'm going to show
• 42:21
  Speaker 4: you what's happened. You haven't shown any evidence for any
• 42:23
  Speaker 4: of these.
• 42:24
  Speaker 1: She seems to be woefully unprepared.
• 42:27
  Speaker 4: Show us the evidence. Never learns for this, where's the
• 42:30
  Speaker 4: evidence of any of this? It's nice that you just
• 42:32
  Speaker 4: went on a diatribe about what you think the entomology
• 42:35
  Speaker 4: of the word ginocentrism is. What the fuck's that got
• 42:37
  Speaker 4: to do? Andrew Wilson, we still don't know.
• 42:40
  Speaker 2: I honestly think that what he's saying here. Of course,
• 42:45
  Speaker 2: he's looking at this very.
• 42:46
  Speaker 4: Male claim, the claim that, and she's going.
• 42:49
  Speaker 2: To probably return with the narrative of us because that's
• 42:54
  Speaker 2: what women are saying is true.
• 42:55
  Speaker 1: You see, if she does prediction made.
• 42:59
  Speaker 4: Show us any evidence.
• 43:04
  Speaker 7: Okay, Andrew, Rachel Wilson, your wife. She includes the theory
• 43:08
  Speaker 7: in her book, and when we have previous encounter, we
• 43:11
  Speaker 7: have numerous witnesses who admit that Rachel has been in
• 43:16
  Speaker 7: guidance with Peter Wright, who was a paying member of
• 43:19
  Speaker 7: her Patreon, and we there's actually.
• 43:22
  Speaker 1: Rachel said, I want to just speaking for Rachel. She said,
• 43:26
  Speaker 1: according to her own words, Peter Wright supported her book
• 43:29
  Speaker 1: and sent her DMS a few times, but she never
• 43:32
  Speaker 1: really talked with him. Chal became about what Rachel Wilson said.
• 43:36
  Speaker 1: And most likely Rachel Wilson didn't need Peter Wright's help
• 43:40
  Speaker 1: writing her book, which she was already writing before he
• 43:44
  Speaker 1: came to the picture, because he was writing the book also.
• 43:49
  Speaker 2: And Peter Wright represents a subset of gyno centrism theory
• 43:53
  Speaker 2: related to Courtly Loved.
• 43:55
  Speaker 7: Yes, and you keep going on about how you don't
• 43:58
  Speaker 7: know anything about Peter Wright, but your wife does, and
• 44:00
  Speaker 7: she's admitted that space and people have witnessed her.
• 44:03
  Speaker 2: Yeah, she's admitted that she can keep.
• 44:05
  Speaker 7: Running away from this or you want or you could
• 44:07
  Speaker 7: actually answer the question and tell us whether you believe
• 44:11
  Speaker 7: the West is going.
• 44:12
  Speaker 1: Essentially, I think I think what she's trying to do
• 44:14
  Speaker 1: is trap him in something. That's why she's asking questions to.
• 44:19
  Speaker 7: See where he stands on more about how.
• 44:22
  Speaker 1: Than use that to sort of bludgeon him. I just
• 44:26
  Speaker 1: want to point out for anybody that's watching, Matty's only
• 44:30
  Speaker 1: been Orthodox for a few years and now she's a theologian.
• 44:36
  Speaker 1: I was saying, I would not dare to like try
• 44:40
  Speaker 1: to be an apologist for that. I wouldn't dare. This
• 44:44
  Speaker 1: is why, this is why Saint Paul said that women
• 44:46
  Speaker 1: should stay in the back.
• 44:48
  Speaker 2: Well, you do know that how her body language is
• 44:50
  Speaker 2: getting small, that is that is a physical demonstratingreat you.
• 44:56
  Speaker 7: Can keep going. But the other thing is that questions.
• 45:00
  Speaker 2: The Bible recognizes that men cleave emotionally.
• 45:03
  Speaker 4: To women, demonstrating any basically games. She wants me to
• 45:08
  Speaker 4: answer her questions so that she can try to prove
• 45:11
  Speaker 4: her claims that she made this accusation. Here's the accusation
• 45:15
  Speaker 4: that she made Andrew and Rachel X. If Andrew Rachel X,
• 45:19
  Speaker 4: I would suppose that you would have some proof. She
• 45:21
  Speaker 4: says that she can prove that Peter Wright was a
• 45:24
  Speaker 4: member of Rachel's patreon. Okay, show us the proof. She
• 45:28
  Speaker 4: says that she can prove that Peter Wright was in
• 45:31
  Speaker 4: contact with Rachel over the idea of because this was
• 45:36
  Speaker 4: included in her book. Okay, show us the proof. All
• 45:40
  Speaker 4: I'm asking for, very simply is for Natty, the accuser
• 45:44
  Speaker 4: and the person who made the claim, to show us
• 45:47
  Speaker 4: the evidence of the claim. Instead, Natty continuously just says
• 45:50
  Speaker 4: that I need to answer questions about some fucking perceived
• 45:53
  Speaker 4: worldview she thinks I have. That's great, I'm glad that
• 45:56
  Speaker 4: she really wants me to answer her questions. But if
• 46:00
  Speaker 4: you have a debate prompt which says this X Wilson X, right,
• 46:04
  Speaker 4: Rachel this, Andrew this, you should be able to demonstrate
• 46:08
  Speaker 4: these things using proof. What's the proof, Natty? I would
• 46:13
  Speaker 4: really like to know. So again, I can just yeah
• 46:17
  Speaker 4: and over and over, and when we get to the
• 46:19
  Speaker 4: socratic part of the debate, you can ask me what
• 46:22
  Speaker 4: you think that my definition of guinocentrism is. I think
• 46:25
  Speaker 4: it's basically a meme. But the thing is is like, ultimately,
• 46:30
  Speaker 4: can you show us the proof now? Like I'll actually wait,
• 46:33
  Speaker 4: I'm gonna hold right now. I won't say a word,
• 46:36
  Speaker 4: and neither will Sarah will stop the whole stream while
• 46:39
  Speaker 4: you can pull up the proof and show it to
• 46:42
  Speaker 4: us so we can see it. That's why I wanted
• 46:44
  Speaker 4: to do this on video, so that there was no
• 46:46
  Speaker 4: way for anybody to be confused about Natty's proof. She
• 46:49
  Speaker 4: could pull it up via video and show it to us.
• 46:52
  Speaker 4: So go ahead, Natty all ears, okay.
• 46:58
  Speaker 7: Wealk you. Orthodox anthropology says that we are that Adam
• 47:06
  Speaker 7: was first.
• 47:07
  Speaker 2: Okay, but this is not proved that Maddy spirits.
• 47:11
  Speaker 7: And body and soul. The West, however, tends to view
• 47:16
  Speaker 7: the human person and human being as mind and body
• 47:21
  Speaker 7: and uh and soul. Okay, And when you hear Andrew's
• 47:27
  Speaker 7: talking points when he says.
• 47:28
  Speaker 1: That he's like, what are you talking about?
• 47:32
  Speaker 7: And then tries to claim that it's a joke, but then.
• 47:35
  Speaker 1: Actually, apparently if anybody has spoken to Peter Wright or
• 47:38
  Speaker 1: gotten text and in anything, or follow him on X,
• 47:43
  Speaker 1: you're all in on it. You guys know that.
• 47:45
  Speaker 7: Viewpoint is out there is if you believe that.
• 47:49
  Speaker 2: All right, she's supposedly an Orthodox Christian. Did she miss
• 47:55
  Speaker 2: the part about women submitting to men's authority and roles?
• 47:59
  Speaker 7: From what I have gathered from isn't.
• 48:01
  Speaker 2: That incompatible with women having a voting.
• 48:03
  Speaker 7: Complementary and Protestant narrative, which focus is giving energy. He
• 48:09
  Speaker 7: focuses on criticizing the eglitarian position, which I would say.
• 48:15
  Speaker 1: It's pronounced egalitarian body, a glitarian eglitarian. I like that
• 48:21
  Speaker 1: it sounds like a character from a pulp novel.
• 48:25
  Speaker 2: In fact, so this is now a minute and a half.
• 48:27
  Speaker 2: But she's even mattering and has not given any proof,
• 48:30
  Speaker 2: and from.
• 48:31
  Speaker 7: What he requested, eccentric. He also wouldn't be saying.
• 48:34
  Speaker 2: That, sorry, Brian, I'm trying to feel like this.
• 48:38
  Speaker 7: But he doesn't do that. He just goes out there
• 48:40
  Speaker 7: and says these really like arrogant things to women, And
• 48:44
  Speaker 7: because he thinks.
• 48:45
  Speaker 2: He can interamericanret narrative.
• 48:47
  Speaker 7: Rhetorical devices against them, he avoids actually being held accountable,
• 48:52
  Speaker 7: which is ironic because he's supposed to be representing the patriarchy.
• 48:55
  Speaker 7: You're not the patriarchy, Andrew a young man or an
• 48:59
  Speaker 7: adult nail even Andrew.
• 49:03
  Speaker 4: And anyway, I would just like to point out that,
• 49:06
  Speaker 4: after all the succession prattling, here's the thing that we
• 49:08
  Speaker 4: didn't get. Isn't it amazing that I told you that
• 49:11
  Speaker 4: I outlined this entire debate strategy and never learns Natty
• 49:15
  Speaker 4: still would fall prey to it. I asked her for
• 49:18
  Speaker 4: this day. She is literally, we didn't actually get from
• 49:24
  Speaker 4: Natty was any proof. So Natty starts by making this claim,
• 49:28
  Speaker 4: Andrew says women shouldn't vote. Where proof.
• 49:31
  Speaker 2: She says, Okay, I just need to explain this because
• 49:34
  Speaker 2: we all know that she's going to talk about her.
• 49:36
  Speaker 2: Notice what Natty is doing here, because this is important,
• 49:41
  Speaker 2: the over arching.
• 49:43
  Speaker 4: Where almost nobody could vote. It has nothing to do.
• 49:45
  Speaker 2: He is using her control as a woman over his identity.
• 49:50
  Speaker 2: Oh you're immature. You're not a real patriarchy. You haven't
• 49:53
  Speaker 2: shown the authority necessary for me to recognize. She's using
• 49:57
  Speaker 2: Guyo centrism to try to win the argument. She's used
• 50:00
  Speaker 2: what she says doesn't exist to try to win the argument,
• 50:03
  Speaker 2: her emotional control, her judgment over her right to judge men.
• 50:09
  Speaker 2: That this isn't an incomprehensible thing that she said a
• 50:11
  Speaker 2: woman saying, oh, well you're not a real man. Well,
• 50:13
  Speaker 2: how the hell would you know you're a woman? Right?
• 50:15
  Speaker 2: Nobody's going to tell her that she's using that to
• 50:18
  Speaker 2: try to control the argument. You see what I'm saying.
• 50:22
  Speaker 2: And yet she denies that.
• 50:24
  Speaker 1: Women he's bringing receipts sat up.
• 50:27
  Speaker 4: If you'll yield your next two minutes to me, I'll
• 50:29
  Speaker 4: pull the receipts up and we can go over them, Natty,
• 50:32
  Speaker 4: right now, live, and we can finally put to rest
• 50:35
  Speaker 4: your fucking insane allegations. Can we do that or not? Natty?
• 50:39
  Speaker 4: Are you actually here for the truth or are you
• 50:41
  Speaker 4: just here to show zero proof of any claims? Or
• 50:44
  Speaker 4: do you actually want to go through the evidence, because
• 50:46
  Speaker 4: if you do, I came loaded with receipts today.
• 50:50
  Speaker 2: This won't make a dent, Naddy.
• 50:52
  Speaker 3: If you want to yield over you don't.
• 50:54
  Speaker 1: Not trying to change her mind.
• 50:56
  Speaker 7: I think Andrew needs to answer my question and smoke
• 51:00
  Speaker 7: his fag a bit stronger. Just put it in your mouth, mate,
• 51:02
  Speaker 7: Come on, you know it's in your hands. It's going
• 51:04
  Speaker 7: to burn out if you keep doing that.
• 51:07
  Speaker 2: This is why I don't have a problem insulting her.
• 51:10
  Speaker 7: Yeah, so this is what I think Andrew really should
• 51:13
  Speaker 7: be talking about. This is a really good.
• 51:14
  Speaker 2: Teaching and what you think called.
• 51:17
  Speaker 7: Dr matisis he's on x As City's liturgy if anyone
• 51:20
  Speaker 7: wants to follow him. And this has taken from his
• 51:23
  Speaker 7: book The Ethics of beauty. He talks about how the
• 51:26
  Speaker 7: sexes have a mutualism between them, and it actually reflects
• 51:31
  Speaker 7: how orthodox for use the Trinity. When Andrew and some
• 51:35
  Speaker 7: of the other guys in his circle start going start
• 51:37
  Speaker 7: having a little jerk off about the monarchical position of
• 51:40
  Speaker 7: the Father there sometimes that gets a little bit misrepresented
• 51:44
  Speaker 7: because in Orthodoxy all three persons of the trinity are
• 51:47
  Speaker 7: coequal the fuck okay, So they can't exist about each
• 51:51
  Speaker 7: other clearly because they're at the beginning.
• 51:53
  Speaker 2: Like literally, all she has is when topical interpretations and
• 51:59
  Speaker 2: accused people.
• 52:00
  Speaker 7: Wright talks about how we have to be Christ like
• 52:05
  Speaker 7: we need to be the prophet, the priest, and the
• 52:07
  Speaker 7: king like how Christ was in the New Testament.
• 52:10
  Speaker 2: So essentially men need to take responsibility for women. Is
• 52:13
  Speaker 2: she going to submit to that responsibility and.
• 52:15
  Speaker 7: They able to achieve that in a priestly manner. When
• 52:18
  Speaker 7: Andrew starts talking about gender roles and how men and
• 52:20
  Speaker 7: women should be, he uses a fundamentalist Protestant framework that
• 52:25
  Speaker 7: some of his clergy buddies that are unfortunately engaging the
• 52:29
  Speaker 7: Protestantism of Orthodoxy online, like Father Trenham and Father Moses McPherson.
• 52:35
  Speaker 7: Andrew actually repeats the talking points and saying framework as
• 52:39
  Speaker 7: they do. Father Moses McPherson says a rather heretical line
• 52:44
  Speaker 7: where he says that Eve ate the apple because she
• 52:47
  Speaker 7: wanted to dominate her husband in the video where he
• 52:50
  Speaker 7: talks about why modern marriage failed, and he attributes that
• 52:54
  Speaker 7: to Saint Isaac the Syrian. Now, I'm wondering if Andrew
• 52:57
  Speaker 7: Wilson agrees with that, because that's backwards theologically.
• 53:01
  Speaker 4: What I mean, if you'd like, I can bring Father
• 53:05
  Speaker 4: McPherson on this panel right the second, and you can
• 53:08
  Speaker 4: say that to his face.
• 53:09
  Speaker 1: Father Moses, let's go, that's the guy that's the weightlifting Okay.
• 53:16
  Speaker 4: I'll reach out to him right the second. Sarah over
• 53:19
  Speaker 4: in your d MS, I sent you a couple of messages.
• 53:21
  Speaker 2: Can you start with you still hasn't proven your assertion.
• 53:25
  Speaker 4: You're making the accusation against these people. You're making the accusations.
• 53:29
  Speaker 4: Why why do you.
• 53:30
  Speaker 7: Want me to be against people?
• 53:33
  Speaker 4: You're not against you people. I wouldn't even say a word,
• 53:35
  Speaker 4: But anyway, if you can bring up the evidences, that
• 53:39
  Speaker 4: would be great. I'm going to, oh god, I'm going
• 53:44
  Speaker 4: to completely eviscerate you right this second. Using the thing
• 53:48
  Speaker 4: that you refuse to bring to this debate proof and
• 53:51
  Speaker 4: evidence of any of your claims. But I'm about to
• 53:53
  Speaker 4: give you proof and evidence of mind, incontrovertible proof.
• 54:01
  Speaker 3: Stand by for just a second. You caught me a little.
• 54:04
  Speaker 2: Okay, So while they're doing this, this is women aren't
• 54:09
  Speaker 2: going to change because you give them proof. They're only
• 54:12
  Speaker 2: going to change. Give them proof. They're only going to
• 54:16
  Speaker 2: change if you refuse to allow them the emotional dominance
• 54:22
  Speaker 2: that Natty's seeking here. And the funny thing is that
• 54:24
  Speaker 2: she is again appealing to her her ability as a
• 54:27
  Speaker 2: woman to judge men's worth, social worth. That's what she's
• 54:31
  Speaker 2: doing to Andrew Wilson. She's a little bit of threat narrativing,
• 54:34
  Speaker 2: but a lot of shaming his identity as a man
• 54:39
  Speaker 2: under the presumption that that's not insane or ridiculous to do,
• 54:43
  Speaker 2: which requires believing that women have some position by which
• 54:47
  Speaker 2: to judge men's identity. That's gynocentrism, that is.
• 54:54
  Speaker 4: Right.
• 54:54
  Speaker 2: Yeah, she's demonstrating it right now. I know that this
• 54:57
  Speaker 2: has all been like push down into her showing her
• 55:02
  Speaker 2: her evidence, and she's never going to do it, or
• 55:05
  Speaker 2: if she does, this isn't going to be sufficient too.
• 55:08
  Speaker 1: Well, we're not. We're not. Natty's never going to change
• 55:11
  Speaker 1: her mind. This isn't about that. I'm looking at the process,
• 55:15
  Speaker 1: but I want to point out that Natty is calling
• 55:18
  Speaker 1: Father Moses a heretic. Father Moses has been He was
• 55:23
  Speaker 1: ordained into the Holy priesthood on June second, twenty thirteen
• 55:27
  Speaker 1: by Bishop Marty, administrator of the Diocese Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania,
• 55:33
  Speaker 1: a Saint's Orthodox Church in Olifant, Pennsylvania. He has been
• 55:37
  Speaker 1: a priest for twelve years for that. And she's telling
• 55:42
  Speaker 1: us that he's not real. And she's been in the
• 55:46
  Speaker 1: church for what like five maybe four?
• 55:50
  Speaker 2: Yeah, well no, not five, because no, like three or
• 55:53
  Speaker 2: four years, three or four years. And she talks like
• 55:56
  Speaker 2: I wanted to address this. She talks about how she
• 55:59
  Speaker 2: is a former men's rights activist, but she confesses that
• 56:04
  Speaker 2: the reason why she was part of men's rights activism
• 56:08
  Speaker 2: was because of some kind of emotional thing that she got,
• 56:11
  Speaker 2: he got she got out of it, which was I
• 56:14
  Speaker 2: guess she had a very conflicted relationship with her mother,
• 56:17
  Speaker 2: so she got to be able to express that I
• 56:20
  Speaker 2: guess anger anger towards women within the movement and I'm like, yeah,
• 56:24
  Speaker 2: that's entirely possible. Like I also had a conflicted relationship
• 56:28
  Speaker 2: with my mother. But at some point, if you're going
• 56:30
  Speaker 2: to be part of these issues, you have to ask
• 56:33
  Speaker 2: yourself why am I here? Am I here just to
• 56:37
  Speaker 2: indulge an emotional need, which may be anger towards women
• 56:41
  Speaker 2: expressing anger towards women? Or am I here to help ment?
• 56:45
  Speaker 2: And I don't think she ever got over the idea
• 56:49
  Speaker 2: that this is not a place where you get those
• 56:52
  Speaker 2: you know you do that you get a selfish need
• 56:55
  Speaker 2: meant you get what I'm saying, like, you're not supposed
• 56:58
  Speaker 2: to be here because you hate women or you're angry
• 57:02
  Speaker 2: at women. You're supposed to be here because you love
• 57:05
  Speaker 2: men and you want to see them treated better. And
• 57:10
  Speaker 2: I think women can get to that point, like they
• 57:12
  Speaker 2: the women who are part of the movement can have
• 57:14
  Speaker 2: to make that choice. And Natty made the choice that
• 57:18
  Speaker 2: you know, once she resolved her anger towards women, she
• 57:22
  Speaker 2: didn't have love towards men to keep her going, so
• 57:24
  Speaker 2: she left. But her entire involvement was selfish. And it's like, yeah,
• 57:31
  Speaker 2: lots of people get into movements for selfish reasons. And
• 57:34
  Speaker 2: I mean ultimately caring about men. I guess you could
• 57:38
  Speaker 2: argue at some level that's a selfish reason, because you
• 57:41
  Speaker 2: know you're competitive. You know there's something in you that
• 57:45
  Speaker 2: makes that wants to not just see compassion for men,
• 57:48
  Speaker 2: but just can't stand the disingenuous bullshit that's used to
• 57:51
  Speaker 2: keep men down. But you know, you get to that
• 57:54
  Speaker 2: point where you have to ask yourself why you're doing
• 57:56
  Speaker 2: what you're doing. And Natty did, and I guess she
• 58:00
  Speaker 2: resolved whatever it was she herself was getting out of
• 58:03
  Speaker 2: the movement and she left. She went to Orthodox or whatever.
• 58:09
  Speaker 7: And I think you should do it.
• 58:10
  Speaker 1: She sent something to him, Oh okay, trying to make
• 58:15
  Speaker 1: this entertaining. I don't know what that bening. He got
• 58:19
  Speaker 1: a messages from Peter Wright that he's bringing up and
• 58:23
  Speaker 1: this is again I know that the debate is supposedly about,
• 58:26
  Speaker 1: like you know, how Rachel Andrew are not truly Orthodox
• 58:29
  Speaker 1: and they're like secret fundies or something, but they are.
• 58:32
  Speaker 1: She is using Peter Wright as the bludgeon and by extension,
• 58:36
  Speaker 1: the Men's movement. She also lame dropped Paul Elim. So
• 58:40
  Speaker 1: this is not like we're not divorced from this at all.
• 58:44
  Speaker 1: I mean like she is embittered because the MRM, I guess,
• 58:49
  Speaker 1: for whatever reason, wasn't what she thought it was gonna be.
• 58:52
  Speaker 1: And instead of like dealing with her own issues that
• 58:55
  Speaker 1: may have been like the side effect of that or
• 58:58
  Speaker 1: the impetus for her entering that is, she is just
• 59:01
  Speaker 1: blaming us for existing.
• 59:05
  Speaker 2: And also assuming that somebody like me has the same
• 59:08
  Speaker 2: emotional reasons for being part of the men's rights movement
• 59:12
  Speaker 2: came in as u as she did conversations like well, yeah,
• 59:17
  Speaker 2: it's possible, but it's but I also very much remember
• 59:22
  Speaker 2: making the decision am I here to hate women or
• 59:24
  Speaker 2: be angry at women? Or am I here to care
• 59:26
  Speaker 2: about men? And I'm like, yeah, I'm here to care
• 59:28
  Speaker 2: about men.
• 59:29
  Speaker 4: Actually wants to make sure like am I crazy? Am
• 59:32
  Speaker 4: I crazy? Or did this just like the volume? But
• 59:37
  Speaker 4: unless my memory is failing, it's completely fabricated. Really can't
• 59:41
  Speaker 4: stand that bitch now, uh. He continues from there, So
• 59:45
  Speaker 4: we'll stop that one and I'll move on to is.
• 59:48
  Speaker 1: That Peter right talking about talking yeah to Andrew Wilson
• 59:53
  Speaker 1: about Natty. I think so Andrew Wilson is pulling up
• 59:56
  Speaker 1: his d MS or something. Rachel's I'm not sure.
• 1:00:02
  Speaker 2: Okay, so this is all quiet again.
• 1:00:06
  Speaker 1: But this is this is oh she's she's bringing Oh.
• 1:00:11
  Speaker 2: Good, this is really becoming.
• 1:00:14
  Speaker 1: It's officially a tag team match.
• 1:00:16
  Speaker 2: Now, yeah, okay, that's that's gonna be some interesting crap.
• 1:00:23
  Speaker 2: Because I criticized Christianity DM.
• 1:00:27
  Speaker 1: Please called he called you Marxist, said were Marxists.
• 1:00:32
  Speaker 2: We're Marxists, like I said, a lot of these individuals.
• 1:00:38
  Speaker 2: All they do is load up the shotgun with their uh,
• 1:00:41
  Speaker 2: with their label du jour and then hit you with it.
• 1:00:44
  Speaker 2: You're a Peter Wright preppet. Oh you're a theosophist.
• 1:00:48
  Speaker 4: Yeah, oh you're funny. You should say that. And macro
• 1:00:53
  Speaker 4: cop I don't remember having any exchange on your Patreon.
• 1:00:58
  Speaker 2: Good lord, this is not going to be very fun.
• 1:01:00
  Speaker 4: James Dean provided proof of that, and I didn't see
• 1:01:03
  Speaker 4: it anywhere anywhere. She just lies. She's so obsessive. Also,
• 1:01:09
  Speaker 4: my book was published in twenty twenty one, and I
• 1:01:11
  Speaker 4: don't think you and I interacted whatsoever until at least
• 1:01:14
  Speaker 4: a couple of years after that, Naddy. So it's hard
• 1:01:18
  Speaker 4: for me to understand how you could have mentioned me
• 1:01:21
  Speaker 4: and told me what to write. Lol. So Natty, this
• 1:01:26
  Speaker 4: is really fucking weird, Natty. So what I just gave
• 1:01:29
  Speaker 4: you was I just gave you. Well, why are you
• 1:01:33
  Speaker 4: on the phone during a live debate, Natty? Why are
• 1:01:35
  Speaker 4: you on the phone?
• 1:01:37
  Speaker 7: You want me to give some Can you respond?
• 1:01:39
  Speaker 4: Can you respond to the evidences that I Naddy you
• 1:01:43
  Speaker 4: have finished?
• 1:01:44
  Speaker 2: Crazy?
• 1:01:44
  Speaker 4: Can you respond?
• 1:01:45
  Speaker 3: Lord?
• 1:01:46
  Speaker 4: You respond now to the two evidences that I do.
• 1:01:49
  Speaker 2: This is pretty much what I thought it would be, Natty.
• 1:01:52
  Speaker 8: I'm gonna ask you very politely to take this a
• 1:01:55
  Speaker 8: little more seriously. I understand that maybe sometimes when we
• 1:02:00
  Speaker 8: get pinned in a corner we don't like what we're hearing,
• 1:02:02
  Speaker 8: we get a little antsy, awkward.
• 1:02:08
  Speaker 1: Wow, Sarah. I like how she's like those just a little.
• 1:02:13
  Speaker 1: It's a little infantilizing.
• 1:02:14
  Speaker 4: But I'm not only are your claims completely uh fictitious
• 1:02:19
  Speaker 4: on the Patreon which you've shown no proof for, but
• 1:02:21
  Speaker 4: that the time sequence for Rachel's book wouldn't have even
• 1:02:23
  Speaker 4: added up between that and their interactions. Now, I'm willing
• 1:02:26
  Speaker 4: right now to give you the floor you can take
• 1:02:28
  Speaker 4: all the same time I just did to pull up
• 1:02:30
  Speaker 4: the proof. Can you please show us your evidences to
• 1:02:33
  Speaker 4: the contrary.
• 1:02:35
  Speaker 2: She's trying to get Dean.
• 1:02:44
  Speaker 8: Gods, I'm gonna ask you very kindly.
• 1:02:49
  Speaker 3: I don't know who that is on your end of
• 1:02:51
  Speaker 3: the line.
• 1:02:51
  Speaker 4: I don't care, Sarah.
• 1:02:52
  Speaker 1: Let it go, Yeah, let's go.
• 1:02:58
  Speaker 7: I'm lost.
• 1:03:00
  Speaker 2: Is this the kind of content you guys wants?
• 1:03:04
  Speaker 1: Do you know how many people are watching this live
• 1:03:06
  Speaker 1: stream right now? How many four thousand, four thousand and
• 1:03:12
  Speaker 1: forty seven people are watching that.
• 1:03:14
  Speaker 7: He's never had a conversation with Rachel Wilson, even.
• 1:03:16
  Speaker 1: Though, can I use a lifeline?
• 1:03:19
  Speaker 4: What did the DM actually say, Natty.
• 1:03:21
  Speaker 7: Andrew, have a little drag of your cigarette, bro? So
• 1:03:25
  Speaker 7: I said, he asked me to produce a little bit
• 1:03:28
  Speaker 7: more of a receipt. So I'm asking you to say
• 1:03:31
  Speaker 7: what you told us in the interview on X and
• 1:03:33
  Speaker 7: then and then you can get back to doing whatever
• 1:03:35
  Speaker 7: you're doing. Thank you very much.
• 1:03:39
  Speaker 2: As a master gas lighter and of picking out screen
• 1:03:44
  Speaker 2: looking for the receipts, dude, good luck at you. You're
• 1:03:52
  Speaker 2: now dealing with Dean.
• 1:03:55
  Speaker 1: That's fine.
• 1:03:56
  Speaker 4: He's one of the most dishonest, hateful, and slander Indiuman
• 1:04:00
  Speaker 4: beings whoever existed.
• 1:04:02
  Speaker 1: Caught me as that ass made from the Red Poll
• 1:04:05
  Speaker 1: movie who Fight the way he slandered multiple times.
• 1:04:09
  Speaker 6: And I'm not even a Christian anymore, but I was
• 1:04:11
  Speaker 6: always a liberal woman, and.
• 1:04:14
  Speaker 4: I don't care about Peter Wright. Can you just give
• 1:04:17
  Speaker 4: me the proof one of his allies.
• 1:04:21
  Speaker 2: The witness, and I caught it proper preparation.
• 1:04:27
  Speaker 4: I just want the receipts, dude, that's all I'm asking for.
• 1:04:33
  Speaker 2: The professional guess, and the productivity of this stream goes
• 1:04:36
  Speaker 2: to zero, I would.
• 1:04:37
  Speaker 1: Walk away, sir.
• 1:04:38
  Speaker 4: I'm out.
• 1:04:38
  Speaker 1: Now call me sometime if you want.
• 1:04:40
  Speaker 4: I don't care about Peter Wright. It just showed me
• 1:04:42
  Speaker 4: the receipts of any of these this That's all I'm
• 1:04:44
  Speaker 4: asking for it so as may.
• 1:04:46
  Speaker 7: By the way, is somebody who was a well known
• 1:04:50
  Speaker 7: men's right sativist who edited piece Wright's work. And then
• 1:04:54
  Speaker 7: he said to Pizza Wright because he was a Roman
• 1:04:56
  Speaker 7: Catholic at the time, and he said, listen, Pizza, your
• 1:04:58
  Speaker 7: writings about the Theo talk us where you tried to
• 1:05:00
  Speaker 7: claim that women had the archetype of the Virgin Mary
• 1:05:03
  Speaker 7: the Theotokos and men had the archetype of Christ. It's incorrect.
• 1:05:07
  Speaker 7: And I, as much as I want to support your work,
• 1:05:09
  Speaker 7: who cares what Peter was waiting landed by a Voice
• 1:05:14
  Speaker 7: for Men and Honey Badger Radio and other individuals, and
• 1:05:18
  Speaker 7: we got to drop. He was about to supporting Dean,
• 1:05:23
  Speaker 7: I don't recall, was having conversations with Peter Wright on
• 1:05:29
  Speaker 7: her Patreon and he also came and did an interview
• 1:05:32
  Speaker 7: with me on X and Rachel has admitted this herself.
• 1:05:35
  Speaker 2: Actually he went on it was the other Andrew, the
• 1:05:38
  Speaker 2: guy who lit his nipples on fire. Now he went
• 1:05:41
  Speaker 2: on blood Sports. Dean went on program to stream with
• 1:05:49
  Speaker 2: an atten mad cat and they slandered me and Honey
• 1:05:57
  Speaker 2: Badger Radio. But I don't even in said anymore.
• 1:06:02
  Speaker 1: Naddy is collected connecting dots, schizo Charlie Day and it's
• 1:06:05
  Speaker 1: always sunny. It's completely.
• 1:06:09
  Speaker 2: What the fuck is this? Answer for it? Andrew answer.
• 1:06:15
  Speaker 7: Answer for the best of.
• 1:06:18
  Speaker 1: You made it guys. We got shouted out in eight thousand,
• 1:06:21
  Speaker 1: eight thousand people. How many people? Wasn't again?
• 1:06:24
  Speaker 5: No?
• 1:06:25
  Speaker 1: Five? Some like five thousands, five thousand. It's true.
• 1:06:28
  Speaker 2: I'm here for the shadows. Thank you, Naddy.
• 1:06:30
  Speaker 1: Problem just appreciate it.
• 1:06:33
  Speaker 2: I keep saying, good Lord, you know what, it would
• 1:06:36
  Speaker 2: be nice to just have a reasonable debate about drying
• 1:06:39
  Speaker 2: of centrism, to just go on to something like this
• 1:06:42
  Speaker 2: and then just talk about it, talk about the various branches,
• 1:06:45
  Speaker 2: the various interpretations, the science behind it, and what it
• 1:06:49
  Speaker 2: means for society.
• 1:06:51
  Speaker 7: Admonished, Yeah, But instead.
• 1:06:54
  Speaker 2: Andrew Wilson has is now introduced to the nest of
• 1:06:58
  Speaker 2: crazy that the men writes for ten years. Like Andrew,
• 1:07:04
  Speaker 2: she's name dropping all of the crazies that we've had
• 1:07:07
  Speaker 2: to Oh God, I went back, I got back like years. Oh.
• 1:07:11
  Speaker 1: Now she's she did you see what she did? What
• 1:07:14
  Speaker 1: she's asking Andrew if he disagrees with his own wife
• 1:07:19
  Speaker 1: about his So she's trying to like, is it my
• 1:07:22
  Speaker 1: turn to respond?
• 1:07:23
  Speaker 8: I'm okay, I'm going to start back with the timer
• 1:07:27
  Speaker 8: again now that we've got the proof out of the way.
• 1:07:29
  Speaker 2: Lord Sarah, I feel for you.
• 1:07:32
  Speaker 4: They go through whatever her little spurkfest there was. But
• 1:07:35
  Speaker 4: I want you to note something here that's very important.
• 1:07:38
  Speaker 4: What I just brought up was actual evidence like that.
• 1:07:42
  Speaker 4: I brought up receipts which disproved this narrative from Natty
• 1:07:46
  Speaker 4: that there was some type of I don't know, collusion
• 1:07:49
  Speaker 4: between Rachel when she wrote her book. Remember, Natty made
• 1:07:52
  Speaker 4: his claim just mere moments ago that Rachel's book because
• 1:07:57
  Speaker 4: by the way, there's no guy nocentrism chapter I'm where
• 1:08:00
  Speaker 4: in the book. But she says, apparently that the book
• 1:08:03
  Speaker 4: mentions this somewhere and is talking and discussing this, and
• 1:08:06
  Speaker 4: that these ideas came from this guy, Peter Wright. But
• 1:08:09
  Speaker 4: we just established a timeline where that can't be possible,
• 1:08:12
  Speaker 4: and it was from Peter Wright's own mouth and Rachel's
• 1:08:15
  Speaker 4: where they both claimed that this never happened. The only
• 1:08:18
  Speaker 4: one who claims that it happened is fucking Natty, And
• 1:08:21
  Speaker 4: the only one who can't show proof is Natty. The
• 1:08:25
  Speaker 4: only one who can't show proof of any of this
• 1:08:27
  Speaker 4: collusion is Natty. Same thing when it comes to this
• 1:08:32
  Speaker 4: crazy ass idea that she says that there was some.
• 1:08:35
  Speaker 1: Titles him, that's all, and she's got nothing.
• 1:08:38
  Speaker 4: There could have been. Show us the proof, show us
• 1:08:41
  Speaker 4: the evidence. Just show us the fucking proof. If not,
• 1:08:45
  Speaker 4: all you have to do is this, And this is
• 1:08:46
  Speaker 4: why never learns Natty. You'll never get it right. Never
• 1:08:50
  Speaker 4: learns Natty right now could completely stomp all over me.
• 1:08:54
  Speaker 4: All she would have to do is show the proof
• 1:08:57
  Speaker 4: that that Rachel and Peter Wright are lying by showing
• 1:09:00
  Speaker 4: some sort of messaging between her and Peter Wright, she
• 1:09:07
  Speaker 4: book or that they ever even had contact.
• 1:09:09
  Speaker 1: Whole things smoky man bad. Also, she knows better than
• 1:09:13
  Speaker 1: clergymen apparently. Yes, that's so difficult, very strange. I'm never
• 1:09:17
  Speaker 1: going to show you claim. Why can't you? That's all
• 1:09:21
  Speaker 1: he has to do to win?
• 1:09:23
  Speaker 2: And you might actually have a personality.
• 1:09:28
  Speaker 4: That why won't she do it?
• 1:09:31
  Speaker 1: Well? Right at the.
• 1:09:33
  Speaker 7: Liar, I'll call, he doesn't even know?
• 1:09:39
  Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, right, she's a liar. Show me the proof.
• 1:09:45
  Speaker 7: How do you know?
• 1:09:46
  Speaker 4: Because he has no proof and I do.
• 1:09:50
  Speaker 7: You don't have proof.
• 1:09:51
  Speaker 4: I just showed it. Where's yours? I'm waiting.
• 1:09:54
  Speaker 7: You haven't shown proof? Just showed her out full tweets
• 1:10:00
  Speaker 7: by Rachel that.
• 1:10:01
  Speaker 1: The DMS so what doesn't mean?
• 1:10:03
  Speaker 4: It means the same thing.
• 1:10:05
  Speaker 7: You do, actually ship exhausts.
• 1:10:08
  Speaker 4: That's what this is.
• 1:10:11
  Speaker 2: This is noise proof.
• 1:10:15
  Speaker 4: Show us your.
• 1:10:20
  Speaker 7: Step and say whether or not my proof is good enough.
• 1:10:24
  Speaker 2: And fundamentally it just represents the difference between how men
• 1:10:28
  Speaker 2: communicate and how women communicate. Women on an extreme of
• 1:10:31
  Speaker 2: the spectrumic Yeah, I mean, she just wants him to
• 1:10:35
  Speaker 2: submit to her emotional opinions about his manhood.
• 1:10:39
  Speaker 7: That's it.
• 1:10:40
  Speaker 2: She's there for that way, and he's there show me
• 1:10:44
  Speaker 2: the proof.
• 1:10:44
  Speaker 11: She's never gonna show what the point is, to taunt you,
• 1:10:48
  Speaker 11: to humiliate you and make you submit to what she
• 1:10:51
  Speaker 11: believes your men would her appraisal of who you are
• 1:10:54
  Speaker 11: as a man.
• 1:10:55
  Speaker 2: Andrew, that's why she's there questions.
• 1:10:58
  Speaker 3: I recognize that, So I.
• 1:10:59
  Speaker 4: Just want you can reset the timer and then I'll
• 1:11:03
  Speaker 4: do the respond Dean.
• 1:11:08
  Speaker 2: I I remember way back when.
• 1:11:09
  Speaker 3: And this is answer.
• 1:11:11
  Speaker 2: Let's ensure that I told the people at a Voice
• 1:11:14
  Speaker 2: for Men that Dean was going to be a problem.
• 1:11:16
  Speaker 3: Anybody hears when I was working there, and nobody can
• 1:11:20
  Speaker 3: hear you. Okay, I will reset the timer. We can
• 1:11:22
  Speaker 3: try this again. Go ahead, Naddy.
• 1:11:25
  Speaker 2: That's actually why I left. I mean, you know, I
• 1:11:28
  Speaker 2: don't want to like a yeah, I was Originally I
• 1:11:33
  Speaker 2: worked on helping them edit and and stuff, and I
• 1:11:37
  Speaker 2: just got into like a fight with Dean and I
• 1:11:42
  Speaker 2: said that, you know, like you think that he's he's
• 1:11:44
  Speaker 2: going to be trouble and and we couldn't resolve it.
• 1:11:48
  Speaker 2: So I said, you know, like I'm going to go
• 1:11:50
  Speaker 2: and I'm going to continue because I had my own
• 1:11:53
  Speaker 2: blog gender attic at the time. I'm just going to
• 1:11:54
  Speaker 2: continue that no hard feelings if but it just is
• 1:11:59
  Speaker 2: interesting that.
• 1:12:02
  Speaker 7: That's what he says. He literally wrote a sermon in
• 1:12:06
  Speaker 7: response to Father Moses Mpheerson's article in the in the
• 1:12:09
  Speaker 7: BBC where he was talking about how Orthodoxy is so musculine.
• 1:12:14
  Speaker 12: Right.
• 1:12:15
  Speaker 1: No, No, Father Moses did not say that. The article
• 1:12:19
  Speaker 1: was written in the slant of making it seem like
• 1:12:23
  Speaker 1: that's where he was saying, because the BBC knew that
• 1:12:27
  Speaker 1: if they framed Orthodoxy as masculine or even hyper masculine,
• 1:12:32
  Speaker 1: then people would be discrediting it because they fear or
• 1:12:35
  Speaker 1: hate masculinity, which Nanny has fallen prey to. If she
• 1:12:39
  Speaker 1: believes the BBC article claim like she believes Father Moses's
• 1:12:43
  Speaker 1: saying that, like, you know, Orthodoxy is hyper masculine. No,
• 1:12:48
  Speaker 1: he never claimed that. This is literally a misrepresentation. She's
• 1:12:52
  Speaker 1: buying into what the BBC said about Father Moses and
• 1:12:56
  Speaker 1: now thinks that's what Father Moses believes. Holy shit, lead
• 1:13:00
  Speaker 1: Please bring on Father Moses. I would love to see
• 1:13:02
  Speaker 1: him live on here man. I would send a super
• 1:13:04
  Speaker 1: chat for that.
• 1:13:05
  Speaker 7: Office of the king. According to doctor Batisis and Orthodoxraphy, U.
• 1:13:09
  Speaker 1: Gred Door says this is an entertaining stream. Thank you.
• 1:13:11
  Speaker 7: You are supposed to be leading in.
• 1:13:14
  Speaker 1: We got cameos.
• 1:13:15
  Speaker 2: This is like ninety percent noise.
• 1:13:19
  Speaker 7: From on the internet and calling a bunch of.
• 1:13:22
  Speaker 2: She's like a noise machine. She is like a pink
• 1:13:26
  Speaker 2: noise machine.
• 1:13:29
  Speaker 7: He's talking about she's shaming them and making them how.
• 1:13:32
  Speaker 1: He's shaming like these only fans girls.
• 1:13:34
  Speaker 2: All right back to you, And that's because they're freaking like.
• 1:13:38
  Speaker 4: Notice that Nanny makes your context of Christianity. Aren't they
• 1:13:42
  Speaker 4: supposed to be called out.
• 1:13:45
  Speaker 2: Confess of their sin and call out, let it go
• 1:13:49
  Speaker 2: and sin.
• 1:13:49
  Speaker 4: No more bishops have come to me and corrected me.
• 1:13:52
  Speaker 4: Show me, like, show me any of the evidence of that?
• 1:13:55
  Speaker 4: What are you talking about? Also, uh, when it comes
• 1:13:58
  Speaker 4: to this her, your very first claim was that Rachel's
• 1:14:01
  Speaker 4: book was and somehow she conspired with this guy Peter
• 1:14:06
  Speaker 4: Wright to write all about ginocentrism from the itemological worldview
• 1:14:11
  Speaker 4: of Peter Wright and what he means by ginocentrism. I
• 1:14:14
  Speaker 4: have been willing over and over again to in the
• 1:14:17
  Speaker 4: most good faith way, allow you to show your evidence
• 1:14:20
  Speaker 4: for that claim. Not a correl it where you say, oh,
• 1:14:23
  Speaker 4: she says things in the book that I think sounds
• 1:14:25
  Speaker 4: similar or whatever. Show the actual evidence that they did
• 1:14:29
  Speaker 4: show it, because I just demonstrated proof that they could
• 1:14:32
  Speaker 4: not have. It would not have even been possible based
• 1:14:35
  Speaker 4: on the timeline. Literally, it would have been impossible. The
• 1:14:37
  Speaker 4: next claim that you made was very simple. You said
• 1:14:41
  Speaker 4: that they had a Patreon connection. Yes you did, and
• 1:14:44
  Speaker 4: you said it multiple times, that they had a Patreon connection,
• 1:14:47
  Speaker 4: and that via this Patreon connection, they were also colluding
• 1:14:52
  Speaker 4: with the same view of ginocentrism that this guy holds.
• 1:14:55
  Speaker 4: I'm also willing to grant the possibility of this and
• 1:14:58
  Speaker 4: in a good faith way hold out an olive branch
• 1:15:01
  Speaker 4: so that you can show the fucking proof, Natty. And
• 1:15:04
  Speaker 4: here's what's gonna happen again. Naddy's gonna say, I'd like
• 1:15:07
  Speaker 4: to pull up what some guy said about some other
• 1:15:10
  Speaker 4: bullshit that doesn't address this core issue because I refuse
• 1:15:13
  Speaker 4: to admit that I'm wrong about anything, because I've never
• 1:15:15
  Speaker 4: learned Natty. Natty has been caught on this. I don't
• 1:15:18
  Speaker 4: know how many times I'll always be able to do
• 1:15:20
  Speaker 4: this to her because she refuses to back down on
• 1:15:23
  Speaker 4: the view she's seeking.
• 1:15:25
  Speaker 2: Your moral submission to her.
• 1:15:27
  Speaker 4: I just showed evidence I showed real proof, which.
• 1:15:29
  Speaker 2: Is really freaking ironic for a Christian woman. She SUPs
• 1:15:33
  Speaker 2: to watch.
• 1:15:33
  Speaker 3: She's gonna double down, no proof, natty to you.
• 1:15:38
  Speaker 7: Fascinating how when we have debates.
• 1:15:41
  Speaker 2: He doesn't understand the term proof. She's giving proof. She's
• 1:15:45
  Speaker 2: showing you her feminine contempt for your identity, Wilson, that's
• 1:15:50
  Speaker 2: her proof, that's her purpose.
• 1:15:53
  Speaker 7: Logic and examining what the other person's viewpoints are. Fascinating.
• 1:15:58
  Speaker 7: How Andrew cannot do that. You can actually have it
• 1:16:01
  Speaker 7: back and forth with me?
• 1:16:02
  Speaker 2: Oh God, this is to know you. Now she's just
• 1:16:06
  Speaker 2: repeating his criticism of her back to him. You notice that.
• 1:16:11
  Speaker 7: Roots it in a This is why I.
• 1:16:15
  Speaker 2: Actually wonder if women are.
• 1:16:18
  Speaker 7: Conscious advice from because she's a.
• 1:16:22
  Speaker 2: Pink noise generator. She does know you, like he criticizes
• 1:16:27
  Speaker 2: her progression of her logic or lack thereof, and then
• 1:16:30
  Speaker 2: she doesn't know you, and then she all she doesn't
• 1:16:34
  Speaker 2: she taunts and she mint minds you know how I
• 1:16:37
  Speaker 2: said that that a lot of the sophistry on her side.
• 1:16:41
  Speaker 2: I don't know what her side is, or at least
• 1:16:43
  Speaker 2: the people who are who act in this way in
• 1:16:46
  Speaker 2: the in the context of trying to advance human knowledge.
• 1:16:49
  Speaker 2: They do mining the mine. She's mining his tiny masculinity,
• 1:16:56
  Speaker 2: like little little masculinity, maybe even homosexual like she's miming
• 1:17:00
  Speaker 2: this because she's trying to create an emotion that people
• 1:17:04
  Speaker 2: will buy into around him. That's her argument. It has
• 1:17:08
  Speaker 2: nothing to do with watch the feminine arguments matter, and ironically,
• 1:17:13
  Speaker 2: at its core is the idea that she is the
• 1:17:16
  Speaker 2: reflection of his masculinity. In other words, what she says
• 1:17:20
  Speaker 2: about his masculinity is what it actually is. That's what
• 1:17:24
  Speaker 2: it relies on. But she said she's a demonstration of guidance,
• 1:17:31
  Speaker 2: and I'm guessing she's not given proof even though I'm talking.
• 1:17:34
  Speaker 4: Over her to you, Andrew, Great, let's respond to this. So,
• 1:17:38
  Speaker 4: first and foremost, never met Father Trenham, never taken any
• 1:17:41
  Speaker 4: advice from him. Do you have any evidence for that?
• 1:17:44
  Speaker 4: Do you including the space that you're referencing, because you've
• 1:17:47
  Speaker 4: brought this up multiple times that I listened to Father
• 1:17:51
  Speaker 4: Trenham or something like this. Never met the guy ever,
• 1:17:56
  Speaker 4: not once, Never had a conversation with him, Naddy, not once.
• 1:18:01
  Speaker 4: So what does Natty do? She says, this is an
• 1:18:03
  Speaker 4: attribute that I'm going to give to this guy. Who's
• 1:18:06
  Speaker 4: not Andrew Wilson, and then try to create a link
• 1:18:09
  Speaker 4: between these two. Therefore, his view becomes inserted on Andrew
• 1:18:13
  Speaker 4: Wilson's view. However, I would love to see any evidence
• 1:18:17
  Speaker 4: whatsoever I've ever even had a conversation.
• 1:18:19
  Speaker 2: This is what she does, like one.
• 1:18:22
  Speaker 4: I don't recall ever having one conversation with this guy, Natty,
• 1:18:25
  Speaker 4: not a single because.
• 1:18:26
  Speaker 1: I don't know.
• 1:18:27
  Speaker 2: I think she just has associated thinking, not once. You
• 1:18:31
  Speaker 2: know what I mean. These two things are alike. They
• 1:18:35
  Speaker 2: are the thing.
• 1:18:36
  Speaker 4: The evidence that I take spiritual advice from this guy,
• 1:18:40
  Speaker 4: which is a claim you just made instead of my
• 1:18:43
  Speaker 4: own spiritual father, right, because I don't take spiritual advice
• 1:18:46
  Speaker 4: from anybody except.
• 1:18:48
  Speaker 2: The problems with emotional regulation.
• 1:18:50
  Speaker 4: I don't even run in those circles. I don't run.
• 1:18:53
  Speaker 2: Because he's acting like a four year old or a
• 1:18:56
  Speaker 2: toddler is.
• 1:18:57
  Speaker 4: I don't even run in those circles. So I don't
• 1:19:00
  Speaker 4: know what you mean when you say, but you know.
• 1:19:02
  Speaker 2: What it is. She's trying to control the emotional center
• 1:19:06
  Speaker 2: for evidence in order to project claim what her emotional
• 1:19:11
  Speaker 2: conclusions around Andrew Wilson. She's trying to project them onto
• 1:19:15
  Speaker 2: the audience. I talk about how movies you something will happen,
• 1:19:22
  Speaker 2: a person will be introduced, and event will happen, and
• 1:19:25
  Speaker 2: then we'll cut to a woman's reaction. That's what Maddy's
• 1:19:29
  Speaker 2: trying to do here. She's trying to be the reaction
• 1:19:31
  Speaker 2: in order to dominate the discussion.
• 1:19:34
  Speaker 13: Ad to you dominate the discussion emotionally if you keep
• 1:19:40
  Speaker 13: running and running and running from the claims and hiding
• 1:19:44
  Speaker 13: behind this burden.
• 1:19:45
  Speaker 7: This this this idea of the burden of proof, and
• 1:19:48
  Speaker 7: it only has to be a certain way that your claims.
• 1:19:53
  Speaker 2: You make a claim, the burden of proof is on you.
• 1:19:57
  Speaker 7: That's sweet that you said, let's leave this one out.
• 1:20:01
  Speaker 7: Let's go to this tweet here.
• 1:20:02
  Speaker 2: I'm glad you're enjoying this great doors because it just
• 1:20:05
  Speaker 2: sounds like you fucking annoys to me.
• 1:20:07
  Speaker 7: Especially with women in a guyinocentric semipocalypse. If people are saying,
• 1:20:14
  Speaker 7: what's true, I want to see it because it's in
• 1:20:17
  Speaker 7: capital as. Sorry I had to shout uh. So that's
• 1:20:20
  Speaker 7: one tweet where Andrew has used the term ganocentrism by name.
• 1:20:24
  Speaker 7: Is he going on?
• 1:20:25
  Speaker 2: But your assertion is that he's tied to the Peter
• 1:20:29
  Speaker 2: Right version of.
• 1:20:32
  Speaker 6: Us.
• 1:20:32
  Speaker 4: The term centrism.
• 1:20:34
  Speaker 7: Anyway, I have already stated that I believe from what
• 1:20:38
  Speaker 7: I've discussed with Andrew before in.
• 1:20:40
  Speaker 1: The space, I believe I figured this out. I can
• 1:20:44
  Speaker 1: read minds. Women have to stop with a telepathy. Yeah,
• 1:20:49
  Speaker 1: it's a woman thing. I don't know why you guys
• 1:20:50
  Speaker 1: do it. You need to stop. You need to just
• 1:20:52
  Speaker 1: ask people.
• 1:20:53
  Speaker 2: Men can see to it to have a lot of
• 1:20:56
  Speaker 2: men do. And it's because of Ghino central, which.
• 1:21:00
  Speaker 1: Is this idea of the burden of proof what you're doing.
• 1:21:06
  Speaker 2: She's again, she's she's mimicking. She's she has a particular
• 1:21:10
  Speaker 2: way that people want to perceive Andrew Wilson emotionally, and
• 1:21:15
  Speaker 2: she's minding it.
• 1:21:16
  Speaker 7: Talks about how chivalry became about.
• 1:21:19
  Speaker 2: It's like watching people argue in two different dimensions at
• 1:21:23
  Speaker 2: the same time, but know that they're about.
• 1:21:25
  Speaker 1: I think one person's arguing in three dimensions and one
• 1:21:28
  Speaker 1: person's arguing in one dimension. That's why they're there. The
• 1:21:32
  Speaker 1: Twain shall meet if you would like.
• 1:21:36
  Speaker 2: She's she's essentially mimicking how people should respond emotionally to
• 1:21:40
  Speaker 2: Andrew Wilson.
• 1:21:40
  Speaker 4: Who cares if I say the word guy? Essentially it
• 1:21:42
  Speaker 4: is such a common word. Who gives a ship. What
• 1:21:45
  Speaker 4: you what your burden of proof is? Yeah? What your
• 1:21:48
  Speaker 4: what your burden of proof is is very simple?
• 1:21:52
  Speaker 2: Thank you, Sarah.
• 1:21:53
  Speaker 4: You just claim that I've been in d ms with
• 1:21:55
  Speaker 4: Peter Wright. Okay, would you like for me to read
• 1:21:57
  Speaker 4: all of them? I will literally read every DM I've
• 1:22:01
  Speaker 4: ever had with Peter Wright for you, right now, live,
• 1:22:04
  Speaker 4: and I'll give you the date stamps answer. I know,
• 1:22:08
  Speaker 4: I know, Natty, Natty, we're gonna take We're gonna this
• 1:22:11
  Speaker 4: is your this is your claim. I've just asked you
• 1:22:14
  Speaker 4: yes or no? Would you like for me?
• 1:22:16
  Speaker 2: He's now proving her claim, proving or disproving her claim,
• 1:22:19
  Speaker 2: which is not responsibility. I can't believe it.
• 1:22:22
  Speaker 7: He's responsibility.
• 1:22:26
  Speaker 4: Just yes or no? Yes or no, Naddy, I'm.
• 1:22:31
  Speaker 8: Getting annoyed at the constant childish behavior.
• 1:22:36
  Speaker 2: Thank you, sir.
• 1:22:37
  Speaker 3: Yes or no? Do you want him to read them? Yes?
• 1:22:40
  Speaker 7: I would like him to answer the question.
• 1:22:43
  Speaker 1: It's not that, it's not that, but that's not the
• 1:22:47
  Speaker 1: debate topic. The debate topic is not what is ANDREWS.
• 1:22:51
  Speaker 1: Wilson's definition of centrist. That's why he doesn't have to
• 1:22:55
  Speaker 1: answer it, because it has nothing to do with it.
• 1:22:57
  Speaker 1: She's using this other claim as the pretest and she
• 1:23:02
  Speaker 1: can't prove the claim, so there's no further We just
• 1:23:06
  Speaker 1: think he's trying to spell this guy's name.
• 1:23:08
  Speaker 2: I really want this to be productive, and I know
• 1:23:10
  Speaker 2: it won't be. I know, but I mean we could
• 1:23:13
  Speaker 2: just say, instead of what she said, be it resolved
• 1:23:18
  Speaker 2: centrism exists, right, and then we can have a discussion.
• 1:23:22
  Speaker 4: On that single rationally.
• 1:23:26
  Speaker 2: I know that's not going to happen with Natty. It
• 1:23:28
  Speaker 2: could happen with someone but not Natty.
• 1:23:32
  Speaker 4: In fact, maybe I can I might be able to
• 1:23:34
  Speaker 4: do this an easier way. What's his ex handle.
• 1:23:38
  Speaker 7: At centrism?
• 1:23:40
  Speaker 4: Okay? At? I know?
• 1:23:46
  Speaker 2: Oh good, Okay, so it's dead air. Now can I talk?
• 1:23:51
  Speaker 1: Sure? Like this is talk soon, but go ahead?
• 1:23:55
  Speaker 2: Yeah about the same damn Like this is the same noise,
• 1:23:58
  Speaker 2: the same Oh are you going to answer for Peter
• 1:24:01
  Speaker 2: Wright's opinion on gino central and centrism and Andrew Wilson.
• 1:24:05
  Speaker 2: And Andrew Wilson says no, there's no proof that we
• 1:24:08
  Speaker 2: have an association, and then Natty says, but you use
• 1:24:11
  Speaker 2: the term ginocentrism, apparently not willing to acknowledge the fact
• 1:24:17
  Speaker 2: that ginocentrism is bigger than Peter Writ's interpretation of ginocentrism. Yeah,
• 1:24:24
  Speaker 2: there there are other facets to it that we can discuss.
• 1:24:28
  Speaker 2: Karen has a different interpretation of ginocentrism from Peter Wright.
• 1:24:32
  Speaker 2: I probably have a different interpretation than Karen, and I
• 1:24:36
  Speaker 2: even have a positive interpretation of centrism. When women take
• 1:24:40
  Speaker 2: responsibility society improtance, that's ginocentrism.
• 1:24:45
  Speaker 3: She will have a very vast appreciation.
• 1:24:48
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but does it take into account that theotokos.
• 1:24:51
  Speaker 12: That because if it does, you fail. Yeah, I guess
• 1:24:59
  Speaker 12: also be discredited all everyone watching this.
• 1:25:04
  Speaker 1: Because because Theotokos still it.
• 1:25:08
  Speaker 2: Seems that responsibility is more of a natural instinct for men.
• 1:25:12
  Speaker 2: So women sort of have to.
• 1:25:13
  Speaker 4: Learn it from me that if you don't mean it,
• 1:25:16
  Speaker 4: I guess.
• 1:25:16
  Speaker 2: That's that's promoting androgyny. The irony is that actually.
• 1:25:24
  Speaker 4: Different means today uh. And so what she does is
• 1:25:28
  Speaker 4: she banks on this idea. She literally just banks on
• 1:25:31
  Speaker 4: this fucking idea that for for some reason, when I
• 1:25:34
  Speaker 4: say I uh uh ginocentrism, or my wife says ginocentrism,
• 1:25:38
  Speaker 4: she that means what Peter Wright means by ginocentrism. The
• 1:25:41
  Speaker 4: most important though, though, is that Natty has still failed
• 1:25:45
  Speaker 4: over and over and over again to show us the
• 1:25:47
  Speaker 4: one thing that I want her to show, proof and
• 1:25:50
  Speaker 4: evidence of her claims that Rachel worked in collusion with
• 1:25:53
  Speaker 4: this guy in order to write her book. I demonstrated
• 1:25:56
  Speaker 4: a timeline where that is false that I that I
• 1:25:59
  Speaker 4: have in any way ever worked with Josiah Trinham or
• 1:26:02
  Speaker 4: had any spiritual advice from him, that in any way,
• 1:26:05
  Speaker 4: shape or form, I've ever colluded with this guy in
• 1:26:08
  Speaker 4: any way for any of my worldviews. If she can
• 1:26:11
  Speaker 4: demonstrate any of those things, she might have a good
• 1:26:14
  Speaker 4: case to make, But she consistently wants to shift the
• 1:26:17
  Speaker 4: burden to me, as though I have to prove her
• 1:26:19
  Speaker 4: prompt and her case for why I bad. It's like,
• 1:26:22
  Speaker 4: I don't you have to do that. You've got to
• 1:26:24
  Speaker 4: prove that, not me.
• 1:26:27
  Speaker 7: Okay, Laddy, Let's just point out that Andrew has said
• 1:26:34
  Speaker 7: that when he used the word guinocentrism, it was just
• 1:26:37
  Speaker 7: a word, bro didn't mean anything, and refuses to confirm
• 1:26:41
  Speaker 7: in the context that how he's using it the easiest way.
• 1:26:45
  Speaker 1: Sure never seen Andrew lose before. This is wild. Yeah,
• 1:26:48
  Speaker 1: he's totally losing the definition.
• 1:26:50
  Speaker 7: Of centrism is and then we can have a look
• 1:26:53
  Speaker 7: at what I've said and compare the contrast the two.
• 1:26:57
  Speaker 7: But Andrew is refusing to do that because this whole debate,
• 1:27:00
  Speaker 7: he's been running around giving.
• 1:27:02
  Speaker 2: Me You've never seen Andrew lose before.
• 1:27:05
  Speaker 1: What are you sarcastic?
• 1:27:08
  Speaker 7: To be honest, I would like to be more serious
• 1:27:10
  Speaker 7: in how we talk about gender roles in ortholos of Christianity,
• 1:27:13
  Speaker 7: because Andrew and all of the author bro circle, and
• 1:27:17
  Speaker 7: in fact entire the entire kind of reactionary right at
• 1:27:20
  Speaker 7: this point, are doing quite a big amount of damage
• 1:27:24
  Speaker 7: in how we view men and women. And I've got
• 1:27:26
  Speaker 7: personal experience with this, which I'm not necessarily but I
• 1:27:31
  Speaker 7: want to go back to Dottor.
• 1:27:32
  Speaker 2: Oh damn kit tis that and Diddy.
• 1:27:36
  Speaker 7: The three types of Christ prophets, priest, and king, and
• 1:27:40
  Speaker 7: that we are actually supposed to fulfill all free and
• 1:27:43
  Speaker 7: we're not supposed to be in a kind of authoritarian
• 1:27:47
  Speaker 7: the Father's telling us to do this. We're supposed to
• 1:27:50
  Speaker 7: be looking to the Father both men and women in
• 1:27:52
  Speaker 7: a kind of martyrdom of marriage. Now, Andrew, I have
• 1:27:56
  Speaker 7: never heard Andrew talk when he talks to women and
• 1:27:59
  Speaker 7: when he talks about gender roles or anything like that
• 1:28:02
  Speaker 7: reference any of the teachings and also talk about how
• 1:28:05
  Speaker 7: much he loves the Theotocus, the Virgin Mary, the mother
• 1:28:07
  Speaker 7: of our God. All he does is play these rhetorical
• 1:28:11
  Speaker 7: trick games and then then turns around and says he's
• 1:28:14
  Speaker 7: joking and then says that actually this is okay, because
• 1:28:19
  Speaker 7: you know, this is what the culture is like. He
• 1:28:21
  Speaker 7: thinks the top culture is lot sided in favor of women.
• 1:28:24
  Speaker 7: When he agreed with Rollo to Massi in the tweet
• 1:28:27
  Speaker 7: that I mentioned in the beginning, that is demonstration on
• 1:28:30
  Speaker 7: its own that he believes the West is going eccentric.
• 1:28:33
  Speaker 8: Okay, okay, well, are you ready to pull anything up
• 1:28:36
  Speaker 8: or you want to keep moving on?
• 1:28:38
  Speaker 4: It is reponded this and I can't get these all
• 1:28:40
  Speaker 4: pulled up as as soon as they get a little
• 1:28:44
  Speaker 4: charge on an.
• 1:28:44
  Speaker 2: Hour and a half and maybe we're getting progress and the.
• 1:28:46
  Speaker 4: Actual anyway, So back to this, I brought again clear
• 1:28:50
  Speaker 4: evidence and reseech. The reason I'm not willing to move
• 1:28:53
  Speaker 4: past this into any other conversation is because I'm dealing
• 1:28:56
  Speaker 4: with a good faith interlocketer. What is the point and
• 1:28:58
  Speaker 4: purpose of me with a person who lies and slanders
• 1:29:01
  Speaker 4: me all the time? I believe anything that she says
• 1:29:04
  Speaker 4: when she can't.
• 1:29:05
  Speaker 2: I just want to point something out. You notice how
• 1:29:07
  Speaker 2: Sarah nady.
• 1:29:11
  Speaker 4: For her to try to have a position todview established
• 1:29:18
  Speaker 4: in the idea that ginocentrism by one mister Peter Wright
• 1:29:22
  Speaker 4: is exactly what I always mean when I when I
• 1:29:26
  Speaker 4: use the word, which I don't even think I use
• 1:29:28
  Speaker 4: it much. But even if I do, she would have
• 1:29:31
  Speaker 4: to establish that that's what I mean by that, and
• 1:29:34
  Speaker 4: that this link exists between us, which she constantly claims. Now,
• 1:29:39
  Speaker 4: if she can't establish this link between us, uh, that's fine.
• 1:29:44
  Speaker 4: I'm willing to allow her to do that. But if
• 1:29:46
  Speaker 4: she can't, why in the world should I humor her
• 1:29:49
  Speaker 4: on any of her bullshit nonsense when she basically won't
• 1:29:52
  Speaker 4: admit that she's just slandering me. Where's where's the proof, Natty?
• 1:29:56
  Speaker 4: Where's the evidence in proof of the link between us
• 1:29:59
  Speaker 4: and p You're right, I showed the evidences, Natty. I've
• 1:30:02
  Speaker 4: been asking you and asking you and begging you and
• 1:30:05
  Speaker 4: olive branching everything I possibly can. Can you just please,
• 1:30:10
  Speaker 4: for all that is good, either do one of two things.
• 1:30:13
  Speaker 4: Either say Andrew, I actually don't have the evidence, and
• 1:30:16
  Speaker 4: I'm willing to correct that you don't have any link
• 1:30:20
  Speaker 4: with this guy and never had any link with this
• 1:30:23
  Speaker 4: guy until basically you brought him up. Or you can
• 1:30:27
  Speaker 4: make the contrary concession and say no, I truly believe
• 1:30:31
  Speaker 4: that this is true and have absolutely zero evidence to
• 1:30:35
  Speaker 4: show for it. Those are your only two options. So
• 1:30:37
  Speaker 4: you're either gonna have to show us the evidence or
• 1:30:40
  Speaker 4: not show us the evidence. You have one choice for
• 1:30:42
  Speaker 4: the other.
• 1:30:42
  Speaker 7: Here to you, Naddy, Okay, Andrew is going to keep
• 1:30:48
  Speaker 7: running around on the circle, running, running, running, running, running,
• 1:30:52
  Speaker 7: and not no, He's right.
• 1:30:55
  Speaker 2: You either have to conceive the point that there is
• 1:30:57
  Speaker 2: no connection, going to keep.
• 1:30:58
  Speaker 7: Bringing up talking points and maybe eventually he will decide
• 1:31:02
  Speaker 7: to actually behave Well, you don't get.
• 1:31:04
  Speaker 2: To do that, Natty. You don't lose and slander somebody
• 1:31:08
  Speaker 2: and then just walk away.
• 1:31:09
  Speaker 7: Concern me either. When the media represents the misrepresents the
• 1:31:12
  Speaker 7: Orthodox faith. In fact, I cannot even really blame them
• 1:31:15
  Speaker 7: most of the time, because of course it's not their job,
• 1:31:18
  Speaker 7: and we.
• 1:31:18
  Speaker 1: Don't mean like when the BBC misrepresented it when they
• 1:31:20
  Speaker 1: interviewed Father Moses and then you bought into exactly the
• 1:31:23
  Speaker 1: narrative that the BBC put out about Father Moses.
• 1:31:26
  Speaker 7: Of course, if there is a malicious intent or a
• 1:31:28
  Speaker 7: deliberate desire to mis represent the teachings of the Church,
• 1:31:32
  Speaker 7: and this sometimes happens, though it doesn't seem to be
• 1:31:35
  Speaker 7: the case really in this particular instance, I'm not overly
• 1:31:38
  Speaker 7: concerned about what the media thinks of us, but I
• 1:31:40
  Speaker 7: am concerned what you think of us, and that is
• 1:31:42
  Speaker 7: to say what each Orthodox person understands about the church.
• 1:31:45
  Speaker 7: We live in a culture where too many people, including
• 1:31:47
  Speaker 7: people on our own church, turn to the media, whether
• 1:31:49
  Speaker 7: it be traditional or social media or other things, and
• 1:31:52
  Speaker 7: think that they will find there's some accurate echo of
• 1:31:54
  Speaker 7: the church's teaching. It's almost never happens, almost.
• 1:31:58
  Speaker 1: Alperol, says one Timothy two twelve. But I suffer not
• 1:32:02
  Speaker 1: a woman to teach, nor to a serve authority over
• 1:32:05
  Speaker 1: the man, but to be in.
• 1:32:06
  Speaker 2: Silence, no offense. But I feel like this might be
• 1:32:13
  Speaker 2: a number of younger This might be what Timothy was thinking.
• 1:32:17
  Speaker 7: They think they're going to preach, that they're going to
• 1:32:19
  Speaker 7: hear preaches about masculinity and real manhood. And I want
• 1:32:22
  Speaker 7: to say that if you're here because you think that's
• 1:32:23
  Speaker 7: what we're here to do, then you're a fool. This
• 1:32:25
  Speaker 7: is stupidity masculinity. As far as I'm aware, it's not
• 1:32:28
  Speaker 7: an orthodox term. It's not a term that has any
• 1:32:30
  Speaker 7: traditional place in Christianity. There's a term embraced by the
• 1:32:33
  Speaker 7: secular world. Because this world is rejective normal concepts of humanity,
• 1:32:37
  Speaker 7: in which, of course there is male and there's female,
• 1:32:39
  Speaker 7: there's a child, there as adult, and there are simply
• 1:32:41
  Speaker 7: human beings. But being the world has lost sight of
• 1:32:43
  Speaker 7: the basics of what it means to be human, it's
• 1:32:45
  Speaker 7: forced to respond to a lack of clarity. Thank you,
• 1:32:50
  Speaker 7: and I from roc Or in Europe, and I will
• 1:32:52
  Speaker 7: continue to read the rest of the sermons since Andrew
• 1:32:54
  Speaker 7: does not want to engage in this.
• 1:32:56
  Speaker 2: No, I don't think George is sarcastic here.
• 1:32:58
  Speaker 4: I think, right, fucking idiot.
• 1:33:02
  Speaker 2: What's incredible is that you fuck adult.
• 1:33:06
  Speaker 4: That's all of them, you fucking idiot.
• 1:33:10
  Speaker 2: We can't see them.
• 1:33:12
  Speaker 1: You can't see them because there aren't any.
• 1:33:14
  Speaker 4: Here's not so there. I just read every message I've
• 1:33:18
  Speaker 4: ever had with Peter Wright for you live. Matt Natty
• 1:33:22
  Speaker 4: showed them all to you. Did you see him? You
• 1:33:27
  Speaker 4: don't care who view God? No centrism comes with a
• 1:33:30
  Speaker 4: guy I've never fucking talked to.
• 1:33:32
  Speaker 7: Natty, the entire right wing believes in god.
• 1:33:37
  Speaker 4: Entire right wing. I watch you now now that we've
• 1:33:40
  Speaker 4: established it.
• 1:33:41
  Speaker 1: I wish we did wear that effective? Are we that effective?
• 1:33:45
  Speaker 4: To go ahead and move We'll move.
• 1:33:46
  Speaker 1: Right userism, it's super effective.
• 1:33:50
  Speaker 4: Now here's how this works. All you gotta do now
• 1:33:53
  Speaker 4: is demonstrate that Andrew Wilson believes anything Peter Wright believes.
• 1:33:57
  Speaker 4: And I'm willing to answer any of your questions in
• 1:33:59
  Speaker 4: order to do that to give you, Yeah, another olive branch,
• 1:34:02
  Speaker 4: and I'll destroy you on this now a second time.
• 1:34:05
  Speaker 4: Go ahead, Natty, what are you got.
• 1:34:08
  Speaker 2: If you don't want?
• 1:34:10
  Speaker 7: If you want to, I don't mind.
• 1:34:12
  Speaker 8: And I apologize if you promised to play nicely. If not,
• 1:34:16
  Speaker 8: I'm going into full bitch mode. But I can put
• 1:34:18
  Speaker 8: the timer to the side and you can dive right
• 1:34:22
  Speaker 8: in if you both play nicely.
• 1:34:25
  Speaker 3: Everyone agree, all right? I swear to God I can.
• 1:34:28
  Speaker 2: That hell is Lazarus Conley. Now it has valid points
• 1:34:32
  Speaker 2: to make it work on presentation and can't let aw
• 1:34:34
  Speaker 2: get under her skin. Both went bad faith at certain points.
• 1:34:37
  Speaker 2: I think it should have been nat versus Rachel like
• 1:34:40
  Speaker 2: what are you even talking about.
• 1:34:42
  Speaker 7: If you think you're here because this is a place
• 1:34:44
  Speaker 7: where you can reinforce some culture masculinity.
• 1:34:46
  Speaker 2: So essentially, this person who just said this, this has
• 1:34:50
  Speaker 2: reversed the causality from and of course it's going that
• 1:34:54
  Speaker 2: the man is responsible for the woman's behavior, Andrew is
• 1:34:57
  Speaker 2: responsible for Natty's behavior.
• 1:35:00
  Speaker 7: Our Lord, we preach it without fear, and we preach
• 1:35:03
  Speaker 7: it without agenda. Our only goal is that every single
• 1:35:05
  Speaker 7: human being might become a living image of Christ himself,
• 1:35:09
  Speaker 7: that men might become christ Like men, and that women
• 1:35:12
  Speaker 7: might become christ Like women, that children might be true
• 1:35:14
  Speaker 7: children of God, and at the age might find the
• 1:35:17
  Speaker 7: real respect due to those who long live and struggle
• 1:35:19
  Speaker 7: for Christ in this world and learn what it means
• 1:35:22
  Speaker 7: to be redeemed. All of these are characterizations of Christian
• 1:35:26
  Speaker 7: life and characterizations of Church life. Things they all have
• 1:35:29
  Speaker 7: in common is that they never seem to religious at all.
• 1:35:32
  Speaker 7: There are only interest is social and political questions. What
• 1:35:35
  Speaker 7: are your views on masculinity or sexuality, on politics or
• 1:35:37
  Speaker 7: government on war? Do not come here if those are
• 1:35:40
  Speaker 7: the questions that drive your life, come here for one reason,
• 1:35:43
  Speaker 7: because you are aware, somewhere deep inside of you, that
• 1:35:46
  Speaker 7: something is very question.
• 1:35:47
  Speaker 4: Somewhere here, something is wrong.
• 1:35:48
  Speaker 7: With you, with me, with the world in which we live,
• 1:35:51
  Speaker 7: and this something is called sin, and this is the
• 1:35:52
  Speaker 7: place where it can be healed. I don't know about you, Andrew,
• 1:35:56
  Speaker 7: but I joined the Autholor's Church because I knew something
• 1:35:58
  Speaker 7: was wrong with me. I was a men's right that's avist.
• 1:36:01
  Speaker 7: I knew that was wrong.
• 1:36:03
  Speaker 4: That's nice.
• 1:36:04
  Speaker 7: I don't think you've made the same realization. To be honest,
• 1:36:06
  Speaker 7: that has no.
• 1:36:07
  Speaker 4: I don't think it's wrong to be a men's rights activist.
• 1:36:09
  Speaker 7: Now whoa thank you and centrism worldview.
• 1:36:14
  Speaker 4: Prove it.
• 1:36:16
  Speaker 7: I can prove it because Dean as May and Pizza
• 1:36:19
  Speaker 7: Right and Paul Elamb have been the most influential men's.
• 1:36:21
  Speaker 4: Rights Yeah, that's just yeah, yeah, so.
• 1:36:24
  Speaker 7: Every all of the talking points, Sarah.
• 1:36:26
  Speaker 4: Make it thirty seconds for back and forth.
• 1:36:28
  Speaker 7: Get so we have come directly from them, and it
• 1:36:31
  Speaker 7: also comes from the miss Sundry bubble of twenty ten.
• 1:36:33
  Speaker 2: Well, but the thing is that centrism, as I told Natty, centrism,
• 1:36:40
  Speaker 2: it's something established in the literature which you refused.
• 1:36:43
  Speaker 4: To men's rights activism like Paul elm for instance, who
• 1:36:47
  Speaker 4: I've debated with on what he believes. I've debated with him,
• 1:36:52
  Speaker 4: Naddy debated against his worldview.
• 1:36:55
  Speaker 8: Natty, I will have to keep doing the timer, all right,
• 1:37:01
  Speaker 8: or keep interrupting?
• 1:37:02
  Speaker 3: All right? Yeah, go ahead, Andrew.
• 1:37:05
  Speaker 4: Yeah, So anyway, So look, I've debated with Paul Elam
• 1:37:07
  Speaker 4: on his worldview live and in a panel with Rolo
• 1:37:11
  Speaker 4: Tamasi against what their version of MRA is. But just
• 1:37:14
  Speaker 4: so you know, just because people so that you could
• 1:37:17
  Speaker 4: say this about anything. You can say political party is
• 1:37:20
  Speaker 4: evil because there's evil interlocktors in it, or people have
• 1:37:22
  Speaker 4: bad world views inside of it. But for you to
• 1:37:25
  Speaker 4: just blanketly state that men men's rights activism is evil
• 1:37:29
  Speaker 4: or in some way bad, you need to demonstrate that,
• 1:37:32
  Speaker 4: not by showing me bad faith interlocktors, but what's wrong
• 1:37:34
  Speaker 4: with advocating for men's rights?
• 1:37:36
  Speaker 1: Go ahead, Maddie, there you go. Okay, Now, look, Andrew's
• 1:37:40
  Speaker 1: not even an MRA, so he can make the case
• 1:37:42
  Speaker 1: though because he understands that there are legal problems.
• 1:37:47
  Speaker 7: Is distorted and it's based on a particular side of
• 1:37:52
  Speaker 7: the spectrum that I was talking about earlier.
• 1:37:54
  Speaker 2: In the men's rights activists don't have to believe in
• 1:37:57
  Speaker 2: Guino centrism, theory of any brand much Peter Wright's brandistic
• 1:38:01
  Speaker 2: understand that.
• 1:38:02
  Speaker 1: I agree, they don't A lot of them don't actually Okay,
• 1:38:05
  Speaker 1: so my turn.
• 1:38:06
  Speaker 2: So yes, I just want to take the issues one
• 1:38:08
  Speaker 2: by one. That's fine.
• 1:38:10
  Speaker 4: What's actually wrong? And you prattled so much you actually
• 1:38:13
  Speaker 4: ran your own time around without answering the question. Here's
• 1:38:15
  Speaker 4: the question again, what's actually wrong with advocating for men's rights?
• 1:38:19
  Speaker 4: What's actually wrong with it? Absent bad faith? Interlockertors who
• 1:38:23
  Speaker 4: could be involved in that movement like they would be
• 1:38:24
  Speaker 4: in any political movement, any ngo, any political establishment which exists.
• 1:38:28
  Speaker 4: What's actually wrong with advocating for the rights of men?
• 1:38:33
  Speaker 1: What?
• 1:38:33
  Speaker 4: Natty?
• 1:38:35
  Speaker 7: It sounds like you sorry, he's finished. It sounds like
• 1:38:39
  Speaker 7: you are calling Paul Elam a bad faith.
• 1:38:43
  Speaker 2: Okay, No, you don't get to then turn around and
• 1:38:47
  Speaker 2: do that.
• 1:38:48
  Speaker 7: It sounds like, so what you're saying the talking points
• 1:38:52
  Speaker 7: about men's rights out there? Are you calling him bad faith?
• 1:38:55
  Speaker 1: Well?
• 1:38:55
  Speaker 2: Okay, so now she's turning this around asking you a question,
• 1:38:59
  Speaker 2: what's wrong?
• 1:39:00
  Speaker 4: You don't answer.
• 1:39:01
  Speaker 2: You don't like worldview? What's wrong with advocating for men's issues?
• 1:39:06
  Speaker 4: It will be my turn again. Go ahead, So one
• 1:39:08
  Speaker 4: more time, I'm going to ask the question to Natty,
• 1:39:12
  Speaker 4: who refuses to fucking answer it for the four hundredth time. Natty,
• 1:39:15
  Speaker 4: what is actually wrong with being a men's rights activist?
• 1:39:19
  Speaker 4: If you're advocating for things like, for instance, I don't know,
• 1:39:21
  Speaker 4: the abolishment of the draft would be a really good one.
• 1:39:24
  Speaker 4: That could be a men's rights advocacy, which I would
• 1:39:26
  Speaker 4: consider to be a moral claim that an Orthodox Christian
• 1:39:29
  Speaker 4: could have a good claim to. Perhaps that men shouldn't
• 1:39:32
  Speaker 4: be put to death by this date. That could be
• 1:39:34
  Speaker 4: another great claim that an Orthodox Christian could make, and
• 1:39:36
  Speaker 4: why they would advocate against it. There's a big split there.
• 1:39:39
  Speaker 4: Circumcision is another claim that can be made by men's
• 1:39:43
  Speaker 4: rights activists which you see in the Orthodox Church. Are
• 1:39:45
  Speaker 4: some split there, Natty, One more time, what's wrong with
• 1:39:49
  Speaker 4: advocating for men's rights? Natty? Answer the fucking question.
• 1:39:54
  Speaker 7: Andrew, take another a bit of your cigarette, Bruy.
• 1:39:58
  Speaker 4: Just answer the question.
• 1:40:00
  Speaker 7: Question.
• 1:40:01
  Speaker 8: Here's what I'm going to do before you, I'll reset
• 1:40:03
  Speaker 8: your time or two. We're going to run this for
• 1:40:07
  Speaker 8: ten more minutes.
• 1:40:09
  Speaker 2: All right, just rest her timer.
• 1:40:11
  Speaker 3: So if you would like to.
• 1:40:13
  Speaker 7: Have you don't have to stay for the super chats
• 1:40:16
  Speaker 7: be productive.
• 1:40:17
  Speaker 3: I suggest we go with Q and A and we
• 1:40:19
  Speaker 3: continue doing that in good thing.
• 1:40:20
  Speaker 7: No, this is no problem.
• 1:40:23
  Speaker 2: I can only imagine the increase of noise that super
• 1:40:26
  Speaker 2: chats would make.
• 1:40:27
  Speaker 7: Is that it's based on the gun no centrism worldview,
• 1:40:29
  Speaker 7: and beneath that, it's also based on an ontological view
• 1:40:34
  Speaker 7: of viewing the human. So if you're an Orthodox Christian,
• 1:40:37
  Speaker 7: you cannot subscribe a lot of the talking points that
• 1:40:40
  Speaker 7: men's rights movement has made. In fact, most of them
• 1:40:43
  Speaker 7: are cherry picked. And in regards to things like the draft,
• 1:40:47
  Speaker 7: there's something in Orthodox Christianity I wouldn't say that they
• 1:40:50
  Speaker 7: would have a particular strong view.
• 1:40:52
  Speaker 4: Yeah, exactly, so my turn. So anyway, so yeah, back
• 1:40:54
  Speaker 4: to this real quick. All of these could be construed
• 1:40:57
  Speaker 4: as men's rights advocation. You're talking about the idea of circumcision,
• 1:41:02
  Speaker 4: the idea of the draft. Abortion would be part of
• 1:41:04
  Speaker 4: men's rights activism. So would custodial custody for parenting. All
• 1:41:09
  Speaker 4: of these things would fall and so a DV laws,
• 1:41:12
  Speaker 4: domestic abuse laws, those would fall under men's rights as well.
• 1:41:15
  Speaker 4: All of these things, which from the Orthodox view is
• 1:41:18
  Speaker 4: fine to advocate for change. For Natty, what's actually wrong
• 1:41:22
  Speaker 4: with being a men's rights advocate? What other than Natty
• 1:41:25
  Speaker 4: says it's all ginocentrism. Prove it, prove any of those
• 1:41:28
  Speaker 4: things are ginocentric.
• 1:41:29
  Speaker 3: Go ahead, Natty.
• 1:41:30
  Speaker 7: Okay. Domestic violence laws, the men's rights movement has closed.
• 1:41:38
  Speaker 7: There's a lot of prejudice against men in terms of
• 1:41:40
  Speaker 7: domestic violence. Well, actually, strictly that's not true.
• 1:41:43
  Speaker 2: The UK defines male victims of domestic violence as part
• 1:41:48
  Speaker 2: of violence against women in the UK, but they define
• 1:41:52
  Speaker 2: them out of existence as women.
• 1:41:54
  Speaker 7: And actually in the UK, coercive control has been passed
• 1:41:57
  Speaker 7: which actually helps men, and that had nothing.
• 1:42:00
  Speaker 4: Okay, So anyway, so this was based on this is
• 1:42:02
  Speaker 4: all based on categorization. So when you go into DV
• 1:42:07
  Speaker 4: laws especially, you already had laws on the books for assault.
• 1:42:10
  Speaker 4: Inside of the United States, special categories were pushed by
• 1:42:13
  Speaker 4: feminists for domestic violence specific laws, right, those were designed
• 1:42:18
  Speaker 4: to favorite women. That is in fact true. Yeah, I
• 1:42:21
  Speaker 4: can actually give you the subset of laws, and I
• 1:42:23
  Speaker 4: can give you the links to those laws and who
• 1:42:26
  Speaker 4: they were pushed by.
• 1:42:27
  Speaker 2: Completely new branching.
• 1:42:29
  Speaker 4: Wrong with advocating under.
• 1:42:31
  Speaker 7: The law, The quality under the war is based on
• 1:42:36
  Speaker 7: an egglitarian ontology.
• 1:42:38
  Speaker 2: Okay, so you can advocate for equality under the law
• 1:42:41
  Speaker 2: when it comes to women that were not for men.
• 1:42:43
  Speaker 7: And women as apples to apples rather than apples to pairs,
• 1:42:47
  Speaker 7: then somebody is going to lose out. And in fact,
• 1:42:50
  Speaker 7: you spend most of your time arguing with liberals who
• 1:42:52
  Speaker 7: have an eglatarian ontology, and you call out things to
• 1:42:56
  Speaker 7: do with them quite successfully. I would say sometimes all
• 1:42:58
  Speaker 7: the time, why are you so?
• 1:43:00
  Speaker 2: Because what she's saying Orthodox Christianity justifies harmast men in
• 1:43:07
  Speaker 2: law somehow.
• 1:43:09
  Speaker 4: Women in the argument I'm getting from an entire philosophical
• 1:43:12
  Speaker 4: branch Ocase you not where Natty, I'm talking about under
• 1:43:14
  Speaker 4: the law. You see, we have prescriptions under the law
• 1:43:16
  Speaker 4: which are designed to be equally prescribed to men and women.
• 1:43:20
  Speaker 4: The second you give non equal treatment to one over
• 1:43:23
  Speaker 4: the other, while one side claims that they deserve that
• 1:43:26
  Speaker 4: special treatment, you are in contradiction. That's why MR advocates
• 1:43:30
  Speaker 4: exist to try to do something about inequality under the law.
• 1:43:35
  Speaker 7: I'm MRA advocates exist because they have a liberal worldview
• 1:43:41
  Speaker 7: that's based on an eglitarian ontology. I know, as the
• 1:43:45
  Speaker 7: Men's rights axivist the people that dominate the kids.
• 1:43:49
  Speaker 2: If she's saying that law shouldn't be egalitarian because of
• 1:43:53
  Speaker 2: orthodox First of all, that means that religion should inform
• 1:43:56
  Speaker 2: law rather than secular principles. But religious law would not
• 1:44:04
  Speaker 2: have that secular attitude towards women's autonomy.
• 1:44:09
  Speaker 4: The contradiction what I'm saying claim we're supposed to have
• 1:44:13
  Speaker 4: an egalitarian society which is built under the idea of equity.
• 1:44:16
  Speaker 4: Then if you do one favorable set of laws which
• 1:44:19
  Speaker 4: are for women that don't apply to men, like you
• 1:44:21
  Speaker 4: see with abortion things like this, that that would be
• 1:44:24
  Speaker 4: a contradiction in the worldview m r A. People, whether
• 1:44:27
  Speaker 4: you agree with their prescriptions or not, are fucking fantastic
• 1:44:30
  Speaker 4: at pointing that out. That's a criticism of the view
• 1:44:34
  Speaker 4: actually serves Orthodoxy wealth to criticize that view.
• 1:44:39
  Speaker 7: Uh again, you don't seem to be appealing to what
• 1:44:42
  Speaker 7: I've actually presented.
• 1:44:43
  Speaker 2: Yeah, Actually, he's got a point. Because the liberal feminist
• 1:44:47
  Speaker 2: or the feminist viewpoint is the primary arguments against male
• 1:44:52
  Speaker 2: authority because it frames male authority as oppressive and aggression
• 1:44:56
  Speaker 2: against men women.
• 1:44:58
  Speaker 7: Those claims wouldn't exist in the way where they would
• 1:45:00
  Speaker 7: say that men don't have as many rights as women.
• 1:45:03
  Speaker 1: She thinks that Peter Wright's work is the basis of
• 1:45:06
  Speaker 1: the men's movements. To me, you see, so what about
• 1:45:09
  Speaker 1: before Peter Wright existed?
• 1:45:11
  Speaker 4: Again, she brings up a criticism of Peter Wright, who's
• 1:45:14
  Speaker 4: not Andrew Wilson. She should be trying to attack Andrew
• 1:45:18
  Speaker 4: Wilson's views. What Andrew Wilson just gave her was an overview,
• 1:45:21
  Speaker 4: a listing of mr things I would advocate against which
• 1:45:24
  Speaker 4: are well within the confines with the orthodox view. She
• 1:45:26
  Speaker 4: even agrees that these things are fundamentally unfair from the
• 1:45:29
  Speaker 4: criticism of categorization of ontology. We're doing an internal critique
• 1:45:32
  Speaker 4: on feminism and proving their worldview has massive faults in it.
• 1:45:36
  Speaker 4: That's the whole point.
• 1:45:37
  Speaker 7: The men's rights movement and feminists have the same ontology.
• 1:45:41
  Speaker 7: You don't seem to be recognizing that, Andrew.
• 1:45:44
  Speaker 2: Okay, So are you willing to get rid of the
• 1:45:47
  Speaker 2: advances that feminism makes? Miss I'm terrified of project what
• 1:45:51
  Speaker 2: is it? Project twenty five about the lady's fill and
• 1:45:56
  Speaker 2: taking away women's rights?
• 1:45:58
  Speaker 5: But how dares she.
• 1:45:59
  Speaker 4: Using the word ontology? Right? Ontology is the study of being.
• 1:46:02
  Speaker 4: It's a philosophical branch, which is designed to study being.
• 1:46:05
  Speaker 4: So how can you take two political ideologies and talk
• 1:46:08
  Speaker 4: about ontology, Dunce, You mean.
• 1:46:11
  Speaker 2: The base, the philosophical basis is on egalitarian But she
• 1:46:14
  Speaker 2: herself tapes for feminist version of a galitarianism. Remember how
• 1:46:20
  Speaker 2: many times she was hysterical about Trump bringing about Handmaiden's
• 1:46:24
  Speaker 2: Tale and taking.
• 1:46:25
  Speaker 1: Away women's right Project twenty five.
• 1:46:27
  Speaker 2: Project twenty twenty five. So she is a complete hypocrisy
• 1:46:32
  Speaker 2: in this with.
• 1:46:33
  Speaker 7: The Orthodox position right, because you're more on the uh.
• 1:46:37
  Speaker 2: So when it comes to women, she embraced me Gali right. Now,
• 1:46:42
  Speaker 2: when it comes to men, she says, well, that's not
• 1:46:46
  Speaker 2: supported by Orthodox knowledge. So Orthodox roles for men question
• 1:46:51
  Speaker 2: galitarians for women. And what is at the part of
• 1:46:56
  Speaker 2: it is she doesn't want to take responsibility for anything.
• 1:47:00
  Speaker 4: That's the whole.
• 1:47:00
  Speaker 2: She thought men's rights existed her emotions, and then when
• 1:47:06
  Speaker 2: it came to where she had to realize, she would
• 1:47:12
  Speaker 2: that it is important to care about men and the right.
• 1:47:15
  Speaker 2: She noped out of that ship because it meant hurt she.
• 1:47:18
  Speaker 2: She took responsibility for something rather than getting something out
• 1:47:22
  Speaker 2: of it.
• 1:47:23
  Speaker 4: In form from the feminist view, yes, from the feminist.
• 1:47:27
  Speaker 7: Men's rights activists worldview is rooted in the same thing.
• 1:47:32
  Speaker 4: Would be rooted.
• 1:47:33
  Speaker 2: Okay, so now it's rooted inalitarianism.
• 1:47:35
  Speaker 1: And.
• 1:47:38
  Speaker 4: Okay, i'll prove it to you.
• 1:47:42
  Speaker 7: Believe belief and they don't.
• 1:47:44
  Speaker 4: Okay, my turn, so i'll prove it to you. If
• 1:47:46
  Speaker 4: you have ontological claims, you would first have to make
• 1:47:49
  Speaker 4: the case that the ontology of men and women from
• 1:47:51
  Speaker 4: the m r A view is the same. It is not.
• 1:47:54
  Speaker 4: That is the view of the feminist. The feminist makes
• 1:47:56
  Speaker 4: a claim that there's ontological the ontological category, distinction between
• 1:48:01
  Speaker 4: men and women doesn't exist. They're interchangeable widgets. MRAs make
• 1:48:04
  Speaker 4: the opposite claim. They claim that based on the distinction ontology,
• 1:48:08
  Speaker 4: there are certain societal roles and structures which need to
• 1:48:10
  Speaker 4: be followed. It's literally the opposite, Natty, It's.
• 1:48:14
  Speaker 1: True, I think, okay, I think there are Actually.
• 1:48:18
  Speaker 2: You're right, you're right because.
• 1:48:21
  Speaker 1: There are egalitarian ms obviously, but I'm not one of them.
• 1:48:27
  Speaker 1: I mean, like, one thing that I've learned from doing
• 1:48:29
  Speaker 1: this is that men and women are not the same.
• 1:48:31
  Speaker 1: They're never going to be the same. They're not interchangeable widgets.
• 1:48:34
  Speaker 1: We got to work with things as it is as
• 1:48:38
  Speaker 1: it exists in reality. So no, I don't. I don't
• 1:48:42
  Speaker 1: at all. Feminists are the ones that believe that they're
• 1:48:44
  Speaker 1: interchangeable and yet men should be treated as inferior.
• 1:48:48
  Speaker 4: Real quick, so real quick. You just made a claim.
• 1:48:51
  Speaker 4: You said that at the core on ontologically, feminist and
• 1:48:54
  Speaker 4: MRA advocates are exactly the shame. But they're not. I
• 1:48:57
  Speaker 4: demonstrate to you how they're not. One has an egalitary
• 1:49:00
  Speaker 4: in worldview, the other one uses the criticism of the
• 1:49:03
  Speaker 4: egalitarian real worldview in order to push men's advocacy. One
• 1:49:07
  Speaker 4: believes the ontology is different. One believes that the ontology.
• 1:49:10
  Speaker 2: Okay, let's put it this way. First of all, when
• 1:49:13
  Speaker 2: you're talking about men's rights, it's really hard to because
• 1:49:16
  Speaker 2: you're right, Brian, there are a gala galitarian men's rights
• 1:49:19
  Speaker 2: activists who believe all social roles should be abolished because
• 1:49:22
  Speaker 2: they're harmful to men. But there are ones like me
• 1:49:26
  Speaker 2: that say, okay, biology affects social roles. When you look
• 1:49:30
  Speaker 2: through history, it's not an issue of oppression. It's an
• 1:49:33
  Speaker 2: issue of men and women cooperating in their biological roles
• 1:49:37
  Speaker 2: to create society, which is against the feminist conception. That
• 1:49:42
  Speaker 2: is not biology. It's oppression right right, it's men deliberately
• 1:49:46
  Speaker 2: and truth oppressed. The women's history.
• 1:49:49
  Speaker 4: Point that would be great. So here again, I'm just
• 1:49:51
  Speaker 4: gonna I'm just gonna point this out very quickly. Ontology,
• 1:49:55
  Speaker 4: state of being. Men and women have a different ontology
• 1:49:58
  Speaker 4: for you. For the feminist right. On the feminist side
• 1:50:01
  Speaker 4: of things, they're going to believe in the interchangeable widgetability
• 1:50:04
  Speaker 4: of men and women. They're exactly the same. They have
• 1:50:05
  Speaker 4: the same ontology. There's no distinction. Anything a man can
• 1:50:08
  Speaker 4: do a woman can do. Blah blah, blah, blah blah.
• 1:50:09
  Speaker 4: The m r are no, there's a distinction in an ontology,
• 1:50:15
  Speaker 4: total distinction. Men aren't the same as women. Waiting for
• 1:50:17
  Speaker 4: the demonstration of the opposition, Go ahead, nat.
• 1:50:20
  Speaker 7: If you want to know what we believed and look
• 1:50:22
  Speaker 7: at the internet. Don't read media reports, listen to your
• 1:50:24
  Speaker 7: own voice.
• 1:50:25
  Speaker 2: What's really funny is that the egalitarians on the feminist
• 1:50:29
  Speaker 2: side will say that women can do everything a man
• 1:50:32
  Speaker 2: can do except rape and domestic.
• 1:50:35
  Speaker 7: Violence and mutual support and following Christ go.
• 1:50:37
  Speaker 2: And also false ac anything negative or criminal.
• 1:50:41
  Speaker 7: If we have failed to proclaim this to the world,
• 1:50:42
  Speaker 7: the world is caused to think otherwise, let us do
• 1:50:45
  Speaker 7: better and where others I'm misrepresenting that?
• 1:50:48
  Speaker 4: Yeah, okay, So anyway, so we're all done with that.
• 1:50:50
  Speaker 4: So now wife, bring me down a cup of coffee.
• 1:50:53
  Speaker 4: I would appreciate it. Uh, it was, this has been great.
• 1:50:56
  Speaker 4: I would still love to know how you're going to
• 1:50:58
  Speaker 4: explain to us how once it says that there's an
• 1:51:00
  Speaker 4: opposition ontology, the other side says an interchangeable ontology, how
• 1:51:04
  Speaker 4: you can demonstrate that that's not the case. When that is,
• 1:51:07
  Speaker 4: I can literally demonstrate it to you from feminist owned
• 1:51:09
  Speaker 4: writings versus Mr people's writings. I can demonstrate it to
• 1:51:13
  Speaker 4: you across the board. One believes in a non interchangeable
• 1:51:16
  Speaker 4: set of ontological structures and the other does not.
• 1:51:20
  Speaker 8: And before I let this one go, uh, this is
• 1:51:23
  Speaker 8: the last thirty seconds cinnati, and then we're doing closing statements.
• 1:51:27
  Speaker 3: I'm over it now.
• 1:51:30
  Speaker 1: I'm with you, Sarah.
• 1:51:32
  Speaker 7: So if Andrew was serious about representing what the Orthodox
• 1:51:36
  Speaker 7: Church says, then he would talk about how were supposed
• 1:51:40
  Speaker 7: to follow Christ, and he would talk about how if
• 1:51:44
  Speaker 7: you were serious and follow.
• 1:51:47
  Speaker 2: About the Eastern or the Orthodox Church.
• 1:51:49
  Speaker 7: He has never done that.
• 1:51:50
  Speaker 2: You wouldn't be talking in public right.
• 1:51:52
  Speaker 7: Now, intimidated a bunch of only fans girls that is
• 1:51:57
  Speaker 7: not christ Like as Christ.
• 1:51:58
  Speaker 4: And again, no proof for any of these allegations whatsoever,
• 1:52:02
  Speaker 4: just arguments from incredulity. I'd never seen Andrew do a thing,
• 1:52:05
  Speaker 4: therefore he's never done thing. By the way, Andrew doesn't
• 1:52:08
  Speaker 4: have a ministry. Andrew says often that he's not here
• 1:52:10
  Speaker 4: to represent the Orthodox Church. I've always been extraordinarily clear
• 1:52:13
  Speaker 4: about that. And guess what, that's not any of Natty's
• 1:52:18
  Speaker 4: fucking business. That would be the business of myself, my church, congregation,
• 1:52:21
  Speaker 4: my spiritual father, not of Natty her. Natty needs to
• 1:52:24
  Speaker 4: mind her own fucking business. And she has an issue.
• 1:52:27
  Speaker 4: She can go through the proper channels of Orthodoxy to
• 1:52:29
  Speaker 4: have me condemned or in some way, you know, push
• 1:52:33
  Speaker 4: back against by the hierarchs who are there, who are
• 1:52:36
  Speaker 4: definitely not fucking Natty. On top of all that, remember
• 1:52:40
  Speaker 4: Natty provided no evidence for any of her claims. I
• 1:52:42
  Speaker 4: provided evidence for my claims. We've got to the back
• 1:52:44
  Speaker 4: and forth, Q and A. She couldn't even answer basic
• 1:52:46
  Speaker 4: questions about an ontology and the distinction between that and epistemology.
• 1:52:49
  Speaker 4: You have failed on every level here, Natty.
• 1:52:52
  Speaker 2: You pretending you minding this emotion does not make an
• 1:52:58
  Speaker 2: argument NADDI statement.
• 1:53:01
  Speaker 1: All right, we'll let them do their clothing statements and
• 1:53:03
  Speaker 1: then we'll we'll stop it and we can talk.
• 1:53:05
  Speaker 4: Yeah, okay, yeah's his entire argument against you.
• 1:53:08
  Speaker 2: Been poisoned by this lack of signals.
• 1:53:09
  Speaker 4: She's always been the same thing. That she has an
• 1:53:11
  Speaker 4: issue with some guy named Peter Wright. And because she
• 1:53:14
  Speaker 4: has an issue with this guy, anybody who who she
• 1:53:18
  Speaker 4: perceives as being in any way associated with this dude's
• 1:53:21
  Speaker 4: circle is him. I'm not ninety percent of her arguments
• 1:53:24
  Speaker 4: or tailored towards him, not towards me. She doesn't. She
• 1:53:27
  Speaker 4: doesn't even categorize the things I say correctly because she
• 1:53:30
  Speaker 4: doesn't even understand my position. She could have taken all
• 1:53:32
  Speaker 4: this time to research out my actual position. She didn't.
• 1:53:35
  Speaker 4: All she did instead was come with the same shit,
• 1:53:37
  Speaker 4: which is why call her never learns, Natty. She never
• 1:53:40
  Speaker 4: learns all she has to do. If you want to
• 1:53:43
  Speaker 4: criticize me, right, use my positions. Use Andrew Wilson's positions
• 1:53:47
  Speaker 4: to make criticisms of Andrew Wilson. When you say absurd
• 1:53:50
  Speaker 4: claims like Rachel got her book ideas from a guy.
• 1:53:52
  Speaker 4: When I show proof that couldn't be possible, you have
• 1:53:54
  Speaker 4: no refutation, but double down. You look stupid when you say, pee,
• 1:53:57
  Speaker 4: I get my ideas from Peter Wright, never had a
• 1:53:59
  Speaker 4: conversation with the guy. You look stupid when you can't demonstrate,
• 1:54:04
  Speaker 4: like you said that there's some Patreon link there, but
• 1:54:06
  Speaker 4: you can't show it. You look stupid when you make
• 1:54:09
  Speaker 4: claims about ontology, you don't know how to separate those
• 1:54:12
  Speaker 4: from epistemological claims. You look stupid when you make these claims, Natty.
• 1:54:17
  Speaker 4: When you say Andrew Wilson is X. You don't come
• 1:54:20
  Speaker 4: to me and then try to get me to give
• 1:54:23
  Speaker 4: you the answers to my worldview. You come equipped and
• 1:54:26
  Speaker 4: ready to criticize that worldview from my view and build
• 1:54:31
  Speaker 4: your case. Not beg me for answers to your questions.
• 1:54:34
  Speaker 4: You should already come equipped with that, just like I
• 1:54:37
  Speaker 4: came equally. All I had to do here was what
• 1:54:39
  Speaker 4: exactly what I said. I outlined at the very beginning
• 1:54:41
  Speaker 4: of the debate that you would fall prey to this tactic,
• 1:54:43
  Speaker 4: and you always do. All I ever have to do
• 1:54:47
  Speaker 4: with you, Natty, is ask you to show evidence, and
• 1:54:50
  Speaker 4: then I watch your entire case fall apart. You're a joke, right,
• 1:54:54
  Speaker 4: People laugh at you because of this, And the thing
• 1:54:56
  Speaker 4: is like, I don't think you're stupid. I don't think
• 1:54:59
  Speaker 4: you're stupid. That's the the funniest part is like you
• 1:55:01
  Speaker 4: could easily reverse your entire image in these fears if
• 1:55:05
  Speaker 4: you would just actually get away from the fucking tinfoil
• 1:55:08
  Speaker 4: hat and engage with people where they're at. That's it.
• 1:55:11
  Speaker 4: Engage with them where they're at. You want to engage
• 1:55:13
  Speaker 4: with Andrew Wilson about his views, good, Actually engage with
• 1:55:15
  Speaker 4: Andrew Wilson on his views. Then, not Peter Wright on
• 1:55:19
  Speaker 4: his views and how they somehow map onto Andrew Wilson.
• 1:55:23
  Speaker 4: With your crazy corelits and lack of evidence, and even
• 1:55:27
  Speaker 4: in the face when you're shown evidence to the contrary
• 1:55:30
  Speaker 4: it serious, significant evidence to the contrary, you doubled down. Anyway,
• 1:55:35
  Speaker 4: Don't come to me and talk to me about fucking humility.
• 1:55:39
  Speaker 4: How fucking humble could you possibly be? When I show
• 1:55:42
  Speaker 4: you all the evidence of your slander, you doubled down
• 1:55:44
  Speaker 4: on it. You should actually be ashamed of yourself. You
• 1:55:47
  Speaker 4: have been on this dogmatic crusade for what going on
• 1:55:50
  Speaker 4: almost two years now with no evidence to show for
• 1:55:54
  Speaker 4: it whatsoever. And I've told you, my wife's told you
• 1:55:57
  Speaker 4: that this isn't true. We've shown you the evidence for
• 1:56:00
  Speaker 4: it multiple times. Now you just got exposed in front
• 1:56:04
  Speaker 4: of so many thousands of people. There's gonna be hundreds
• 1:56:06
  Speaker 4: of thousands of people who watched this, Natty, and they're
• 1:56:09
  Speaker 4: never gonna let you forget that you did this for what.
• 1:56:12
  Speaker 4: What did you even gain? You didn't even gain anything.
• 1:56:16
  Speaker 4: It was just stupid. Next time, all you wrote, Oh,
• 1:56:19
  Speaker 4: you know what's really funny about all this, I'm one
• 1:56:21
  Speaker 4: of the most easily accessible guys out there who have
• 1:56:25
  Speaker 4: platform my size in the world. You could have just
• 1:56:27
  Speaker 4: DM me. You could have just been like, hey, you
• 1:56:29
  Speaker 4: know what, Andrew, you know, is there actually a link
• 1:56:32
  Speaker 4: between you and this guy? And if there is, what
• 1:56:34
  Speaker 4: is it? Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.
• 1:56:36
  Speaker 4: I would have just told you. I literally would have
• 1:56:38
  Speaker 4: just told you. Instead, you do you played phone call
• 1:56:41
  Speaker 4: a friend and he comes in and says, Peter Wriot's
• 1:56:43
  Speaker 4: one of the most manipulat of blah blah blah blah
• 1:56:45
  Speaker 4: blah blah blah. I don't give a fuck about Peter Wright.
• 1:56:48
  Speaker 4: First of all, Right, when I looked into this guy,
• 1:56:51
  Speaker 4: my platform's way fucking bigger than his, like gigantic in comparisons,
• 1:56:55
  Speaker 4: not even in the same fucking universe. This guy's not
• 1:56:59
  Speaker 4: even on my dar. I don't give a fuck about him.
• 1:57:02
  Speaker 4: But you guys, all you can do is make these
• 1:57:05
  Speaker 4: corelage in your conspiracy tinfoil hat fucking wearing bullshit about
• 1:57:09
  Speaker 4: how there's a corel it between everybody and this ginl
• 1:57:12
  Speaker 4: centric view and Peter Wright Taylor the view to the person.
• 1:57:14
  Speaker 4: Next time, Natty, you won't look so stupid, That's all
• 1:57:17
  Speaker 4: I gotta say, thank you.
• 1:57:19
  Speaker 2: And it's gonna be the next time.
• 1:57:20
  Speaker 7: Good lord catching and having a little tand trim. Let's
• 1:57:27
  Speaker 7: be serious, forn't it? So I said earlier, gender essentialist
• 1:57:37
  Speaker 7: kind of like bi ganes centrism from a biological position,
• 1:57:42
  Speaker 7: and that's what the main difference between as say someone
• 1:57:46
  Speaker 7: like a track con you probably say.
• 1:57:48
  Speaker 2: The centrism from a biological position.
• 1:57:51
  Speaker 9: And the difference between him and Peters, Right, Yeah, she
• 1:57:55
  Speaker 9: seems to think that Peter Wright's ideas that centrism is
• 1:57:59
  Speaker 9: both come biological.
• 1:58:02
  Speaker 2: It's not what Peter Wright says.
• 1:58:05
  Speaker 7: I know, but that's her concern that that is why
• 1:58:07
  Speaker 7: I brought up ontology.
• 1:58:09
  Speaker 2: Well, so she basically lives in a delusionalking.
• 1:58:12
  Speaker 7: About a kind of dualism between them.
• 1:58:14
  Speaker 2: Where she's just decided what people advocate, and even when
• 1:58:18
  Speaker 2: they say no, I don't advocate that thing, and I
• 1:58:22
  Speaker 2: can show you that I don't, it doesn't penetrate.
• 1:58:25
  Speaker 7: Peter Wright's quite into quite a sophisticate operator because he
• 1:58:28
  Speaker 7: likes to play around between those two positions. As somebody
• 1:58:31
  Speaker 7: that knows knew him paston to write, I remember I
• 1:58:34
  Speaker 7: did an arcicle about model and Wilson's got a real
• 1:58:37
  Speaker 7: point here promoting.
• 1:58:40
  Speaker 2: Why is she so obsessed with this man the.
• 1:58:43
  Speaker 7: Same thing but just more rooted animal? What is it
• 1:58:46
  Speaker 7: about Peter.
• 1:58:47
  Speaker 2: Wright that's really gotten under Natty's skin? This is the
• 1:58:51
  Speaker 2: great this is the great irony of this. Daddy came
• 1:58:54
  Speaker 2: on a debate with Andrew Wilson and she's debating Peter Wright.
• 1:58:58
  Speaker 7: The kind of right wing culture water everybody has accepted.
• 1:59:02
  Speaker 2: I think, does Andrew Wilson even exists.
• 1:59:04
  Speaker 7: And take a trick about being a tad wife hasn't.
• 1:59:07
  Speaker 2: Even penetrated who she's talking.
• 1:59:09
  Speaker 7: To man woman from Corinthians, and that that is part
• 1:59:13
  Speaker 7: of in the same way in the framing as orthodoxy does.
• 1:59:16
  Speaker 7: And Orthodoxy doesn't think about gender in that way. And
• 1:59:19
  Speaker 7: and thank the Lord for that, because he's basically saying,
• 1:59:23
  Speaker 7: let's go back to something that we've tried before. And
• 1:59:26
  Speaker 7: this is compassive orthodoxy. And I don't think Andrew's paper.
• 1:59:31
  Speaker 2: Okay, now she's talking about Andrew.
• 1:59:33
  Speaker 7: Wilson presenting what he truly believes about that, because.
• 1:59:36
  Speaker 2: I think the problem that she has with guy on
• 1:59:38
  Speaker 2: centrism is the criticism.
• 1:59:40
  Speaker 7: But at the same time, I think.
• 1:59:41
  Speaker 2: She honestly believes that the world should be guynocentric. But
• 1:59:45
  Speaker 2: that's just the way it is around. The author shouln't
• 1:59:49
  Speaker 2: even have a word for it, just like fish don't
• 1:59:50
  Speaker 2: have a word for water.
• 1:59:51
  Speaker 7: Clergy influence. And I will just bring this up one
• 1:59:54
  Speaker 7: more time, father Moses McPherson's claim where he said that
• 1:59:58
  Speaker 7: Eve ate the apple because she wanted to dominate her husband.
• 2:00:02
  Speaker 7: But anybody that has studied Genesis or any basic theology
• 2:00:06
  Speaker 7: will tell you that power dynamics between men and women
• 2:00:08
  Speaker 7: or anyone is a consequence of the fall, and it's
• 2:00:12
  Speaker 7: not something that caused the full So he's literally being
• 2:00:15
  Speaker 7: backwards in the way. And he also said that Isaac
• 2:00:20
  Speaker 7: is true that, which is completely.
• 2:00:22
  Speaker 1: I don't know. I think that it was Adam and
• 2:00:25
  Speaker 1: Eve's decisions that caused the fall, but I mean very
• 2:00:29
  Speaker 1: similar the fall if you if you believe, you know,
• 2:00:33
  Speaker 1: in the Bible.
• 2:00:34
  Speaker 10: And stuff, the fall was sort of like predetermined, also fascinating,
• 2:00:38
  Speaker 10: so God knew it was going to happen, but this
• 2:00:41
  Speaker 10: is the way it was supposed to play out, so
• 2:00:42
  Speaker 10: that we would suffer and then redeem ourselves through Jesus.
• 2:00:46
  Speaker 7: Going out there into the kind of dude bro culture
• 2:00:50
  Speaker 7: and all of these joking when actually really like trying
• 2:00:53
  Speaker 7: to be Christ like Christ is a serious matter. I
• 2:00:57
  Speaker 7: really don't know why he thinks he can get away
• 2:00:59
  Speaker 7: with that. So if for anyone that's watching this and
• 2:01:04
  Speaker 7: actually can see that Andrew doesn't really want to deal
• 2:01:07
  Speaker 7: with this on the serious way that it should be,
• 2:01:09
  Speaker 7: then I thoroughly recommend looking at doctor Bertisi's work and
• 2:01:14
  Speaker 7: any other source about gender roles and stuff. That's not
• 2:01:19
  Speaker 7: Father Trenham, that's not Father Moses McPherson, that's not Andrew,
• 2:01:23
  Speaker 7: any of the author bo crews I'm not going to
• 2:01:25
  Speaker 7: name right, actually go directly to the source and speak
• 2:01:29
  Speaker 7: to your priests that are not those guys, because they
• 2:01:31
  Speaker 7: are being called out as the protestantizing of Orthodoxy right now,
• 2:01:35
  Speaker 7: and I wouldn't be surprised if they all didn't join
• 2:01:38
  Speaker 7: some cult under Mosam Speerson's mansion, because I don't know,
• 2:01:43
  Speaker 7: that's quite disturbing. The last thing I'm going to say
• 2:01:47
  Speaker 7: before I don't know how much time.
• 2:01:48
  Speaker 3: I have left, thirty seconds, is that.
• 2:01:52
  Speaker 7: We as late lay people, we are allowed to call
• 2:01:54
  Speaker 7: each other out.
• 2:01:55
  Speaker 1: Are you a laypersonowed speak?
• 2:01:58
  Speaker 9: You seem to think you're an expert, but are also
• 2:02:00
  Speaker 9: supposed to be open to I.
• 2:02:02
  Speaker 2: Think she's done a lot more calling other people out
• 2:02:05
  Speaker 2: than calling herself out.
• 2:02:06
  Speaker 7: And everyone in that circle to be corrected. I'm contributing
• 2:02:10
  Speaker 7: what I know.
• 2:02:12
  Speaker 2: Oh, she's innocent.
• 2:02:15
  Speaker 7: Just when I realized that I.
• 2:02:16
  Speaker 2: Was abdication of agency right here.
• 2:02:17
  Speaker 7: He has the most distinct, horrible resentment towards her based
• 2:02:20
  Speaker 7: on evolutionary psychology and Caryon's archetypes, which, by the way,
• 2:02:26
  Speaker 7: he is saying that he agrees with, you know, he
• 2:02:29
  Speaker 7: agrees with the framing of that the men's rights world
• 2:02:32
  Speaker 7: view comes from uses all of that stuff, right right, Okay,
• 2:02:36
  Speaker 7: Because he's saying all of that, he doesn't seem to
• 2:02:39
  Speaker 7: be capable of being honest and admitting. He's trying to
• 2:02:43
  Speaker 7: infuse that with the very serious message of Orthodoxy, and
• 2:02:48
  Speaker 7: which also says that Adam's will, it's Adam ate the
• 2:02:54
  Speaker 7: fruit willfully, and his will is what needs healing first
• 2:02:58
  Speaker 7: in man, And I don't think Andrew wasn't.
• 2:03:00
  Speaker 2: She's the one who ate the fruit first.
• 2:03:02
  Speaker 7: Thank you for listening.
• 2:03:03
  Speaker 2: Absolutely, Why would Adam be the one who has.
• 2:03:08
  Speaker 7: But we ate it first here today?
• 2:03:11
  Speaker 3: I should get him on try Why.
• 2:03:15
  Speaker 1: No, he never he never goes on anywhere we can.
• 2:03:19
  Speaker 1: I'm just gonna stop. We're gonna pause it there. They're
• 2:03:21
  Speaker 1: just gonna don't want me to play more.
• 2:03:23
  Speaker 2: Well, who doesn't go on? I'm just curious, you're right?
• 2:03:26
  Speaker 1: Oh yeah, no, uh, you know, I don't know who
• 2:03:29
  Speaker 1: the fuck Peter Wright is, but we should try to
• 2:03:31
  Speaker 1: get Maybe he should have been here and she said
• 2:03:33
  Speaker 1: go ahead, and and then Nady said go ahead and
• 2:03:35
  Speaker 1: get him on. But he won't do appearances, probably because
• 2:03:39
  Speaker 1: he would get treated like shit. And I can't. He's
• 2:03:44
  Speaker 1: got a job he's trying to protect his job, and
• 2:03:46
  Speaker 1: I understand.
• 2:03:46
  Speaker 2: You'll just protect his job, but protect the people who
• 2:03:49
  Speaker 2: he works with. And I'm not saying anything more than that,
• 2:03:51
  Speaker 2: but like, this is the Yeah, this is not something
• 2:03:53
  Speaker 2: he's gonna do better off asking me or Brian because
• 2:03:57
  Speaker 2: we probably know more about Peter Wright than either now
• 2:04:00
  Speaker 2: or Andrew Wilson. But or no, don't don't ask d
• 2:04:05
  Speaker 2: ms bay or Paul elim again. Bring him back on
• 2:04:08
  Speaker 2: right because.
• 2:04:09
  Speaker 1: He done this show and I don't think Paul is
• 2:04:13
  Speaker 1: interested in debate especially.
• 2:04:16
  Speaker 2: Yeah, debating Daddy is just like you have to listen
• 2:04:19
  Speaker 2: to this pink noise generator for like an hour and
• 2:04:21
  Speaker 2: a half. It's like what cok uh? Stop stop making
• 2:04:26
  Speaker 2: acute accusations you can't prove. I mean the best part
• 2:04:29
  Speaker 2: of this debate was when they started to talk about
• 2:04:31
  Speaker 2: whether or not it's it's okay to be a men's
• 2:04:33
  Speaker 2: rights activist and the and he and Andrew's right, the
• 2:04:36
  Speaker 2: only thing that qualifies somebody as a men's rights activist
• 2:04:39
  Speaker 2: is that they advocate for a men's rights issue. There
• 2:04:42
  Speaker 2: you don't have to agree with any worldview.
• 2:04:46
  Speaker 1: You don't have to adopt it like a religion because
• 2:04:48
  Speaker 1: it is. You don't, it's just a lot of us
• 2:04:50
  Speaker 1: have I desire to address. Uh, let's say, injustice. I
• 2:04:55
  Speaker 1: would even call it equality.
• 2:04:57
  Speaker 2: Exactly just injustice, yeah, you know, And I mean and
• 2:05:01
  Speaker 2: apply in some cases apply the law equally between men
• 2:05:04
  Speaker 2: and women. If feminism is going to control the law,
• 2:05:07
  Speaker 2: and feminism's control narrative means, oh, we're going in to
• 2:05:10
  Speaker 2: make equality, then they should allow criticisms based on how
• 2:05:15
  Speaker 2: that equality affects one half of the equality, which is men,
• 2:05:20
  Speaker 2: you know, like this, If that's going to be our
• 2:05:22
  Speaker 2: principle that guides our laws, then there should be actual
• 2:05:26
  Speaker 2: criticism to how equality is being judged. Right, and there isn't.
• 2:05:31
  Speaker 2: Now it's just feminism define it and the laws follow feminism.
• 2:05:35
  Speaker 2: Well that's not fair because I mean, would you want
• 2:05:39
  Speaker 2: to invest in a government department that I don't know,
• 2:05:42
  Speaker 2: the government department of making sure widget's widget. And then
• 2:05:47
  Speaker 2: they define what a widget is, and they define what
• 2:05:49
  Speaker 2: a widget is supposed to do, and they've defined it
• 2:05:52
  Speaker 2: as in whatever way that they want. There's no oversight
• 2:05:57
  Speaker 2: to make sure they're actually doing what they're doing. There's
• 2:05:59
  Speaker 2: no oversight to feminism to make sure they're actually creating
• 2:06:02
  Speaker 2: equality none whatsoever. We're the oversight, Yeah, a small channel
• 2:06:08
  Speaker 2: of people who've looked into these issues, studied these issues.
• 2:06:11
  Speaker 2: We're their oversight. Like we are. We are prosecuted by
• 2:06:16
  Speaker 2: the Department of Homeland and Security most likely. You know,
• 2:06:19
  Speaker 2: we're probably on a whole bunch of black category lists.
• 2:06:23
  Speaker 2: And we even there is even feminists who talk to
• 2:06:25
  Speaker 2: YouTube to talk about censoring us. We're their oversight. Guys.
• 2:06:30
  Speaker 2: If without us they'd have none, And we are barely
• 2:06:34
  Speaker 2: a drop in the bucket or a drop in the
• 2:06:36
  Speaker 2: ocean of their influence. And and and again. I mean,
• 2:06:41
  Speaker 2: I've talked to scholars in criminology. The fact is that
• 2:06:45
  Speaker 2: feminism just went into a wide open space, made any
• 2:06:49
  Speaker 2: assertions they wanted. They were swallen, swallowed wholesale without any
• 2:06:54
  Speaker 2: expectation that they like This entire damn stream showed any
• 2:07:00
  Speaker 2: expectation that feminists prove what they're saying. So they just
• 2:07:04
  Speaker 2: made a whole bunch of assertions with no proof that
• 2:07:07
  Speaker 2: were accepted by academia and no oversight, right, just nothing.
• 2:07:13
  Speaker 2: They made shit up. Feminists made shit up about equality,
• 2:07:18
  Speaker 2: They made shit up about the past, never were held
• 2:07:21
  Speaker 2: to any standard of proof, just like Natty doesn't hold
• 2:07:25
  Speaker 2: herself to a standard of proof in any of our assertions,
• 2:07:27
  Speaker 2: and they were just accepted, and now our law is
• 2:07:30
  Speaker 2: informed by that. It's insane and you don't have to
• 2:07:35
  Speaker 2: actually even believe in egalitarianism to criticize this.
• 2:07:41
  Speaker 4: Right.
• 2:07:42
  Speaker 2: But again, Natty certainly agrees with the woman's rights part
• 2:07:48
  Speaker 2: of egalitarianism, because she's spoken out against Project twenty twenty five,
• 2:07:52
  Speaker 2: which was supposed to put her in a burka and
• 2:07:56
  Speaker 2: slap a freaking duct tape on her every time she
• 2:07:59
  Speaker 2: attempted to talk, like Nope, here's your duct tape, your
• 2:08:03
  Speaker 2: state sanctioned duct tape. Nanny, you're not allowed to speak,
• 2:08:06
  Speaker 2: which incidentally is in orthodoxy, Like there's a bunch of
• 2:08:11
  Speaker 2: freaking super chats saying women should not lecture men and
• 2:08:15
  Speaker 2: stuff like that.
• 2:08:15
  Speaker 1: Well that's in Christianity. There's mostly about like, you know,
• 2:08:20
  Speaker 1: it's not the same as say, Islam, It's not like
• 2:08:23
  Speaker 1: that at all. But there is like an understanding of
• 2:08:26
  Speaker 1: the natural order I believe, and that you know, women
• 2:08:30
  Speaker 1: have a place in it. But there are rules. I mean,
• 2:08:32
  Speaker 1: there's expectations of men and women in the church. It's
• 2:08:36
  Speaker 1: just that the expectations on men. Men don't complain about
• 2:08:39
  Speaker 1: them even today in America. In the church I go to.
• 2:08:44
  Speaker 1: I go to an Orthodox church. Case you guys don't know,
• 2:08:47
  Speaker 1: I'm in a church whatever they call it. I'm sorry.
• 2:08:50
  Speaker 1: I'm new to this and I'm not like so proud
• 2:08:52
  Speaker 1: of iss to think that I know what it all means,
• 2:08:54
  Speaker 1: because I don't. That's part of what's beautiful about it
• 2:08:57
  Speaker 1: is that I know that I don't know shit and
• 2:08:58
  Speaker 1: that I'm small, and that that's like part of like
• 2:09:02
  Speaker 1: it's like the first thing you have to understand about
• 2:09:04
  Speaker 1: yourself is that you're not the main character in the story.
• 2:09:07
  Speaker 4: Right.
• 2:09:07
  Speaker 1: But even at my church, there's they they're basically a rule.
• 2:09:12
  Speaker 1: It's like a rule that women have to be veiled
• 2:09:14
  Speaker 1: in church. That's just one of the things I'm veiled
• 2:09:18
  Speaker 1: as in they wear something on their head. It's not like,
• 2:09:20
  Speaker 1: you know, completely covered, just like to cover their hair.
• 2:09:23
  Speaker 1: And there's a lot of women that have a real
• 2:09:26
  Speaker 1: big problem with that, and it's like a subject that's nothing,
• 2:09:30
  Speaker 1: Like you're not at that's like nothing. Meanwhile, there's debates
• 2:09:33
  Speaker 1: going on at the higher levels that there should be
• 2:09:35
  Speaker 1: females in the actual like stat in the clergy like
• 2:09:39
  Speaker 1: deacons and stuff. Now there are nuns, but like not
• 2:09:42
  Speaker 1: not deacons, right, but they're but they're arguing for that
• 2:09:45
  Speaker 1: right now.
• 2:09:46
  Speaker 6: So the.
• 2:09:48
  Speaker 1: Modern world, as it were, is trying to like muscle
• 2:09:52
  Speaker 1: its way into even Orthodoxy. I mean, Protestantism is completely
• 2:09:57
  Speaker 1: cooked by ginocentrism. I will I'm just call it that
• 2:10:00
  Speaker 1: because I think it applies there. And Catholicism is under siege,
• 2:10:05
  Speaker 1: it's it's starting to buckle under that. But even Orthodoxy
• 2:10:09
  Speaker 1: isn't safe from it. And when you when you understand that,
• 2:10:12
  Speaker 1: the I mean, some people would argue the Catholic Church
• 2:10:15
  Speaker 1: is the oldest church, but there's a strong case be
• 2:10:17
  Speaker 1: made that the Orthodox Church is the first church, is
• 2:10:19
  Speaker 1: the oldest church, and it's been around for thousands of years,
• 2:10:24
  Speaker 1: thousands of years. And that being said, you know that
• 2:10:31
  Speaker 1: is not immune. This is why, like, because we're humans,
• 2:10:33
  Speaker 1: we have to be steadfast against like altering things. It's
• 2:10:37
  Speaker 1: like the one it's one of the churches that has
• 2:10:39
  Speaker 1: changed the least over the years because it's so strict.
• 2:10:43
  Speaker 1: Remember it was the only bulwark against the Bolshevik revolution
• 2:10:47
  Speaker 1: in Russia, the only thing that was there to provide
• 2:10:51
  Speaker 1: any kind of like refuge from the Bolshevik Revolution was
• 2:10:54
  Speaker 1: the Orthodox Church, which is why they basically for a
• 2:10:57
  Speaker 1: while had banned it to the point where it was
• 2:10:59
  Speaker 1: underground during the Communist you know, the reign of the Soviets.
• 2:11:05
  Speaker 1: But anyway, so now we're dealing with people who have
• 2:11:11
  Speaker 1: just found this thing, and yeah, they're gonna maybe they're
• 2:11:13
  Speaker 1: gonna have different interpretations on it or whatever. I think
• 2:11:17
  Speaker 1: what my belief is is that Natty thinks that kinocentrism theory,
• 2:11:24
  Speaker 1: as she puts it, is like sort of like the
• 2:11:27
  Speaker 1: flip side of feminist patriarchy theory, as in it it's
• 2:11:31
  Speaker 1: central to the ideology, but it is not. It's not
• 2:11:35
  Speaker 1: the same. In order to be a feminist, you have
• 2:11:37
  Speaker 1: to believe in patriarchy. It's like step one patriarchy and
• 2:11:40
  Speaker 1: not patriarchy like in the let's say, divine sense of patriarchy,
• 2:11:44
  Speaker 1: like from the Bible, like as it's written, but patriarchy
• 2:11:47
  Speaker 1: from the feminist definition, which is essentially a tool used
• 2:11:50
  Speaker 1: by men to oppress women at the expense of women
• 2:11:52
  Speaker 1: to the benefit of themselves. That's the feminist So it's
• 2:11:55
  Speaker 1: not just patriarchy. You have to believe their specific version
• 2:12:00
  Speaker 1: of patriarchy, which is also based in the idea that
• 2:12:04
  Speaker 1: men and women don't have to like live like this.
• 2:12:07
  Speaker 1: So it's like a you know, it's got to be
• 2:12:10
  Speaker 1: like a cultural thing that has to be undone, a
• 2:12:13
  Speaker 1: social thing that has to be undone. And we've talked
• 2:12:16
  Speaker 1: about it on the show all the time. That's why
• 2:12:18
  Speaker 1: when we get into discussions about like, you know, you'll
• 2:12:22
  Speaker 1: see feminists that I'd be like, well, I didn't like
• 2:12:23
  Speaker 1: the first wave, but I'm okay with the second wave,
• 2:12:26
  Speaker 1: or i don't like the second wave, but you know,
• 2:12:28
  Speaker 1: or whatever, or I like I hate the current wave,
• 2:12:32
  Speaker 1: but I'm okay with this other wave or this, or
• 2:12:34
  Speaker 1: I think we need feminism in you know, the Middle East,
• 2:12:37
  Speaker 1: we need feminism in this other country because that's where
• 2:12:39
  Speaker 1: women are really being impressed. That's why we push back
• 2:12:41
  Speaker 1: on that, because all feminism is based on that one lie,
• 2:12:46
  Speaker 1: the central lie that men hate women enough to do
• 2:12:49
  Speaker 1: this to women, Okay, and and not just like individual men,
• 2:12:54
  Speaker 1: which I think would also be a very hard a
• 2:12:57
  Speaker 1: hard sell, but that when men as a group would
• 2:13:01
  Speaker 1: do this to women. But ginocentrism is not the flip
• 2:13:05
  Speaker 1: of that. It's not even both like again, a lot
• 2:13:09
  Speaker 1: of people disagree with whether or not it's even valid
• 2:13:12
  Speaker 1: and what it means.
• 2:13:14
  Speaker 2: Well, it's also mischaracterized like ginocentrism. Isn't just women win
• 2:13:20
  Speaker 2: all the time. It's this idea that women are the
• 2:13:24
  Speaker 2: center around that men are judged by so providing and
• 2:13:29
  Speaker 2: protecting women, and it's it's absolutely like it's evolutionary, like
• 2:13:34
  Speaker 2: if women do not survive, then you know, there isn't reproduction.
• 2:13:37
  Speaker 2: Now there's a certain there's there's uh, there're factors that
• 2:13:43
  Speaker 2: make this very simplistic. So the other factors involved, but
• 2:13:46
  Speaker 2: it's the idea that women are the center, and it's
• 2:13:48
  Speaker 2: you see it everywhere, like look at terrorist organizations in
• 2:13:51
  Speaker 2: the Middle East. I just demonetize this stream. But we're
• 2:13:54
  Speaker 2: already demonetized, so who cares. It's the women who provide
• 2:13:57
  Speaker 2: the continuity from generation to generation, the generation and in
• 2:14:01
  Speaker 2: some cases really horrifically, like the women who are raping
• 2:14:04
  Speaker 2: boys in the un AID camps because they want to
• 2:14:08
  Speaker 2: make more martyrs for their fanatical religion. But it's the
• 2:14:12
  Speaker 2: women who provide that continuity, who teach the children, who
• 2:14:16
  Speaker 2: give them the emotional habits that support the greater society.
• 2:14:19
  Speaker 2: That's the recognition of it. It's like, and there's the
• 2:14:22
  Speaker 2: old saying and Christian cultures. I'm not going to say
• 2:14:25
  Speaker 2: it's Christian. The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.
• 2:14:28
  Speaker 2: That's gynocentrism, right, that's it. That doesn't mean women win
• 2:14:34
  Speaker 2: in every circumstance. It means that they have this influence
• 2:14:38
  Speaker 2: over society, and they have this influence socially over groups
• 2:14:42
  Speaker 2: of people and communities, and when they don't use that
• 2:14:45
  Speaker 2: influence to maintain society, we get a shithole, a smoking crater.
• 2:14:50
  Speaker 2: Rights that can be completely compatible with the idea that
• 2:14:54
  Speaker 2: women men are on the outside, which is the place
• 2:14:57
  Speaker 2: where authority lies, especially authority in relationship to defending territory
• 2:15:02
  Speaker 2: and establishing cultural norms around criminality. Like, it's not it's
• 2:15:08
  Speaker 2: not this kind of thing that it's just, oh, women
• 2:15:11
  Speaker 2: are out to get men throughout all the human history.
• 2:15:14
  Speaker 2: It's just a recognition of women's particular social power, right,
• 2:15:18
  Speaker 2: and that we need if we want to pursue so
• 2:15:21
  Speaker 2: called egalitarianism, then we need to recognize it and account
• 2:15:25
  Speaker 2: for it when it comes to various situations. And it's
• 2:15:28
  Speaker 2: it's this is the way that's being presented by by
• 2:15:33
  Speaker 2: natty is she is denying responsibility for something, and I
• 2:15:39
  Speaker 2: think that's what she's drawn to because she doesn't even
• 2:15:42
  Speaker 2: want to take as a Christian. She doesn't even want
• 2:15:43
  Speaker 2: to take responsibility for her part as a woman for
• 2:15:46
  Speaker 2: the fall. She wants that all to be on men,
• 2:15:50
  Speaker 2: which is.
• 2:15:52
  Speaker 6: Oh.
• 2:15:53
  Speaker 1: I think she has a different interpretation of yeah all
• 2:15:57
  Speaker 1: or at least Adam and Eve thing. So she said
• 2:15:59
  Speaker 1: that at at like Sin is greater because he took
• 2:16:03
  Speaker 1: the apple willingly. But that suggests that Eve did was
• 2:16:07
  Speaker 1: like somehow the serpent tricked her and she wasn't. It
• 2:16:11
  Speaker 1: was like the serpent had thrall over Eve and got
• 2:16:15
  Speaker 1: her to eat the apple. She had no ability to
• 2:16:17
  Speaker 1: stop herself. But the promise from the serpent, to my understanding,
• 2:16:21
  Speaker 1: was that he's like, if you eat of this fruit,
• 2:16:23
  Speaker 1: you will become like God. So that would basically mean
• 2:16:26
  Speaker 1: you will have power, and that's why Eve did it.
• 2:16:29
  Speaker 1: So it was because Eve wanted to be like God.
• 2:16:32
  Speaker 1: And then she offered it to Adam, and Adam the
• 2:16:35
  Speaker 1: original sin said okay, and worst that was his sin
• 2:16:39
  Speaker 1: was listening to her, so basically giving her authority over
• 2:16:43
  Speaker 1: him and doing what she asked. But worse than that
• 2:16:45
  Speaker 1: is when God came and was like, hey, man, I
• 2:16:48
  Speaker 1: you know what you guys ate the apple right? And
• 2:16:51
  Speaker 1: then Adam passed the buck and said no, no, she
• 2:16:53
  Speaker 1: made me do it, so that was his sin. But
• 2:16:56
  Speaker 1: she also they both did it for that reason. They
• 2:16:59
  Speaker 1: wanted to be like God. That was their sin. And
• 2:17:02
  Speaker 1: that's by the way, in a way that's like a
• 2:17:05
  Speaker 1: commentary on sort of modern day you know, the identity
• 2:17:09
  Speaker 1: politics of the day. It's like, I, you know, you
• 2:17:12
  Speaker 1: know how how people I think I.
• 2:17:16
  Speaker 2: Choose my identity.
• 2:17:17
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I choose my identity right, like it's not given
• 2:17:19
  Speaker 1: to me. Like there was somebody made a post. I
• 2:17:22
  Speaker 1: think it was Stefan mallin you actually, which is funny
• 2:17:25
  Speaker 1: because Molin you came up in this conversation. He's on
• 2:17:27
  Speaker 1: Twitter and he's like on fire, I love it. But
• 2:17:29
  Speaker 1: he said, name, uh, something that you see in someone,
• 2:17:35
  Speaker 1: Like when somebody makes an opening statement, what is the
• 2:17:38
  Speaker 1: first thing you see that that turns you off of
• 2:17:40
  Speaker 1: them completely? And I answered when I didn't think I
• 2:17:43
  Speaker 1: was surprised nobody else did, but I said mine, for me,
• 2:17:46
  Speaker 1: it's when somebody starts a sentence with as a blank.
• 2:17:50
  Speaker 1: That that's like how I I was like, okay, you know,
• 2:17:52
  Speaker 1: like as a woman, as a queer person, as a
• 2:17:55
  Speaker 1: black person, whatever i'man, I immediately just tune it out,
• 2:17:58
  Speaker 1: like okay, you because that's what you're doing, You're saying,
• 2:18:01
  Speaker 1: You're basically kind of saying, I am a small god.
• 2:18:04
  Speaker 1: Here is my title and everything, and it's got nothing
• 2:18:07
  Speaker 1: to do with something I've done. It's just about me
• 2:18:10
  Speaker 1: as a person, you know. And I think that that
• 2:18:13
  Speaker 1: is like the vain glory that you know, we are
• 2:18:16
  Speaker 1: all sort of steeped in and and it's it is
• 2:18:18
  Speaker 1: what it is. We are. We are falling, you know,
• 2:18:20
  Speaker 1: in that sense. But to but you can't, like as
• 2:18:24
  Speaker 1: a as a I just did it. I don't think
• 2:18:28
  Speaker 1: that I would ever say that men are not fallen
• 2:18:33
  Speaker 1: as well. And I think that that nanny does seem
• 2:18:36
  Speaker 1: to be suggesting that women have nothing. They have no excuse,
• 2:18:41
  Speaker 1: Like they have no not an excuse. What is it,
• 2:18:42
  Speaker 1: no incentive to like try to make things better because
• 2:18:46
  Speaker 1: because Eve and Adam and because Adam, men have to
• 2:18:49
  Speaker 1: be the ones to step up. But of course when
• 2:18:51
  Speaker 1: men do step up, which they did in the last
• 2:18:53
  Speaker 1: election for example, that's the wrong kind of stepping up. Guys,
• 2:18:57
  Speaker 1: you're not supposed to do that because that's scary.
• 2:19:00
  Speaker 2: You know, responsibility and do everything that women say. Yeah,
• 2:19:05
  Speaker 2: take responsibility for doing everything that women say. I just
• 2:19:08
  Speaker 2: want to say that ginocentrism. Cheruso Churiso is demonstrating ginocentrism accountability.
• 2:19:14
  Speaker 2: He says accountability was Adam's kryptonite and it wasn't Eve's.
• 2:19:19
  Speaker 2: Right there, that's ginocentrism. That is the automatic assumption of
• 2:19:24
  Speaker 2: most people. Remember that nothing happens a man is to blame.
• 2:19:29
  Speaker 1: Eve was the So the reason why Eve was the
• 2:19:33
  Speaker 1: first one was because Eve was. There are some that
• 2:19:38
  Speaker 1: say it was because she was able to like relate
• 2:19:41
  Speaker 1: to the animals of the of the Garden of Eden
• 2:19:45
  Speaker 1: more than Adam, so she could talk to them, right,
• 2:19:48
  Speaker 1: which is why the snake spoke to her. Is why
• 2:19:51
  Speaker 1: you know that happened. And so she was an ad
• 2:19:54
  Speaker 1: It's like what what women are is they're the advocates
• 2:19:57
  Speaker 1: for those who don't have a voice. That's what that
• 2:19:59
  Speaker 1: simm licenses as well, which is why women you know,
• 2:20:02
  Speaker 1: you can look around you. They are typically the biggest activists, right,
• 2:20:07
  Speaker 1: and of course that can be used against them to
• 2:20:09
  Speaker 1: make them advocate for things that are not right or
• 2:20:12
  Speaker 1: not good, but it doesn't matter. It's what they're good
• 2:20:14
  Speaker 1: at doing. It's what they tend to do. But when
• 2:20:16
  Speaker 1: God came, Eve did not advocate for Adam, so like
• 2:20:21
  Speaker 1: her ability to do that was not there. She just
• 2:20:23
  Speaker 1: let it unfold. So and again it is a sin
• 2:20:27
  Speaker 1: like it like they both sin. That's the point, you know.
• 2:20:30
  Speaker 1: The other thing I was gonna say is that I
• 2:20:32
  Speaker 1: think again Natty's criticizing like members of the clergy that
• 2:20:39
  Speaker 1: have been doing this for decades. I mean, like, at
• 2:20:42
  Speaker 1: least in the case of Father Moses, he's been a
• 2:20:44
  Speaker 1: you know, a priest for like twelve years. Are you
• 2:20:46
  Speaker 1: sure the people who vetted him like thought like they
• 2:20:49
  Speaker 1: like did they not know what he believed? And he
• 2:20:52
  Speaker 1: still is a priest, Like he hasn't been like excommunicated
• 2:20:55
  Speaker 1: or anything. He hasn't been kicked out or exiled, So
• 2:20:59
  Speaker 1: is he wrong? And like, how can you know when
• 2:21:01
  Speaker 1: you've been doing this for what like three years? I mean,
• 2:21:05
  Speaker 1: like I've been doing it for about three years, and
• 2:21:09
  Speaker 1: I'm I don't talk about it much because I know,
• 2:21:12
  Speaker 1: you know, it's like because of humility.
• 2:21:14
  Speaker 2: Basically, that's what I call him.
• 2:21:19
  Speaker 1: I like chia, Yeah, good with eggs.
• 2:21:24
  Speaker 2: I just I feel like this was a lot of noise.
• 2:21:28
  Speaker 1: It's kind of what I expected. But I thought that
• 2:21:30
  Speaker 1: better than I thought.
• 2:21:31
  Speaker 2: Entertaining. It's entertaining to people. Yeah, I think that what
• 2:21:36
  Speaker 2: did we learn from this, aside from Natty is crazy
• 2:21:39
  Speaker 2: and she's obsessed with Peter Wright.
• 2:21:42
  Speaker 1: Well, now I know, but here's what I would saying.
• 2:21:45
  Speaker 1: Now I know some things. I know for sure. Andrew
• 2:21:48
  Speaker 1: Wilson gets what we're doing and he doesn't disagree. And
• 2:21:51
  Speaker 1: that's good because he has a massive platform. He doesn't
• 2:21:54
  Speaker 1: have to call himself anything. This is something that we
• 2:21:56
  Speaker 1: established years and years and years ago. You know where
• 2:21:59
  Speaker 1: people say, well, well, why don't you remember Sargon. He
• 2:22:02
  Speaker 1: used to say, you guys should just stop calling yourselves
• 2:22:04
  Speaker 1: MRAs and we were like, yeah, that's not gonna matter.
• 2:22:07
  Speaker 1: And he eventually came around on it, because it's like,
• 2:22:09
  Speaker 1: it's not a title that we give ourselves. It's something
• 2:22:12
  Speaker 1: that we just do. It's a verb. It defines what
• 2:22:14
  Speaker 1: we do.
• 2:22:15
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and we basically feminists tried to get people to
• 2:22:18
  Speaker 2: stop doing it by labeling it men's rights activism.
• 2:22:21
  Speaker 1: Right right, Yeah, and they use it as a pejorative,
• 2:22:24
  Speaker 1: and we just kept on moving. And also because it's
• 2:22:28
  Speaker 1: just a verb, you can't put it in a box,
• 2:22:31
  Speaker 1: so that she can't. And then and that's to our credit, right,
• 2:22:35
  Speaker 1: but Natty wants to put us in a box. That's
• 2:22:37
  Speaker 1: why he said, oh, you all subscribe to the guynocentric worldview, right, Yeah,
• 2:22:40
  Speaker 1: I wanted to understand what she meant by that, and
• 2:22:43
  Speaker 1: now I do have a better idea, and I think
• 2:22:46
  Speaker 1: there is something about that she misses too.
• 2:22:48
  Speaker 2: But go a right, there was some good stuff. It
• 2:22:50
  Speaker 2: was it was about to five percent signal. I think
• 2:22:53
  Speaker 2: if if Natty wasn't there and Andrew Wilson was talking
• 2:22:57
  Speaker 2: about somebody who's like a serious perch and it probably
• 2:23:01
  Speaker 2: be significantly more signal than it was. But so, and
• 2:23:05
  Speaker 2: I appreciate. Yeah, you're right the whole, the whole exchange
• 2:23:08
  Speaker 2: between what's wrong with being men's rights activists, there's nothing
• 2:23:12
  Speaker 2: wrong with it. And here's the other thing that I
• 2:23:14
  Speaker 2: want to point out about goddess centrism versus feminism, because
• 2:23:17
  Speaker 2: she says they're they're the same.
• 2:23:19
  Speaker 1: Well that's my what I I eluded that. But she
• 2:23:22
  Speaker 1: does say that their MRAs and feminists are both they
• 2:23:24
  Speaker 1: have the same YI view, Yeah, yeah, yeah.
• 2:23:29
  Speaker 2: But the thing is that egalitarianism is something that's generally
• 2:23:33
  Speaker 2: a lot of people agree with. Even in history, I
• 2:23:36
  Speaker 2: think if you actually look at how people discussed the
• 2:23:41
  Speaker 2: relationship between men and women, there was a lot of
• 2:23:43
  Speaker 2: a desire for galitarianism, even when times when you wouldn't
• 2:23:47
  Speaker 2: think it would be normal, times that feminism has presented
• 2:23:52
  Speaker 2: as being you know, the dark Ages, and even in
• 2:23:55
  Speaker 2: Christian theology, you know men and women are one in God.
• 2:23:59
  Speaker 2: That's something about egalitarianism. So I think that there's a
• 2:24:03
  Speaker 2: strong desire for galitarianism because it feels just. It's why
• 2:24:07
  Speaker 2: men were ones who were pushing women's vote more than
• 2:24:10
  Speaker 2: women were, because they wanted egalitarianism. They felt like it
• 2:24:14
  Speaker 2: was a principled ideal, and I'm not sure women were
• 2:24:17
  Speaker 2: as driven by principles. Maybe in that sense, they're probably
• 2:24:21
  Speaker 2: maybe more driven by common sense. But regardless, my point
• 2:24:26
  Speaker 2: is that feminism's patriarchy or conjecture requires people believing that
• 2:24:35
  Speaker 2: men's in authority equals women oppressed. So you can't conceive
• 2:24:41
  Speaker 2: of a situation where men in an authority and women
• 2:24:44
  Speaker 2: are actually treated better than other men are right, while
• 2:24:49
  Speaker 2: they call that patriarchy hurts men too. They dismissed that.
• 2:24:52
  Speaker 2: But they are making the assertion that one equals the other,
• 2:24:54
  Speaker 2: not that you have to prove a causal relationship, and
• 2:24:57
  Speaker 2: they don't. They say, we don't have to prove a
• 2:24:59
  Speaker 2: causal relationship. Men in authority equals women oppressed. Now, oppression
• 2:25:03
  Speaker 2: is the unjust exercise of authority. So in order to
• 2:25:06
  Speaker 2: actually prove that men in authority equals women oppressed, you
• 2:25:09
  Speaker 2: have to prove that men unjustly use their authority. And
• 2:25:13
  Speaker 2: the problem with that is throughout history, men are usually
• 2:25:18
  Speaker 2: the ones enforcing the roles of provision and protection on
• 2:25:22
  Speaker 2: other men for women, which is why women have of
• 2:25:26
  Speaker 2: survival advantage throughout history despite not being stronger or having
• 2:25:31
  Speaker 2: the same degree of endurance, et cetera. So that that
• 2:25:35
  Speaker 2: doesn't hold true. Men in authority does not equal women oppressed.
• 2:25:39
  Speaker 2: But feminists believe or assert that the one equals the other,
• 2:25:44
  Speaker 2: not even that equals the one is the other, Like
• 2:25:46
  Speaker 2: there's no there's no relationship that they have to prove there.
• 2:25:49
  Speaker 2: So they that was one of their foundational things that
• 2:25:52
  Speaker 2: nobody said, well, maybe you actually have to prove that,
• 2:25:54
  Speaker 2: you know, you have to develop some scientific some scientific
• 2:25:59
  Speaker 2: exercises that actually show that to be true or false. No,
• 2:26:03
  Speaker 2: it was just accepted, just accepted. That relationship with just accepted,
• 2:26:08
  Speaker 2: and it shouldn't have been. And everything else falls from that.
• 2:26:11
  Speaker 2: And not only do feminists assert that men in power,
• 2:26:16
  Speaker 2: men in authority over women equals women oppressed without proving
• 2:26:19
  Speaker 2: the relationship, they also assert that men use beatings and
• 2:26:25
  Speaker 2: rape to uphold their power over women. So we're not
• 2:26:29
  Speaker 2: just getting the initial assumption, which is that men in
• 2:26:33
  Speaker 2: authority when equals women oppressed, which requires believing that men's
• 2:26:37
  Speaker 2: authority is innately cruel and unjust. Now we're operationalizing it
• 2:26:43
  Speaker 2: and saying that men's authority equals rape and beatings. Right,
• 2:26:47
  Speaker 2: that's the feminist patriarchy in its essence. Okay, ginocentrism is
• 2:26:52
  Speaker 2: just people prefer to benefit women, People judge things by
• 2:26:56
  Speaker 2: women's benefit. Like, that's not actually a hateful statement. It's
• 2:27:03
  Speaker 2: basically just an observation, and it's their studies that prove
• 2:27:07
  Speaker 2: it's true. It's just an observation about how humans do.
• 2:27:11
  Speaker 2: Is it a hateful statement towards women? There's nothing hateful
• 2:27:14
  Speaker 2: about it? Is that hateful? Can somebody explain how that's hateful.
• 2:27:18
  Speaker 2: The human beings just prefer to benefit women, probably because
• 2:27:21
  Speaker 2: women are their moms, you know, and they're also the
• 2:27:24
  Speaker 2: reason why a society has a future in terms of
• 2:27:27
  Speaker 2: its children. There's nothing hateful about that. It's not saying
• 2:27:30
  Speaker 2: that women use ghino centrism to rape and beat women
• 2:27:33
  Speaker 2: to uphold their privileges, you know. It's just a neutral
• 2:27:37
  Speaker 2: statement of how we'd arrange where we want things to
• 2:27:40
  Speaker 2: be benefited. And the other assumption is that if you
• 2:27:43
  Speaker 2: benefit women, you're also benefiting the children that they have
• 2:27:46
  Speaker 2: with men. Right, there's nothing hateful about it. I dare
• 2:27:51
  Speaker 2: you to tell me what's hateful about ginocentrism. Feminism has
• 2:27:57
  Speaker 2: a lot of hateful shit in it from the inception.
• 2:28:02
  Speaker 2: Gino centrism is just an observation. Okay.
• 2:28:06
  Speaker 1: I was just gonna say, I got something else about
• 2:28:10
  Speaker 1: ginocentrism that I think is important to that I would
• 2:28:15
  Speaker 1: bring up and I know that. Okay. First of all,
• 2:28:18
  Speaker 1: going back to the egalitarian view again, MRAs are all
• 2:28:22
  Speaker 1: over the map like what they believe.
• 2:28:24
  Speaker 4: Right.
• 2:28:25
  Speaker 1: You got people that are more like Paul Elim, you
• 2:28:27
  Speaker 1: got people who are more like Warren Ferrell. There's a
• 2:28:29
  Speaker 1: lot of overlap, but they're they're definitely distinct in the
• 2:28:32
  Speaker 1: way that they view things. I think Warren Ferrell is
• 2:28:34
  Speaker 1: definitely more in the egalitarian camp because of his like
• 2:28:38
  Speaker 1: former you know, like life as a member of the
• 2:28:43
  Speaker 1: National Organization for Women and all that, and you can
• 2:28:46
  Speaker 1: tell like that, like he's definitely down with the egalitarianism.
• 2:28:49
  Speaker 1: Don't have a problem with that. Warren Ferrell's great, He's
• 2:28:52
  Speaker 1: done a lot of great work. Have nothing but massive
• 2:28:54
  Speaker 1: respect for him. Okay, he's the mister Rogers, grandpa of
• 2:28:57
  Speaker 1: the men's movement. Paul Elam is not like that, but
• 2:29:00
  Speaker 1: they but they still get along. Paul Eland does I believe,
• 2:29:03
  Speaker 1: at least to some degree, subscribe to you know, Peter
• 2:29:07
  Speaker 1: Wright's uh, you know ideas. And some people like v
• 2:29:10
  Speaker 1: For Vernon, who I know I've had in the show,
• 2:29:13
  Speaker 1: and a lot of other guys. They have like their
• 2:29:14
  Speaker 1: own different tastes and they're they're all over the place
• 2:29:17
  Speaker 1: politically too, right. Warren Ferrell is more of an old
• 2:29:20
  Speaker 1: school lefty Democrat. Guy Vernon is like a you know,
• 2:29:23
  Speaker 1: Randian like libertarian. Guy. Paul is like, uh, you know,
• 2:29:28
  Speaker 1: more like libertarian Maga type, you know, loves his guns,
• 2:29:32
  Speaker 1: none of that matters to us, but like, like what
• 2:29:35
  Speaker 1: we care about is the same. Like Karen is, you know,
• 2:29:38
  Speaker 1: an atheist libertarian, and like you know, Hannah is a
• 2:29:40
  Speaker 1: little bit more conservative whatever, right, but we all like see,
• 2:29:46
  Speaker 1: you're well, you're basically like an old liberal. But uh,
• 2:29:51
  Speaker 1: but where where what matters is where we like agree
• 2:29:54
  Speaker 1: and there's no baseline anti female sentiment coming out of it.
• 2:29:58
  Speaker 1: And I think one of the other things that gets
• 2:30:01
  Speaker 1: missed A couple of things I want to bring up.
• 2:30:02
  Speaker 1: So one, to love someone does not mean you agree
• 2:30:06
  Speaker 1: with everything they do does not mean that you don't
• 2:30:08
  Speaker 1: criticize them when they make mistakes. In fact, if you
• 2:30:11
  Speaker 1: love someone, if you care about them, you should criticize
• 2:30:15
  Speaker 1: them when they're doing something self destructive, even if it
• 2:30:18
  Speaker 1: isn't hurting anybody else. Like if you know a person
• 2:30:20
  Speaker 1: and they just drink themselves stupid every night and you
• 2:30:23
  Speaker 1: don't say anything because hey, man, I don't want to, like,
• 2:30:26
  Speaker 1: you know, tell you what to do with your life
• 2:30:27
  Speaker 1: or whatever, because uh, you know, but you're not serving them,
• 2:30:31
  Speaker 1: Like maybe they do need your help. And it's okay
• 2:30:33
  Speaker 1: to criticize people when they make mistakes if you care
• 2:30:36
  Speaker 1: about them. So criticizing women or blaming women when they
• 2:30:39
  Speaker 1: do something wrong is not hatred, you know. So that's
• 2:30:44
  Speaker 1: that's another thing, is like we we you know, we
• 2:30:49
  Speaker 1: should be working towards that. Yeah, then that My My
• 2:30:54
  Speaker 1: thing about gynocentrism too is that I think there's different
• 2:30:59
  Speaker 1: ways that people define it. For some it's biological, for
• 2:31:02
  Speaker 1: some it's like learned behavior. I think that the way
• 2:31:06
  Speaker 1: that like Lindsay and I have been having conversations about
• 2:31:08
  Speaker 1: this because she's been sort of like takt, She's had
• 2:31:10
  Speaker 1: some back and force with Peter Wright, and she did
• 2:31:12
  Speaker 1: a little bit of looking into this and where we
• 2:31:16
  Speaker 1: have landed, and I think this is really fascinating. So
• 2:31:19
  Speaker 1: before I get into the Guiyo schedule, I'm want to
• 2:31:21
  Speaker 1: bring up something that sort of related to it, So
• 2:31:24
  Speaker 1: World War Two as a mythology around it. That I'm
• 2:31:29
  Speaker 1: not saying that World War Two didn't happen, or any
• 2:31:31
  Speaker 1: of the atrocities that happened during that time did not happen.
• 2:31:34
  Speaker 1: I'm not saying that, but I'm saying that there it
• 2:31:36
  Speaker 1: has become like a historical moment that we view with
• 2:31:42
  Speaker 1: mythological reverence right where it affects everything we do is like,
• 2:31:49
  Speaker 1: have you noticed that if you call someone like Trump,
• 2:31:54
  Speaker 1: for example, if you don't like Trump, what what do
• 2:31:57
  Speaker 1: people call him? In the media and the activists they
• 2:32:00
  Speaker 1: call him Hitler? Right, Why don't they call him Satan
• 2:32:03
  Speaker 1: or Lucifer? But that they call him Hitler instead because
• 2:32:08
  Speaker 1: Hitler has has more cultural impact on people's emotions because
• 2:32:14
  Speaker 1: of the mythology than the devil does. It's like more
• 2:32:18
  Speaker 1: impactful than Satan. In fact, we view that we view
• 2:32:22
  Speaker 1: figures like Satan as a little bit like comical, right,
• 2:32:27
  Speaker 1: And some people say, well, this is because Hitler is
• 2:32:29
  Speaker 1: real or whatever, but you but you're not. You're missing
• 2:32:31
  Speaker 1: my point about like how impactful it is when you
• 2:32:35
  Speaker 1: see this mythology. The mythology of World War two, though,
• 2:32:38
  Speaker 1: is dying, and people are starting to ask real questions
• 2:32:41
  Speaker 1: about what really happened every during that period and everything
• 2:32:44
  Speaker 1: leading up to it, and they're finding that it's not
• 2:32:46
  Speaker 1: as black and white as we have been led to
• 2:32:48
  Speaker 1: believe through that mythology. And I think that ginocentrism is
• 2:32:52
  Speaker 1: the same thing for men and women. There's a mythology
• 2:32:56
  Speaker 1: of romance, as though it was like this thing that
• 2:33:01
  Speaker 1: always existed and this this thing about like romantic love
• 2:33:06
  Speaker 1: and dating and like finding the one and like that
• 2:33:09
  Speaker 1: you know, there's a soul made out there. I think
• 2:33:11
  Speaker 1: all of that is mythology. And I think that if you,
• 2:33:14
  Speaker 1: like you take a big historical view at the way
• 2:33:17
  Speaker 1: men and women pair it up for most of history,
• 2:33:20
  Speaker 1: it's nothing like it's happening now, and it makes you wonder, like,
• 2:33:24
  Speaker 1: is the reason why so few relationships work out and
• 2:33:27
  Speaker 1: so many divorces exist is because of this mythology of
• 2:33:31
  Speaker 1: how men and women get together that just is not
• 2:33:35
  Speaker 1: reflecting on reality, like the reality of our history, you
• 2:33:38
  Speaker 1: know what I mean. And I think that when Paul
• 2:33:42
  Speaker 1: Peter Wright, I'm sorry Peter Wright talks about Kino centrism,
• 2:33:46
  Speaker 1: at least from what like I said when I talked
• 2:33:48
  Speaker 1: to Lindsay about it, I think it is like that
• 2:33:52
  Speaker 1: that a lot of people. Ginocentrism is what you said
• 2:33:57
  Speaker 1: Elison about like carrying about women's well being, but it's
• 2:34:00
  Speaker 1: it's also like couched in that romantic model of how
• 2:34:04
  Speaker 1: we view women and and like what it means to
• 2:34:09
  Speaker 1: like be with someone when when it wasn't like that,
• 2:34:13
  Speaker 1: like in the past, you know, a marriage was essentially
• 2:34:16
  Speaker 1: a business contract between two families, and that was what
• 2:34:20
  Speaker 1: it was for most of history. So why do we
• 2:34:22
  Speaker 1: take on this whole now? Women come into a marriage
• 2:34:24
  Speaker 1: and they got like, you know, ten figures in debt,
• 2:34:26
  Speaker 1: not ten like six figures, five figures in debt, and
• 2:34:30
  Speaker 1: men are just expected to pick up the bill, you know,
• 2:34:32
  Speaker 1: Like that's where we are now because we have adopted that.
• 2:34:36
  Speaker 1: Does that make sense?
• 2:34:37
  Speaker 2: Yeah, no, it does. It's this It's a when I
• 2:34:42
  Speaker 2: say that, it's just generally the observation that we want
• 2:34:44
  Speaker 2: to benefit women. I mean, obviously there's a great deal
• 2:34:47
  Speaker 2: of influence socially, and so there are cultures that say, well,
• 2:34:53
  Speaker 2: and I think actually it might be seen as a
• 2:34:56
  Speaker 2: negotiation between the benefit of a wife versus the benefit
• 2:35:00
  Speaker 2: of the female relatives of her husband, who are also
• 2:35:03
  Speaker 2: going to be contributing financially and in terms of personal
• 2:35:06
  Speaker 2: resources to the children who may not be there are
• 2:35:11
  Speaker 2: genetically related. So I mean, in those societies where you
• 2:35:14
  Speaker 2: don't see the level of like over crass gynocentrism as
• 2:35:19
  Speaker 2: we do in our society, it may be because there's
• 2:35:21
  Speaker 2: a more of a negotiation between the traditional investment of
• 2:35:25
  Speaker 2: women in other women's offspring and the Because the thing
• 2:35:30
  Speaker 2: is that if a woman cheats on a man and
• 2:35:32
  Speaker 2: has a child in a place where all of the
• 2:35:36
  Speaker 2: relatives contribute, all of the male relatives contribute to that child,
• 2:35:39
  Speaker 2: she's not just defrauding the man, She's defrauding the aunt,
• 2:35:42
  Speaker 2: the mother, the grandmother, the sisters, you know, and the nieces,
• 2:35:48
  Speaker 2: like every other woman who's investing in her offspring that
• 2:35:51
  Speaker 2: isn't genetically related to her. So I think like a
• 2:35:54
  Speaker 2: lot of traditional pressures may come from that as well.
• 2:35:57
  Speaker 2: So I mean, yeah, there's a lot of different like
• 2:36:01
  Speaker 2: social pressures affect ginocentrism. It can change ginocentrism. And then
• 2:36:07
  Speaker 2: I would argue that in some ways ginocentrism can be
• 2:36:11
  Speaker 2: a benefit because without it, And when I say this,
• 2:36:19
  Speaker 2: just bear with me. Yeah, who are men without another?
• 2:36:27
  Speaker 2: And that's women? And the real problem is not that
• 2:36:31
  Speaker 2: women are men's other, that men judge themselves based on
• 2:36:36
  Speaker 2: women's benefit and protection and provision. The real problem is
• 2:36:39
  Speaker 2: that women don't do the same when it comes to men. Yeah,
• 2:36:43
  Speaker 2: And I mean maybe that was really what the fall
• 2:36:47
  Speaker 2: is about, you know, this idea that men and women like,
• 2:36:53
  Speaker 2: what would have happened if Eve had taken responsibility? What
• 2:36:57
  Speaker 2: would have happened if Adam had taken responsibility right like,
• 2:37:01
  Speaker 2: and that that maybe it would probably be a completely
• 2:37:03
  Speaker 2: different outcome. Maybe who knows. But my point is that
• 2:37:07
  Speaker 2: the fact that women function as men's other I don't
• 2:37:10
  Speaker 2: think is the problem. The problem is that men don't
• 2:37:14
  Speaker 2: function as women's other, and women are putting in other
• 2:37:18
  Speaker 2: things besides men. They might be putting in nationalism, they
• 2:37:21
  Speaker 2: might be putting in terrorist, uh, fundamentalist religion, all this
• 2:37:26
  Speaker 2: other thing, and I think it's I think it should
• 2:37:29
  Speaker 2: be men. And I think that if we ever get there,
• 2:37:33
  Speaker 2: if we ever get that brass ring, we're gonna have
• 2:37:36
  Speaker 2: quite the society. Let me tell you one that might
• 2:37:39
  Speaker 2: actually get to the stars. And that's what I advocate for. So,
• 2:37:44
  Speaker 2: I mean, when when Natty's like, oh god, you think
• 2:37:47
  Speaker 2: you're organist centrism, I like, well, yes, And I don't
• 2:37:51
  Speaker 2: necessarily think it's a bad thing. And it's a bad
• 2:37:53
  Speaker 2: thing in isolation, if it's balanced by androcentrism, it's not
• 2:37:57
  Speaker 2: a bad thing, right Like. All I'm concerned about is
• 2:38:02
  Speaker 2: the fact that there's an excess here of excusing women,
• 2:38:08
  Speaker 2: which I don't think benefits them at all. I mean,
• 2:38:10
  Speaker 2: women have never been more miserable in a society where
• 2:38:13
  Speaker 2: everything is taken care of for them and they're given
• 2:38:16
  Speaker 2: endless excuses and no responsibilities. They're living out the mouse
• 2:38:21
  Speaker 2: utopia and they've gone nuts, And that honestly isn't necessarily
• 2:38:27
  Speaker 2: a bad reflection on them, all right, because if they're
• 2:38:30
  Speaker 2: going nuts because they have nothing to do and no
• 2:38:32
  Speaker 2: responsibilities to live up to, what does that mean about
• 2:38:37
  Speaker 2: being responsible and being productive to women's psyche? It means
• 2:38:43
  Speaker 2: it's essential. And really what we talk where you talk
• 2:38:47
  Speaker 2: about men leading women, men need to give them those boundaries,
• 2:38:53
  Speaker 2: those expectations, and expect them to be productive. Maybe that's
• 2:38:56
  Speaker 2: where the dowry comes in, you know, expect them not
• 2:38:59
  Speaker 2: to make stupid decisions that leave them six figures in debt,
• 2:39:03
  Speaker 2: or with three children from men who did not want
• 2:39:06
  Speaker 2: to commit, right because they had a child with a
• 2:39:09
  Speaker 2: man who was well outside of their ability to get
• 2:39:12
  Speaker 2: him to commit. It's not his fault, you know. Men
• 2:39:15
  Speaker 2: are not obligated to commit to women. Women are not
• 2:39:18
  Speaker 2: obligated to commit to men. Okay, so if you have
• 2:39:20
  Speaker 2: a child with a man who is so outside your league,
• 2:39:23
  Speaker 2: you'll never get him to commit, or he functionally doesn't
• 2:39:27
  Speaker 2: have the commit genes, and it's probably usually pretty obvious.
• 2:39:31
  Speaker 2: You know, that's sort of on you because a lot
• 2:39:35
  Speaker 2: of women are all choosing those men. But regardless, my
• 2:39:38
  Speaker 2: point is that it's the lack of expectations on women.
• 2:39:43
  Speaker 2: It's the lack of expecting women to be productive that's
• 2:39:45
  Speaker 2: leading to their misery because they don't have any other
• 2:39:49
  Speaker 2: to serve. And maybe this is a pastate. I think
• 2:39:53
  Speaker 2: that men serve women, women serve men, and maybe we
• 2:39:57
  Speaker 2: serve the spaghetti monster, great unified source. I don't know
• 2:40:02
  Speaker 2: what to call it. I could call it God. We
• 2:40:05
  Speaker 2: serve God by loving each other. All right, all right,
• 2:40:10
  Speaker 2: there's enough woo for today.
• 2:40:11
  Speaker 1: Yeah. So yeah, in closing, I think Natty is a
• 2:40:16
  Speaker 1: pharisee and doesn't know.
• 2:40:18
  Speaker 2: Yeah, my husband popped in. I saw that hawk's nest
• 2:40:23
  Speaker 2: is my husband.
• 2:40:25
  Speaker 1: I know. I could tell. I'm going to do the
• 2:40:27
  Speaker 1: logo when I see it.
• 2:40:30
  Speaker 2: Loll. She's just this is on Natty. This is my
• 2:40:32
  Speaker 2: husband's words on Natty. She just talks her husband Jonathan.
• 2:40:36
  Speaker 2: She just talks and talks. Does she breathe? And Natty
• 2:40:41
  Speaker 2: is too prideful to follow Christian teaching. That's that's dire
• 2:40:46
  Speaker 2: Hawk's summation ic, Yeah.
• 2:40:50
  Speaker 1: You know, do you guys know who the Pharisees are?
• 2:40:51
  Speaker 1: I brought this up before. I suspected that she was
• 2:40:54
  Speaker 1: acting like that, but she is. Do you guys know
• 2:40:57
  Speaker 1: who the Pharisees are? Do you know the Pharisees? They were?
• 2:41:03
  Speaker 1: They were? But go ahead, what we're gonna say?
• 2:41:08
  Speaker 2: No, No, I know where the Pharisees are? I do,
• 2:41:10
  Speaker 2: but you please.
• 2:41:12
  Speaker 1: Illustrated illustrates. The Pharisees were the actually the primary antagonists
• 2:41:19
  Speaker 1: to Jesus during in the New Testament. A lot of
• 2:41:21
  Speaker 1: people claim it was the Romans, but that's not actually true.
• 2:41:25
  Speaker 1: The Pharisees were Jesus's primary antagonists. They were the primary opponents.
• 2:41:31
  Speaker 1: They were essentially the They were the It was like
• 2:41:38
  Speaker 1: a council of priests or high high ranking rabbis that
• 2:41:44
  Speaker 1: were highly like focused on legalistic adherence to the Jewish law,
• 2:41:50
  Speaker 1: and they emphasized external rituals over inner righteousness. Jesus criticized
• 2:41:56
  Speaker 1: them frequently for hypocrisy, pride, and burdening people with strict rules.
• 2:42:00
  Speaker 1: They are basically the original rules lawyers of Christianity. They
• 2:42:04
  Speaker 1: were ultra focused on like the letter of you know,
• 2:42:07
  Speaker 1: every single like little rule that you had to follow,
• 2:42:10
  Speaker 1: and that like what you could and couldn't do on Shabbat,
• 2:42:13
  Speaker 1: which was like the I guess you could like say
• 2:42:15
  Speaker 1: that was like their Sabbath day, and that still exists today.
• 2:42:19
  Speaker 4: Uh.
• 2:42:20
  Speaker 1: In Judaism, there's a you know, there's Shabbat, and there's
• 2:42:23
  Speaker 1: and there's like all these various like days of recognition,
• 2:42:27
  Speaker 1: and there's all these really you know, weird rules that
• 2:42:30
  Speaker 1: you have to follow. And Jesus was like, those things
• 2:42:33
  Speaker 1: don't matter as much as being righteous, like you're just
• 2:42:37
  Speaker 1: you're just trying to control people's behavior. And they did
• 2:42:39
  Speaker 1: get a bit power hungry, and they were also really
• 2:42:42
  Speaker 1: resentful of him because they they thought the Messiah, when
• 2:42:45
  Speaker 1: he was supposed to come, it was supposed to be
• 2:42:48
  Speaker 1: like in the way of you know, Moses, where they
• 2:42:50
  Speaker 1: would come and like essentially overthrow the Romans and give
• 2:42:55
  Speaker 1: the land to the Jews. But he did not come
• 2:42:57
  Speaker 1: for that. He came to basically say, look, everybody can
• 2:43:01
  Speaker 1: can come through me, you know, Jew and gentile, right,
• 2:43:04
  Speaker 1: doesn't matter where you're from. And they hated that because
• 2:43:07
  Speaker 1: they liked the exclusivity of only you know, being the
• 2:43:11
  Speaker 1: chosen people, right, and that the pharisees are the rules lawyers.
• 2:43:16
  Speaker 1: And in a way, Natty is like really sounding like
• 2:43:19
  Speaker 1: a pharisee because she's going in and she's telling people
• 2:43:22
  Speaker 1: who have been doing this for years and years and
• 2:43:24
  Speaker 1: years that they're doing it wrong and that they're heretics.
• 2:43:27
  Speaker 1: That's kind of messed up.
• 2:43:29
  Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, we have a super chow.
• 2:43:32
  Speaker 4: I had got it.
• 2:43:33
  Speaker 1: Okay, great, indoors, thank you, gives us five dollars and says, so,
• 2:43:37
  Speaker 1: what are you saying, Alison, Is that Natty's motivation to
• 2:43:40
  Speaker 1: join the MRAM was similar to that of feminists joining
• 2:43:43
  Speaker 1: the New Atheist movement fifteen plus years ago. In Nannie's case,
• 2:43:46
  Speaker 1: because of her dislike of her mother. In a lot
• 2:43:48
  Speaker 1: of feminist cases, it was because of their upbringing to
• 2:43:52
  Speaker 1: in traditional Christian households that clash with their teachings at
• 2:43:55
  Speaker 1: various universities. Joining movements due to emotional baggage is never
• 2:43:59
  Speaker 1: a good thing.
• 2:44:00
  Speaker 2: Yeah, well, I mean it wasn't. I'm not conjecturing. I'm
• 2:44:02
  Speaker 2: just that's what she said. She said that she had
• 2:44:05
  Speaker 2: a hatred towards herself and her mother, or or something
• 2:44:09
  Speaker 2: related to her mother. Don't put words in my mouth
• 2:44:12
  Speaker 2: it was quite these streams. So I don't know if
• 2:44:14
  Speaker 2: I remember everything correctly, but.
• 2:44:15
  Speaker 1: I do know that I remember the stream it was.
• 2:44:18
  Speaker 1: It sounded like it came. It was the impetus to
• 2:44:21
  Speaker 1: do this was personal.
• 2:44:23
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it was personal. It was based around necessarily self fratred.
• 2:44:27
  Speaker 2: Do not quote me on disliking her mother because I
• 2:44:30
  Speaker 2: but it was based on apparently her hatred of women
• 2:44:33
  Speaker 2: or her anger towards women. And I'm like, well, yeah,
• 2:44:38
  Speaker 2: I mean, maybe you can't continue to do that based
• 2:44:44
  Speaker 2: on like an emotional desire. I mean I do as well.
• 2:44:48
  Speaker 2: My My thing is I can't stand it when people
• 2:44:51
  Speaker 2: are disingenuous, like in feminism, is just choc a block
• 2:44:55
  Speaker 2: with being disingenuous. And also the basic feminist narrative is
• 2:45:00
  Speaker 2: it's hateful. Men in authority equals women oppressed. We can
• 2:45:05
  Speaker 2: have a discussion over whether men in authority is necessarily
• 2:45:09
  Speaker 2: the way we want to go forward, if it's necessarily
• 2:45:12
  Speaker 2: what we want to aim for, what it actually means,
• 2:45:15
  Speaker 2: but men in authority does not equal women oppressed, not inherently,
• 2:45:20
  Speaker 2: because authority is the exercise of cruel and unjust Its
• 2:45:24
  Speaker 2: cruel and unjust exercise of authority there's where to believe
• 2:45:30
  Speaker 2: that men in authority equals women's oppression. You have to
• 2:45:33
  Speaker 2: believe that men are hateful towards women, right, that men
• 2:45:38
  Speaker 2: are uncaring towards women. There's nothing that indicates to me
• 2:45:42
  Speaker 2: that this is a common behavior of men towards women,
• 2:45:46
  Speaker 2: because if they were, believe me, women would have been
• 2:45:48
  Speaker 2: eradicated by now. If anything, men are too conciliatory towards women.
• 2:45:54
  Speaker 2: They're too willing to bend over backwards to flatter and
• 2:45:57
  Speaker 2: make women feel better. That's what I see. And the
• 2:46:02
  Speaker 2: women who assert that men in authority equals women oppression,
• 2:46:06
  Speaker 2: they don't. They omit so much of men's activity in
• 2:46:12
  Speaker 2: order to do so. So they'll focus on the minority
• 2:46:15
  Speaker 2: of criminal men who have themselves been most likely sexually abused,
• 2:46:19
  Speaker 2: most likely by women who engage in sexual abuse, or
• 2:46:22
  Speaker 2: the cycle of domestic violence, the cycle of violence and families.
• 2:46:25
  Speaker 2: They'll hyper focus on that, and they'll ignore firefighters, policemen, soldiers.
• 2:46:31
  Speaker 2: They'll ignore all of the men who of themselves volunteer
• 2:46:34
  Speaker 2: to help others in disaster situations. They'll ignore all of
• 2:46:38
  Speaker 2: the men who risk in order to bring people in
• 2:46:41
  Speaker 2: general utilities. They'll ignore every single good thing that men
• 2:46:46
  Speaker 2: do in order to hyper focus on the bad in
• 2:46:48
  Speaker 2: order to assert their conjecture that men are bad, that
• 2:46:53
  Speaker 2: that men in authority are bad, and it's it's disingenuous, okay,
• 2:46:59
  Speaker 2: And that pisses me off, and maybe it's an emotional feeling.
• 2:47:02
  Speaker 2: I guess being pissed off is an emotional feeling. I
• 2:47:05
  Speaker 2: just can't stand people who are disingenuous. But to Nattie's
• 2:47:10
  Speaker 2: point that she was emotionally invested in the men's rights
• 2:47:14
  Speaker 2: Active movement because I guess it was a place where
• 2:47:16
  Speaker 2: she could express her anger towards women, Well, yeah, I
• 2:47:19
  Speaker 2: mean that's valid, but that if that's the only thing
• 2:47:22
  Speaker 2: you're doing, then you're not in the movement to help others.
• 2:47:28
  Speaker 2: You're in the movement to help yourself. And eventually, you know,
• 2:47:33
  Speaker 2: either you're gonna run out of being helped or you're
• 2:47:36
  Speaker 2: just gonna get pissed off or just gonna bounce, and
• 2:47:39
  Speaker 2: then you're gonna find the new thing that helps you
• 2:47:41
  Speaker 2: or supposedly helps you, or you feel helps you. So
• 2:47:44
  Speaker 2: I mean, yeah, if you're just gonna have a if
• 2:47:47
  Speaker 2: you're gonna come to this in just in terms of
• 2:47:49
  Speaker 2: what you get out of it. I mean, there's there's
• 2:47:53
  Speaker 2: a hell of a lot you get out of men's advocacy.
• 2:47:56
  Speaker 2: I'm sorry, guys, I mean personally, I feel it's challenged
• 2:47:59
  Speaker 2: me to grow. Oh and I think it's challenged that people,
• 2:48:02
  Speaker 2: the men and women who are involved in it, to grow.
• 2:48:05
  Speaker 2: But you're not going to retire comfortably on it necessarily
• 2:48:10
  Speaker 2: unless you you know, you put, you create products that
• 2:48:13
  Speaker 2: people want and feel are very valid, and you're not
• 2:48:18
  Speaker 2: going to get a hell of a lot of attention
• 2:48:20
  Speaker 2: if you if you just flat out the solution to
• 2:48:23
  Speaker 2: the problems that we're facing is the thing that we
• 2:48:25
  Speaker 2: refuse to acknowledge, which is men's point of view and
• 2:48:29
  Speaker 2: men's issues. If you flat out go from there, instead
• 2:48:32
  Speaker 2: of advocating for positions that already have a lot of
• 2:48:36
  Speaker 2: influence and a lot of people interested in them, no offense.
• 2:48:39
  Speaker 2: You know, Christianity does have a lot of people who
• 2:48:41
  Speaker 2: are invested in it, Conservatism does, Liberalism does, and you
• 2:48:45
  Speaker 2: try to fit the men's rights advocacy to that position
• 2:48:49
  Speaker 2: rather than saying, no, first principles is men's rights advocacy, Like,
• 2:48:53
  Speaker 2: you're not going to get necessarily get a huge following
• 2:48:56
  Speaker 2: for that because it's a very uncomfortable, uh, Karen put.
• 2:49:00
  Speaker 2: But it's something that people don't want to think logically
• 2:49:05
  Speaker 2: about because it's in many ways, the relationship between men
• 2:49:08
  Speaker 2: and women is where we derive a purpose, and a
• 2:49:12
  Speaker 2: lot of men derive a purpose from appealing to women,
• 2:49:15
  Speaker 2: protecting and providing for women. And when you challenge that,
• 2:49:18
  Speaker 2: you're challenging something very fundamental themselves. And a lot of
• 2:49:21
  Speaker 2: women derive a sense of self from babe being able
• 2:49:25
  Speaker 2: to manipulate things out of men because they have that
• 2:49:29
  Speaker 2: kind of emotional dependency on men. So it's like you're
• 2:49:32
  Speaker 2: challenging things people don't want to think about intellectually. It's
• 2:49:36
  Speaker 2: very difficult. So all you hear, give yourselves a pat
• 2:49:39
  Speaker 2: in your back. You're really stubborn, you're really invested in
• 2:49:43
  Speaker 2: the truth because a lot of people just bounce as
• 2:49:46
  Speaker 2: soon as the truth becomes uncomfortable, but you haven't. But anyway,
• 2:49:49
  Speaker 2: my ultimate point is that you don't get much personally
• 2:49:52
  Speaker 2: out of this advocacy. You know, I'm glad, I'm very
• 2:49:56
  Speaker 2: grateful that we've managed to be able to make something
• 2:49:59
  Speaker 2: of a living off of it, you know, me, Brian,
• 2:50:02
  Speaker 2: Jonathan and uh and everybody and Hannah to the lesser degree,
• 2:50:06
  Speaker 2: and I think, uh, doctor random ur camb also, you
• 2:50:10
  Speaker 2: know we've managed to make something out of it. I mean,
• 2:50:13
  Speaker 2: very grateful for that. But I mean if you weren't
• 2:50:16
  Speaker 2: doing this, you'd be doing something else, right, And I'm
• 2:50:18
  Speaker 2: grateful to be able to do this work because I
• 2:50:20
  Speaker 2: think that it does it does challenge me to become
• 2:50:23
  Speaker 2: a better person. But in terms of just getting emotional sucker, no,
• 2:50:27
  Speaker 2: you're not going to get it from this. It is
• 2:50:30
  Speaker 2: it's like it's you know, most other forms of thinking
• 2:50:34
  Speaker 2: is like just sitting on the couch and eating eating
• 2:50:37
  Speaker 2: pop U potato chips. This is CrossFit. Men's rights advocacy
• 2:50:42
  Speaker 2: is cross fit for political positions. If it is a
• 2:50:45
  Speaker 2: political position, it's it's gonna challenge you. And she was
• 2:50:51
  Speaker 2: challenged for whatever reason, it ceased to be giving her
• 2:50:54
  Speaker 2: the emotional sucker that she wanted, and she bounced.
• 2:50:58
  Speaker 7: Right.
• 2:50:58
  Speaker 2: She didn't she didn't evolve of her viewpoint from what
• 2:51:02
  Speaker 2: do I get out of this to what do I give?
• 2:51:04
  Speaker 2: And that's I mean a while back I mentioned this
• 2:51:07
  Speaker 2: having a conversation with a feminist. She didn't understand what
• 2:51:10
  Speaker 2: I got as.
• 2:51:11
  Speaker 7: A pick me.
• 2:51:12
  Speaker 2: She's like well, whatever you pickmies get, I'm like, yeah,
• 2:51:15
  Speaker 2: it's not what I get, it's what I can give. Well,
• 2:51:19
  Speaker 2: Natty got to the point where she had to ask
• 2:51:21
  Speaker 2: herself what do I give? And she bounced. That's that's
• 2:51:25
  Speaker 2: my interpretation of what she said.
• 2:51:28
  Speaker 1: And I think COVID traumatized her and she was the same.
• 2:51:32
  Speaker 1: I think the COVID lockdowns did something. That's my that's
• 2:51:35
  Speaker 1: my it's just pure guess, pure gress. Okay, something happened
• 2:51:41
  Speaker 1: during COVID because of the lockdowns and all of the
• 2:51:45
  Speaker 1: stuff that happened. And you know, I think it like
• 2:51:48
  Speaker 1: some people never recovered and they just like went down
• 2:51:52
  Speaker 1: a dark road where they were trying to like understand
• 2:51:55
  Speaker 1: why why did this happen? And they didn't. And I like,
• 2:51:59
  Speaker 1: that's what I think.
• 2:52:00
  Speaker 2: Became obsessed with risk. We failed to appropriately assess risk.
• 2:52:06
  Speaker 1: I I think or like it shattered like people's like
• 2:52:09
  Speaker 1: perception of like you know, trust and institutions and all that.
• 2:52:12
  Speaker 1: I mean, I didn't have a lot of trust in
• 2:52:14
  Speaker 1: them anyway. But that's why for me it wasn't a
• 2:52:17
  Speaker 1: big deal.
• 2:52:19
  Speaker 2: Why is there some dude Trump is a felon? Who cares?
• 2:52:22
  Speaker 2: What's the poor take?
• 2:52:24
  Speaker 1: Oh whatever, Alison, don't take the bait. Anybody who goes
• 2:52:29
  Speaker 1: by that name obviously is an unseerious person. So but
• 2:52:33
  Speaker 1: we should.
• 2:52:34
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it's been a while, hasn't it.
• 2:52:36
  Speaker 1: It was a long one.
• 2:52:38
  Speaker 2: It's a long one. Okay. Yeah, Well I never did
• 2:52:41
  Speaker 2: the things, but I'll double check to make sure that
• 2:52:44
  Speaker 2: we got all the super chows.
• 2:52:46
  Speaker 1: I did read them both. There were two just too.
• 2:52:50
  Speaker 2: If you do want to send a message after the
• 2:52:52
  Speaker 2: show is over, do so it feedbadger dot com slash
• 2:52:54
  Speaker 2: just the tip. We will read it out on the next,
• 2:52:58
  Speaker 2: you know show. That makes it makes sense to address
• 2:53:00
  Speaker 2: it basically, So feed the badger dot com slash just
• 2:53:02
  Speaker 2: the tip to send us a message, and it also
• 2:53:04
  Speaker 2: goes to our patron discord for people to ruminate upon it,
• 2:53:08
  Speaker 2: hopefully in a positive way. And if you're interested in
• 2:53:11
  Speaker 2: joining us in our patron discord, it's badger Nation dot online.
• 2:53:15
  Speaker 2: You do have to get a discord account, but Badgernation
• 2:53:19
  Speaker 2: dot online. There are some places that you can talk
• 2:53:22
  Speaker 2: to the rest of the crew and get some more information.
• 2:53:26
  Speaker 2: We have sources. It's very much appreciated if you come
• 2:53:28
  Speaker 2: and participate in the community because that's really what this
• 2:53:32
  Speaker 2: is about is to build a community. So feed the
• 2:53:35
  Speaker 2: Badger nation dot online and if you want to support
• 2:53:39
  Speaker 2: the show for the month, feed the Badger dot com
• 2:53:41
  Speaker 2: slash support and I'll hand it back to you Brian
• 2:53:44
  Speaker 2: to do the final things.
• 2:53:46
  Speaker 1: All right, Well, then, if you guys like this video,
• 2:53:48
  Speaker 1: please hit like subscribe if you're not already subscribed to
• 2:53:51
  Speaker 1: developmentification that leaves a comment let us know what you
• 2:53:53
  Speaker 1: guys think about what we discussed on today's show. I
• 2:53:58
  Speaker 1: was entertained and I think I learned something from it,
• 2:54:00
  Speaker 1: and uh please please please share this video because sharing
• 2:54:03
  Speaker 1: is caring. Thank you guys so much for coming on
• 2:54:05
  Speaker 1: today's episode of Maintaining Frame, and we'll talk to you
• 2:54:07
  Speaker 1: guys in the next one.