Latest / Honey Badger Radio / Speaking With Researcher and Men's Advocate David Mottershead _ Fireside Chat 254

Transcript

Speaking With Researcher and Men's Advocate David Mottershead _ Fireside Chat 254 · Honey Badger Radio

1:37
Speaker 1: Terry whiskey. Oh you told me you couldn't lucky secret.
1:42
Speaker 2: Oh suddenly Holloway could not hiding it.
1:55
Speaker 1: Let's begin Indeed.
2:07
Speaker 3: Yo, hello everybody, and welcome to Honey Badger Radio. My
2:12
Speaker 3: name is Brian and this is the Fireside Chat and
2:14
Speaker 3: today I have a very special guest. He's a he's
2:17
Speaker 3: an og. I think he's been doing this for a
2:19
Speaker 3: long time. He is a researcher or he does research
2:24
Speaker 3: work and he is also you know, uh set up
2:28
Speaker 3: a service for veterans for families and fathers. And yeah,
2:33
Speaker 3: and his name is David matters Head right, Welcome to
2:37
Speaker 3: the show.
2:37
Speaker 2: David, thank you, thank you, thanks for having me.
2:41
Speaker 1: Yeah, no, it's good to have you on.
2:43
Speaker 3: So, and you've been doing this for a while now,
2:46
Speaker 3: tell us a little bit about like how you got
2:48
Speaker 3: started and what it is that you do specifically.
2:52
Speaker 2: Okay, So I'm a researcher. I set up the Veteran
2:56
Speaker 2: of Blue Light Service for a charity called Families Need
2:58
Speaker 2: Fathers Both Parents Cumery. Here in the UK, we're the
3:02
Speaker 2: only service that helps veterans, coppers, paramedics, fire service personnel
3:07
Speaker 2: going through the family court process, mainly because our services
3:11
Speaker 2: often use as a reason to stop us seeing our children,
3:14
Speaker 2: and this is what initially got me started with father's
3:17
Speaker 2: rights and domestic violence campaigning. I'm a veteran with complex PTSD,
3:22
Speaker 2: so it's hard enough to see past the mental health
3:25
Speaker 2: with me in the best of days. But I was
3:28
Speaker 2: in a domestic violence relationship with my ex wife as
3:30
Speaker 2: the perpetrator as well, so that complicated things massively because
3:34
Speaker 2: it feeds right into the stereotypes of angry man. He
3:37
Speaker 2: therefore must be at full And for five years I
3:42
Speaker 2: was essentially being leathered all over the place and then
3:46
Speaker 2: blamed for it by the very woke social workers that
3:48
Speaker 2: were involved at the time. And it took for one
3:51
Speaker 2: particular professional to get involved before she pointed out that
3:54
Speaker 2: for four years I've been turning up at meetings with
3:56
Speaker 2: black eyes and batlets and god knows what else. Wow,
4:00
Speaker 2: blaming me and her exact words, well, look, if she
4:04
Speaker 2: was doing, if David was doing to her, what she's
4:06
Speaker 2: doing to hit, we would all be up in arms
4:08
Speaker 2: about her. And that's when things changed and marak was conducted.
4:13
Speaker 2: I was found to be a medium for high risk
4:15
Speaker 2: of being further abused. She realized her games were up
4:19
Speaker 2: and she snatched our children moved and I barely seen
4:23
Speaker 2: them since. And I recognized obvious that could happen to anyone,
4:27
Speaker 2: which started.
4:29
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, do you absolutely that's so terrible. I'm sorry,
4:34
Speaker 3: that's you know. It's what's crazy is I see this
4:38
Speaker 3: more and more happening, more and more with all the
4:41
Speaker 3: men that I know, the men that are my friends,
4:44
Speaker 3: in my in my circles. Yeah, like divorce and losing
4:49
Speaker 3: access to kids and losing.
4:50
Speaker 1: The house and all these other things.
4:53
Speaker 3: I know that's just anecdotal, But how long has it
4:57
Speaker 3: been since you've seen your kids to face?
5:03
Speaker 2: My eldest son I last or in November twenty and fifteen,
5:09
Speaker 2: and my youngest son I last saw in January twenty sixteen.
5:14
Speaker 2: I have spoken to them a couple of times since,
5:17
Speaker 2: a handful of times via video call. Have been very lucky.
5:20
Speaker 2: Things have settled in our family now, so mum and
5:23
Speaker 2: myself are communicating much better, and that's allowing for some
5:27
Speaker 2: contact with my children, which is great. It's great to
5:29
Speaker 2: hear their voices, it's great to see them doing so well.
5:33
Speaker 2: But yeah, it was the longest time with nothing, not
5:35
Speaker 2: a single word. Absolutely horrible.
5:39
Speaker 3: Yeah, no, I couldn't imagine. Well, so are you you
5:45
Speaker 3: can talk to the how old are they now?
5:49
Speaker 2: I'd rather keep their details, okay, but.
5:54
Speaker 1: More adults.
5:54
Speaker 2: Yeah, they're in.
5:56
Speaker 3: Their teens now, all right. So I just very very well, okay,
6:03
Speaker 3: are you? So you do a lot of research. I
6:06
Speaker 3: am looking at your website. You have some papers here, like,
6:10
Speaker 3: for example, I give some titles and I'll let the
6:12
Speaker 3: chat let me know if there's anything you want me
6:15
Speaker 3: to dive into a little deeper. But here's one how
6:18
Speaker 3: feminist campaigning hit the existence of male and LGBTQ victims
6:22
Speaker 3: of domestic violence for.
6:24
Speaker 1: Nearly fifty years.
6:26
Speaker 3: Miscarriages of justice in relation to male victims of domestic
6:29
Speaker 3: violence slash intimate partner violence, remove the feminist schema to
6:33
Speaker 3: save lives.
6:34
Speaker 1: I'm actually interested in that one.
6:37
Speaker 3: Broken families, the single biggest precursor to multiple deprivations, feminism
6:43
Speaker 3: or Marxism incognito. The how it significant our social movements
6:47
Speaker 3: and political parties to the implementation of political ideas. So
6:52
Speaker 3: those are some of the things that you have written.
6:54
Speaker 3: So can you tell me what is the feminist schema
6:59
Speaker 3: for people who you know may be new to this?
7:03
Speaker 2: Wow? Big question. Start So At this point, it takes
7:10
Speaker 2: you to the area of Twitter spaces where they talk
7:13
Speaker 2: about definitions of everything and we're feminists always say the
7:17
Speaker 2: same thing, Well, everyone's a feminist because everyone wants equality,
7:21
Speaker 2: But unfortunately that is that is not what feminism is.
7:25
Speaker 2: We all want equality because we're all decent people. We
7:27
Speaker 2: want everyone to have the same opportunities, of course, But
7:32
Speaker 2: when you drill down into feminism the core premise it
7:37
Speaker 2: rests upon patriarchal oppression theory, which obviously we hear a
7:40
Speaker 2: lot in normal discourse on social media and in society
7:44
Speaker 2: how oppressed women are because of the patriarchy. But unfortunately,
7:49
Speaker 2: patriarchal oppression theory turns out to be Karl Marx's oppressive
7:53
Speaker 2: bourgeois family concept. They've taken Morgan's data directly out of
7:59
Speaker 2: Carl Marx's Communist Manifesto to prop up the patriarchal oppressure theory,
8:04
Speaker 2: and they've used that as the be all, end all
8:08
Speaker 2: cause of all issues for women in the world, which
8:12
Speaker 2: is what you're supposed to do with Carl Marx's concept.
8:17
Speaker 2: I was supposed to find guilt where there is none,
8:20
Speaker 2: assigned collective guilt to a huge group and it is
8:23
Speaker 2: in that conflict that will bring about a culture war,
8:26
Speaker 2: which will lead to the complete collapse of society. And
8:29
Speaker 2: then at the end of that collapse, fingers crossed communism
8:33
Speaker 2: will arise from the ashes. So that's what it is.
8:37
Speaker 3: That's pretty that's a pretty succinct look at it. So
8:40
Speaker 3: essentially what I how I would and let me know
8:44
Speaker 3: if this is also like another way of sort of
8:46
Speaker 3: saying the same thing. Marxism or communism essentially takes certain
8:53
Speaker 3: things that used to be like sort of material wealth.
8:56
Speaker 3: But because the anti capitalist argument doesn't work in most
9:01
Speaker 3: Western countries as a result of the ways that people
9:04
Speaker 3: can sort of like you know, rise out of their circumstances,
9:09
Speaker 3: so what they do is they take other things that
9:11
Speaker 3: are normal and they describe them as a form of capital.
9:15
Speaker 3: And that is a form of capital privilege that has
9:18
Speaker 3: to be you know, flattened or redistributed or something. So
9:23
Speaker 3: for example, if you are look, we can put it
9:27
Speaker 3: in another other context. So if you're white, then whiteness
9:31
Speaker 3: is a form of capital that needs to be you know, flattened,
9:35
Speaker 3: and it gives you privilege. If you are male, then
9:37
Speaker 3: being male is a form of capital, and I think
9:40
Speaker 3: that also essentially being in an intact family that is
9:44
Speaker 3: stable and loves each other, and or even like they're
9:48
Speaker 3: if they're let's say, they they happen to be religious,
9:51
Speaker 3: and that is like one of the ways that they,
9:53
Speaker 3: you know, one of the things they operate under. All
9:55
Speaker 3: of those things are considered a form of capital, which is,
9:59
Speaker 3: you know, in oppressive and unequal.
10:01
Speaker 1: Is that is that a fair way to look at it?
10:05
Speaker 2: Yeah? I think that's the way they would like to
10:07
Speaker 2: describe it. They probably use more fluffy language around it,
10:12
Speaker 2: but unfortunately, all that's underneath it is just pure nihilism.
10:18
Speaker 2: So the people who have brought about this most recent
10:21
Speaker 2: culture war and potentially World War three onto our lapse
10:25
Speaker 2: were Marcuse dered Are, you know, the founilies of the
10:28
Speaker 2: Frankfurt School, Michelle Ford coh and things like that. And
10:30
Speaker 2: it was actually dered Are that pointed out that the
10:33
Speaker 2: problem with capitalism as it works, it does make people's
10:37
Speaker 2: lives better, and they said that essentially working class people
10:41
Speaker 2: were too stupid to know they're oppressed, so they were
10:44
Speaker 2: going to have to create the conditions in society ready
10:47
Speaker 2: for a revolution, which just essentially means that they were
10:50
Speaker 2: going to put policy and legislation into our institutions that
10:53
Speaker 2: would be societally carnivorous. To put it bluntly, that was
10:58
Speaker 2: intended to cause mass chaos, so that we would then
11:02
Speaker 2: come out on the streets and go, oh my god,
11:04
Speaker 2: our institutions are terribly racist and sexist, and we need
11:08
Speaker 2: to burn them to the ground and start again. And
11:11
Speaker 2: that's where the conflict theory is again. Nobody, like car
11:14
Speaker 2: Mark said, nobody's allowed to plan for post revolution, so
11:18
Speaker 2: the only focus is to destroy everything through those narratives.
11:23
Speaker 2: And that's why there's a paper called the word capitalism
11:27
Speaker 2: the Soviets Gift to the West, and that's because there
11:30
Speaker 2: is no such economic model as capitalism. In actual fact,
11:34
Speaker 2: it was a socialist by the name of LeBlanc who
11:36
Speaker 2: came up with a term, and he was describing how
11:38
Speaker 2: the British government were borrowing money for the industrial war
11:42
Speaker 2: machine that nobody knew how they were going to be
11:44
Speaker 2: able to pay back, and that has just been accepted
11:47
Speaker 2: as somehow an economic model, and that is what we
11:50
Speaker 2: describe all our states as now, when natural fact, it
11:53
Speaker 2: is a phantom concept designed to make people argue.
11:57
Speaker 1: Yes, yes, that's so good. I'm so glad you said that.
12:00
Speaker 3: I've been saying this forever, and I I kind of
12:02
Speaker 3: like thought, I was thinking a lot about this idea
12:06
Speaker 3: of because people who defend let's say markets or the
12:13
Speaker 3: you know, the the concept of property rights, they use
12:16
Speaker 3: the word capitalism. And I've been saying forever, guys, stop
12:19
Speaker 3: using the word capitalism. That's their word, right when. And
12:22
Speaker 3: this is all this is what it always comes back to.
12:24
Speaker 3: They create the terms, and then they put them through
12:28
Speaker 3: the schools and them in the media, and and and
12:30
Speaker 3: they sort of like make them ubiquitous. And then, uh,
12:34
Speaker 3: while they're creating the words, they're also creating the sort
12:38
Speaker 3: of paradigm or the framework that.
12:40
Speaker 1: We're all like operating within.
12:42
Speaker 3: And then when people who are well intended, people who
12:45
Speaker 3: are who are speaking in defense of these you know,
12:49
Speaker 3: sort of common sense or at least like these these
12:53
Speaker 3: these practices are using their words to do it. So
12:57
Speaker 3: you'll see you know, right wing people saying, oh I capitalism,
13:01
Speaker 3: even people who are supposedly like well versed in you know,
13:05
Speaker 3: what the Marxists do, and they're sort of like part
13:08
Speaker 3: of the mess Caucus, which is sort of like our
13:10
Speaker 3: libertarian you know.
13:13
Speaker 1: Caucus model.
13:14
Speaker 3: They'll say, they'll say the word capitalism, and I'll say,
13:16
Speaker 3: the guys, try not to say the word capitalism because
13:19
Speaker 3: that is that is their word.
13:21
Speaker 1: You should use. You should just say property rights.
13:23
Speaker 3: I mean, as an example, this is the same as like,
13:26
Speaker 3: you know, let's try not to use the word patriarchy.
13:29
Speaker 2: Well, you know, I think I think one of the
13:32
Speaker 2: you're hitting one one of the most important parts about
13:35
Speaker 2: all of the what's going on at the moment in
13:38
Speaker 2: terms of the reification of these concepts. So that's what
13:41
Speaker 2: a lot of these concepts are designed to do. A
13:43
Speaker 2: misogyny is the perfect example. Sexism exists in the world
13:48
Speaker 2: on both sides, and when the original theoretics just the moment,
13:53
Speaker 2: just a moment.
13:54
Speaker 3: When you when you say sexism exists, do you mean
13:58
Speaker 3: that people have, you know, preconceived notions about people based
14:04
Speaker 3: on their sex, or do you mean that they know
14:07
Speaker 3: they have a hatred against the other sex?
14:10
Speaker 2: Oh? No, so sexism itself would be a hatred towards
14:14
Speaker 2: the other sex. But we do have these stereotypes as well.
14:19
Speaker 2: So the stereotype that in gossip is one hundred percent
14:21
Speaker 2: correct and it's a very required part of evolutionary behavior,
14:25
Speaker 2: but it's seen as sexist to point out out that
14:28
Speaker 2: it is very much a female trait, isn't it. So
14:31
Speaker 2: it's a complicated area. But the point about sexism is
14:35
Speaker 2: the same as all of these big arguments. They've all
14:37
Speaker 2: been categorized that people can experience differing levels of these
14:41
Speaker 2: things when it's not true. That's the whole point of
14:43
Speaker 2: the unknown soldier. For all of our countries to have
14:46
Speaker 2: one is to remove the politics, to remove the skin color,
14:49
Speaker 2: everything else, releigiend the lot, and to recognize the individual.
14:52
Speaker 2: And that's what we do with all of our laws.
14:54
Speaker 2: They are explicitly neutral, but these concepts encourage a misapplic
15:00
Speaker 2: of the law to the diagnosed level of apparent oppression
15:06
Speaker 2: that somebody can experience. So misogyny, for example, misogyny is
15:11
Speaker 2: not a thing in actual fact that it's in the
15:14
Speaker 2: that's a sociological term. In the psychiatric world, it's called
15:17
Speaker 2: negative sex based implicit bias. And the first people who
15:21
Speaker 2: went out and who theorized systemic misogyny, who the first
15:26
Speaker 2: people who tested for it were Dunham Baron and Benaji
15:28
Speaker 2: in twenty fifteen, and they couldn't find it at all.
15:32
Speaker 2: In fact, they found the exact opposite. They found from
15:34
Speaker 2: the younger to the older, a boy to a man,
15:36
Speaker 2: you get, the more protective of women you become. And
15:39
Speaker 2: in actual fact, the only negative sex based implicit bias
15:42
Speaker 2: was from women onto other women and from women onto
15:45
Speaker 2: men and boys. Now, that went under the radar, and
15:48
Speaker 2: we just accepted it as a concept because they pushed
15:50
Speaker 2: it onto us, and even the American Psychiatric Association took
15:54
Speaker 2: it on as something that existed until they tested it
15:58
Speaker 2: themselves last year maybe nineteenth, the paper came out. They
16:02
Speaker 2: tested over six and twenty four something like that individuals,
16:08
Speaker 2: and they found exactly the same as Done and Baron
16:10
Speaker 2: and Banaji. There was this negative sex based implicit advias
16:14
Speaker 2: between women and from women onto men, but directly the
16:18
Speaker 2: opposite for men. We are extremely protective of women. There
16:23
Speaker 2: is no negative, There is only a positive sex based
16:26
Speaker 2: this advice for the majority of men. Now, we've been
16:30
Speaker 2: as men and boys targeted by these feminists for so
16:32
Speaker 2: long and told that we're all toxic and horrible, and
16:35
Speaker 2: our relationships have been destroyed with all of these techniques.
16:38
Speaker 2: To the point now that the younger generations are waking
16:40
Speaker 2: up and going, WHOA, what's going on here? We're not
16:42
Speaker 2: going to end up with a family. We're not going
16:44
Speaker 2: to end up with what everyone else was promising. We're
16:46
Speaker 2: going to end up old, lonely and no house because
16:49
Speaker 2: it's gone in the divorce and all of that. So
16:51
Speaker 2: who's got the answers? And all of a sudden, we've
16:54
Speaker 2: got Tait, We've got the authors, We've got the guys
16:57
Speaker 2: who are offering up the very s exist advice about
17:01
Speaker 2: how to win women, And all of a sudden, we
17:04
Speaker 2: have misogyny being rearified, which is the Marxist term for
17:08
Speaker 2: created into society. So exactly as you described it, this
17:13
Speaker 2: is the creation of a concept through agitation that never
17:17
Speaker 2: used to exist. Well, yes, behavior.
17:21
Speaker 3: Yeah, I've said many times, and we have said on
17:24
Speaker 3: the channel many times that the feminists created the conditions
17:28
Speaker 3: that made people like Andrew Tate and put him like,
17:32
Speaker 3: you know, and I don't even think Andrew Tait is misogynists,
17:34
Speaker 3: I honestly don't. But but he's very like opinionated, and
17:39
Speaker 3: he's outspoken, and he's arrogant, and he's got all these
17:43
Speaker 3: like negative, like sort of dark triad qualities. But he
17:46
Speaker 3: is the person that's pushed into the and there's lots
17:48
Speaker 3: of other guys like this too that are pushed into
17:50
Speaker 3: the into the front. And of course the feminists and
17:54
Speaker 3: the media and the cathedral they love this because now
17:56
Speaker 3: they get to now they have something they can use
17:58
Speaker 3: to make the example of, and it makes it impossible
18:01
Speaker 3: for us to have a real conversation.
18:03
Speaker 1: But it's their doing.
18:05
Speaker 3: So they create the problem, they perpetuate the problem, and
18:08
Speaker 3: they offer a placebo. They don't actually offer any solutions.
18:12
Speaker 3: And that's so yeah.
18:16
Speaker 2: Instead of placebo in actual fact, they offer policy and
18:19
Speaker 2: legislation that almost always makes it worse in fact. And
18:23
Speaker 2: that's the key characteristic of Marxist policy. It is designed
18:27
Speaker 2: to always do the exact opposite of what it claims,
18:30
Speaker 2: but it only fails at what the Hitler called the
18:32
Speaker 2: absurd element because he used these techniques as well. So
18:35
Speaker 2: it looks very good when you first put it in place,
18:37
Speaker 2: and you can't quite decide whether it's working or not
18:40
Speaker 2: until it hits societal saturation level, and then it collapses
18:45
Speaker 2: under its own weight because it was founded on a
18:46
Speaker 2: phantom concept. So now you have three times as many
18:49
Speaker 2: domestic violence victims, and you can see this in the
18:52
Speaker 2: Nordic Paradox research to more of these feminist interventions you
18:55
Speaker 2: put in place to try and resolve domestic violence, the
18:58
Speaker 2: worse the situation gets.
19:00
Speaker 3: Yes, yes, yeah, I mean like for me, I guess
19:05
Speaker 3: I thought this was kind of obvious, but it seems
19:07
Speaker 3: like it's so hard for people to wrestle with, uh,
19:12
Speaker 3: you know, these these concepts like and I think it
19:14
Speaker 3: has to do with the fact that we have been
19:16
Speaker 3: propagandized for so long.
19:18
Speaker 1: You know that the idea that women.
19:20
Speaker 3: Like you you yourself, you're a veteran, thank you for
19:23
Speaker 3: your service, by the way, and Veterans Day was just
19:26
Speaker 3: on Monday, which is one of the other reasons why
19:28
Speaker 3: I thought I wanted to have them on.
19:30
Speaker 1: But uh, you know.
19:32
Speaker 3: If you based on what I what I see, and
19:34
Speaker 3: what I know about your history, uh, regarding your your
19:37
Speaker 3: service and everything, I think that people would be shocked
19:40
Speaker 3: to hear that you were a victim of domestic violence.
19:43
Speaker 3: And I think it's because we you know, of these
19:46
Speaker 3: misconceptions like how did how did was that?
19:49
Speaker 1: What did she choose weapons on you?
19:51
Speaker 2: Like?
19:51
Speaker 1: What was the experience?
19:53
Speaker 2: Like, yeah, I mean the majority of it was psychological.
19:58
Speaker 2: She would say she was thinking years ahead. She was
20:01
Speaker 2: planning years ahead in terms of arguments and things. It
20:03
Speaker 2: was really quite something. It was quite an extreme case.
20:06
Speaker 2: She would most often lash out. She was a big girl.
20:10
Speaker 2: She'd try and punches in the head, punches in the face,
20:12
Speaker 2: in the back. She went at me with a set
20:14
Speaker 2: of keys and her hand once and you covered and
20:17
Speaker 2: I end up with holes all over back and everything else.
20:22
Speaker 2: But it was I mean, the physical violence was as
20:26
Speaker 2: extreme as you would expect of any male perpetrator onto
20:29
Speaker 2: a female. But for me, the hardest part was the
20:32
Speaker 2: psychological stuff. I think most did she ever, would probably
20:36
Speaker 2: say that.
20:37
Speaker 3: Yeah, one of the things we have here in the
20:38
Speaker 3: United States, And I'm so glad because this is actually
20:41
Speaker 3: starting to like really make the rounds. I'm seeing more
20:44
Speaker 3: and more people outside of this men's right space talking
20:46
Speaker 3: about it. Is we have the dluthe model, now you
20:50
Speaker 3: do you know what the delute model of the sort
20:52
Speaker 3: of the wheel of power and privileged like a feminist
20:55
Speaker 3: like way of viewing domestic violence.
20:58
Speaker 1: Do you guys have something like that in the UK?
21:00
Speaker 2: Actually, all of our domestic violence interventions in the UK
21:03
Speaker 2: are specifically required to how the loose model at its center.
21:09
Speaker 2: So you're not allowed to run a single domestic violence
21:11
Speaker 2: program here in the UK unless the the loose model
21:14
Speaker 2: is informing the intervention, which is obviously extremely dangerous. I'm
21:19
Speaker 2: sure you're about to.
21:20
Speaker 3: Mention, Yeah, yeah, well yeah, I mean, I know that
21:23
Speaker 3: our audience knows that the dluthe model is essentially a
21:25
Speaker 3: feminist framing of every interaction between men and women. It
21:29
Speaker 3: operates under you know, feminist theory, which is hardly even theory.
21:34
Speaker 3: It's more like you know, conjecture or presumptions that are unproven, unscientific.
21:40
Speaker 1: In every way, but it's the way we operate.
21:42
Speaker 3: But one of the reason why I brought it up
21:43
Speaker 3: too is because you know, you talk about your experiences.
21:47
Speaker 3: So one of the things that women who want to
21:49
Speaker 3: be abusers will do in the States that's fairly common
21:52
Speaker 3: is they will call the police on their husbands and
21:54
Speaker 3: say that they don't feel safe but they feel threatened
21:57
Speaker 3: or that he hurt them. And of course, instead of
21:59
Speaker 3: having to abuse them themselves, so just let the system
22:02
Speaker 3: do it for them. And I was wondering, first of all,
22:05
Speaker 3: have you ever had that happen? Has she ever used
22:07
Speaker 3: the cops on you or other authorities outside like a
22:10
Speaker 3: third party, and you know what do you have to
22:13
Speaker 3: say about that?
22:15
Speaker 2: Yeah, So, like most female perpetrators of domestic violence, my
22:19
Speaker 2: ex wife was reliant on third part of the abuse.
22:22
Speaker 2: So coercive and controlling forms of abuse is a relatively
22:26
Speaker 2: news phrase for those who haven't read too much in
22:29
Speaker 2: that side, it's easier to remove all of the complex
22:31
Speaker 2: language and just think of it as passive aggression, triangulating.
22:35
Speaker 1: That weaponize passive aggression.
22:37
Speaker 2: That's a good way with yeah, exactly. In the evolutionary
22:41
Speaker 2: anthropological data and in the psychiatric literature, it is recorded
22:45
Speaker 2: as the utilization of gossip and innuendo as a form
22:48
Speaker 2: of reputation savage for the intent of isolating the target
22:51
Speaker 2: from the widest social community. And it's actually how women
22:54
Speaker 2: set up their hierarchies in adolescence. This is why the
22:59
Speaker 2: phrase women can be bitches to each other exists. So
23:03
Speaker 2: those techniques that women use in their social interactions, that
23:06
Speaker 2: they learn in their adolescent years that can truly be
23:09
Speaker 2: vile and really quite destructive at times, are employed on
23:14
Speaker 2: average by ninety nine percent of female perpetrators of domestic violence.
23:17
Speaker 2: So they will have flying monkey after flying monkey after
23:21
Speaker 2: Flying Monkey and I wrote one of the largest studies
23:24
Speaker 2: of its kind, although it's not published in the UK,
23:27
Speaker 2: into the lived experience of male victims of domestic violence,
23:30
Speaker 2: and that was there were several things that consistently came up,
23:36
Speaker 2: things like bringing work to gossip about you at work,
23:40
Speaker 2: or to cause you trouble at work so that you're
23:41
Speaker 2: get in trouble with your boss. You might lose your job,
23:44
Speaker 2: and that's an element of financial control as well as
23:47
Speaker 2: you know, isolating you from your workmates and things like that.
23:51
Speaker 2: So yeah, it's a huge part of the lived experience
23:55
Speaker 2: of almost every male victim of domestic violence, and it
23:57
Speaker 2: can often take years to unpick the damage done. Often
24:04
Speaker 2: the institutions are obviously on the side of mothers and
24:06
Speaker 2: women because of this fifty year narrative, and especially in
24:11
Speaker 2: the case of if you have a vulnerability like myself,
24:14
Speaker 2: a mental health condition, you may have to spend several
24:17
Speaker 2: years being told you are violent and delusional blah blah
24:20
Speaker 2: blah blah blah, punt with all sorts of antipsychotics just
24:25
Speaker 2: for them. At the end of that two year theory
24:26
Speaker 2: to go, We're really sorry, We've realized we've made a mistake.
24:31
Speaker 2: So there's layer upon layer about how these allegations and
24:35
Speaker 2: these forms of abuse can affect you in your own life,
24:38
Speaker 2: whether it's at work or in your therapy, or amongst
24:40
Speaker 2: your friends and family. But either way, it is exactly
24:45
Speaker 2: the same behavior that the feminists choose to shut down
24:48
Speaker 2: anyone who tries to have a conversation about male victims
24:51
Speaker 2: of domestic and or sexual violence. Funnily enough, so it's
24:55
Speaker 2: quite easy to spot in your own intimate relationship if
24:59
Speaker 2: you think of it in that way. Uh, it's often
25:03
Speaker 2: harder to see it happening when it's happening to yourself,
25:06
Speaker 2: because you want to have faith in the other person.
25:08
Speaker 2: But if you can look onto Twitter and see a
25:12
Speaker 2: feminist of the year going after somebody and doxing them,
25:15
Speaker 2: and then you look at your partner and realize, oh,
25:16
Speaker 2: hold on, that's the same behavior, it makes it a
25:20
Speaker 2: little bit clearer and easier to understand.
25:23
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, for sure, we'll get to Twitter in a moment.
25:27
Speaker 3: But but because you're yeah, you're pretty, you're you seem
25:31
Speaker 3: to be pretty active there. And I don't think it's
25:34
Speaker 3: a bad place to have. I know a lot of
25:36
Speaker 3: people think that it's the worst place ever. But I
25:38
Speaker 3: think it's good that like it's more of a you know,
25:41
Speaker 3: like an open dialogue there than it was historically. But
25:45
Speaker 3: I wanted to ask one more thing first. So one
25:48
Speaker 3: of the things that I've seen that that is a
25:51
Speaker 3: big topic of discussion and advocacy these days is parental alienation.
25:56
Speaker 3: Canada has you know, Monique, who's a friend of the Channel.
26:00
Speaker 3: She works hard to try to you know, address that
26:03
Speaker 3: as well as justin Trotier. In Australia, there is a
26:08
Speaker 3: group called Enie Meanie Mighty mo I think, which is
26:12
Speaker 3: a parental alienation group.
26:14
Speaker 1: And one of the weapons.
26:16
Speaker 3: That you know, I guess you could say ex wives
26:20
Speaker 3: or parents could use against their you know, their exes,
26:24
Speaker 3: is this kind of not just parental alienation but also
26:27
Speaker 3: sort of like conditioning their children against the parents. And
26:32
Speaker 3: since your ex wife has your kids, has she like
26:35
Speaker 3: tried to do that? Has she tried to get the
26:37
Speaker 3: kids to hate you or anything like that?
26:40
Speaker 2: Well, I'm not going to talk about my kid's own situation, Okay,
26:43
Speaker 2: it is what will?
26:45
Speaker 1: We could talk about this in broader strokes, not about your.
26:48
Speaker 2: Specific Yeah, okay, that'd be great, Yeah, that'd be fine.
26:50
Speaker 2: So yeah, thank you man. You have to remember that
26:54
Speaker 2: one of the more senior judges here in the UK
26:57
Speaker 2: in twenty fifteen went on record and said, look, it
27:01
Speaker 2: now appears that parental alienation appears to have become mainstream
27:06
Speaker 2: here in the UK. Now that was Casey Wildblood, who's
27:11
Speaker 2: just retired and just moved to Wales. Actually he's trying
27:14
Speaker 2: to now currently trying to divert family cases from the
27:17
Speaker 2: family court to try and save those families because he
27:19
Speaker 2: recognizes the outcomes once they get in there. But yes,
27:24
Speaker 2: so parental alienation obviously everyone knows what it is. Everyone
27:27
Speaker 2: knows its child abuse. It's now recognized as domestic violence
27:30
Speaker 2: here in the UK. Even though the phrase parental alienation
27:33
Speaker 2: is not in the new Domestic Abuse Bill. The new
27:35
Speaker 2: Domestic Abuse Bill does cover the behaviors, so it is
27:39
Speaker 2: now recognized as domestic violence against the alienated parent the
27:44
Speaker 2: and as obviously child abuse against the child. There is
27:47
Speaker 2: now a better intervention for this and for all domestic
27:50
Speaker 2: violence issues. Page eighty three. I believe it is of
27:54
Speaker 2: the New Domestic Abuse Bill. It attains to what's known
27:57
Speaker 2: as the Hertfordshire model, which takes rather than a judgmental
28:01
Speaker 2: approach to child protection, which is what we've done in
28:03
Speaker 2: the past. The domestic violence. This one takes a more appropriate,
28:08
Speaker 2: holistic approach to the family, recognizing that only five percent
28:13
Speaker 2: of domestic violence is what we would expect to see
28:16
Speaker 2: in domestic violence in terms of physical violence. The rest
28:19
Speaker 2: is the majority is passive aggression. It is silly name
28:23
Speaker 2: calling and things like that wouldn't take a particularly good
28:26
Speaker 2: therapist to have ever got involved in the past. But
28:29
Speaker 2: in the past and up until this point in the
28:31
Speaker 2: last year when it's changed, the feminists have always argued,
28:35
Speaker 2: oh my god, you can't intervene, and you can't you know,
28:38
Speaker 2: have therapists around the children and families when there's domestic violence.
28:42
Speaker 2: Suggested what if she dies? What if the children die?
28:45
Speaker 2: And that almost never happens. So it's definitely something that's
28:53
Speaker 2: being addressed more, but unfortunately it might be too late.
28:58
Speaker 2: We are at a stage where most of our relationships
29:01
Speaker 2: fail now, and most children experience single parenting at some
29:04
Speaker 2: point during their childhood, and most children lose contact with
29:08
Speaker 2: their fathers within the first three years of separation. So
29:11
Speaker 2: that's most kids in society now losing their dads and
29:14
Speaker 2: when you filter back, why would that outcome be so
29:17
Speaker 2: important to the feminists. It's not just blind arrogance, it's
29:21
Speaker 2: not just sexism, it's not just bigotry. When you look
29:25
Speaker 2: to see what a culture war is, you will find
29:27
Speaker 2: the Hague Library in the Netherlands. These are all the
29:31
Speaker 2: books that teach us about what steps to keep an
29:33
Speaker 2: eye out for with regards to the bringing about a
29:36
Speaker 2: world wars or genocides. And it turns out that the
29:39
Speaker 2: feminists at the core have always known that they needed
29:43
Speaker 2: to remove the fathers because that would leave the mothers
29:46
Speaker 2: and the children vulnerable to political gradation in the same web,
29:51
Speaker 2: so that they would take on this woe ideology. So
29:53
Speaker 2: this woe ideology is not new. They're this is not
29:56
Speaker 2: brand new. Every single argument has been made before, and
29:59
Speaker 2: it was by Stalin, Lenin, Hitler, Mao, Polpop, all of them.
30:06
Speaker 2: So all we're seeing is the replication of that. And
30:09
Speaker 2: there has only been one of those so called cultural
30:11
Speaker 2: revolutions that failed, and that was the Hungarian Revolution. And
30:16
Speaker 2: the guy who tried to bring that about wrote a
30:17
Speaker 2: paper saying, look, the reason we failed was because their
30:20
Speaker 2: families were too strong. Their families were too strong due
30:23
Speaker 2: to religiosity. Therefore, as we push Western try again, we
30:26
Speaker 2: must first destroy religiosity and then go after their families.
30:30
Speaker 2: And this is why Churchill and the Hague put a right,
30:33
Speaker 2: a human right to a private family life in the
30:36
Speaker 2: European Convention on Human Rights. It was to prevent fathers
30:39
Speaker 2: being removed so you could then indoctrinate the children. And yeah,
30:45
Speaker 2: we missed I say we missed it. I say we
30:47
Speaker 2: missed it. But I don't see how a single judge
30:50
Speaker 2: in the UK managed to sit on the bench without
30:53
Speaker 2: reading this single book out of the Hague.
30:55
Speaker 1: Yeah, does that makes sense? Yeah, it's honored Percy again.
31:00
Speaker 3: You know, I'm it's maybe this is just ego centric
31:04
Speaker 3: or something, but I'm getting I'm hearing a lot of
31:07
Speaker 3: things that's very validating for things that I have brought
31:10
Speaker 3: up and talked about myself. How I've often said that
31:15
Speaker 3: the large so essentially this requires the growth of the state,
31:21
Speaker 3: so that this like or at least there are let's
31:24
Speaker 3: say that because a lot of times people say the
31:27
Speaker 3: the you know, the communists, they don't want a state,
31:29
Speaker 3: they want to live in a stateless society. But they
31:31
Speaker 3: have to destroy everything first, and then this new thing
31:33
Speaker 3: will rise from the ashes like the phoenix. But I
31:36
Speaker 3: think that in order to get there, the state has
31:39
Speaker 3: to be massively powerful so that it is essentially the
31:42
Speaker 3: father or the husband to all of the women and
31:46
Speaker 3: the father to their children. And that's why, you know,
31:49
Speaker 3: we refer to it as big Daddy government here in
31:53
Speaker 3: the States. And I think that the only real threat
31:56
Speaker 3: to that, or the largest threat to that is a
31:59
Speaker 3: father in the home with a family that is you know,
32:02
Speaker 3: very much like committed to each other. And this is
32:06
Speaker 3: like the purpose of all this, and so like what
32:08
Speaker 3: I'm hearing from you kind of you know, it confirms my.
32:12
Speaker 1: What I've been saying.
32:13
Speaker 3: And I mean, like, I don't think that I think
32:15
Speaker 3: a lot of people agree with me that watch, But
32:17
Speaker 3: I'm just saying it's nice to hear it from someone
32:19
Speaker 3: I've never spoken to before.
32:20
Speaker 1: That's sort of like heading in the same direction, you
32:22
Speaker 1: know what I mean.
32:23
Speaker 2: Yeah, it sucks. There's not many of us that are
32:26
Speaker 2: heading in that direction. I think most We've seen a
32:28
Speaker 2: lot of Twitter spaces about things like where did the
32:30
Speaker 2: attack from on the family come from? And things like that,
32:33
Speaker 2: So people are finally connecting the dots. But I think
32:36
Speaker 2: It's the hardest lump to get over is the idea
32:38
Speaker 2: that it was all a lot and there was never
32:41
Speaker 2: any equality in it. Do you know what I mean?
32:45
Speaker 2: You can and that you can directly go to Hitler's arguments.
32:48
Speaker 2: The man the bear argument was Hitler's argument. From the
32:51
Speaker 2: River to the Sea was Hitler's argument.
32:54
Speaker 3: The way the man versus bear. The man versus bear
32:57
Speaker 3: came from Hitler. Can you can you expand on that
32:59
Speaker 3: a little bit, because that's super interesting to me.
33:02
Speaker 2: Yeah, absolutely so. Etymologically speaking, it comes from nineteen thirty
33:06
Speaker 2: eight when he was printing children's books for German children
33:09
Speaker 2: in schools. Obviously that had a picture of a Jewish
33:13
Speaker 2: face with a mushroom that put onto a mushroom and
33:16
Speaker 2: a star of David on its stomach, and it was
33:19
Speaker 2: just one mushroom in the center with that big nose
33:21
Speaker 2: that you associate with a stereotype, and then a load
33:24
Speaker 2: of other mushrooms in the background. And his argument was,
33:27
Speaker 2: we know not all Jews are dangerous, or we know
33:31
Speaker 2: not all Jews are gentiles, but we don't know which ones. Therefore,
33:37
Speaker 2: it's a bit like mushrooms. You wouldn't just pick one
33:39
Speaker 2: up and eat one because you don't know which one
33:40
Speaker 2: the poisonous one is, and that's the poison skit or
33:42
Speaker 2: poisoned eminem manly bear argument.
33:45
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, it's the eminem's thing, exactly, Yeah, yeah, exactly.
33:49
Speaker 2: So when you then consider that from the river to
33:53
Speaker 2: the sea, Palestine will be free was Hitler's propaganda argument
33:56
Speaker 2: to the app Arabic world. That was the slogan he had.
34:00
Speaker 2: If you don't join me, one day there will be
34:02
Speaker 2: a inn Israeli state. So now we have two Nazi
34:06
Speaker 2: arguments coming out of the radically left leaning feminist left.
34:10
Speaker 2: Then in twenty eighteen, James Lindsay, Helen pluck Crowse and
34:13
Speaker 2: Peter Pagosian managed to get chapter twelve of Mine Camp
34:17
Speaker 2: published in the top social work journal in the world,
34:20
Speaker 2: specifically focused on chart protection. For those who don't know,
34:23
Speaker 2: chapter twelve of mine Camp was Hitler's own words on
34:26
Speaker 2: how members of the Nazi Party should behave but he
34:28
Speaker 2: never actually said the words our party, sorry Nazi Party.
34:32
Speaker 2: He said the words our party. So they essentially removed
34:35
Speaker 2: the words our party and put intersectional feminism in there. Instead,
34:39
Speaker 2: passed it to again pop social work journal in the world,
34:42
Speaker 2: and they went Oh, this is wonderful, This is great. Yeah,
34:46
Speaker 2: and published it. So what we're seeing now is the
34:50
Speaker 2: evidence that the Fourth Reich were right. The Fourth Reich
34:53
Speaker 2: were Nazis who scuppered away to Spain just after World
34:57
Speaker 2: War Two. The CIA worked with them. There's a great
34:59
Speaker 2: BBC documentary, but they were very clear that Ashism always
35:04
Speaker 2: begins on the left and it agitates the right. The
35:08
Speaker 2: right comes out and because the narratives are so big
35:11
Speaker 2: and everyone's arguing, the center is forced to take aside,
35:15
Speaker 2: and because the left sounds like lunatics, everyone has no
35:19
Speaker 2: real choice but to come down on the side of
35:21
Speaker 2: the right. And that is how you create like normal,
35:24
Speaker 2: hardworking German people and turn them into Nazis. And that's
35:27
Speaker 2: what's happening here. M So is it?
35:31
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's interesting, I think.
35:35
Speaker 3: Without I guess this might turn into a bit of
35:38
Speaker 3: a political discussion, but I think it has to because
35:41
Speaker 3: you know, on some level, that's like the feminism makes
35:44
Speaker 3: the you know, the personal political, and they sort of
35:47
Speaker 3: shove it in your face everywhere, so you can't really
35:49
Speaker 3: run from it. I know some people want to, but
35:51
Speaker 3: I'm okay with confronting it. But yeah, I see what's
35:55
Speaker 3: happening so like in the States, But I think is
35:56
Speaker 3: going on at least from what I observed, and you know,
36:00
Speaker 3: like I go out, I touch grass, I talk to
36:02
Speaker 3: regular people as often as I can. It's not that,
36:08
Speaker 3: I guess what seems to be happening is the left
36:10
Speaker 3: has gone you know, further and further left. I don't
36:14
Speaker 3: think it's insane. I think it's completely rational because they
36:17
Speaker 3: know that that's the only way they're going to.
36:19
Speaker 1: Get to what they want.
36:20
Speaker 3: They have to keep pushing the Overton window further and
36:23
Speaker 3: further left until everything is destroyed so that they can
36:25
Speaker 3: build the new social man, you know, like has to come.
36:29
Speaker 1: Out of that.
36:30
Speaker 3: And I think that what's happening is it's not Yeah,
36:33
Speaker 3: it's not so much that people are moving right, it's
36:35
Speaker 3: that they're they're just not. It's like the paradigm, in
36:39
Speaker 3: my opinion, is there's the left and then there's the
36:41
Speaker 3: non left, which is sort of like everybody else, which
36:44
Speaker 3: means that they're all divided in their own way. Like
36:46
Speaker 3: some you know, are moderates, some are libertarians, some are
36:49
Speaker 3: casual like sort of like classical liberals. Some of them
36:51
Speaker 3: are right wing or paleocons or whatever, and so they
36:55
Speaker 3: all have a bunch of stuff that they're not really
36:57
Speaker 3: in lockstep with. And meanwhile, the left becomes tighter and
37:00
Speaker 3: tighter because it's trying harder and harder, so it ends
37:03
Speaker 3: up pushing more and more people out of itself. But
37:07
Speaker 3: what the reaction now could go, at least from the
37:11
Speaker 3: normal people in the United States can go one of
37:13
Speaker 3: two ways. I think most likely what will happen is
37:16
Speaker 3: it's sort of like a you know, the father is like,
37:20
Speaker 3: the children are in the home and they're making a
37:23
Speaker 3: mess of things and they're like playing and they're leaving
37:25
Speaker 3: things out, and their toys are lying around everywhere, and
37:28
Speaker 3: they've broken stuff or whatever. And then they get the
37:30
Speaker 3: phone call and it's the father saying I'm coming home
37:32
Speaker 3: and the kids are cleaning up so that it doesn't
37:35
Speaker 3: look like a mess when he gets there. That's one
37:37
Speaker 3: that's the most likely direction it's going to go. But
37:40
Speaker 3: it there is definitely a threat of an overreaction that
37:43
Speaker 3: we should be.
37:44
Speaker 1: You know, on the lookout for an over rather well.
37:49
Speaker 2: I mean, that's that's the entire point. That's what the
37:52
Speaker 2: technique they're using is rules for radicals and it's designed
37:56
Speaker 2: to pushes over the edge. They're reliant and calm. Every
38:01
Speaker 2: single one of them is very clear that they were
38:03
Speaker 2: reliant on our reaction. And the problem with the reaction
38:07
Speaker 2: that we have is it's a perfectly a terrible as
38:11
Speaker 2: extreme as this sounds, it is a perfectly normal reaction
38:15
Speaker 2: for the German people to have gone the way of
38:16
Speaker 2: the Nazis given the provocation. And what I mean by
38:19
Speaker 2: that is that the techniques that these people are using
38:22
Speaker 2: are so abhorrent, so evil that it is, and it
38:27
Speaker 2: is deliberately designed that way so that you cannot avoid
38:31
Speaker 2: but react. Everyone will have to react at some point
38:35
Speaker 2: over these issues, and if we ignore them, which is
38:39
Speaker 2: what the institutions and the government would like to do,
38:41
Speaker 2: it will only make the situation worse. So let's just
38:44
Speaker 2: pretend for a moment that trans doesn't exist, and that
38:46
Speaker 2: they tried to transition the children in the failed Hungarian
38:50
Speaker 2: Revolution of nineteen whatever it was, and that they published
38:54
Speaker 2: a book saying that it was in fact about gender,
38:59
Speaker 2: and that it was about the reduction of internal man
39:02
Speaker 2: from concrete possibility to abstract subjectivity, which leads, under all
39:06
Speaker 2: circumstances to a deep dissolution of the contours and personality
39:09
Speaker 2: and the kind of schizophrenic split. The point being that
39:12
Speaker 2: they're trying to make is they're trying to make violent
39:14
Speaker 2: political activists one hundred years ago out of trans kids,
39:17
Speaker 2: and they would specifically hyper sexualizing the children in schools
39:21
Speaker 2: now exactly. It's the same technique, exactly the same technique.
39:26
Speaker 2: So if trans doesn't exist, then it is just a
39:29
Speaker 2: provocation technique. Then we are butchering our children right now
39:32
Speaker 2: for no reason. And that's I use that as an
39:36
Speaker 2: example to show you of how extreme it is. You
39:39
Speaker 2: will not get to sit and rest on your laurels here,
39:42
Speaker 2: nobody will. At some point you will have to react.
39:45
Speaker 2: And at that point, because of the level of extremity,
39:48
Speaker 2: every single one of us would be normal and human
39:51
Speaker 2: to overreact. And that's the only place where you can
39:55
Speaker 2: stop a cultural war from turning into a genocide for
39:59
Speaker 2: a world war. Can you accept that you will react,
40:02
Speaker 2: but then have the temperance to react appropriately rather than overreact.
40:09
Speaker 3: Yeah, And that's what that's kind of like how I've
40:12
Speaker 3: been trying to, you know, live, at least for my part,
40:17
Speaker 3: because obviously you can't. You can't make other people react
40:21
Speaker 3: a way that you think they should.
40:22
Speaker 1: But I'm with you on that.
40:24
Speaker 2: For example, yeah, go ahead, bad PHSD. I was sorry,
40:27
Speaker 2: I've got bad pgsday. I react badly all over the internet.
40:30
Speaker 3: All the time.
40:31
Speaker 2: Everyone will tell you that. So I just want to
40:33
Speaker 2: point out that, yeah, I'm relying on you guys reacting perfectly.
40:38
Speaker 1: Oh well, I don't know if it's perfect.
40:40
Speaker 3: But for example, you know, we had in the summer
40:46
Speaker 3: of twenty twenty, there were I was living in Chicago,
40:50
Speaker 3: which is where I was born and raised, and I
40:53
Speaker 3: thought I was gonna basically die there, like that was
40:56
Speaker 3: just going to be my home from start to finish.
40:58
Speaker 3: And there was these violent riots and they were violent,
41:02
Speaker 3: and there was you know, riots and buildings were burned
41:05
Speaker 3: down and businesses, and I thought that, you know, the
41:08
Speaker 3: parts of the city where this is happening, they will
41:10
Speaker 3: never recover, at least not in my lifetime. For example,
41:13
Speaker 3: there are parts of Chicago that never recovered from the
41:17
Speaker 3: assassination of Martin Luther King because of the riots that
41:20
Speaker 3: came after that. So and my wife, who was Canadian,
41:25
Speaker 3: she was living with me at the time, and she
41:27
Speaker 3: was not accustomed to this kind of thing because you
41:30
Speaker 3: know she was in Canada, that sort of thing didn't happen,
41:33
Speaker 3: although it was happening there as well, And so we
41:37
Speaker 3: decided to move and we moved to Virginia, and I lost, Like,
41:42
Speaker 3: you know, even though I spoke out, like I tried
41:44
Speaker 3: to be rational. I tried to speak out about what
41:46
Speaker 3: was happening. I tried to explain how this was all
41:49
Speaker 3: part of, essentially the same thing.
41:51
Speaker 1: We've been talking about.
41:52
Speaker 3: It's all intentional, you know, unraveling of everything so that
41:56
Speaker 3: it's all burned down. It's just multiple vectors you can
41:59
Speaker 3: come out to from. I think that COVID was part
42:01
Speaker 3: of it too. It was a weaponized in the same way. Yeah,
42:04
Speaker 3: one hundred percent right.
42:05
Speaker 2: And so but did you sorry to interrupt? Did you
42:08
Speaker 2: know he's snuck in Polo Free for the second w
42:11
Speaker 2: WF conference in nineteen ninetey nine in Switzerland to speak
42:14
Speaker 2: and then because illegal for Marxist to speak to public.
42:18
Speaker 1: In the command, so they skid.
42:21
Speaker 3: They they Paolo Fear the guy, the guy who essentially
42:25
Speaker 3: is probably a nonce that wrote about educating queering the child.
42:30
Speaker 3: That's the guy, right, the yes, very good education system, yeah, yes, yes,
42:35
Speaker 3: which we're dismantling or at least hoping to. But yeah,
42:38
Speaker 3: so what I guess what I'm what I tried to
42:41
Speaker 3: do is I didn't overreact. I tried to stay calm,
42:45
Speaker 3: I stated my case, I allowed my friends to essentially
42:48
Speaker 3: stop talking to me, and I just waited and I thought, Okay,
42:53
Speaker 3: we're just going to measuredly, you know, address all of
42:57
Speaker 3: these issues. And I think that's what's starting to happen
42:59
Speaker 3: for a lot of people in the States anyway, like
43:01
Speaker 3: this last election, despite all of the strong reactions, everyone
43:05
Speaker 3: I know is basically like, okay, so we're just going
43:08
Speaker 3: to address the problems. It's kind of like, you know,
43:12
Speaker 3: trying to be rational and not delicate, but you know, firm,
43:18
Speaker 3: and we're going to address the problems. We're not going
43:20
Speaker 3: to overreact, we're not going to overcreact, or at least
43:22
Speaker 3: we're hoping that everyone will be on the same page.
43:24
Speaker 3: But that's definitely the goal. And when when we won
43:27
Speaker 3: the election, I was one of the people at least
43:30
Speaker 3: that I knew that was not as shocked as others
43:32
Speaker 3: because I was.
43:33
Speaker 1: Like, I had a feeling this was going to work out,
43:36
Speaker 1: and it was a gut thing.
43:38
Speaker 3: But but I was like, Okay, so now this has
43:40
Speaker 3: done the sort of like you know, let's say the
43:44
Speaker 3: top town, the top down effort to destroy everything has
43:48
Speaker 3: been halted. And maybe the best thing or the worst
43:52
Speaker 3: thing that happens is that, you know, it's only a
43:55
Speaker 3: delay for four years and then it continues after that.
43:58
Speaker 3: But I think that there is a strong effort from
44:02
Speaker 3: very you know as men primarily also was men that
44:06
Speaker 3: mostly stepped up and made this happen, like I mean,
44:09
Speaker 3: more than they have in the past.
44:11
Speaker 1: I put it that way.
44:12
Speaker 3: They're more aware of their problems, they're more aware of
44:15
Speaker 3: their you know, sort of of of the propaganda against them,
44:20
Speaker 3: because we've had anti mail propaganda for what one hundred
44:23
Speaker 3: years probably going back further, Yeah, for as long as
44:28
Speaker 3: there's been propaganda, there's been anti male propaganda.
44:31
Speaker 2: You know.
44:32
Speaker 3: And I think that, yeah, I think there that this
44:36
Speaker 3: is like the that they are trying to address that,
44:39
Speaker 3: and I think it's going to be maybe cautiously optimistic
44:44
Speaker 3: that we're going to be able to do so without overreacting.
44:48
Speaker 2: I really like the idea of that, and I'm hopeful
44:51
Speaker 2: that that is the case. Unfortunately, I was given evidence
44:56
Speaker 2: on October the ninth, last year, two days after Israel
45:00
Speaker 2: that we might not be and I initially thought, this
45:03
Speaker 2: is just crazy, this is not true. The so called
45:06
Speaker 2: intelligence I've been given here is nonsense, but it's unfortunately
45:10
Speaker 2: turned out to be true. And the only thing that's
45:11
Speaker 2: missing is that they said that the perfect storm would
45:14
Speaker 2: come by the end of this year latest early next year,
45:19
Speaker 2: and that it would stettle around Trump being told he
45:23
Speaker 2: wasn't allowed to take over his presidency. And I wouldn't
45:26
Speaker 2: take that seriously were it not for the fact that
45:29
Speaker 2: on October the ninth last year they told me that
45:32
Speaker 2: the riots at the start of summer would be horrifying
45:35
Speaker 2: here in the UK, but they wouldn't be the ones
45:37
Speaker 2: that were dangerous. In actual fact, it would be the
45:40
Speaker 2: ones at the end of the summer, centering around the
45:42
Speaker 2: Trump stuff that would have the potential to cause thousands
45:45
Speaker 2: of deaths. So for me, I'm trying to be in
45:49
Speaker 2: a hopeful place. But at the same time, because this
45:51
Speaker 2: guy was able to actulately predict what happened with Southport,
45:54
Speaker 2: you know this was a potential rising attack, I have
45:59
Speaker 2: to take it a little bit more serious. So a
46:02
Speaker 2: goalpost of Trump taking office before I'm too hopeful, do
46:06
Speaker 2: you know what I mean?
46:06
Speaker 1: Yeah, I know, I get that.
46:08
Speaker 3: I think that there is going to be a lot
46:10
Speaker 3: more chaos, But again it's sort of I'm not I'm
46:14
Speaker 3: not denying that at all, but I think that it
46:16
Speaker 3: ultimately comes down to, you know, can we remain steadfast
46:20
Speaker 3: and still do the right thing despite everything?
46:22
Speaker 1: And I don't, I don't know, We'll see.
46:23
Speaker 3: But you mentioned, you know that what we were talking
46:28
Speaker 3: right before the show, that you had your arms to
46:32
Speaker 3: stay and your.
46:35
Speaker 2: Is it.
46:35
Speaker 1: Also you also have Veterans Day something like.
46:37
Speaker 2: That, and there were remembrance on the remembrance.
46:42
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, yeah, and that there were riots, protests something
46:47
Speaker 1: like that.
46:48
Speaker 2: Yeah, we had Palestinian protests in Birmingham, which it is frustrated.
46:54
Speaker 2: I don't know how the rest of the Armed Forces
46:56
Speaker 2: feels about this, but you know, of all days, that
46:58
Speaker 2: should be the one day that no, but he's all
47:00
Speaker 2: out to protest. It doesn't matter whether you're a Palestinian
47:03
Speaker 2: or not. But considering the fact that the British Armed
47:07
Speaker 2: Forces fought the Palestinians because they sided with Hitler during
47:10
Speaker 2: the war, it was especially insulting. So yeah, it's frustrating.
47:16
Speaker 2: But again, these.
47:20
Speaker 1: It is also part of that whole Yeah, creating that
47:25
Speaker 1: the dialectic.
47:26
Speaker 2: Yeah, well this is the problem, so most people haven't.
47:29
Speaker 2: This is where people need to scale out their perception
47:32
Speaker 2: and this offers us the best chance of shutting down
47:34
Speaker 2: any major problems. So a culture war culture race is
47:38
Speaker 2: downstream from culture. Religion is downstream from culture. Sex is
47:42
Speaker 2: downscreen from culture. Gender is downstream from culture. So all
47:46
Speaker 2: of these big things are coming out of a cultural revolution,
47:50
Speaker 2: and they truly and there are people within overseas communities,
47:57
Speaker 2: both in this country and external who understand that we
48:00
Speaker 2: are in a cultural war and that all they have
48:02
Speaker 2: to do is so chaos in society. And this is
48:05
Speaker 2: why there was a handful of guys coming across with
48:07
Speaker 2: the usual economic migrants about the year and a half
48:10
Speaker 2: ago through Greece, and as soon as they got through
48:13
Speaker 2: the border, three or four of them took their lighters
48:15
Speaker 2: out started lighting dry grass. And that's because they were
48:19
Speaker 2: trying to set forest fires. They were trying to so
48:22
Speaker 2: chaos in any way they could. So if there are
48:24
Speaker 2: individuals and the reason they're doing that is because they've
48:27
Speaker 2: read mine camp. When Camp teaches you how to do
48:30
Speaker 2: that and teaches you it in the same way as
48:32
Speaker 2: Carl Marx's Communist Manifesto that just uses different language and labels.
48:37
Speaker 2: So yeah, it is definitely all into linked and when
48:41
Speaker 2: you follow it backwards as well, when we consider the
48:43
Speaker 2: DEI stuff that's being forced on all our institutions and
48:46
Speaker 2: into our schools by the United Nations, we essentially have
48:49
Speaker 2: the United Nations who have had really bad, radically left
48:53
Speaker 2: leaning history, who have been who are trying to indoctrinate
48:58
Speaker 2: all our children in schools, despite the fact that they
49:01
Speaker 2: know why the European Convention on Human Rights has a
49:03
Speaker 2: right to a private family life, so they know what
49:05
Speaker 2: they're doing. At the same time as unrah are publishing
49:10
Speaker 2: books in Palestine teaching the children there to want to
49:13
Speaker 2: kill Jews, So we have one organization in doctrinating all
49:18
Speaker 2: our children around these massive conflict subjects. It's not odd
49:24
Speaker 2: mm hmm that I do not like the deconstruction of anything,
49:28
Speaker 2: but that is one institution that cannot and will not
49:32
Speaker 2: survive this. If I survived this, the UN won't. Yeah.
49:39
Speaker 3: Well did you hear that the UN is itself a
49:43
Speaker 3: kind of like I don't know, hermetic institution.
49:48
Speaker 2: Like yeah, yeah, I said with them out and costs
49:51
Speaker 2: of and they were extremely dangerous out there while we
49:54
Speaker 2: were out there driving defensively. They were taught to drive
49:56
Speaker 2: aggressively and they were causing thousands of deaths on the
49:58
Speaker 2: road with their dodgy driving. Kids were dying all sorts.
50:01
Speaker 2: It was horrible. So I've hated them since that point.
50:04
Speaker 2: But then when James Nuzzo did that research, the gamma
50:07
Speaker 2: bias research into the United Nations, and he found twenty
50:09
Speaker 2: six thousand academic papers about women's health on their website,
50:14
Speaker 2: and then when he looked for men's he found nineteen
50:16
Speaker 2: for men. And I don't mean nineteen thousand, I mean nineteen.
50:20
Speaker 2: It was just like, I'm hot on a tech and
50:23
Speaker 2: then all of this DEI stuff comes up, and then
50:25
Speaker 2: UNRAH comes up, and then they find they call it
50:27
Speaker 2: a data center underneath the UNRAH center. A data center
50:31
Speaker 2: is an intelligence command center where the intelligence comes into
50:35
Speaker 2: That's where your commanders are. They want it sooner than
50:38
Speaker 2: everyone else. So, yeah, the United Nations are one hundred
50:42
Speaker 2: percent trying to push us into a bloody revolution.
50:47
Speaker 1: Yeah one.
50:49
Speaker 3: So I haven't heard anything crazy. So why are you
50:52
Speaker 3: always getting into fights on Twitter? What's that about?
50:56
Speaker 2: Okay, so where does that come from? Yeah, okay, I'm
51:01
Speaker 2: an effective campaigner, and I've always had that pushback. But
51:05
Speaker 2: the pushback changed when I've got a referral to the
51:07
Speaker 2: Prevent Program, And that was for that essay that I
51:12
Speaker 2: wrote that research gate there and I've actually changed the
51:14
Speaker 2: title to this essay resulted in a referral to Prevent Program.
51:18
Speaker 2: For those who don't know, the Prevent Program is an
51:20
Speaker 2: anti extremist program that was used by the radical left
51:24
Speaker 2: for since its inception until now, seventy eight percent of
51:29
Speaker 2: all referrals. Bearing in mind that was supposed to be
51:32
Speaker 2: about Islamic extremism, seventy eight percent of all referrals turned
51:36
Speaker 2: out to be by radically left leaning teachers and lecturers
51:39
Speaker 2: for children and students who had conservative or what they
51:42
Speaker 2: termed in cell beliefs. So seventy eight percent of a
51:46
Speaker 2: referrals were politically motivated by the radical left. Now they
51:51
Speaker 2: obviously have slapped me with the same bags that they
51:55
Speaker 2: have everyone far right. Misogynistic insight are oh look yeah yeah,
52:03
Speaker 2: apparently according to The Guardian, I was found guilty in
52:05
Speaker 2: the court case of that, but I'm not. I've got
52:07
Speaker 2: three kids, I've been married once. I'm definitely not an
52:11
Speaker 2: in cell. And I wasn't found guilty either. I was
52:14
Speaker 2: found in ten minutes.
52:16
Speaker 1: This is it.
52:17
Speaker 2: But these feminists that keep coming after me, they're using
52:20
Speaker 2: that article every single time, going, oh my god, you
52:22
Speaker 2: were like found guilty and you're an insult. I was like, no,
52:25
Speaker 2: I'm not guilty in Le's ten minutes, married three children.
52:30
Speaker 2: Do you know what I mean? I think what it
52:34
Speaker 2: is and I think Aaron Pizzyon Honey Badger will agree
52:37
Speaker 2: with this as well. The more effective you are as
52:39
Speaker 2: a campaigner, the worst the stalking and harassment gets these Yeah, I'm.
52:47
Speaker 3: Sorry, Well I was just going to say, okay, they
52:52
Speaker 3: say that you know you're over the target because you're
52:55
Speaker 3: getting hit with flack. So that's how. That's how, you know,
52:58
Speaker 3: And I think that's what it is. I think you're
53:00
Speaker 3: beer really effective they have to stop you. And it's
53:02
Speaker 3: really funny they always do this thing where, you know,
53:05
Speaker 3: I made this comment just the other day on a show,
53:09
Speaker 3: I said, the funny thing about the left is that
53:13
Speaker 3: everything comes from they have these certain appeals they do
53:17
Speaker 3: because they're trying to essentially validate something that is anti
53:24
Speaker 3: reality and The way that they do it is they
53:26
Speaker 3: make appeals to you know, a couple of things. One
53:30
Speaker 3: is authority. You know, doctor Fauci knows what he's doing.
53:34
Speaker 3: That's how I know that this, you know, the vaccine
53:36
Speaker 3: is safe and effective because doctor Fauci said, so are you,
53:39
Speaker 3: you know, a licensed pharmacist?
53:41
Speaker 1: Are you part of big pharma? Are you? Are you
53:44
Speaker 1: accredited in whatever way?
53:46
Speaker 3: You can't be like an independent researcher, because that means
53:49
Speaker 3: you're not credible. The other thing they do is they
53:52
Speaker 3: appeal to consensus. They'll say, you know, these papers are
53:56
Speaker 3: from a college and they have been peer reviewed, and
53:59
Speaker 3: they're you know, all of these feminists co signed on
54:01
Speaker 3: this thing.
54:02
Speaker 1: Therefore, the wage gap is real.
54:04
Speaker 3: The one in four women will be you know, sexually
54:07
Speaker 3: assaulted in their lifetime thing is real because all of
54:09
Speaker 3: this came from these people. Or they'll appeal to, you know,
54:13
Speaker 3: like sort of like a majority viewpoint, like if if
54:16
Speaker 3: you if you're candidate in the election one the the
54:22
Speaker 3: the the you know, the car the what is it,
54:24
Speaker 3: the electoral college, but they but they had they didn't
54:27
Speaker 3: get the majority of votes, like they didn't get the
54:29
Speaker 3: actual majority. They'll say, well, look our you know, our
54:32
Speaker 3: our person is better because they got the majority, and
54:35
Speaker 3: if any of those things are shattered, they lose their
54:38
Speaker 3: minds because now they have to figure out how what
54:41
Speaker 3: they believe is still true because they won't accept it
54:43
Speaker 3: they might be wrong that they just can't do that,
54:46
Speaker 3: so instead they have to say, well, there's got to
54:48
Speaker 3: be some other reason why this is true. And that's
54:51
Speaker 3: what they're doing to you. They're saying, well, look look
54:52
Speaker 3: at these articles written about you. This must be true
54:55
Speaker 3: because you know, the journalists that we like, they're obviously
54:58
Speaker 3: like you know, they're just better people. They're they're whatever.
55:02
Speaker 3: It's like, they idolize that because it validates them and
55:07
Speaker 3: they don't have to experience the kind of cognitive dissonance
55:11
Speaker 3: that comes out of their what is it some can
55:14
Speaker 3: cost you know, right?
55:18
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean the psychology behind the indoctrination process for
55:24
Speaker 2: young girls into feminists is exactly the same as the
55:28
Speaker 2: trans community. And what they're doing is they and the
55:30
Speaker 2: Marxists explain this very well. We all have a void
55:34
Speaker 2: between the ego and our outside world, and we present it,
55:40
Speaker 2: we perform who we are every day, but in these
55:44
Speaker 2: techniques they shift back void to between the ego and
55:48
Speaker 2: the self, so you're no longer fighting with your sense
55:51
Speaker 2: of identity with the outside world. Now it's you. And
55:54
Speaker 2: when you unpick the evidence around their sense of identity
55:58
Speaker 2: in that manner, it creates an extream level of cognitive dissonance.
56:03
Speaker 2: And this is why you see the heightened suicide rate
56:06
Speaker 2: amongst the trans community, because at some point they have
56:08
Speaker 2: to internalize that process themselves and they're not getting the support. So, yeah,
56:13
Speaker 2: I get triggered as much. I get triggered by very
56:18
Speaker 2: specific circumstance, though, and most people haven't cottoned onto it yet.
56:22
Speaker 2: People need to use me as a litmus test. I've
56:25
Speaker 2: had no therapy from an extremely, extremely psychologically abusive domestic
56:30
Speaker 2: violence relationship. So where would you expect to see, even
56:34
Speaker 2: as a basic layman, where would you expect to see
56:36
Speaker 2: triggers with me? Passive aggression manipulation. So when I go
56:41
Speaker 2: into these Twitter spaces and there are people flying under
56:44
Speaker 2: the radar in little shit, I really lose my shit
56:48
Speaker 2: with them. Because some you can reach the kids and
56:50
Speaker 2: they need to be told that what they're doing is
56:52
Speaker 2: bullying and fucking disgusting and they need to stop. Others
56:56
Speaker 2: are more perverse. Those individuals are fully versed on a
57:00
Speaker 2: gaily dialectic. They come into the room, they assume an
57:03
Speaker 2: identity that they think will fly under the radar, with
57:06
Speaker 2: the specific intent of guiding the dialectic in their favor.
57:12
Speaker 2: So you might think you've made friends with these individuals
57:15
Speaker 2: and you spent a long time with them, and oh, yeah,
57:17
Speaker 2: we all like the same stuff. It's great. But they
57:19
Speaker 2: will be sat there in the background planning, how can
57:22
Speaker 2: I make this individual do this for me? How can
57:24
Speaker 2: I make this individual do this for me? How can
57:26
Speaker 2: I make them say what I want them to say?
57:29
Speaker 2: And so the entire relationship with those individuals is beyond fake.
57:34
Speaker 2: It is amongst the most because of the techniques they're using,
57:37
Speaker 2: because they're almost expert in the techniques they're using. Because
57:41
Speaker 2: nobody's a full expert. They must have sat down at
57:44
Speaker 2: some point and read hity used these techniques, and they
57:48
Speaker 2: have to have sat there and gone but I'm better
57:50
Speaker 2: than it. Yeah, And that's what pierces me. Excuse my
57:54
Speaker 2: French everyone. When I know somebody is that leveled and
57:58
Speaker 2: they're in there playing those games, yeah, I'll pill that
58:01
Speaker 2: person's face off.
58:03
Speaker 1: I have to explain rhetorically.
58:06
Speaker 2: Yes, of course, of course.
58:10
Speaker 3: All right, well, we're gonna head into the after show.
58:12
Speaker 3: I want to talk to you a little bit about
58:14
Speaker 3: one of the things that you brought up in in
58:16
Speaker 3: a space that I.
58:16
Speaker 1: Hung out with you in, but I'm not going to
58:18
Speaker 1: do it on the main show.
58:20
Speaker 3: And we're going to talk a little bit about Peter
58:23
Speaker 3: Wright's work and your thoughts on that. And so yeah,
58:27
Speaker 3: if you guys want to join us there, you have
58:29
Speaker 3: to become a Badger and go to feed the Badger
58:31
Speaker 3: dot com forward slash subscribe and join us. I think
58:35
Speaker 3: it will be a pretty good discussion. So I hope
58:37
Speaker 3: I'll see you guys there, and if you give it
58:39
Speaker 3: higher levels, you can even join the Zoom call and
58:41
Speaker 3: talk to David personally. I actually put the wrong name here,
58:45
Speaker 3: hold on, I got to fix that later. I'm sorry, guys,
58:47
Speaker 3: it's David. I don't know why I mistyped and wrote Davis,
58:51
Speaker 3: but it's actually in the title correctly and in the
58:53
Speaker 3: description correctly. But anyway, is there any like last words
58:58
Speaker 3: you want to give to people before I sign off
59:00
Speaker 3: here and we go into the Patron show.
59:03
Speaker 2: Just that the key characteristic of the culture war is
59:06
Speaker 2: that the target group has suicide right through the roof,
59:09
Speaker 2: and that there will be lots of blokes who are
59:11
Speaker 2: listening who are struggling. I want you to know that
59:14
Speaker 2: you're not alone and that there are plenty of people
59:16
Speaker 2: like me out there who can help you. You don't
59:19
Speaker 2: have to go through it on your own. Just reach
59:21
Speaker 2: out please.
59:23
Speaker 3: All right, Well, thank you, that's well said. Links to
59:26
Speaker 3: David's things. I got his Twitter and your website where
59:32
Speaker 3: your writings are at and where I'm like spacing on
59:35
Speaker 3: that your publications are in the description, as well as
59:40
Speaker 3: your Twitter page. Follow him there and maybe if you
59:42
Speaker 3: see him inside of a Twitter space, jump in and
59:44
Speaker 3: just like enjoy the fireworks.
59:46
Speaker 1: But thank you guys so much for coming on today's show.
59:50
Speaker 3: If you guys like this video, please hit like, subscribe
59:52
Speaker 3: you're not already subscribed, hit the belt notifications, leave as
59:55
Speaker 3: a comment, let us know what you guys think about
59:56
Speaker 3: what we discussed on the show today, and please please
59:59
Speaker 3: please share this video because sharing is caring. I want
1:00:02
Speaker 3: to thank again David matters Head for joining me on
1:00:05
Speaker 3: the show today, and I want to thank you guys
1:00:07
Speaker 3: for watching. We'll talk to you guys in the next one.
1:00:10
Speaker 1: Have a good one, everybody. Y are machines, dude. Okay,
1:00:15
Speaker 1: they are literal machines. They are talking point machines. They
1:00:20
Speaker 1: are impossible to fucking deal.
1:00:21
Speaker 3: With, especially if you have like especially if you have
1:00:23
Speaker 3: like a couple of dudes who have good memory.
1:00:25
Speaker 1: On top of that too, Holy shit, you're fucked