Latest / Honey Badger Radio / Who invented gynocentric culture | HBR Talk 306

Transcript

Who invented gynocentric culture | HBR Talk 306 · Honey Badger Radio

• 0:01
  Hello, and welcome to HBr Talk three oh six. Who invented guyes centric
• 0:07
  culture. I'm your host Hannah wall In here with nonsense annihilator Lauren Brooks and
• 0:12
  the personification of perceptivity Mike Stevenson, and tonight we're going to look at a
• 0:16
  timeline of guyes centric culture to better understand the context in which we're discussing suffrage
• 0:23
  history. And I don't understand why, but for some reason, my Mike
• 0:27
  just dropped in volume between before the show and as soon as I hit hit
• 0:38
  the buttons to unmutinary and and that's weird. Let me just add my voice
• 0:42
  onto this and see what the dynamic differentiation is. Hang on, it seems
• 0:48
  like it's uh, this is weird. Why it's doing this? I'm not,
• 0:55
  Oh yeah, I am. I am some amount louder than you shown
• 0:59
  yourself up and the desktop audio down Yang that obs hates me. I swear
• 1:07
  to god, I did nothing wrong this time, and it's still fucked up.
• 1:15
  This is not my fault. You won't hear me say that very often,
• 1:19
  because most of the time is totally my fault. But I don't even
• 1:25
  know why it changed. Something in the system. Oh you want to talk
• 1:29
  now, sh it's my my application is feminist, That's what it is.
• 1:36
  It's trying to choke me out. But in any case, before we go
• 1:40
  into the rest of the topic, we gotta do what we gotta do.
• 1:45
  As always, Honey Badger Radio dishes out a smorgasbord of thought provoking discussions,
• 1:49
  and as experiences both recent and long past have demonstrated, the provoked thoughts are
• 1:53
  fighting back. They've made it clear that for people like us, relying on
• 1:57
  third party payment platforms like Patreon to fund our work is treading on thin ice
• 2:02
  or building our house in the path of a rapidly growing wildfire. In light
• 2:08
  of this, we strongly encourage our supporters to switch at least their support for
• 2:14
  us to feed the Badger dot Com the most stable way to help us out.
• 2:17
  And if you want to tip us directly instead of relying on any social
• 2:22
  media platform's tip jar, the link for that is feed the Badger dot Com
• 2:24
  slash just the tip. And as always, the same risk applies to our
• 2:30
  social media platforms because we keep pissing people off, which is why you should
• 2:36
  further provoke the thought police by tracking our thought provoking discussions on Honeybadger Brigade dot
• 2:39
  com, where you can find your way to all of our content, as
• 2:44
  well as a link to feed the Badger dot Com in the drop down menu
• 2:46
  at the top of the page. So we've looked at the early part of
• 2:53
  how voting rights evolved in Western culture, and we looked at at how guyinescentrism
• 3:04
  sort of plays into that, and we've looked at the difference between guinescentrism and
• 3:08
  guinescentric culture. So now we are going to look at the evolution of guinescentric
• 3:15
  culture. Because in the context of discussing the evolution of voting rights, and
• 3:23
  remember voting rights evolved, we talked about medieval voting rights where it started and
• 3:32
  how it started with men keeping the king in check. Essentially when the king
• 3:39
  decided to make a bunch of really stupid decisions and demand that men pay to
• 3:46
  facilitate those decisions, and the men said no. And when the king insisted,
• 3:52
  the men said no with swords, which is much more effective than just
• 3:58
  saying no. Don't try that in you know, the drug culture though that's
• 4:03
  not okay, you will get arrested. But in any case, yeah,
• 4:13
  they basically created the parliamentary system together the vassals of the king and the king
• 4:21
  in the context of no, we will not pay for your dumb ideas anymore.
• 4:26
  You have to let us have our say. And the system of them
• 4:30
  having their say it already existed, it's just the king was ignoring it.
• 4:33
  So they established that it's not optional, and then they established voting rights later
• 4:41
  when one of the barons sort of won a an organized campaign against I believe
• 4:49
  it was King Edward the Second that we talked about, and he included the
• 4:57
  commoners in the parliamentary system, even though at that time we're still talking about
• 5:02
  less than four percent of the population having the right to vote, and two
• 5:08
  hundred years later, less than less than four percent still had the right to
• 5:13
  vote, even after they'd expanded it. Two hundred years after that, the
• 5:17
  newer expansion also gave the vote to a tiny percentage that increased it to still
• 5:26
  less than four percent of the population. Do consider the situation you have in
• 5:30
  the US right now. Most of the people who hate Joe Biden, men
• 5:38
  of all races, particularly rural men, who have the wherewithal to actually start
• 5:46
  revolution and actually behead Joe Biden with the AR fifteen, should they feel the
• 5:50
  need to, and most of the people who support Joe Biden and one Donald
• 5:55
  Trump dead women and highly feminized men who can do little more than screech like
• 6:04
  a bunch of chimps and wouldn't have the ability to do so even if they
• 6:09
  wanted to. Now, I'm not saying anyone should do anything along those lines.
• 6:15
  I'm just saying if if we granted people, especially men, the ability
• 6:23
  to actually have a hands on influence on what would otherwise be less like modern
• 6:33
  democracy and more like medieval monarchy, then you would never get yourselves a Joe
• 6:41
  Biden. You would have yourselves at Donald Trump. Just the food for thought.
• 6:47
  Yeah, politicians don't have to earn the respect of the people whose money
• 6:53
  they are stealing anymore, especially not if they're also stealing the elections, which
• 6:58
  would never happen. I would not say that ever. Yeah, it's it's
• 7:02
  really sad like because they because they're now relying largely on the female vote,
• 7:09
  and women don't even understand respect at large. I mean, you know,
• 7:14
  the the drill hashtag not all right, or I wouldn't be able to even
• 7:18
  talk about it. But most most women don't understand respect, so they don't
• 7:25
  know how to demand it. They only know how to demand veneration and being
• 7:30
  catered to, so respect which they call respect. Neither of those two things
• 7:38
  are respect words, so what we say they are though? Oh well,
• 7:44
  then in that case, saying no, saying saying no to neighborhood crime with
• 7:49
  the sword is just pacifism. There we go, There we go. I
• 7:56
  I have redefined pacifism to include violence. Now now it's all right, Now
• 8:01
  it's double plus good speak. Yeah, there we go. I mean if
• 8:05
  feminists can do it. Obviously we're joking, just just for the for the
• 8:11
  sensors that YouTube. Nobody here actually advocates violence. Violence is stupid and it
• 8:16
  always ends up with with results that that aren't what you were hoping for and
• 8:24
  include things you definitely were hoping against. So speak softly and carry a big
• 8:31
  stick. Is that what the thing is? Yeah? Essentially, be being
• 8:37
  capable of being capable of extreme violence. Being capable of backing your demands with
• 8:43
  extreme violence and not using it when you don't have to, is a much
• 8:50
  greater sign of strength, demands much greater respect from the individual that you're dealing
• 8:58
  with, and is a much better tool of diplomacy than just using violence all
• 9:03
  the time, just like back in the day when it was acceptable for parents
• 9:09
  to just spank their kids as as a means of discipline, and people didn't
• 9:15
  try to think through more effective ways of training children to recognize their agency and
• 9:24
  their accountability. There were some parents for whom like, that's the most extreme
• 9:33
  punishment is a spanking for you know, non abusive parents, that's still the
• 9:39
  most extreme punishment, And so they would use it rarely, and they didn't
• 9:41
  threaten it all the time, either do this or I'm going to spank.
• 9:45
  It was in the background. You knew it could happen. It was very
• 9:50
  rarely pulled out as an actual weapon against your behavior and the other like ninety
• 9:58
  nine point nine repeating person. End of the time, you had, hey,
• 10:03
  this is not okay, don't do it, and that was that was
• 10:05
  pretty much all it took. Or you had uh, oh you broke the
• 10:09
  neighbor's window, Well, you're going to do chores. I'm going to pay
• 10:13
  you minimum wage and then you're going to give that money to the neighbor to
• 10:16
  pay for his window. That's that's how That's how most parents were. And
• 10:24
  you didn't you didn't pull out violence as your primary means of teaching your kid.
• 10:31
  And when parents did do that, when parents did pull out violence as
• 10:35
  their primary means of discipline, their kids didn't learn what they needed to learn
• 10:41
  about their personal agency and how it relates to their accountability and how that relates
• 10:50
  to their interpersonal relationships, and and how their behavior influences their relationships with the
• 10:58
  people around them. It actually screws them up. And of course, obviously
• 11:03
  there were plenty of parents who didn't even make it the ultimate form of punishment.
• 11:07
  There were things that were worse than being spanked, and so you had
• 11:13
  kids that learned to deal with conflict by using violence, and yeah, it's
• 11:18
  just dumb. It's just so we're all dumb. It's the same with any
• 11:22
  form of martial arts as we call them, even the ancient ones, even
• 11:28
  the modern ones or although I guess they're all sort of based on ancient forms
• 11:33
  of martial arts, not not just the Eastern ones that everyone's post colonial,
• 11:37
  post colonially obsessed with. This is the same with with European martial arts,
• 11:43
  which are often called hma i think, which just involved different weapons from from
• 11:46
  the Eastern ones. The whole, the whole point is you do not commit
• 11:50
  violence unless in self defense, and unless unless you are brought to that point
• 11:56
  by by by someone who will give you no other option. And that's that's
• 12:01
  the difference between authoritarianism and libertarianism, though I don't wish to get either of
• 12:07
  them. Isms in authority and liberty, those who are centered on liberty will
• 12:16
  not enact violence unless it is brought upon them. It's the non aggression principle.
• 12:24
  Doesn't mean you will never enact violence. It means you will not enact
• 12:28
  it until it is brought upon you. The authoritarian the libertarian ways don't tread
• 12:35
  on me, but wait and see what happens when you tread on me.
• 12:37
  The authoritarian way is, we will tread on you regardless of what you do.
• 12:46
  We will tread on you because you are in our way, yep.
• 12:50
  And if you retaliate, we will tread on you even harder. In my
• 12:56
  neighborhood, the principle was basically described as never throw the first punch, but
• 13:01
  always be ready to throw the last one. Yeah, there you go,
• 13:07
  and all start a fight and a ship, right and and of course you
• 13:11
  know, and in terms of what we've been discussing, when we talked about
• 13:16
  the medieval progression of voting rights. One of the one of the first things
• 13:22
  we talked about was the steps between King John being a dick and uh and
• 13:31
  and and a count at the same time, and the barons actually giving up
• 13:37
  on communicating to him, hey, this this is this is absolutely unacceptable.
• 13:41
  We aren't going to uh allow this and we aren't going to fund it,
• 13:46
  and and them finally taking up arms. Right, So they didn't just get
• 13:52
  mad and attack. There were a whole series of attempts at negotiating and communicating
• 14:00
  to an agreement, and when that didn't work, then they went to the
• 14:03
  last resort and you know, the taxation, which they didn't actually call taxation
• 14:09
  back then. It was paying tribute, but the demands for bigger and bigger
• 14:13
  tribute to fund things that were more and more dysfunctional. That was the initial
• 14:20
  active aggression in that war. It's because it's it's essentially theft. Theft is
• 14:26
  an active aggression, right, So you had that going on. You had
• 14:30
  men establishing the people having a say in their government through defending that right using
• 14:41
  their their risk. And I don't like to usually self reference, but I've
• 14:46
  written about this and done video on this in response to pop culture song that
• 14:54
  I absolutely hate, and I explained violence is labor. Violence uses your risk
• 15:01
  and your use of your body, your actual wear and tear on your body,
• 15:09
  and so it's work. It's not just a response to something. It
• 15:16
  counts as labor. It's effort, and it's a risky job. And only
• 15:22
  men have ever really been obligated to do it. Women haven't really been obligated
• 15:26
  to do it. Women have historically, we found, been able to do
• 15:30
  it, and when women chose to step up, they have done it.
• 15:35
  It hasn't been as common as when men did it, but there are examples
• 15:41
  in history of women stepping up and they're the exception, but they also demonstrate
• 15:48
  that it's a thing that women could do. Women just didn't have to do
• 15:52
  it right. And we've also proven that the history history of suffrage did not
• 16:03
  involve excluding women from the vote on the level that feminists claim or on the
• 16:11
  basis of their gender. Women could vote. They had to meet the same
• 16:15
  standards except military service that men had to meet, so they actually had it
• 16:22
  easier, and most women still didn't meet the standards and qualify. We even
• 16:30
  went back and showed that women worked historically so it's not that they couldn't meet
• 16:37
  those standards. It's that in their lives, their work life balance, right,
• 16:44
  their obligation balance as opposed to those that of men, they didn't have
• 16:49
  to They didn't have to meet the same standards men met. They had their
• 16:52
  own standards, and they weren't kept from meeting the standards that men at.
• 17:00
  They just got all of the benefits of their culture and being a woman in
• 17:07
  their culture without having to uphold the obligations that a man would have to uphold
• 17:15
  and meet. So we have that as the history of our discussion. In
• 17:19
  that context, let's look at the timeline of guinescentric culture. And we did
• 17:26
  differentiate also last week, and we talked about how guinocentric culture is where the
• 17:36
  culture itself is geared around a dominant focus on women's interests as opposed to men's
• 17:42
  interest not just in terms of, you know, somebody having an attitude,
• 17:48
  a ginescentric attitude, but in terms of the laws, the way the laws
• 17:53
  are designed, and the social expectations of the sexes being different and so on
• 18:00
  being geared around protecting women at men's expense, behaviors being acceptable when women do
• 18:06
  them, but not when men do them and so on. So we are
• 18:11
  at the start of this article. I think we've read this paragraph last week,
• 18:15
  but I am going to read it again. But before we get into
• 18:19
  that, I am going to go ahead and read Albert Nata Retro's super chat
• 18:25
  because I'm really happy about it. So Albert Nada Retro gave us two dollars
• 18:29
  Canadian and said Weinstein's New York verdict verdict overturned new trial pending. Yeah,
• 18:40
  and it actually have seen a story and it is the prediction that I made
• 18:45
  is coming true. So I'm happy about it twice. I'm happy that his
• 18:49
  due process rights are being respected. This doesn't mean that he can't be found
• 18:57
  still found guilty, or that he is, you know, suddenly a great
• 19:03
  guy. It doesn't mean that he will be found guilty later using a different
• 19:11
  pathway either or that he is a terrible guy. It just means that you
• 19:17
  can't you can't determine someone's guilt and the resulting punishment by allowing testimony in regard
• 19:32
  to allegations that he is not allowed to address in his case. And what
• 19:36
  happened in that case was they allowed the judge allowed women to come in and
• 19:41
  just make allegation after allegation regarding his behavior toward them, that that you know,
• 19:49
  claiming that he did things to them that have not been criminally tried.
• 19:53
  So there's no conviction on any of those. They could not actually criminally try
• 20:00
  most of those because most of those were either from out of state or past
• 20:07
  the statute of limitations, or there are other issues with those cases. So
• 20:10
  they allowed this to be introduced as evidence where somebody testified that he did commit
• 20:15
  a crime against them, and then he wasn't allowed to contradict that testimony because
• 20:22
  it wasn't the crime that he was being tried for. So they were used.
• 20:26
  Those allegations were used to establish a pattern of behavior, and essentially that
• 20:33
  means that he was denied the right to confront his accusers and to present evidence
• 20:42
  against the allegations, right to present to present evidence against the claim that there
• 20:51
  was a pattern of behavior. And you know it. I have my thoughts
• 20:57
  about this, Like there are people that are like, well, you know,
• 21:00
  he's a creep, but he didn't deserve to have his due process rights
• 21:03
  taken away. I have a different definition of creep. Right, he wasn't
• 21:11
  refusing to take no for an answer. I don't. You know, I
• 21:15
  don't condone the casting couch, but I don't pretend that the casting couch was
• 21:19
  a one way thing. Yeah, and I don't condone the concept of essentially
• 21:33
  attaching any kind of promotion or treatment at work to sexual favors. But I
• 21:40
  also don't pretend that there weren't women exploiting this. So this goes both ways.
• 21:45
  And it's wrong to impose accountability only on the involved man, and it's
• 21:52
  doubly wrong to do that in a context where we know that the kind of
• 22:03
  obsessive like hyper sexuality that it looks like he experienced is often a result of
• 22:14
  childhood abuse. So all the demonization is basically, look at this horrible person,
• 22:21
  he who might have been victimized as a child. How dare he respond
• 22:25
  to being victimized in a dysfunctional manner? You know, that's that's bullshit.
• 22:30
  None of this is to say that Weinstein's perfectly innocent. That would be that
• 22:37
  would be a naive thing to assume. Obviously there's there was something exploitative about
• 22:45
  him, just like there's something highly exploitative about Hollywood what we call Hollywood as
• 22:51
  an industry, but it's largely exploiters exploiting other exploiters, which which which only
• 23:02
  goes to show you what we're overall almost mutually exploitative industry. It is the
• 23:11
  point is precedent. You don't want it to set a precedent that if Harvey
• 23:18
  Weinstein can be found guilty of of of of such kangaroo courts, that means
• 23:26
  people much less powerful than Harvey Weinstein can can be found guilty of things of
• 23:32
  which they were not guilty whatsoever, like they like like if some if some
• 23:37
  aspiring actress exploits a possible male producer and then gets exactly what she wants,
• 23:48
  and then she can sue or you know, legally prosecute that man for allowing
• 23:57
  her to exploid him in similar ways. It's it's much like the Trump thing.
• 24:03
  Even if you think Trump's guilty of the ninety one things he's been accused
• 24:07
  of, which I don't for a minute believe he was. I mean,
• 24:11
  I don't actually anybody that does. I question their sanity no matter where you
• 24:19
  draw the line. Like, even if you hate Trump and you think he's
• 24:22
  guilty, if if any of these court cases actually come through, then that's
• 24:29
  going to affect all of you, especially in New York City. It's getting
• 24:33
  mental in New York City. If you're if you're someone who wants to live
• 24:37
  their life whatsoever, and try and run, try and run any business,
• 24:41
  or just fucking exist, then yeah, there was this recent court case in
• 24:48
  NYC of this guy who who built his own guns, and the judge in
• 24:55
  his court case was like, the Second Amendment doesn't exist in this court.
• 24:59
  Get to park with you. And that's that's the kind of precedent we don't
• 25:03
  want happening because it could be turned on any of you. So yeah,
• 25:10
  and and until we can we until we can turn that ship around and U
• 25:15
  and turn New York City red, and then possibly not even red, just
• 25:19
  let's move away from the colors altogether, so to the point where we don't
• 25:25
  even have to worry about the UNI Party. Then get the fuck out of
• 25:30
  New York City and get the fuck out of wherever it was that Harvey Weinstein
• 25:33
  was tried. Was that New York City as well? Yeah, that was
• 25:37
  that was the one that we're talking about, was the New York City trial.
• 25:40
  He's been trying in Well, I think California too, Well, there
• 25:44
  you go, get the fuck out of California. Get the fuck out of
• 25:45
  New York until until we can figure out what on earth is going on.
• 25:51
  Yeah, there was a time, and I'm sure it's still It hasn't really
• 25:56
  changed in a lot of cities, But there was a time when walking down
• 25:59
  the street associating yourself with red or blue could get you shot by other people
• 26:07
  who associate themselves with blue or red. And it had absolutely nothing to do
• 26:11
  with Democrats and Republicans, aside from the fact that the Uniparti's policies facilitated the
• 26:18
  growth of gang culture in the United States. It was the two gangs,
• 26:25
  and I honestly am starting to view the two political parties as their own private
• 26:32
  mafias that are fairly similar. And this you can see. You know,
• 26:38
  you had the involvement of mafia manipulation and gang manipulation in areas of business during
• 26:48
  the twentieth century, and you still see that today. There's still influence of
• 26:56
  gangs and you know, mafia and so on in some areas of business today.
• 27:03
  But it's getting a lot harder to differentiate between criminal organizations and my nation's
• 27:14
  political parties. It really is like they're just they're just allowed to do what
• 27:22
  they do right, and the only people that can police them are us,
• 27:27
  and they're working very hard to make that impossible. I just I so,
• 27:33
  I don't know. I don't I don't see a whole lot of difference between
• 27:40
  the colors being associated with the Bloods and the crips and the colors being associated
• 27:45
  with Republicans and Democrats. It's just this distinction is vanishing rapidly in my mind.
• 27:53
  So it's there you go. We do have an old super chat from
• 27:57
  last week that came through like right after I hit the button to close out
• 28:03
  the show last week. Richard Bierre gave us five dollars and said, have
• 28:07
  you heard about the school in Utah where a portion of the students are expressing
• 28:10
  themselves as Therians, slash furries and are acting badly but are having special protection
• 28:18
  from the school staff. There is a video from a student walkout protest where
• 28:22
  there's a claim that litter boxes are placed in restrooms. What I am surprised
• 28:27
  that that that the LDS Church, Latter Day Saints Church hasn't talked to the
• 28:33
  parents of these children. I had not heard of that we might be doing
• 28:38
  a raging on it soon. Allison's done something in the sentence, or it
• 28:42
  might be on a different thing. But yeahs wa'ts this space. This is
• 28:48
  this is insane because that actually could be considered a human rights violation. It's
• 28:56
  it's rather undignified to expect somebody to poop in a litter box, or to
• 29:03
  allow somebody to poop in a litter box. And these kids are essentially being
• 29:11
  taught by their sex education teachers, who should be teaching them how their bodies
• 29:17
  work and how that affects their reproductive choices and how those choices might affect their
• 29:23
  lives. Instead, they're teaching them to poop in a litter box. I
• 29:27
  mean, just think about that. It's insane. Okay. Do you know
• 29:30
  how kids are already their little shitheads and they get into the fights over stupid
• 29:34
  little things, right, Imagine imagine if there was just a supply of loose
• 29:42
  eigel matter at the ready, you know, imagine what you could do,
• 29:48
  the kind of chaos. That's a good point. That's a good point.
• 29:52
  Kids in school will use everything around them to get into fights. My friend
• 29:57
  is a school teacher actually had to take a ruler away from another student.
• 30:04
  And you know, in a class where that ruler was used, it was
• 30:08
  an art class, not a math class. But you use a ruler for
• 30:11
  a straight edge to draw lines, because she had a metal ruler and the
• 30:17
  kid had attacked another kid and just slashed the hell out of that kid like
• 30:23
  like it like with a knife, because those metal rulers, even though the
• 30:26
  edges aren't knife sharp, the corners of the flat edge are, and so
• 30:34
  it's not actually that hard to cut somebody with one of them. You have
• 30:38
  to be careful handling them. Sometimes because of that, you can poke yourself
• 30:41
  and stuff. And yeah, I'm aware the kids are demanding the litter box,
• 30:47
  but that is the school failing to teach the children about dignified behavior and
• 30:53
  maintaining their sense of personal dignity. It's not just an autonomy thing. When
• 30:59
  I was growing up and attending school, I remember being taught to do certain
• 31:03
  things and not do certain things in order to preserve my image in my culture,
• 31:14
  my surrounding culture, which was the school culture, and to communicate that
• 31:19
  I expected to be treated a certain way. Right. So, for instance,
• 31:26
  it is undignified to dress like you don't care about yourself. It's undignified
• 31:33
  to show up to school dirty. It's undignified to to use demeaning language about
• 31:44
  yourself or the people around you. It's more dignified to use respectful language toward
• 31:52
  yourself and the people around you. And granted, once you hit adulthood,
• 31:57
  a lot of people will make difference choices regarding how they talk and how they
• 32:01
  act and everything. But if you had a student that was showing up with
• 32:07
  dirty hair and no deodorant and stuff like that on a regular basis, the
• 32:12
  teacher might take that student aside, especially if there's a teacher that that student
• 32:16
  could hear it from more easily and say, hey, you know, you're
• 32:21
  going to do better in with your friends and making friends in your class if
• 32:27
  you wear deodorant and wash your hair. And similarly, we weren't allowed to
• 32:30
  tell each other in elementary school to shut up. You would say, please
• 32:37
  stop, be quiet, I don't want to have this discussion, you know,
• 32:39
  anything but rudeness. We weren't allowed to cuss. We weren't allowed to
• 32:45
  you know, ignore protocol, social protocols. And that is essentially And yeah,
• 32:53
  my teachers didn't like grunge culture, Richard, they were not fans.
• 33:00
  But that is essentially ways of demonstrating to students that you have value, and
• 33:06
  the people around you have value, and you take that into consideration when interacting
• 33:10
  with each other, so you know, you know. One of the most
• 33:17
  arguable arguments against homeschooling is that children need to learn how to react with other
• 33:24
  children, because it teaches them to learn how to react with other adults once
• 33:30
  they become adults. If all you've ever known is growing up with your parents
• 33:35
  who love you, usually almost always they love you, spending your entire life
• 33:43
  with adults who love you and want nothing more than to protect you is not
• 33:49
  going to prepare you for for for the big bad world of people who don't
• 33:52
  give a shit about you, and and and so it sort of makes sense
• 33:58
  to to to introduce children to to that big bad world. But it's it's
• 34:07
  it's something of a culture shock, perhaps too much of a culture shock,
• 34:12
  when you throw them into school at any age, because it usually happens at
• 34:15
  age five or six or something whenever it is and and and no matter what
• 34:22
  age it is, you're you're suddenly plunged into an environment surrounded by hundreds of
• 34:28
  children who not only don't give a shit about you, but I mean actively
• 34:35
  hate you. Because because because children don't know any better in that sense,
• 34:38
  they see other children they they've never met, and it's like, we compare
• 34:45
  it to a prison for more ways than one. I know, it's not
• 34:46
  like a prison because they're only they're only trapped in that building for eight hours
• 34:52
  a day, but it's it's still an institution, and its still institutionalizes them
• 34:58
  in a way. It's still i mean eight hours a day when they're not
• 35:00
  allowed to leave this building, and during those eight hours a day they're surrounded
• 35:06
  by hundreds of miniature psychopaths. I mean, yeah, it does, it
• 35:12
  does. It does teach them what it's like to interact with other people who
• 35:17
  don't give a shit about you. But it's a bit much. It's perfectly
• 35:22
  possible to homeskill your homeschool your children while letting them play with the other children
• 35:28
  on your street and the other children in the in the closest vicinity in your
• 35:34
  town, and that you know, you know, they can they can learn
• 35:37
  how to interact with other children that way. Like I know, this sounds
• 35:42
  alien to the Zoomers, the idea that you can let children play outside,
• 35:47
  but yeah, that's that's what we did in the twentieth century. We just
• 35:52
  we just let children play outside and meet with the other kids in the neighborhood.
• 35:58
  And and they had so thing in common in that sense, because like
• 36:01
  they're on the same street and stuff, and they weren't as focused on each
• 36:10
  other's well being like parents are focused on their children's well being. But at
• 36:15
  least, you know, at least they got together in groups of maybe five
• 36:19
  or six and and and and kicked a football or around the neighborhood. That's
• 36:24
  that's enough. That's all you need. That's It's not like we ever needed
• 36:30
  to institutionalize children in a large building with hundreds of other psychopaths. And you
• 36:37
  know that. I'm not saying children are like well they are kind of,
• 36:39
  but when you when you put a hundred of them together in a building,
• 36:44
  it's when they become much like the Sanford prison experiment. Well, honestly,
• 36:51
  a lot of it depends on the teachers and how the school system is because
• 36:55
  I went to an elementary school that was a little different, and honestly,
• 37:00
  my dad was the reason it was different. He's the one that instituted the
• 37:04
  policies that made it different. When he was the head teacher there. They
• 37:07
  didn't have a principal. They just had a had teacher, and so my
• 37:12
  first elementary school had a credo. So when I was growing up, had
• 37:17
  two different sets of lessons on how to make relationships with other people. I
• 37:22
  had the ones I learned in the wilds of the local park where there were
• 37:29
  no adults within ten feet of us or twenty or thirty feet of us.
• 37:34
  There were adults that could see what was going on at the park that would
• 37:37
  come over and intervene if it looked like people were beating the hell out of
• 37:38
  each other too much. But aside from that, it was almost almost lord
• 37:46
  of the flies, you know, at that park. And we learned to
• 37:52
  get along pretty well actually by sort of discovering through experience or learning discovery,
• 38:00
  uh, that that violence begets violence, and cooperation begets cooperation and so on.
• 38:07
  So we we came up with our own rules, right but at school
• 38:10
  because we had a credo, and it was a credo of ethical treatment of
• 38:15
  each other and respect. We uh we we kind of learned that having a
• 38:23
  loose set of rules, that that could act as a guide for decision making
• 38:30
  in relationships with each other. And how we played together and uh, you
• 38:36
  know, how we organized our games and our our friendships and everything helped to
• 38:43
  work as a shortcut to determining, you know, those decisions like how do
• 38:47
  we how do we respect each other's rights. We didn't necessarily have that discussion,
• 38:54
  but it was something that was imprinted on us by the credo, and
• 38:58
  it was the credo wasn't anything complicated. It was essentially the original meaning of
• 39:05
  chivalry without the horses. The big kids helped the little kids, you know,
• 39:10
  and and you try to be nice to each other, like real simple,
• 39:16
  But other schools don't all do that, and you can't substitute that for
• 39:22
  parenting. It has to be the big kids. The big kids bully the
• 39:27
  little the little kids. Yeah, and and it it it's one of those
• 39:30
  things that if you don't have a good environment, you do create little monsters,
• 39:37
  and if you do have a good environment, you create great experiences.
• 39:40
  And the kids that came out of that school ended up as a valedictorian almost
• 39:45
  every year. Some the valedictorian came from that that elementary school until that school
• 39:52
  was closed, and then then the validate valedictorian came from the little Catholic school
• 39:58
  every year after that just about so. But in any case, that kind
• 40:04
  of addresses, uh like that last super Chat, and we have one more
• 40:08
  or not super Chat, but super Chow, the one that I missed.
• 40:13
  We have one more that I'll read before the the before we start, just
• 40:19
  because I forgot about, because I'm gonna get this over with otherwise I'll be
• 40:24
  anticipating it throughout the entire show. Richard Bierre gave us five dollars and I'm
• 40:30
  gonna I'm gonna make this sound the same way that we did when I was
• 40:36
  in camp as a kid. He gave us five dollars and he said,
• 40:40
  I'm Innery the eighth. I am Enery, the eight dim. I am
• 40:45
  I got married to the window next door. She's been married seven times before,
• 40:49
  and everyone was an Innery, never had a Willie or Sam. I'm
• 40:53
  r eighth the old man. I'm Enery Enery the eighth. I am.
• 40:58
  We always finished that up with the second verse same as the first, a
• 41:01
  little bit louder and a whole lot worse. And I'm not gonna sing it
• 41:06
  that way. So but that's our that's our super Chow. So with that
• 41:09
  out of the way, I think I got all of them. No.
• 41:15
  He also Albert Nada Retro gave us two dollars and said, no doubt he
• 41:20
  meaning Harvey Weinstein is a creep. It's a matter of degrees. So all
• 41:24
  right, I got to hit that one too. If a woman behaved exactly
• 41:34
  the way that Harvey Weinstein behaved, instead of being labeled a creep and charged,
• 41:42
  she would be labeled an imfhomeniac maniac and viewed as vulnerable and a victim
• 41:46
  of her own choices. Just just that alone should tell you my opinions on
• 41:54
  this. I'm like, I don't condone the behavior, but I see it
• 42:04
  as an outcropping of a mental health condition that needs to be treated, and
• 42:08
  demonizing people with that kind of problem doesn't fix the problem. Demonstrating that our
• 42:16
  society is prepared to protect people from the fallout of having that kind of mental
• 42:24
  health condition, and not just the people that are affected by the individual with
• 42:31
  the health condition, but the person him or herself from having the opportunity to
• 42:39
  engage in behaviors and then also from you know, just being left untreated like
• 42:50
  that. That's not a bad thing, but treating it as a reason to
• 42:53
  demonize and to humanize and and lock someone away and eliminate, you know,
• 43:02
  or unwrite their history like he has a whole professional history that that's bullshit.
• 43:13
  That's not a good way to handle that, and we sure shouldn't be handling
• 43:17
  it different between the sexes. It should be. If we're going to recognize
• 43:23
  the vulnerability aspect of it in women, then we should be able to do
• 43:28
  that when it comes to men. And if we're going to recognize the culpability
• 43:35
  and accountability aspect of it when it comes to men with such mental illness,
• 43:40
  then we should also be able to do that with women. Right. There
• 43:45
  has to be a balance, and there also has to be a genderless approach
• 43:49
  to this, because it can't be okay when women do it but creepy when
• 43:53
  men do it, right, and it can't be It can be that mental
• 44:01
  illness allows for a more nuanced approach to a person's behavior whenever that behavior isn't
• 44:10
  sexual, but not when it is. Just that's that's all I've got to
• 44:17
  say about it. Albert Nada Retro gave us another two dollars and said she'd
• 44:22
  be a creep to me, look at my stuff. No bias. Yeah,
• 44:24
  I recognize that, but creeps, creeping on creeps, creeping on creeps.
• 44:30
  It's it's a whirlpool. It's it's a pit of quicksand like, yeah,
• 44:34
  it sucks, but the moral of the story is stay the fuck away
• 44:37
  from it. Yeah, And and when somebody has has the kind of boundary
• 44:42
  issues that result from being traumatized or uh raised badly or things like that,
• 44:51
  the solution has to include addressing the lessons that they learned through from that that
• 44:59
  that were wrong, so that they have an opportunity to not just be that
• 45:04
  way for the rest of their lives. And so that we have an opportunity,
• 45:07
  like somebody who's capable of doing things in society that we want, that
• 45:15
  we don't lose them as a resource because we can't. We just it's just
• 45:21
  too distasteful for us to try to help them reform. But in any case,
• 45:30
  so that that hits all, that hits all the super discussions that need
• 45:34
  to take place before the article. The article is the timeline of guines centriculture.
• 45:38
  This is an old article again, this was written in twenty thirteen,
• 45:40
  but it's very important and this is stuff that you know. When we get
• 45:47
  back to the timeline, you'll see how this applies. The voting timeline.
• 45:52
  This you'll see how this applies. And then when we get done with the
• 45:54
  voting timeline, there is more from this website that I'm going to want to
• 45:59
  talk about because it all it intersects with how we as a community, the
• 46:07
  men's rights activist and advocate community, can have success in modern society, which
• 46:14
  is a guinescentric culture. So we'll dig into this one today, and this
• 46:22
  is me telling you that in the future that there will be more from this
• 46:25
  website that we're going to discuss, and probably some other important men's rights websites
• 46:31
  that we haven't really spent a lot of time looking at because we've been too
• 46:36
  busy reading feminist news and objecting to it. So the following timeline details the
• 46:44
  birth of guynescentric culture, along with significant historical events that ensured its survival.
• 46:51
  Prior to twelve hundred a d, broad spread guyinescentric culture simply did not exist,
• 46:58
  despite evidence of isolated ginocentric acts and events. It was only in the
• 47:01
  Middle Ages that guyes centrism developed cultural complexity and became a ubiquitous and enduring cultural
• 47:09
  norm, and of course did not exist links to guinocentrism or guyocentric culture,
• 47:17
  which we did discuss last week. And you think about twelve hundred a d
• 47:23
  is just just a generation prior to the advent of a parliamentary system in the
• 47:38
  UK. Wow. Yeah, So in one thousand and one and two AD
• 47:49
  guyocentrism trope is first introduced. So we have William ninth, the Duke of
• 47:57
  Aquitaine. Aquitane, the most powerful feudal lord of France, wrote the first
• 48:04
  troubadour poems and is widely considered the first troubadour. And this he links to
• 48:08
  Wikipedia sometimes it's easier, but like I've found other spots where that's discussed as
• 48:17
  well. And interestingly, Wikipedia's references on this are not bad. So apparently
• 48:25
  feminists didn't object to this information. Parting with the tradition of knighting fighting wars
• 48:34
  strictly on behalf of man, king, god and country. William is said
• 48:37
  to have had the image of his mistress painted on his shield, whom he
• 48:42
  called middens or my Lord, saying that it was his will to bear her
• 48:46
  in battle as she had borne him in bed. And I'll point out last
• 48:53
  week's discussion on chivalry is relevant here too, because when we talked about it
• 49:00
  last week, I you know, I pointed out the concept of chivalry was
• 49:07
  created as a as a means of giving knights, you know, a loose
• 49:14
  guide for their behavior toward other people, because they had strengths, capabilities,
• 49:20
  power that other people didn't have. They had the most powerful form of transportation,
• 49:28
  the most powerful weapons, the most powerful armor, and it wasn't available
• 49:35
  to the overwhelming majority of the public. Most people couldn't afford to just have
• 49:39
  a sword. On the subject of transportation, considered that. To this day,
• 49:45
  ships are generally called she. Large transportation vessels are generally referred to as
• 49:53
  she, and countries are referred to as she. Now I know there's a
• 50:00
  lot of things that are referred to as he, sort of by default.
• 50:05
  And I'm obviously not talking about countries that still have languages that gender all of
• 50:12
  their nouns, where where random objects are randomly given female pronouns or male pronouns.
• 50:22
  We don't have that in English, and we haven't had it for a
• 50:25
  for a jolly long time. But when you look at how things are differentiated,
• 50:30
  the biggest things we have like ships, which are like self contained countries
• 50:36
  because they sail on the open ocean, and the open ocean to this day
• 50:40
  is called international waters. Hence, such things are called are called female,
• 50:46
  and countries are called female. Will referred to Britain as she, Americans refer
• 50:55
  to will refer to America as she, and indeed Ben Shapiro will refer to
• 51:01
  Israel she. I mean that sort of makes sense because Jewish lineage is tracked
• 51:08
  along the female lineage, which is otherwise unique to the jurist thing. But
• 51:20
  let's not get into that. When when when we speak of how things become
• 51:25
  male centric in in any such ways, Yeah, you have to look at
• 51:34
  how we how we pointed things using these pronouns, as important or unimportant as
• 51:38
  you may think these things are. But you may wonder if this old dates
• 51:46
  back to the date that Peter Wright is talking to. It's it's it's it's
• 51:52
  around the middle point between the inception of Christianity and the modern point we find
• 52:00
  ourselves now in Christianity. That's we started referring to the to the most significant
• 52:08
  nouns that people could think of at the time as female, even though this
• 52:15
  is all driven by an ostensibly male God and ostensibly male Messiah. But as
• 52:27
  you may be able to track from what certainly Catholicism, Catholicism is, if
• 52:34
  anything, a religion that worships the Virgin Mary as as as much as the
• 52:40
  Messiah is male and the God is ostensibly male, Catholics seem to worship the
• 52:47
  Virgin Mary more than they've worshiped Jesus, and even though she's not part of
• 52:53
  the Holy Trinity, although one has to wonder what the Holy Spirit is,
• 52:58
  and she's supposed to be considered an intermediary between humanity and Jesus by virtue of
• 53:08
  having been his earthly mother, but people forget that and treat her like a
• 53:13
  deity instead of a saint. Yes, and then you know, I'm not
• 53:17
  I'm not having to goanity. I guess I am as much as I would
• 53:21
  go any other religion or any other It's realm of thought that is susceptible too,
• 53:34
  to the magnetic attraction of kind of centrism. It's it's well, here's
• 53:49
  the thing, like we've seen over over the last several centuries, a change
• 53:57
  to Christianity that I think a lot of people think it was always this way.
• 54:02
  Modern churches are very ginescentric, and modern churches are sometimes exclusively ginescentric.
• 54:09
  Even Protestant churches in their relationship counseling and everything very kind of centric, and
• 54:19
  it's a challenge really to trace back when that change took place. But it
• 54:27
  doesn't mesh necessarily with the Bible. And like, the Bible wasn't misogynistic.
• 54:35
  People think it was because there's some isolated verses they'll cite that they would object
• 54:43
  to in a modern context and ignore the cultural context in which they were written.
• 54:49
  But really, men and women were treated as partner, partners in culture
• 54:57
  and partners in family and so on. Men and women were equally culpable for
• 55:02
  their actions. Men and women were equally equally obligated to, you know,
• 55:10
  to to make the same deal with God. It wasn't that men are guilty
• 55:16
  of original sin and women aren't. And the Bible goes back and and traces
• 55:22
  the original sin, even to the fact that Eve didn't have to listen to
• 55:30
  the snake and Adam didn't have to listen to Eve. So they're both to
• 55:35
  they're both to blame for that behavior, and they let each other down,
• 55:40
  and they they let God down, and they let their their future descendants down.
• 55:46
  Right, So that's that's not guydnescentric or misogynistic. And the Bible has
• 55:53
  verses in it explaining things like if you're going to get married, you shouldn't
• 55:58
  be equally yoked or unequally oaked, meaning not just that you shouldn't marry someone
• 56:05
  of an alternative set of beliefs, which is what it's used for a lot
• 56:08
  now, but also you shouldn't treat your marriage like your partner is more or
• 56:15
  less responsible for your partnership, your your household, your welfare, their welfare,
• 56:20
  and so on, because that is also unequally yoked. So the accountability
• 56:27
  gap, which is a marriage wrecker, kind of goes against biblical advice.
• 56:35
  And yet in modern churches we hear a lot of romantic chivalry endorsing guynocentrism from
• 56:47
  like conservative traditional traditionalist, very self proclaimed godly men and self proclaimed god women,
• 57:00
  and it's, in my opinion, it's really an abandonment of the principles
• 57:07
  laid out in the instruction Manual for the faith that they're trying to practice.
• 57:15
  I don't know how the church is ever going to walk away from that or
• 57:19
  come back from that without confronting the fact that it's wrong, and and that's
• 57:24
  going to be difficult. The clergy is in on it, so I don't
• 57:30
  know. It's kind of hard, but oh gosh, Uh, at some
• 57:37
  point, we're going to have to do a lower discussion. Stinky Bunbun,
• 57:43
  says Mike. I was wondering if you chose to have the Pandama trench coat
• 57:46
  avatar. So we definitely need to go back and talk about the honey Badgers
• 57:55
  we got together. He's just luck an undertake it. I was. I
• 58:00
  was a big fan of the of the b WF wrestler, the Undertaker,
• 58:06
  and I just think that's something cool about an Undertaker's outfit. It's it's it's
• 58:10
  somewhat sort of yeah, well neutral in a way, but also a harbinger
• 58:15
  of death in a way. And that's what I like about it. That
• 58:21
  was that was my That was my favorite wrestler back in the day. I
• 58:24
  even I even learn how to do the Undertaker set up. I couldn't do
• 58:30
  it now to save my life. But oh Jesus, Pizza, you just
• 58:35
  you just sit up? What? No, No, If you ever do
• 58:38
  sit ups, you'll notice that you have your knees bent, maybe you have
• 58:43
  your feet attached underneath something. You don't. You have to have some serious
• 58:50
  core strength to be able to be laying flat on your back with your arms
• 58:53
  flat on the ground next to you and then go from that position in to
• 59:00
  sitting straight up. And guys didn't have as much trouble doing that. But
• 59:07
  the gals, the other gals that I knew, none of them could do
• 59:08
  it. I was the only one. Your your abs are the only you
• 59:15
  know. Like, you have to have your abs working well. You have
• 59:17
  to have your upper body weight less than the weight of your legs, or
• 59:22
  you have to be able to counterbalance without having your legs come up off the
• 59:28
  ground. It's not as easy as he makes it look. But in any
• 59:32
  case, yeah, and uh and and yeah, Packard, I think the
• 59:39
  Catholic Church is never going to care about the fact that they're too guind of
• 59:43
  centrism or too centrism oriented. I I do agree with that. I'm not
• 59:50
  a big fan of of the way that works. And I mean, any
• 59:53
  any religion that doesn't have some kind of clause about men's rights is going to
• 1:00:01
  gravitate towards women's rights and nothing else, even when it does like and the
• 1:00:08
  same goes, and the same goes for this this phenomenon we call atheism,
• 1:00:15
  which we really don't need to call atheism. We really never needed to call
• 1:00:17
  it anything. This was the The problem is identity politics. As I'm going
• 1:00:25
  to explain in in in a very in a very long rund video I'm going
• 1:00:30
  to do soon, that the problem was never religion. The problem was always
• 1:00:34
  identity politics. And that goes for atheism as well. You don't need to
• 1:00:37
  call yourself anything, and this was just just as much a problem for atheism.
• 1:00:45
  More so actually that that uh and and anything that that that pandas panders
• 1:00:54
  to to identity politics rather than what actually needs to be done, what actually
• 1:01:06
  needs to be focused on for the sake of humanity, for the sake of
• 1:01:09
  women and men, is just going to is just going to gravitate towards what
• 1:01:17
  we call optics, what we call is the best way to emotionally get through
• 1:01:22
  to the masses. And the problem with the masses is, I mean,
• 1:01:29
  the bigger the mass you're dealing with them, the more they the more they
• 1:01:34
  care about emotions than rationality. And I know the people we call atheists like
• 1:01:43
  to think that they gravitate towards rationality than emotion, but as long as they're
• 1:01:50
  looking to identities, they don't. Identity politics is tied in with irrational emotions,
• 1:01:59
  because there's nothing rational about identities. It's it's just it's just a shorthand,
• 1:02:06
  a rhetorical shorthand that that lets people step over all of all of the
• 1:02:14
  necessary rational considerations that that that that should be thought of, so they can
• 1:02:21
  just go, well, I'm this, I'm a this, and you're a
• 1:02:25
  this. So we have nothing in common, whereas all along we did.
• 1:02:30
  We have a lot of things in common people people who who believe a given
• 1:02:35
  book is real, and people who don't believe a given book is real.
• 1:02:38
  We we like to pretend that we have nothing in common because we have different
• 1:02:43
  beliefs regarding different books. But we do, like the people who call themselves
• 1:02:45
  atheists and the people who call themselves Christians, have a great deal in common.
• 1:02:52
  And it's and it's and it's far more transcendent than the things we believe
• 1:02:58
  the books tell us. And it's and and and it's shared beliefs, shared
• 1:03:05
  values where when it comes to to the nature of humans and the nature of
• 1:03:09
  human life, and what is necessary to uh to maintain the beliefs we have
• 1:03:17
  about humanity and human nature that have got us this far. And and yeah,
• 1:03:23
  homogeneity, well not what's what's the word, it's some kind of word
• 1:03:32
  that begins with homo. But yeah, it's it's it's it's all having shared
• 1:03:38
  beliefs. That's what's important. They don't need to be spiritual beliefs based on
• 1:03:43
  any given book. They just we just we just need to all sort of
• 1:03:46
  agree on on on on what's important as to what keeps the human race together,
• 1:03:53
  or what keeps a national people together, or what keeps the people of
• 1:04:00
  your town together or people or keeps people in your street together. It's it's
• 1:04:04
  anything that that you can agree on. And and I think identity politics doesn't
• 1:04:14
  help. I mean, yes, you need a name. I'm I'm I'm
• 1:04:17
  Mike. That's Hannah, that's Laury. We need those names so we can
• 1:04:20
  differentiate between each other, so we know who we're talking to. We need
• 1:04:25
  to be called men or women because those are literal things that pertain to literal
• 1:04:30
  reality that actually, you know, there is a physical difference, indeed a
• 1:04:35
  genetic difference between men and women, and we need those things. And arguably
• 1:04:40
  we even need a national difference between because that pertains to our geographical location.
• 1:04:45
  Like I'm British, these two are American like to some degree, we we
• 1:04:51
  need we need those three things in order to identify ourselves. But I don't
• 1:05:00
  quite understand anything else that's actually required for our identities. You know, honestly,
• 1:05:09
  I'm quite I'm willing to accept arguments along those lines, but as far
• 1:05:14
  as as far as I know, those are the things, three things we
• 1:05:16
  need, and it's it's not and I guess it is all right. But
• 1:05:21
  it's no surprise that the how do I say this without being identitarian? The
• 1:05:28
  s J A w U S we're arguing against m HM, those are the
• 1:05:33
  three identities they hate the most. You should, you shouldn't. You don't
• 1:05:38
  need a name, you don't need a biological sex. You can change that.
• 1:05:42
  And you don't need a national identity. You can change that. But
• 1:05:45
  everything else is fixed in stone, all all all those mad identities that we
• 1:05:51
  that we make up on the spot, and that the ones that we can
• 1:05:55
  change willy nilly any given time, though, those are the ones that are
• 1:06:00
  important, the malleable ones, the ones that we change a calling to our
• 1:06:05
  emotions, those are the important ones. But you're your your your name given
• 1:06:11
  by your parents, now that doesn't matter. Your your biological description that doesn't
• 1:06:16
  matter, and your nationality that doesn't matter anything else we can think of applying
• 1:06:24
  to you. That's the only thing that matters. And that's and that's why
• 1:06:27
  people call it gnosissism, because they're taking the only thing that the only identity
• 1:06:31
  that matters, and pretending it doesn't matter, and taking all the identities that
• 1:06:36
  don't matter and pretending they do matter. You know what I mean. Yeah,
• 1:06:42
  it's it's not necessarily wrong to have labels for known sets of shared beliefs.
• 1:06:47
  The problem comes in where it just like it's it's helpful to have a
• 1:06:55
  credo as a shortcut in in some of your decision making, it's also helpful
• 1:07:01
  to have a name for a shared set of beliefs as a means of communicating
• 1:07:10
  shorthand when you talk to me about these subjects, I'm The perspective I'm coming
• 1:07:15
  from is that I hold you know, some, most, or even all
• 1:07:20
  of this shared set of beliefs right. But at the same time, a
• 1:07:25
  credo can be a handicap if you use it as a substitute in place of
• 1:07:31
  thoughtful consideration of your actions before you take them and so on, where you
• 1:07:36
  know you rules lawyer instead of self judging and mindful determination of what to do,
• 1:07:49
  and the same is true with a label for an identity that is based
• 1:07:55
  on a shared set of beliefs. Yes, you can say that you have
• 1:08:01
  that shared set of beliefs with other people and you use this label to describe
• 1:08:05
  it. No, that does not mean that you don't have to consider ideas
• 1:08:13
  before you make a decision on them. Well, this doesn't sound libertarian.
• 1:08:17
  I'm not gonna accept it. Why not? What makes it sound not libertarian?
• 1:08:21
  What is the detail that you object to? Because that still should be
• 1:08:26
  discussed and debated, and there's no reason that you should be using your label
• 1:08:33
  as a as a thought terminating cliche to avoid that. Libertarian is another very
• 1:08:41
  good example, like sometimes when when I express my disdain for the government,
• 1:08:45
  I'll get some midwits calling me a laubatarian, as if that's as if that's
• 1:08:54
  gonna just just dismantle everything I say because I've called you a name like I
• 1:08:58
  don't. I don't identify as a libertarian. I don't need to. But
• 1:09:01
  I have a great deal of criticism against authoritarianism. That doesn't make me a
• 1:09:09
  libertarian, And I reject like any of your thought terminating cliches in the form
• 1:09:15
  of this label that you give me. Like, you'll notice, as I've
• 1:09:21
  pointed out often in the past, nobody identifies as an authoritarian. Almost nobody
• 1:09:27
  identifies as an authoritarian. It's just that some people don't identify as a libertarian
• 1:09:33
  either, but they they argue against authoritarianism, and then when people call them
• 1:09:41
  names, they go no, no. It's much like people like advocate for
• 1:09:45
  men's rights, and then when someone calls them a men's rights advocate, they
• 1:09:48
  go, no, it doesn't matter, none of it fucking matters. Just
• 1:09:55
  do the things you're doing, and just reject the fucking identities that people throw
• 1:10:00
  in you because they're not helping. They don't help anyone. Yep. So
• 1:10:08
  essentially, the whole fact of religion being guinocentric, like it's not really it's
• 1:10:17
  not necessarily a naturally occurring thing in religion. I think it's the influence of
• 1:10:24
  guinocentric culture on religion because if you look at the history of Christianity in the
• 1:10:30
  way that it spread, it didn't it didn't spread through guinocentric means. It
• 1:10:40
  spread through Rome outward to the entire Roman Empire, and people adopted the belief
• 1:10:49
  system because it sounded good to them. It was something that they liked,
• 1:10:56
  or because their leaders adopted it and then said everybody else in the country you
• 1:11:00
  will also adopt this. Right, there was those two different ways that that
• 1:11:06
  happened, and neither one of them are things that would have occurred in that
• 1:11:14
  time period if the religion was as guyinocentric as it is today. Women did
• 1:11:20
  not control the culture. And you know, the funny thing is feminists will
• 1:11:30
  claim that we lived in a woman oppressing patriarchy during that time. That was
• 1:11:38
  not true either. But uh, but then then they'll they'll essentially claim that
• 1:11:48
  this, this religion as it is in the modern time, as guinocentric as
• 1:11:55
  it is in the modern time, was somehow imposed bye by men like and
• 1:12:02
  that's that's not exactly right either. So in any case, I think that's
• 1:12:11
  that's kind of enough on the tangent, the religious tangent. Just just the
• 1:12:15
  fact that what we're looking at today is guynescentric, I would say, it's
• 1:12:23
  just not it's just not accurate or reasonable to treat it as the historical version.
• 1:12:36
  It's not a naturally occurring thing. It's something that we should look at
• 1:12:41
  as this change has has come about as a result of influences that that should
• 1:12:47
  never have happened. Albert Nada retro uh CA was two dollars and said,
• 1:12:54
  look, look catch up women most affected. But that goes back to that
• 1:13:00
  that study I mentioned that where where we the taxpayers of the United States of
• 1:13:05
  America, funded an experiment to see how fast different brands of ketchup ran down
• 1:13:15
  the edge. There's a surface of a tilted table. Ketchup means fish sauce.
• 1:13:23
  You know it's it's from a It's from a Chinese word meaning cats,
• 1:13:28
  meaning fish, and so that's funny meaning sauce. So ketchup means fish sauce.
• 1:13:32
  There's no fish, it's only tomatoes and sugar ketchup. Ketchup used to
• 1:13:38
  mean all sorts of things. There was a mushroom ketchup, there was an
• 1:13:41
  onion ketchup. There was. It just happened that tomato ketchup became the most
• 1:13:46
  popular ketchup. So that became what everyone now knows as ketchup. Identity.
• 1:13:50
  Politics is the enemy people. There we go. So moving on from the
• 1:13:58
  fish, fish sauce on, we're looking at eleven fifty two eighty now Queen
• 1:14:05
  Eleanor of Aquitaine, endless poet Bernard de Ventadorn to compose songs of love for
• 1:14:16
  her and her husband, Henry the second. The songs lay down a code
• 1:14:20
  of chivalric behavior for how a good man should treat a lady, which Eleanor
• 1:14:28
  employs in an apparent attempt to civilize her husband and his male associates. So
• 1:14:33
  basically, they took the existing chivalric code and they applied it to the relationship
• 1:14:41
  between men and women. And remember, the chivalric code was about getting knights
• 1:14:50
  to be mindful and accountable for the impact of their use of their greater strength
• 1:14:58
  and power, their greater access to transportation, weaponry, and armor when they
• 1:15:05
  were out in the community where they lived, rather than abusing people who did
• 1:15:11
  not have the same the same power and the same tools that they had.
• 1:15:17
  So to create a romantic chivalry here is to essentially claim that women don't have
• 1:15:30
  the same tool set as men, that don't have the same ability, the
• 1:15:35
  same power, that women are the inferior, softer, weaker sex, and
• 1:15:41
  that men need to be mindful of the impact of their actions on women.
• 1:15:45
  That's what that laid out, and it also treated women as like royalty in
• 1:15:56
  comparison to men who are like vassals. Eleanor and other noble women utilize poetry
• 1:16:02
  and song for setting expectations of how men should act around them, and thus
• 1:16:09
  was born in the attitude of romantic chivalry, promoting the idea that men need
• 1:16:13
  to devote themselves to serving the honor, purity, and dignity of women.
• 1:16:17
  And he's got a reference here, So I'm gonna scroll all the way to
• 1:16:21
  the bottom. Let's see if I can. This is. This is from
• 1:16:30
  a I believe a book, Morris Ken's Chivalry, Yale University Press, nineteen
• 1:16:36
  eighty four. So the article is citing something from nineteen eighty four. It's
• 1:16:41
  not new. This is information that has been known and understood at least since
• 1:16:48
  that time. Then we have eleven sixty eight to eleven ninety eight eighty,
• 1:16:56
  so a thirty year period. The Gaynostrism trope elaborated giving imperial patronage gayness centrism
• 1:17:05
  trope is further popularized and given imperial patronage by Eleanor and her daughter Marie at
• 1:17:12
  Eleanor's court in I think that's pronounced Portier Poitier. Eleanor and Marie completed the
• 1:17:21
  work of embroidering the Christian military code of chivalry with a code for romantic lovers.
• 1:17:29
  So, in other words, this didn't exist until this happened. This
• 1:17:32
  wasn't a thing in society where men were expected to behave this way and women
• 1:17:40
  felt entitled to it until members of the French aristocracy in in the twelfth century
• 1:17:51
  and you know, behaved this way and demanded it, specifically the female members
• 1:18:00
  of the French aristocracy, thus putting women at the center of a courtly life
• 1:18:11
  and placing romantic love on the throne of God itself, and in doing so
• 1:18:16
  they had changed the face of chivalry forever. Key events are eleven seventy eight
• 1:18:26
  Eleanor and Marie established the formal courts of love, presided over by themselves and
• 1:18:31
  a jury of sixty noble ladies. Oh good grief. So this is essentially
• 1:18:38
  the first family court, right, sixty of them, sixteen noble ladies who
• 1:18:45
  would investigate and hand down judgments on love disputes according to the newly introduced code
• 1:18:53
  governing gender relations. So this would be what proto feminism right. Proto feminism
• 1:19:03
  was always centered around horses, so in theory, vosh is still a Puritan
• 1:19:11
  form of feminist he's actually going back to core principles. It's not about women
• 1:19:19
  are better, it's about horses are better. You're quite right, according to
• 1:19:25
  the to the medieval pioneers of the bullshit you believe, it's it's quite interesting,
• 1:19:32
  like the they basically just looked at this. This code is used to
• 1:19:40
  control the behavior of knights. And of course knights were the epitome of manliness
• 1:19:47
  during the time period. They were the ones who were protecting their communities.
• 1:19:53
  They were the ones who went out to do the king's bidding. They were
• 1:19:55
  the strong people in their in their society, both the forcers and the protectors.
• 1:20:01
  And they'd have been been like a combination of cops and marines. And
• 1:20:11
  uh. And here we have these women looking at It'd be like if modern
• 1:20:15
  women took the rules from the military and said women women have a right to
• 1:20:25
  expect military service to women from men, which to this day they still do.
• 1:20:32
  Yeah, So that's that's essentially what we're looking at here. So they
• 1:20:40
  created the first family court where it was a separate thing from the criminal court.
• 1:20:46
  Uh and uh, and of course it was run by women, and
• 1:20:50
  the women were proto feminists. If you look at that, let's see,
• 1:21:00
  the courts were model modeled precisely along the lines of the traditional feudal court,
• 1:21:04
  where disputes between retainers had been settled by the powerful lord. But in this
• 1:21:10
  case the disputes were between lovers. So basically they decided to set themselves up
• 1:21:16
  as having authority over something and that's what they took chose over other people's relationships.
• 1:21:23
  So the Duluthe model is not even the Duluthe models. It's been a
• 1:21:29
  similar model since six hundred years before Duluth was even discovered, at least before
• 1:21:38
  it was part of the United States of America, because the state that it's
• 1:21:45
  in wasn't a state, and America wasn't wasn't the nation. The Native American
• 1:21:53
  Indians that lived there at the time probably had no concept of chivalry. They
• 1:21:58
  were they had a uh, they did weird from from our perspective way of
• 1:22:04
  doing things. They weren't guynocentric they weren't and eccentric they were. They had
• 1:22:12
  egalitarian outlooks, although people will romanticize a lot of what they did depending on
• 1:22:19
  their ideology. So some social justice warriors will ignore things that they would call
• 1:22:26
  misogynistic. If, say, a white culture did them. For instance,
• 1:22:32
  Uh, there were there were some tribes where the leadership could only be male,
• 1:22:39
  but only the female cultural leaders of the tribe and the most respected women
• 1:22:46
  of the tribe could vote for them. And they did have a voting system.
• 1:22:50
  It wasn't secret, but so so you could never be a chief if
• 1:22:58
  you were female, but you got to decide who was chief. And so
• 1:23:02
  it was. They considered that a balance of power between men and women.
• 1:23:08
  And if I think if a white culture came along and said, well,
• 1:23:14
  no women can serve in political positions of authority, it wouldn't matter if only
• 1:23:21
  women were allowed to vote people into those positions. If women couldn't hold those
• 1:23:27
  positions, feminists would still call it a misogynistic culture. And you know,
• 1:23:32
  it's still problematic that men didn't have representation in that they didn't get to vote.
• 1:23:41
  The idea that native tribalistic people didn't understand ownership is nonsensical. It's a
• 1:23:50
  winsl when you consider that women have since prehistory have had a very defined in
• 1:24:00
  the concept of which children belong to them because they've always known which children belong
• 1:24:04
  to them, even long before men had any concept of which children belong to
• 1:24:11
  them. I covered this when Terrence McKenna talked about it. His whole idea
• 1:24:19
  was humanity began spiraling into the worst possible excesses when men discovered that children belonged
• 1:24:30
  to them, because they put two and two together and realized that the sexual
• 1:24:33
  act led to the childbirthing acts, and they realized, oh, the fact
• 1:24:40
  that this woman is giving birth to a child nine months I had sexed with
• 1:24:44
  her means that this is my child. And not just Terrence Mckenni's all kinds
• 1:24:48
  of people who were like, yeah, when when men realized that that they
• 1:24:54
  could own children in the same way women own children, this was this caused
• 1:24:59
  the downfall of humanity because because that, and only that was the point in
• 1:25:06
  history in which in which humans discovered the concept of ownership. But it wasn't,
• 1:25:14
  was it, Terrance. Women have known for a bloody long time which
• 1:25:18
  children they owned, and yes, they very much did consider it. Only
• 1:25:24
  they you know, they were they were rapidly focused on protecting their children,
• 1:25:31
  much in the same way a mama bear is rapidly focused. Rapidly is a
• 1:25:40
  rhetorical term, but yeah, it went, you know, in all kinds
• 1:25:45
  of mammal species moving towards the case selected area of these things, they've they've
• 1:25:50
  always they've always understood the concept of ownership. And it is over the children
• 1:25:57
  because they know exactly which children popped out of their joinments exactly the inflection point.
• 1:26:03
  The discussion about the concept is kind of dishonest. The the concept may
• 1:26:09
  not have been put into words per se, and it may not have had
• 1:26:14
  a set of rules laid out that were written down, but uh, every
• 1:26:21
  every people throughout human history have had the concept of ownership, right they and
• 1:26:30
  and you can tell that just by the fact that families congregated in domiciles of
• 1:26:38
  some sort or another that were separate from the domiciles of other families. People
• 1:26:43
  had clothing that they would wear that that other people didn't pick up and put
• 1:26:49
  on, you know, on a different day, and so on, like
• 1:26:54
  if you you know, took it all off to go into the water or
• 1:26:58
  something like that, when you got back out, you you picked up your
• 1:27:00
  own Those were things that were owned that that you know, it doesn't matter
• 1:27:08
  whether it's uh, Jonathan but Jonathan's boots or sads boots, it's still ownership.
• 1:27:17
  It's just that the more technology and the more industry, and the more
• 1:27:27
  organized a society develops into over time, the more rules get applied to the
• 1:27:36
  concept of ownership, and the more importance gets placed on the concept of ownership,
• 1:27:43
  especially if there is a density to the population. It's easy for people
• 1:27:48
  to say they don't have a concept of ownership when there's a large open land
• 1:27:51
  with very few people living in close proximity to each other on it. But
• 1:27:58
  at the same time, you know, those same people will have a concept
• 1:28:04
  of territory and they may not describe it. But if another tribe invades their
• 1:28:12
  territory and starts reducing the availability of of prey for hunters to bring back and
• 1:28:21
  feed their communities, you can bet the concept of ownership will lead to a
• 1:28:27
  concept of war. It's an important it's an important distinction between ownership and stewardship.
• 1:28:33
  Yep. Well, people like to talk about these ancient tribalistic, noble
• 1:28:46
  savage tribes who never had a concept of ownership over the of which they they
• 1:28:55
  oversee, but they do have a sense of stewardship over it that they don't
• 1:29:00
  think of all all of these animals and plants as things their own. They
• 1:29:02
  see them as as organisms that they oversee as stewards of it. And that's
• 1:29:10
  also reflected in what I was what I was saying just now about the idea
• 1:29:14
  of babies that women women have always had this sense of ownership over their babies
• 1:29:21
  because they've they've always known which which babies are theirs, and so they have
• 1:29:28
  this concept of, well, this came out of me, so it's clearly
• 1:29:31
  mine. It's clearly I own it, and it's it's only in the last
• 1:29:35
  few at the least tens of thousands of years, and at the most hundreds
• 1:29:42
  of thousands of years that men have realized not that they owned these babies,
• 1:29:47
  but they but that they have stewardship over them, that they were instrumental in
• 1:29:54
  the creation of those babies. Therefore they have stewardship over them, but not
• 1:29:59
  necessarily ownership, because because they could put two and two together and say,
• 1:30:06
  I guess I don't own it because it didn't come out of me. But
• 1:30:11
  I've realized I've, like I said, I've put two and two together as
• 1:30:15
  to my contribution to the creation of this baby. So I don't own it,
• 1:30:20
  but I do have stewardship over it. So I need to protect it.
• 1:30:24
  It's my job to provide for it and and and and protect it,
• 1:30:30
  which makes it all the more ironic that this uh communist movement of of of
• 1:30:40
  women who say that no one owns anything. Mm hmm, yeah, that's
• 1:30:45
  uh, that's uh. No one can claim ownership over anything except me being
• 1:30:54
  a woman. I do have ownership over my baby, and I have ownership
• 1:30:59
  over every thing, but men don't and men are still sat here going uh.
• 1:31:08
  I I do have to claim stewardship because I do realize my responsibility drink
• 1:31:17
  for for for what I do to this world. But I don't necessarily own
• 1:31:24
  it. But I but but I do have stewardship over over it. I
• 1:31:30
  need, I need to prepare it for this world. And yeah, it's
• 1:31:35
  it's well a good illustration of ownership versus stewardship. I like the the biblical
• 1:31:44
  story of King Solomon and the two women, uh and their babies, where
• 1:31:48
  there were two women that lived together, and you know, the practice back
• 1:31:53
  then was the baby would sleep with the mother in the mother's bed so that
• 1:31:58
  she could wake up and then I nurse if she had to, and then
• 1:32:00
  go back to sleep. And one of the mothers this is why you don't
• 1:32:05
  sleep with your baby in your bed, rolled over on the baby and smothered
• 1:32:11
  the baby to death. So she woke up in the morning and her baby
• 1:32:14
  was dead, and she sneaked over to the other mother's bed and switched the
• 1:32:17
  babies, so that she had a living baby, and the mother that that
• 1:32:24
  actually hadn't killed her baby had a dead baby in bed with her, like
• 1:32:29
  she wouldn't notice the difference between her child and the other child, right,
• 1:32:31
  And they get they get into this dispute over you know, these these the
• 1:32:36
  living baby, and you know, the mother of the living baby is going,
• 1:32:42
  oh my god, she stole my baby. She stole my baby.
• 1:32:45
  You know. So they end up taking their dispute. But before King Solomon,
• 1:32:50
  and he this is supposed to be this story is supposed to be indicative
• 1:32:57
  of the wisdom of King Solomon. You know, he can't find any evidence
• 1:33:01
  that proves which mother is actually the mother of the living baby. So he
• 1:33:10
  basically says, all right, my solution is that we're going to cut the
• 1:33:15
  baby in half and each of you will get half of the baby, and
• 1:33:19
  that'll settle it, right. And of course the mother that had a sense
• 1:33:24
  of ownership and only a sense of ownership and not a sense of stewardship.
• 1:33:30
  Was like, fine, by me, if I can't have him, she
• 1:33:32
  can't have him either, Let him die. But the other mother immediately was
• 1:33:39
  willing to give up the baby. Let her take the baby as long as
• 1:33:42
  he gets to live. Don't kill him, don't kill him. And then
• 1:33:45
  of course Solomon gave the baby to the woman who wanted him to live,
• 1:33:49
  who was willing to give him up to save his life because she had a
• 1:33:54
  sense of stewardship and not justice and sense of ownership. So you can have
• 1:33:59
  ownership bands to worship, and you can have a sense of stewardship without ownership,
• 1:34:04
  and those can both be functional. But just having a sense of ownership
• 1:34:10
  of your children without having a sense of stewardship makes you abusive. Yep.
• 1:34:15
  And the same can be true if you're talking about nature. Not to get
• 1:34:21
  on the whole environmentalist kick modern environmentalist kick, but it's dumb to put poison
• 1:34:29
  directly into the water that you're going to be getting, you know, out
• 1:34:32
  of the faucet when you run your tap, right, So you definitely don't
• 1:34:39
  want to dump up a bunch of chemicals into the ground. And similarly,
• 1:34:46
  smog is obviously dangerous. It doesn't necessarily mean I believe in everything that modern
• 1:34:54
  like the modern global warming movement has said about human relationship to global weather and
• 1:35:00
  so on. But we've gotten to a point now in our society where it's
• 1:35:04
  like all or nothing, and there's there's there's nuance to that discussion that has
• 1:35:13
  been forgotten, and that sense of ownership without a sense of stewardship stewardship is
• 1:35:19
  coming back out of it, and it's having some pretty bad effects. The
• 1:35:24
  obsession over stewardship of the environment has taken over the possibility that we might have
• 1:35:29
  stewardship over humans. Yeah, I went now being being overrun by people who
• 1:35:35
  think they have own ownership over other human beings. Well, it's also than
• 1:35:42
  stewardship. It's also led to a backlash that is too tolerant of a complete
• 1:35:45
  lack of stewardship over the environment. And you know, it's like I said,
• 1:35:55
  there's nuance to that, right, you don't need to go overboard.
• 1:35:59
  But at the same time, it's ecosystems are not something that you can just
• 1:36:04
  consistently abuse and pollute without consequences either, So you have to find a balance
• 1:36:12
  between ownership and stewardship, and unfortunately we're too busy arguing politics and the politics
• 1:36:20
  of ownership and stewardship to engage in the practical application of those concepts. So
• 1:36:31
  basically, you know, if you have a right to use something even if
• 1:36:36
  you don't own it, like you can't own the air that's around everybody.
• 1:36:45
  Yeah, everybody gets to breathe it, everybody gets to move around in that
• 1:36:47
  air. But you can fuck it up by creating a disaster within the space
• 1:36:58
  that air resides in, and you can fuck it up so badly that it
• 1:37:01
  affects the people in the vicinity for a long time. And so that's that's
• 1:37:08
  having a sense of stewardship over something that you don't necessarily have a sense of
• 1:37:14
  ownership over. Yes, you have a right to be there. Yes you
• 1:37:16
  have a right to be in a sphere of influence on that air. No,
• 1:37:20
  you don't have a right to abuse that to the detriment of the other
• 1:37:25
  people that are also in that area, like happened in here in Ohio,
• 1:37:32
  you know, with the train wreck. In any case, yes, eleven
• 1:37:42
  eighty eighty, Marie directs, oh god, this would be this isn't this
• 1:37:49
  Christian because it's not I don't want to say Cretan b B Christian, I
• 1:37:57
  think or Kretian Detroit. I'm going to butcher this. So I'm going to
• 1:38:00
  apologize to our French listeners because, like I'll be honest, the first time
• 1:38:06
  I ever had to actually study in school was was when I took a non
• 1:38:14
  English language, and I not only did I have to study, but I
• 1:38:19
  had to study to be able to get sees like I didn't have to study
• 1:38:27
  when I took higher math. I did it, but that was because it
• 1:38:30
  was fun. But to get to pass, I had to study when I
• 1:38:38
  when I took non English languages, it's hard to call something foreign when you
• 1:38:43
  come from a country that has lots of languages spoken by by people who are
• 1:38:47
  first or second generation immigrants. But anyway, to write Lancelot the Knight of
• 1:38:57
  the Kart, a love story about Lancelot and Guinevere, elaborating the nature of
• 1:39:01
  Guynescentric chivalry. So just to remember, remind you all that was an adulterous
• 1:39:08
  relationship, that that she was romanticizing. Lancelot was not her husband, but
• 1:39:18
  yeah, that was that That's that's just great. Uh, Cristiaan Detroit's abandoned
• 1:39:26
  this project before it was completed because he objected to the implicit approval of the
• 1:39:30
  adulterous affair between Lancelot and Guinevere that Marie had directed him to write, but
• 1:39:34
  the approval of the legend was irresistible. Later poets completed the story on Christian's
• 1:39:42
  behalf and Questian Crushian also wrote other famous romances, including Eric and in id
• 1:39:51
  so or maybe that's any day I think if I remember right, Yes,
• 1:39:59
  Tyler Preston, he does end up alone. I don't remember about whether it
• 1:40:02
  was as a monk and bald, but yeah. This is the thing,
• 1:40:08
  all right, when you when you get together with somebody who turns out to
• 1:40:14
  be a straying partner, somebody else who is betraying the relationship. You're associating
• 1:40:20
  yourself with someone who does not have a moral objection to engaging in that betrayal.
• 1:40:28
  And you have to realize if that person will abandon the person that they
• 1:40:32
  promise to love, honor, cherish, obey, be loyal, to take
• 1:40:38
  care of of hold, you know, till death did them part, that
• 1:40:43
  you can't expect them to treat you any better, right, You never can
• 1:40:53
  just assume that it's going to be different with you, just in case certain
• 1:41:01
  people still stalk everything I'm doing. This isn't specific to anyone individual. This
• 1:41:09
  is something I've seen over and over again in a variety of relationships with a
• 1:41:15
  variety of people, friends and family, not not just one relationship. The
• 1:41:23
  cheater, the person who commits adultery against their partner. You cannot expect that
• 1:41:30
  person to be better in a next relationship. But yeah, So eleven eighty
• 1:41:40
  eight, A. D. Marie directs her chaplain Andreas capellan Us to write
• 1:41:45
  the Art of Courtly Love, which we will read at a later date.
• 1:41:49
  I think, I don't know. I don't know if I want to go
• 1:41:51
  over. That's another whole article. But this guide to the Chivalric Codes of
• 1:41:58
  Romantic Love is a document that could pass as contemporary in almost every respect,
• 1:42:02
  accepting for the outdated class structures and assumptions. Many of the admonitions in Andrea's
• 1:42:12
  textbook clearly come from the women who directed the writing. So now we are
• 1:42:17
  at the the guynescentric culture of the day, having been written like a script
• 1:42:29
  and directed by women, and was not something that just organically happened. It
• 1:42:35
  wasn't something that resulted from the conditions in which people lived. It was the
• 1:42:45
  French aristocracy. And and you know they're they're the French aristocracy was just European
• 1:42:53
  aristocracy in general, right there are all a lot of the aristocrats in various
• 1:42:59
  countries were related to each other. But it was the French aristocracy. The
• 1:43:03
  women of the French aristocracy establishing authority over the men using this concept of romantic
• 1:43:15
  love and romantic chivalry eleven eighty to thirteen eighty eighty. So now we're a
• 1:43:26
  couple of centuries here. Guines centriculture spreads throughout Europe. So I'm going to
• 1:43:32
  say, like a virus, the original wolk mind virus right here in two
• 1:43:40
  hundred years, any biological virus wishes it could survive as long as this ship
• 1:43:45
  did. Yeah, most of them evolved, literally evolved into a benign form
• 1:43:54
  of itself. This thing has evolved into more and more what's the opposite of
• 1:44:02
  benevolent whatever that is, malice, malicious, Yeah, malevolent forms of itself.
• 1:44:15
  It's weird how that works. Mind viruses work in the opposite direction because
• 1:44:20
  they for some reason keep the hosts alive even longer than the previous version of
• 1:44:31
  itself. Go on, yep, and you look at this. In two
• 1:44:38
  hundred years, kind of center culture spread from France to become instituted in all
• 1:44:43
  the principal courts of Europe. So its spread through the aristocracy first, right,
• 1:44:47
  and from there went on to capture the imagination of men, women and
• 1:44:51
  children of all social classes. So you had and it bas be like if
• 1:45:00
  Hollywood, because you know, we have the political aristocracy in in d C.
• 1:45:06
  Right, but if you look at the cultural aristocracy in a country like
• 1:45:12
  the United States, that's not our politicians, that's our entertainers. They're the
• 1:45:17
  stars. And so be like if Hollywood decided that they were going to spread
• 1:45:24
  something like this, and the aristocracy of Hollywood, the producers, the the
• 1:45:35
  the most highly paid stars, particularly the female ones, commissioned screenwriters to create
• 1:45:45
  material that would romanticize it, that would make it, that would would uh
• 1:45:50
  propagandize it, and and make it something that could be dosed to the public
• 1:45:58
  in order to convince the public that this is the way they should live.
• 1:46:01
  That's basically what this is describing. And of course the the aristocracies of other
• 1:46:10
  countries adopted it first. But the public romanticizes the life's lifestyles of the aristocracy
• 1:46:19
  because it, you know, certainly looks easier if you don't have to struggle
• 1:46:26
  and farm and uh create things with your labor and sell them to other people
• 1:46:32
  in order to survive, uh and and have your your betters take, you
• 1:46:39
  know, skim off the top of what you produce, and and you get
• 1:46:43
  to be the person that skims off the top of what other people produce.
• 1:46:45
  And and that's how you get what what you have. Like that looks a
• 1:46:50
  lot easier, right, So people would romanticize that lifestyle. According to Jennifer
• 1:46:57
  Wallack, the continuing populace already of chivalric love stories is confirmed by the contents
• 1:47:03
  of women's libraries of the late Middle Ages. So it didn't spread through the
• 1:47:10
  general public, it spread through the female public. And what happens who governs
• 1:47:18
  the gatekeeping of relationships? We're told by feminists that throughout history men determined women's
• 1:47:30
  relationships. But is that really true. I mean, you're considering a relationship,
• 1:47:39
  you're considering being married and raising children, right, do you want your
• 1:47:43
  relationship to be that you have to negotiate all the time or impose yourself or
• 1:47:50
  would you rather have your relationship, be that your wife displays a sense of
• 1:47:56
  companionship, camaraderie, and sexual will interest in you. Because if I was
• 1:48:02
  faced with a lifetime of being with an asshole who didn't want me, I
• 1:48:09
  wouldn't have wanted to get married. And I don't think that men are any
• 1:48:15
  more keen on that idea just because the asshole is going to be a woman.
• 1:48:21
  So women have always governed the gatekeeping, even when marriages were arranged,
• 1:48:29
  and even when the responsibility of a woman transferred from father to husband at the
• 1:48:34
  time of marriage, and the result of that transfer of responsibility was all that
• 1:48:42
  there was also a transfer of being, essentially being her boss. She still
• 1:48:49
  had the power of withholding affection, even if she couldn't enforce the withholding of
• 1:48:58
  physical contact. Even if a guy could violently impose himself on her, it
• 1:49:03
  doesn't necessarily mean that was a preferable relationship. So if men thought that the
• 1:49:10
  only way to have happy relationships with wives was to go along with this new
• 1:49:17
  idea, they would have adopted it because the women had. I was told
• 1:49:24
  there's no such thing as women's libraries. If women could ever write, then
• 1:49:31
  they couldn't. Such libraries could never be controlled by rich women. There's no
• 1:49:38
  such thing as rich women. Women have always been poor, do you not
• 1:49:42
  see? And that's that, and that's why history has never known such a
• 1:49:47
  thing as a woman's voice, because women have never been rich. They have
• 1:49:50
  only ever been poor. And history has never been driven by by rich,
• 1:49:58
  pampered women who have no sense of the real world around them. Yeah,
• 1:50:03
  it's only never been driven by by rich men who have no sense of the
• 1:50:09
  world around them, and paul men who have no sense of the world right.
• 1:50:15
  In fact, all of history has been written by poor men and at
• 1:50:19
  the total expense of rich women. Rich women have never had a voice.
• 1:50:26
  They've always been raped by poor men or something something like that. Yeah,
• 1:50:31
  so Noba twenty one, since it's a rumble, rant gave us a dollar
• 1:50:38
  and said sorry if I missed it. But did it say why the French
• 1:50:41
  aristocratic women were able to create their unique form of authority? Why did it
• 1:50:45
  not happen in other cultures or other periods of time? So we could go
• 1:50:51
  back and discuss how something like this also happened in Rome. Actually, I
• 1:50:57
  just would need to do more research on that, because I know more about
• 1:51:00
  this from Peter's writing than I do about ancient Rome. Alison might know more
• 1:51:05
  about that. But in terms of why they were able to create their unique
• 1:51:10
  form of authority, there's a there's a common myth that because men were responsible
• 1:51:17
  for the purse, women didn't have access to it. In history, it's
• 1:51:24
  not true. Women had lots of access, and so their ability to do
• 1:51:31
  things like commissioning poets and other the other I guess parallels to what Hollywood is
• 1:51:42
  today, uh to to create media that that would promote what they wanted,
• 1:51:50
  that that wasn't any more limited than it is now. The difference is,
• 1:51:58
  you know that they weren't as responsible for how they spent that money. So
• 1:52:03
  she spent that money getting that done, and then there was backlash immediately during
• 1:52:09
  the time period, Well, the wife spent the money and the wife commissioned
• 1:52:13
  the writing, but the husband would get blamed. Whereas today, if I
• 1:52:18
  spent money to commission a songwriter to write a song about how women shouldn't vote,
• 1:52:27
  and then the song pissed a bunch of people off and somebody decided that
• 1:52:32
  there needed to be some repercussions, I would be the one that would be
• 1:52:35
  responsible for that. I would be the one that the backlash would hit.
• 1:52:42
  Nobody would come along and say her husband permitted her to use money to do
• 1:52:45
  that, Like, bitch, that money came out of my check. That
• 1:52:50
  was my pay I earned that. It worked a double shift, so I
• 1:52:55
  could afford that, right Or you know, if I was if I really
• 1:53:00
  wanted to, I could write those lyrics myself. They wouldn't be as good,
• 1:53:04
  but but there you go. In any case. Yeah, so they
• 1:53:10
  had all the same powers that a woman has today. They just didn't have
• 1:53:15
  the same responsibility for what happened if they exercised those powers, and they might
• 1:53:24
  have an additional hoop, like their husband had a better chance of being able
• 1:53:28
  to say, you know, I really don't want you to do that,
• 1:53:30
  so I'm I'm going to say you can't pay for that, or I'm going
• 1:53:34
  to not pay for that, But there would still be a battle and that
• 1:53:41
  still might not go his way. So the misconceptions about how women were treated
• 1:53:47
  in history that have been promoted by feminists, that probably one of the most
• 1:53:53
  egregious ones is that men controlled the purse strings and women had no access.
• 1:54:00
  Bullshit, how many times am I going to say bullshit tonight? We're gonna
• 1:54:04
  end up growing something in this in this like gonna plan it. Yeah no,
• 1:54:13
  no, no, she says, responsibility finish a drink. Bullshit is
• 1:54:16
  fertilizer. So every time I say bullshit, you have to commit to planting
• 1:54:20
  a tree somewhere. That can just be as simple as taking one of those
• 1:54:24
  little helicopter seeds from a maple tree and sticking it in the ground because those
• 1:54:28
  things grow like weeds. Don't do that with black walnuts, though, because
• 1:54:31
  those things basically are weeds. Let's see. So, according to Jenner Jennifer
• 1:54:39
  Wallock, the continuing popularity was also confirmed by women's libraries of late Middle Ages.
• 1:54:45
  Uh, a wealthy woman's library might be a whole room full of books,
• 1:54:49
  but even a woman of moderate means, like maybe the time period's equivalent
• 1:54:59
  of a mi class I might have, you know, seven or eight books
• 1:55:06
  that she particularly liked, because she would have she would have money that she
• 1:55:13
  could spend, and she would use it for things that she wanted, and
• 1:55:18
  that was the entertainment of the day. You know. She might have a
• 1:55:21
  musical instrument, but she would definitely have a few books. Probably not very
• 1:55:30
  many poor women had very many books unless they inherited them. But you know
• 1:55:36
  from from family that you know, this collection goes back to my great grandmother.
• 1:55:43
  She bought a book, and I bought a book, and mom bought
• 1:55:45
  a book, and now we have three and if you buy a book or
• 1:55:48
  be four and so on. But uh, and that's that's before the printing
• 1:55:57
  press. So they weren't. It wasn't like today when you go out and
• 1:56:00
  you want to buy a paperback, which I don't even know if there were
• 1:56:05
  books bound with thicker paper back then. But the binding wasn't machine done yet,
• 1:56:15
  I don't think either, So this is all done by hand. It
• 1:56:18
  would have been. The printing would have been done by hand, and the
• 1:56:26
  materials for the binding would have been more expensive materials. So if you go
• 1:56:30
  out today and you buy a paperback book, you might spend an amount of
• 1:56:36
  money that's the equivalent of one hour's worth of labor for somebody who works a
• 1:56:44
  retail job. But back then, a book that was not necessarily expensive might
• 1:56:53
  still cost several days or weeks wages, might not it might not be very
• 1:57:01
  long lasting in comparison to other books. They were expensive. But uh,
• 1:57:09
  but yeah, so that's what women spent their money on, was Uh.
• 1:57:14
  The dissemination of kind of centrism throughout their culture. Aside from the growing access
• 1:57:21
  to literature, gino centric cultures, values spread via everyday interactions among people in
• 1:57:28
  which they created, shared, and or exchanged information and ideas. So an
• 1:57:38
  example of how this works in modern culture is a type of local vernacular speech
• 1:57:49
  develops in an area that uh is it's it's it's fun to use that particular
• 1:57:59
  local slim idioms and so on, but nobody knows about it until a movie
• 1:58:05
  is made with a title referencing the females of that particular area, and within
• 1:58:17
  a short period of time after the movie comes out, all of the girls,
• 1:58:23
  teenage girls in the entire country and pretty much anywhere else the movie has
• 1:58:30
  played has start to incorporate words and phrases from the vernacular of the girls portrayed
• 1:58:40
  in the movie as parts of their language and how they describe things in everyday
• 1:58:46
  speech. And suddenly groedy is the nonsense word. Everybody knows it means gross,
• 1:58:56
  and if it's really gross, it's totally groedy. And if you really
• 1:59:00
  hate something, your comment on it is gross me out and gag me with
• 1:59:05
  a spoon, And you know it goes on like that for years and years,
• 1:59:13
  and that generation's slang hearkens back to that movie for the rest of their
• 1:59:19
  lives. That's how that type of culture spreads for the millennials and the zoomers.
• 1:59:26
  The title of the movie is Valley Girl, and if you watch it,
• 1:59:30
  you'll be embarrassed for us. You will find it to be totally groady,
• 1:59:42
  you know. Or you could say the same thing with a number of
• 1:59:46
  movies that have come out, and it doesn't always work, Like there are
• 1:59:49
  times when our elites have tried very hard to make a to insert a nonsense
• 2:00:00
  word into common use and failed miserably, like Disney's Hook and Bangering, like
• 2:00:11
  that never took off because it was it was made up. But but yeah,
• 2:00:19
  it wasn't made up by ordinary people, and it didn't. There wasn't
• 2:00:24
  anything about it that appealed to the kids. Like you didn't hear a bunch
• 2:00:30
  of kids out there moved bangering, but you did hear a lot of that.
• 2:00:36
  You'd have to watch the movie Hook. It's a good movie. It's
• 2:00:39
  got Robin Williams in it. It involves a fat kid cannon bawling his way
• 2:00:45
  through a congomeration of enemies. Yeah, yeah, it's I mean, I
• 2:00:54
  mean, maybe they tried it a few times. Let's get this fat kid
• 2:00:58
  too to run his way through an army of his enemies, and yeah,
• 2:01:03
  it didn't work. He just gets shanks. Yeah. But yeah, it's
• 2:01:11
  when it happens organically within a culture. It it works better when it's portrayed
• 2:01:17
  as something that is characteristic if women and girls or has their approval, or
• 2:01:25
  is viewed as cute by them, it takes on an appeal. But if
• 2:01:30
  it's just something that the writers think they can insert into the common language by
• 2:01:35
  making it look in the movie like it's part of the common language, it
• 2:01:41
  doesn't work. I guess that's the best way for me to describe it.
• 2:01:48
  So but yeah, so that's how That's how medieval women spent their money promoting
• 2:01:55
  guynescentrism throughout the European culture. So we have a thirteen eighty six eighty guydescentric
• 2:02:04
  concept of gentlemen is formed, meaning that prior that was not what gentlemen meant.
• 2:02:16
  Coined in the twelve hundreds, the word gentlemen so soon became synonymous with
• 2:02:21
  chivalry, which makes sense, right if you are stewarding your excessive power over
• 2:02:31
  and above what other people have. You are stewarding your big gun when everybody
• 2:02:39
  else either lacks guns entirely or only has small caliber weak guns. Then you
• 2:02:46
  are behaving in a manner that is gentle. You are not being rough,
• 2:02:49
  you are not being violent and threatening. And so that's what a gentleman was.
• 2:02:57
  Wasn't somebody that catered to women. It was somebody that wasn't an asshole
• 2:03:01
  to everybody just because he could be and get away with it. According to
• 2:03:08
  the Oxford Dictionary, gentlemen came to refer by thirteen eighty six to a man
• 2:03:13
  with chivalrous instincts and fine feelings. Gentlemen therefore implies chivalric behavior and serves as
• 2:03:20
  a synonym, a meaning that has been retained to this present day. And
• 2:03:30
  yeah, Catherine Scully says, people forget gentle woman as a word. It
• 2:03:36
  used to be a thing that it was recognized that women had power, and
• 2:03:43
  it was expected that women would steward that power instead of being a raging cunt
• 2:03:51
  just because she could do so and get away with it. And what is
• 2:03:55
  the male equivalent of lady? I guess it didn't appear until the twenty first
• 2:04:00
  century, and it's also called lady. Well, I thought a male equivalent
• 2:04:04
  of lady was lord. You'd think so, wouldn't you. Of course,
• 2:04:13
  today we say ladies and gentlemen, which is interesting. Yeah, we don't
• 2:04:17
  say lords and gentlewomen, poor lords and ladies. So yeah, when the
• 2:04:30
  meaning of the term chivalry got warped to guyinnocentric chivalry, then the meaning of
• 2:04:36
  the term gentleman got warped to the guynocentric term. For the word I wonder
• 2:04:44
  if it's connected to the word gentile. I don't think so. I think
• 2:04:49
  those are two separate etymologies because maybe yeah, because they don't have the same
• 2:04:58
  language origin. Just a word coincidence, is it? Well, I mean
• 2:05:03
  it would be like suggesting that because they sound similar though work or have similar
• 2:05:11
  spelling. The word grin, referring to a particular type of facial expression,
• 2:05:15
  is related to the word gringo. Possibly, I will have to look into
• 2:05:26
  it. And there's an awful lot of English words that date back to Hebrew
• 2:05:30
  words, such as my name and your name. Although gringo is not an
• 2:05:35
  English word. No, neither is Michael or Hannah, but here we are
• 2:05:41
  both with with Hebrew names. Yeah, I would I would look up the
• 2:05:45
  etymology, because it turned out that Romance didn't have the etymology that is frequently
• 2:05:51
  attributed to it. So I wouldn't I wouldn't want to make any claims about
• 2:06:00
  gentile versus gentle versus genteel, which may be more related to gentle. I
• 2:06:09
  don't necessarily think it would be appropriate to make any assumptions about the relationship between
• 2:06:15
  I'm not saying I'm not saying anything anti semitic. I'm just saying, no,
• 2:06:21
  it's not a matter of whether it's anti Semitic or not. It's a
• 2:06:25
  matter of whether it's accurate or not. I haven't I have a great deal
• 2:06:29
  of religious terms that started with Hebrew and then became Greek and then became a
• 2:06:33
  part of the Holy Roman Empire. Yeah, we have a lot of words
• 2:06:38
  that are related, but I don't want to speculate on that until until we
• 2:06:44
  have an idea whether that speculation is merited, just because like I said,
• 2:06:47
  it doesn't. It's not that I don't care about anti Semitism, but it's
• 2:06:54
  not the issue here, if that makes sense. It's it's not about whether
• 2:07:00
  or not it's anti Semitic. It's about whether or not it's accurate. Look
• 2:07:05
  it up everyone in the audience. There we go. That would be the
• 2:07:09
  best way to put it. Bring me back what you've just what you discover.
• 2:07:15
  So let's see. Oh gosh, we're at nine o'clock already. How
• 2:07:18
  much of this do we have left before we Yeah, we only have a
• 2:07:21
  couple of progress. I'm going to finish this tonight fourteen beginning of the Coral
• 2:07:30
  Defems. I think I'm pronouncing that right. The Correll Defems are quarrel about
• 2:07:34
  women technically had its beginning in twelve thirty eighty with the publication of Romance of
• 2:07:40
  the Rose, and I know we might read some of this stuff. Actually,
• 2:07:45
  before I go any further with the I'll look into this. If I
• 2:07:50
  don't see anything that is absolutely necessary to discuss, I want to get into
• 2:07:56
  that timeline but that I'm creating. I'm still working on it right now,
• 2:08:03
  but I intend to have what I want to discuss in the next show on
• 2:08:09
  voting done by next week. That doesn't mean that there will not be further
• 2:08:13
  edits to the timeline, and I may bring those up too, but it
• 2:08:18
  is a work in progress, and when I do get it completed, I'll
• 2:08:24
  try to make it a resource. I just have to figure out a way
• 2:08:28
  to save it without having it come up so small that you can't read it.
• 2:08:35
  Because it's right now. It stretches over a few hundred years of developments
• 2:08:41
  in different countries, and I'm still putting things on it from different countries.
• 2:08:46
  So but anyway, so fourteen hundred eighty beginning of the correl defems however,
• 2:08:50
  it was Italian French author. So now we have Italian French author, not
• 2:08:56
  just French. It can't blame at all on the Franks. Christine the Pisen
• 2:09:03
  who in fourteen hundred a d turned the prevailing discussion about women into a debate
• 2:09:09
  that continues to reverberate in feminist ideology today. So protofeminism turns into just flat
• 2:09:18
  out feminism. At this point. The basic theme of the centuries long quarrel
• 2:09:24
  revolved and continues to revolve around advocacy for the rights, power, and status
• 2:09:28
  of women. So the idea that women are oppressed by the conditions that make
• 2:09:39
  men responsible for women sort of traces back to fourteen hundred a D. And
• 2:09:46
  again France and Italy, and then we skip forward here quite a bit twenty
• 2:10:01
  first century Guynes centrism continues. The now a thousand year long culture of ganessentrism
• 2:10:07
  continues with the help of traditionalists eager to preserve guyanescentric customs, manners, taboos,
• 2:10:11
  expectations, and institutions with which they have become so familiar, and also
• 2:10:18
  by feminists who continue to find new and novel ways to increase women's power with
• 2:10:24
  the aid of chivalry. The modern feminist movement has rejected some chivalric customs,
• 2:10:30
  such as opening car doors or giving up a seat on the bus for women.
• 2:10:33
  However, they continue to rely on the spirit of chivalry to attain new
• 2:10:37
  privileges for women. Opening car doors has become opening doors into university or employment
• 2:10:43
  via affirmative action, and giving up seats on buses has become giving up seats
• 2:10:48
  in boardrooms and political parties via quotas. Yep. Despite the varied goals me
• 2:10:56
  too movement and the me Too movement, Yeah, despite the very goals,
• 2:11:00
  contemporary Guindness centrism remains a project for maintaining and increasing women's power with the assistance
• 2:11:05
  of chivalry. And the one thing that I would insert into this is increasing
• 2:11:11
  women's power at the expense of men's autonomy, men's rights, and men's power
• 2:11:20
  because feminists aren't letting go of the power that women had under coverture. They
• 2:11:31
  don't abandon the power to command men's dedication as protectors and providers. They just
• 2:11:41
  want added into that power all of the powers that the protectors and and providers
• 2:11:48
  had in order to live up to those roles. So they want women to
• 2:11:54
  have one hundred percent of the available power while still limiting men to only having
• 2:12:00
  power as protectors and providers. Power attached to obligation, in other words,
• 2:12:09
  and how this relates to voting rights is very simple. Like you can tell
• 2:12:16
  from our past discussion that voting rights came as a result of fulfillment of obligation.
• 2:12:26
  Voting rights can't be separated from from the concept of civic obligation and military
• 2:12:35
  obligation in regards to men any more than you can be separated from your own
• 2:12:41
  DNA, because they were a part of the creation of voting rights. They
• 2:12:48
  came out of, They grew out of those obligations, and how men acted
• 2:12:56
  to meet those obligations to hold their their stewardship of their community resources and their
• 2:13:09
  protection of their community safety and their personal resources and their family safety. Women
• 2:13:16
  didn't quite have the military end of that, but they did still have the
• 2:13:20
  obligation if they wanted to vote, they did still have the obligation to demonstrate
• 2:13:26
  fiscal responsibility. At that time when when you had the forty shilling franchise,
• 2:13:31
  it applied to everybody. So women were not prevented from voting under the forty
• 2:13:37
  shilling franchise franchise, but they were not given lenients to not live up to
• 2:13:48
  the same standard as a man under that franchise if they wanted voting rights.
• 2:13:52
  And similarly, like it wasn't that men voted in public and women got private
• 2:13:58
  voting booths. Everybody voted in public, everybody that voted anyway, So that
• 2:14:09
  imbalance of power as it increased over time, where men only had power as
• 2:14:16
  protectors and providers, but women had power as the arbiters of the culture and
• 2:14:24
  as the focus of men's protector and provider role, and then also demanded to
• 2:14:31
  have the same powers as the protector and the provider even though they didn't do
• 2:14:35
  those jobs. Like now you have this situation where women have something that could
• 2:14:41
  be referred to as privilege, and yet who do we hear has privilege?
• 2:14:46
  Not women. We hear it about men. We hear it about the patriarchy
• 2:14:50
  and who has control over the evolution of culture women. So as we go
• 2:15:01
  through the timeline in the next few weeks, just keep in mind that while
• 2:15:09
  men are men are the ones who are taking those steps and making those changes
• 2:15:16
  at the expense of their safety. They're stretching their necks out and just hoping
• 2:15:22
  that a blade doesn't come down on it or a rope doesn't get put around
• 2:15:26
  it for the benefit of both sexes in a culture controlled by female interests,
• 2:15:37
  and women are benefiting crazy. And do bear in mind that what has brought
• 2:15:46
  us the the self indulgent life that we live in nowadays, the ability to
• 2:15:56
  communicate with everyone, all of the ability too just just live here doing whatever
• 2:16:05
  we want to do, even if we're not doing jobs. We have all
• 2:16:09
  this plumbing, all this electricity, we have, all this internet. We
• 2:16:13
  can do whatever we like. Is because of the technological advances of the last
• 2:16:20
  couple of hundred years. And you may say that we have that because of
• 2:16:26
  whatever came before it. But at the same time we have we have people
• 2:16:31
  saying that we have the the adjacents of the ted Kaczynski mindset, saying the
• 2:16:41
  results of the Industrial Revolution have been a catastrophe for for humanity. And it's
• 2:16:50
  whatever it's, it's it's difficult to really pin point where it went wrong,
• 2:16:56
  because yeah, we've we've we've been a Christian nation, the Christian West for
• 2:17:03
  a long hours time, and and on top of that, we've been I
• 2:17:09
  don't even know what you call it? What do you what do you call
• 2:17:13
  it? Where where we're able to to develop such technological advances for for so
• 2:17:20
  very long? Is it because of Christianity or is it because of UH a
• 2:17:28
  detachment from such UH religiosity in the first place. And and maybe it's this
• 2:17:39
  detachment that has brought us to all of these technological ebutism. And maybe it's
• 2:17:48
  because we've been Christian rather than mostly more Jewish or Hindu or Buddhist or whatever.
• 2:17:52
  Maybe it's it's it's hard to say whether whether it's whether it's because of
• 2:18:00
  these particular religious advance advantages that's brought us to this point, or if it's
• 2:18:09
  in spite of them, And it's possible that it's both. Yeah, I
• 2:18:15
  will leave it open to the audience, leave your comments below. Well you
• 2:18:20
  think about it, a lot of technological advancements, well, every technical technological
• 2:18:26
  advancement actually has come about as a result of somebody's attempt to solve a problem
• 2:18:35
  that was in front of them. And in some cases the problem is just
• 2:18:39
  I have a desire to profit by entertaining people, and I can profit more
• 2:18:46
  if I can entertain people on a larger scale, and so we invent devices
• 2:18:52
  to spread our entertainment to a larger audience, like radio, television, media
• 2:18:58
  storage devices like records, tapes, and you know, so on CDs,
• 2:19:05
  everything like that. But a lot of technology that was created to solve problems
• 2:19:11
  was created to solve problems that people wanted to solve out of compassion for their
• 2:19:18
  fellow human being. They weren't necessarily trying to advance civilization for the sake of
• 2:19:24
  advancement. They were trying to advance civilization for the sake of saving lives or
• 2:19:31
  making people more comfortable, saving time, facilitating relationships, you know, a
• 2:19:39
  variety of things like that. And so you had the invention of new forms
• 2:19:46
  of medicine, the invention of new forms of travel, Safer forms of travel,
• 2:19:50
  like seat belts were invented because you know, the the inventor wanted to
• 2:19:56
  preserve life even when there's an accident with a vehicle, right, And and
• 2:20:03
  that's it's not necessarily related to religion or lack of religion or any of that.
• 2:20:11
  But these things can either get in a way or stay out of the
• 2:20:16
  way, or guide what you pay attention to. Like you might pay more
• 2:20:22
  attention to whether or not people are getting killed in car accidents than you do
• 2:20:26
  to whether or not you can spread entertainment over a wide area or share news
• 2:20:31
  over a wide area, because it's a more immediate problem if you are of
• 2:20:37
  a religious belief that preserving life is more important than personal engagement with other people.
• 2:20:46
  Right. But aside from that, I don't know that it's necessarily something
• 2:20:50
  that religion determines so much as when people make up rules within a religion and
• 2:20:58
  they decide things look like they might be sins because they bear similarity to things
• 2:21:05
  that are or you know, stuff like you end up with hindrances for a
• 2:21:09
  long time that stop technology from advancing because the people that would create that technology
• 2:21:18
  aren't allowed to address those problems. You know, they get they get in
• 2:21:22
  trouble with the authorities of their religion. So That's that's my thinking on it.
• 2:21:28
  It's it's a great duality of I guess, both the right and the
• 2:21:33
  left, and of any given religion and of any given lack of any given
• 2:21:41
  religion, that that technology has brought us to the point where we can communicate
• 2:21:48
  with each other across thousands of miles like we're doing right now. And and
• 2:21:54
  you know, we're kind of like this has brought us together, but at
• 2:21:58
  the same time has ruined us. Like it's like like like as adults,
• 2:22:07
  we're like, this is great. This is allowing us to report on on
• 2:22:13
  on world events instantaneously and and to to to a greater degree of of of
• 2:22:24
  evidence that we were ever able to do before. That we don't have to
• 2:22:30
  rely on on the mainstream media or the television or newspaper. Can actually we
• 2:22:39
  can get a whole bunch of independent journalists, and I say journalists with all
• 2:22:46
  the caveats, we can bring all these people together and actually decipher from as
• 2:22:52
  many independent view viewpoints as possible as to what is actually going on in the
• 2:22:56
  world. But at the same time, we're like, this technology is funking
• 2:23:00
  up our children. The the the exact same top technology that is is helping
• 2:23:05
  adults appears to be screwing up our children, and and yeah, it's It's
• 2:23:13
  quite the conundrum, isn't it that if we, if we even if we
• 2:23:18
  even if we can put this down to a spiritual thing or a or a
• 2:23:22
  modernistic technological thing, is this to what degree is this? Is this doing
• 2:23:28
  us a favor or or actually fucking us up? And we have to try
• 2:23:35
  and find this middle space between what it what good it does for adults,
• 2:23:39
  and what bad it does for children, and and how we meet in the
• 2:23:43
  middle. Yeah, I'm I don't know, I'm I'm I'm bringing this to
• 2:23:50
  a weird porridge in the middle of it all where nobody knows what is going
• 2:23:52
  on. So yeah, leave your comments in the commentation. Yea, in
• 2:23:58
  my opinion, And a lot of it boils down to balance again. It's
• 2:24:03
  good to have beliefs in philosophies that can act as a placeholder and a shortcut
• 2:24:11
  to keep your moral values, your ethical values, your human interests in the
• 2:24:20
  forefront of your mind or in the forefront of the influencers on your actions.
• 2:24:26
  Right. It's just not good when you get so caught up in honoring that
• 2:24:33
  or sticking with that that you forget to logic and reason in the process.
• 2:24:39
  Those are just as important. And when you lose track of logic and reason,
• 2:24:46
  you start fabricating your beliefs systems. You start fabricating what's part of and
• 2:24:58
  parcel to I guess, your belief systems, and then then you end up
• 2:25:01
  wharping them and screwing them up and getting away from them. And the next
• 2:25:07
  thing you know, you you look like an idiot or maniac, or you're
• 2:25:11
  hurting people, or you're hurting yourself. Are you missing out on things?
• 2:25:15
  And so on. So it's it's a crazy time to be alive. Yes,
• 2:25:20
  I for one appreciate it, and I hope you all did he and
• 2:25:24
  I hope I hope we all make the most of it. And in the
• 2:25:28
  meantime, uh like, let's let's let's hope our new AI overlords that are
• 2:25:35
  coming in the future will be more merciful to humanity than humanity is. But
• 2:25:43
  with that, let me see if I have any thing, any rants or
• 2:25:48
  anything that I haven't read. I don't think that I've missed any I think
• 2:25:52
  the last thing was the catch up most affected super chat. Yeah, and
• 2:26:03
  no more super chows. That make me sing because I'm not very good at
• 2:26:07
  that. So and I don't think we have any more rumbel rants either.
• 2:26:13
  So with that, thanks to my two co hosts for going over this article
• 2:26:18
  with me in the long and wandering sausage. Thanks to everybody for listening and
• 2:26:24
  for tolerating my tangents, including this one which it's irrelevant tangent, not an
• 2:26:31
  irrelevant tangent, but it's still a tangent. Thanks to everybody who works in
• 2:26:35
  the background to make HBr talk happen. And good night all. Yes co
• 2:26:43
  sign tangent sign or sin. I always used to read that sin. It's
• 2:26:50
  really bad, but yeah, see you next Thursday.