Latest / Honey Badger Radio / Feminism Has No Excuse: Psychoanalytic Feminism’s War on Men with TL;DR Part 2

Transcript

Feminism Has No Excuse: Psychoanalytic Feminism’s War on Men with TL;DR Part 2 · Honey Badger Radio

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Okay, hello everybody, and welcome to Honey Badger Radio.
• 0:04
  Speaker 2: My name is Brian.
• 0:05
  Speaker 1: I'm here with Allison and the special guest, Til Deer,
• 0:08
  Speaker 1: and this is maintaining frame where we're gonna be continuing
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: our dive into psychoanalytic feminism by Christina Wolf. And yeah,
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: that's what we're gonna be doing today. So welcome to
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: the show everyone, and greetings. And I just want you
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: guys to know you may notice that Badger cham looks
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: a little different this time. We've had some I don't
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: know complaints I guess about the Bachet Champ being a
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: little distracting.
• 0:39
  Speaker 2: So she's a little different so that.
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: This hopefully will get us less I don't know static.
• 0:45
  Speaker 2: But anyway, why don't you tell everybody what we're doing?
• 0:48
  Speaker 3: Go ahead, Well, I just want to clarify the complaints.
• 0:51
  Speaker 3: One person just said that she was very distracting, is all.
• 0:56
  Speaker 3: So I guess we could save the distracto chan for
• 1:02
  Speaker 3: game streams and for streams where you actually have to think,
• 1:05
  Speaker 3: we'll keep maybe a little bit more modest chan. But
• 1:09
  Speaker 3: uh yeah, So if you want to send a message
• 1:12
  Speaker 3: at any point throughout the show, please do so at
• 1:14
  Speaker 3: feed the Badger dot com slash just the tip and
• 1:17
  Speaker 3: the monthly fundraiser is live it feed the Badger dot
• 1:19
  Speaker 3: com slash support, So please do help us out so
• 1:24
  Speaker 3: we can continue to do this analysis of this increasingly
• 1:29
  Speaker 3: moribund is that how you say it? Moribund? Morbid?
• 1:33
  Speaker 2: Morbid?
• 1:35
  Speaker 3: No, not morbid, it's moribund, right, morbond. It's like moving
• 1:41
  Speaker 3: towards death, but slowly and with a great ponderous self righteousness.
• 1:46
  Speaker 3: That's our society anyway. If you want to see more
• 1:49
  Speaker 3: of our analysis of that, than please support us at
• 1:52
  Speaker 3: feed the Badger dot com slash support. And today today
• 1:57
  Speaker 3: we're apparently going into the grooming part of psychoanalytic feminism,
• 2:02
  Speaker 3: So yay.
• 2:04
  Speaker 2: Because that's always a part.
• 2:06
  Speaker 3: Yeah, keep your vomit bags ready at the ready as
• 2:10
  Speaker 3: we enter the dark side of feminists actual, the darker side. Well, yes,
• 2:19
  Speaker 3: I guess it only gets darker from here, folks. And yes,
• 2:22
  Speaker 3: we all decided to let these women have access to
• 2:24
  Speaker 3: our children. So that's the thing we did, Okay, to
• 2:30
  Speaker 3: just start.
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: Yeah, let's go ahead, and oh, go ahead and go ahead.
• 2:36
  Speaker 4: Yes, let's move out of the penumber that we've been
• 2:39
  Speaker 4: living under, and let let's just go full umbrel. Let's
• 2:42
  Speaker 4: just get right on in there and get the pretense.
• 2:47
  Speaker 4: What I am going to say is what we're going
• 2:49
  Speaker 4: to do while we are going to be going through this,
• 2:51
  Speaker 4: because there is, you know, the psychoanalytic nature of this
• 2:56
  Speaker 4: and their obsession with Freud. I'm going to remind people
• 2:59
  Speaker 4: once again of what we are actually doing by, of course,
• 3:03
  Speaker 4: quoting from feminist academia here phallic effect or why men's
• 3:07
  Speaker 4: rights activists have feelings. I have mentioned this one before.
• 3:11
  Speaker 4: This was the men's rights activists are in opposition to
• 3:15
  Speaker 4: societal problems that dispportunately affect men because of castration, anxiety,
• 3:19
  Speaker 4: and fear of being anally penetrated. Well, the other important
• 3:25
  Speaker 4: part of that paper is that without having a phallus
• 3:31
  Speaker 4: as Garren Torre, because of course you've been castrated. The
• 3:35
  Speaker 4: only reason that men are using these effective utterances of
• 3:39
  Speaker 4: victimhood and all of that is as a means of
• 3:42
  Speaker 4: constructing a new masculine phallus that they can insert into
• 3:47
  Speaker 4: the conversation of gender politics, gender equality, feminism more broadly
• 3:54
  Speaker 4: and grow this giant metaphorical fallus to take up more
• 3:57
  Speaker 4: space of that conversation. And that is feminist Academia's description
• 4:03
  Speaker 4: of the men's rights movement of men's rights activists, and
• 4:06
  Speaker 4: so that's what we're going to be doing here today.
• 4:09
  Speaker 4: So I would just like to say, Allison, I think
• 4:11
  Speaker 4: you need to stop inserting your ever increasingly enlargening penis
• 4:16
  Speaker 4: into everything just discussions.
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: No, I think we call it a sheenis fuck.
• 4:28
  Speaker 3: That is how people wonder where the replicatability crisis came from.
• 4:33
  Speaker 3: It came from this crap yep.
• 4:36
  Speaker 4: But this phallic effect or why men's rights activists have feelings?
• 4:41
  Speaker 4: It is by Alan Jonathan A.
• 4:44
  Speaker 2: Allen.
• 4:44
  Speaker 4: It was published in twenty fifteen. And of course this
• 4:48
  Speaker 4: psychoanalytic feminism that we're going through now, which makes a
• 4:51
  Speaker 4: big use of Freud and all of that sort of stuff.
• 4:53
  Speaker 4: This is from the Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology, which is
• 4:57
  Speaker 4: published in two thousand and seven.
• 5:00
  Speaker 3: I'd just like to say this is the development I've completed,
• 5:06
  Speaker 3: World Revolving. I finished it. Oh it was on slow song.
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: Never mind.
• 5:11
  Speaker 3: I was gonna say my sheenis is now enormous, but
• 5:15
  Speaker 3: I was on an easier setting, So there you go.
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: All right, Well, anyway, yeah, I'm sorry, Tilda, you were saying.
• 5:25
  Speaker 3: No, that was it.
• 5:26
  Speaker 4: I just wanted to make sure that the tone of
• 5:29
  Speaker 4: this live stream was suitably set by my inappropriate penis jokes.
• 5:35
  Speaker 4: I would suggest that is as high as the brow
• 5:38
  Speaker 4: is probably going to be, it is going to be
• 5:40
  Speaker 4: a lot worse. And that is not going to be
• 5:42
  Speaker 4: on my part here. That's going to be just the
• 5:44
  Speaker 4: paper because oh yeah, of course.
• 5:49
  Speaker 3: We're going into the feminist justifications for why they should
• 5:53
  Speaker 3: have access to the developing sexuality of elementary school kids.
• 5:59
  Speaker 3: So you know, it's it's always going to be feeling
• 6:01
  Speaker 3: slightly disgusting.
• 6:03
  Speaker 4: It's the destruction of the family unit that they'll.
• 6:05
  Speaker 3: Look okay, all right, all right, but.
• 6:07
  Speaker 4: That's what it's about. That's what all of it is about.
• 6:10
  Speaker 4: Because of course you've got to go back to Jean
• 6:13
  Speaker 4: Paul de Sartre and Simone de Boufois, who considered the
• 6:17
  Speaker 4: family to be a bourgeois construct which needed to be
• 6:19
  Speaker 4: destroyed because of course they were feminist and socialists and
• 6:23
  Speaker 4: all of that stuff. Interesting side note of people for that,
• 6:27
  Speaker 4: if you want to know where that ends, someone who
• 6:29
  Speaker 4: was quite a big fan of theirs read a lot
• 6:31
  Speaker 4: of their stuff was pot you know, genocide guy. And
• 6:40
  Speaker 4: of course if you know about more of the sort
• 6:42
  Speaker 4: of socialist stuff that influenced them, and the need for
• 6:45
  Speaker 4: the destruction of everything in society so they can form
• 6:48
  Speaker 4: their new socialist man and all of that stuff. France,
• 6:50
  Speaker 4: Fann and Wretched of the Earth. Similar thing. Quite enjoyed
• 6:54
  Speaker 4: all those people. Remember, revolution is not this quiet thing
• 6:57
  Speaker 4: that you just do peacefully through academic and intellectual means.
• 7:01
  Speaker 4: No revolution reeks of blood knives and red hot cannon bowls.
• 7:07
  Speaker 4: You must rise up and throw off the chains of
• 7:09
  Speaker 4: your oppressor, sit in his chair, eat at his table,
• 7:13
  Speaker 4: sleep in his bed, preferably with his wife.
• 7:20
  Speaker 2: There you go.
• 7:20
  Speaker 3: Oh boy, okay, okay.
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: So let's first of all, I got a super chow
• 7:27
  Speaker 1: from laptop two fifteen gives us five dollars and says,
• 7:30
  Speaker 1: I think it's pretty cool that you have a custom
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: avatar for beat Saber.
• 7:34
  Speaker 2: Actually, thank you laptop, all right.
• 7:38
  Speaker 1: And.
• 7:40
  Speaker 3: For a while, what I've had it for a while.
• 7:45
  Speaker 2: Yeah, you've had it for at least a year or so,
• 7:47
  Speaker 2: maybe longer.
• 7:48
  Speaker 3: No, I'm more like four. Yeah, yeah, it's been a while,
• 7:53
  Speaker 3: but thank you for noticing. I appreciate it. It is cool.
• 8:01
  Speaker 3: I just want to say that I've been reading about
• 8:03
  Speaker 3: another wolf in a completely different context. He was the
• 8:07
  Speaker 3: head of might have been the entire Stazzi, but the
• 8:12
  Speaker 3: intelligence apparatus of Russia during the Cold War, and his
• 8:19
  Speaker 3: claim to fame is that he was well, he says
• 8:23
  Speaker 3: he was the father of sexponan sexpionage, Yes, sexpionage. So
• 8:29
  Speaker 3: he did the He ran the honey traps and the
• 8:33
  Speaker 3: Romeos that got all the secrets from the West. And
• 8:35
  Speaker 3: what's really interesting is that this wolf was literally exploiting
• 8:40
  Speaker 3: human pair bonding, which is the very thing that this
• 8:43
  Speaker 3: wolf that we're talking about right now is denying exists.
• 8:47
  Speaker 3: But anyway, that was just like a weird labble aside.
• 8:50
  Speaker 3: Let's let's get into it, okay, delay no longer.
• 8:53
  Speaker 2: Yeah, let's get into the groomy section of this, okay.
• 8:57
  Speaker 2: The development of a person's sexuality and romantic desires also
• 9:01
  Speaker 2: begins at an early age. Many theorists recognize that children
• 9:05
  Speaker 2: have the potential for bisexuality during the pre edible stage
• 9:09
  Speaker 2: of their lives. All right, what is the pre edible
• 9:13
  Speaker 2: stage of their lives?
• 9:14
  Speaker 3: For?
• 9:15
  Speaker 2: Does anyone know the answer? Quiz? Pre edible? What is that.
• 9:21
  Speaker 3: I do? But you want me to tell you.
• 9:25
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I want to know. Yeah, we're informing people.
• 9:31
  Speaker 3: I'm pretty sure they do. But it's basically the stage
• 9:34
  Speaker 3: in which a boy kills his father and mates with
• 9:36
  Speaker 3: his mother or want to Is that that's before that?
• 9:44
  Speaker 3: I guess that. Yeah. Well, is there is there specific
• 9:48
  Speaker 3: like Greek play that Freud is referencing in the pre
• 9:53
  Speaker 3: edible pre edible at a pole stage?
• 9:58
  Speaker 2: I don't know, Tillier, were you gonna say something.
• 10:01
  Speaker 4: Oh, yes, this is in the before the boy or
• 10:04
  Speaker 4: in some other cases the girl wants to murder the
• 10:06
  Speaker 4: opposing parent to or murder the same sex parent to
• 10:10
  Speaker 4: sleep with the opposite sex parent. Yeah, so we're going
• 10:13
  Speaker 4: to be going pre that, which of course means pre
• 10:15
  Speaker 4: sexual desire, which of course means we're talking about children.
• 10:20
  Speaker 4: As of course they mentioned earlier in this paper they
• 10:23
  Speaker 4: talk about the very very early years of people's life,
• 10:27
  Speaker 4: so I think it was sub three years. They mentioned
• 10:30
  Speaker 4: before that, most of which is in the pre socialization stage,
• 10:34
  Speaker 4: as in the human brain is not physically developed enough
• 10:37
  Speaker 4: nor you physically do not have the neural capacity for
• 10:42
  Speaker 4: any sort of learning or any sort of interaction. It's
• 10:45
  Speaker 4: basically anything up until about eighteen months you're on pretty
• 10:47
  Speaker 4: much evolutionary autopilot. Your brain doesn't really do very much.
• 10:52
  Speaker 4: So they are looking at effectively that sort of stage
• 10:56
  Speaker 4: declaring that this is indicative of bisexual or the potential
• 11:01
  Speaker 4: for bisexuality. And the important part here regarding the oedipal
• 11:06
  Speaker 4: staff or the pre edipal stuff is, as they're going
• 11:11
  Speaker 4: to make the case a little bit shortly, the heterosexuality
• 11:15
  Speaker 4: or presumed heterosexuality of children when they grow up is
• 11:18
  Speaker 4: informed by the opposite sex parent, and that's where this
• 11:23
  Speaker 4: comes from. So basically, men treat their daughters to be
• 11:27
  Speaker 4: straight by being attractive to them. Women teach their sons
• 11:31
  Speaker 4: to be straight by being attractive to them. So when
• 11:35
  Speaker 4: you're going pre edible with this, the eventual endpoint is
• 11:39
  Speaker 4: completely disrupting that, which of course then destroys heteronormativity because
• 11:44
  Speaker 4: people don't learn to be straight. And of course, excellent
• 11:48
  Speaker 4: ways of doing that, which we've seen a lot of
• 11:49
  Speaker 4: these leftist academics etc. Trying to aim for, is things
• 11:54
  Speaker 4: like the communal raising of children. You're taking children away
• 11:57
  Speaker 4: from their parents. If you're familiar with the keybots of Israel,
• 12:02
  Speaker 4: you know how that ended. I know, some people like
• 12:05
  Speaker 4: to point to them and say, oh they still exist now, Yeah,
• 12:07
  Speaker 4: not in anywhere near the form that they did before. Previously, Well,
• 12:12
  Speaker 4: they ended because all of the children who were being
• 12:15
  Speaker 4: taken away from their parents because nobody knew who their
• 12:18
  Speaker 4: parents were, there ended up being cases of child abuse, unsurprisingly,
• 12:25
  Speaker 4: and a bunch of the children who grew up there
• 12:27
  Speaker 4: basically grew up incredibly mentally, messed up and left because
• 12:32
  Speaker 4: of course they did, because there was no sort of
• 12:35
  Speaker 4: family tie to anything like that. And well, it was
• 12:39
  Speaker 4: a broadly socialist experiment, and they always collapse because, as
• 12:43
  Speaker 4: it turns out, that political system does not work. It
• 12:48
  Speaker 4: doesn't produce anything constructive, it doesn't produce anything that actually
• 12:51
  Speaker 4: stands together. It merely aims to undermine everything, and then
• 12:55
  Speaker 4: somehow this socialist man phoenix will burst for from the
• 13:02
  Speaker 4: capitalism that you have undermined. Of course, that never actually happens,
• 13:07
  Speaker 4: you know. All that happens is they increase the size
• 13:09
  Speaker 4: of the state, and then at some point the state
• 13:12
  Speaker 4: would eventually abolish itself. But that never happens. But anyway,
• 13:16
  Speaker 4: that's that's the pre edible thing that they're getting out here.
• 13:19
  Speaker 4: It's reducing the family unit, it's getting rid of that
• 13:21
  Speaker 4: bourgeois notion, that bourgeois construct of the family unit, by
• 13:27
  Speaker 4: indicating to children that, well, you're learning from your parents
• 13:31
  Speaker 4: how to be straight, and we can abolish that. We
• 13:33
  Speaker 4: can abolish heterosexuality because they don't like heteronormativity either, because
• 13:37
  Speaker 4: that's just a social construct. So get the children young
• 13:40
  Speaker 4: and that social construct won't be forced into their brains.
• 13:46
  Speaker 4: So you can keep children as bisexual or they should
• 13:51
  Speaker 4: be considered non sexual. But now they're really big into
• 13:54
  Speaker 4: children being some sort of sexual that doesn't begin with
• 13:58
  Speaker 4: the word no.
• 14:01
  Speaker 3: Oh. Like I said, this is this is going to
• 14:04
  Speaker 3: be an excuse for why these women get access to
• 14:06
  Speaker 3: people's kids, and everybody was okay with it, which just
• 14:09
  Speaker 3: baffles me. And I want to point out something. This
• 14:12
  Speaker 3: is the framework that ended up pushing out honest research
• 14:20
  Speaker 3: into human sexuality and pair bonding because there was there's
• 14:25
  Speaker 3: all kinds of endocrinology studies, hormonal studies and related to
• 14:30
  Speaker 3: evolutionary psychology, and they got destroyed. The feminist the Empire
• 14:35
  Speaker 3: attacked and they destroyed the careers of anybody who wanted
• 14:39
  Speaker 3: to look at human sexuality, men and women, the relationship
• 14:44
  Speaker 3: between the two of them in terms of evolutionary factors
• 14:48
  Speaker 3: and actual physical things like hormones and and and indocrines
• 14:53
  Speaker 3: and like cascades of hormones and stuff. And this is
• 14:57
  Speaker 3: what was This is what we prioritized. This is the
• 15:00
  Speaker 3: self knowledge that we decided upon a bunch of women
• 15:05
  Speaker 3: on a foundation, Freudian foundation, which has already been discredited. Right,
• 15:11
  Speaker 3: using a Freudian foundation to push the notion that we
• 15:14
  Speaker 3: should take children away from their children so that they
• 15:17
  Speaker 3: can be raised as perfect sex slaves for billionaires. I know, sorry,
• 15:23
  Speaker 3: I want a little eskated into some weird territory there,
• 15:26
  Speaker 3: but let's let's continue.
• 15:28
  Speaker 4: Well, you've got to remember from what we mentioned last
• 15:30
  Speaker 4: time that women's opinion is science. I don't forget that
• 15:35
  Speaker 4: from the Defining Patriarchy book. Interesting way of no, I
• 15:39
  Speaker 4: do want to get back to the paper, but there's
• 15:41
  Speaker 4: so many interesting things to talk about concerning things like
• 15:45
  Speaker 4: actual data and information. Obviously, there was that split sort
• 15:50
  Speaker 4: of in the seventies where you basically ended up with
• 15:52
  Speaker 4: sociology on one side and sociobiology on the other side. Well,
• 15:56
  Speaker 4: sociobiology is the one that actually makes sense because it
• 15:59
  Speaker 4: hashimical data behind it, which is why the feminists and
• 16:03
  Speaker 4: the sociologists don't like it. Well, there was an interesting
• 16:07
  Speaker 4: article which was written two years ago as of tomorrow,
• 16:11
  Speaker 4: so February twenty eighth, twenty twenty four. You can find
• 16:15
  Speaker 4: it on some sub stack. It's called personal Drama in
• 16:18
  Speaker 4: Academic peer review. And this is the second particular story,
• 16:22
  Speaker 4: Data be damned, perceptions trump data. And this was a
• 16:26
  Speaker 4: guy who was submitting a peer reviewed piece for something
• 16:30
  Speaker 4: in the Journal of Sports Medicine. And it was regarding
• 16:34
  Speaker 4: male and female just general participation in sports and sports
• 16:40
  Speaker 4: research in general, because men are more likely to engage
• 16:43
  Speaker 4: in those things than women. And one of the obviously,
• 16:47
  Speaker 4: when you send things off like this for peer review,
• 16:51
  Speaker 4: what happens is you send it in, you pick a journal,
• 16:53
  Speaker 4: you send it into a journal. You'll get the editor
• 16:56
  Speaker 4: of the journal or one of the editors of the
• 16:58
  Speaker 4: journal who will either just to desk reject you out
• 17:02
  Speaker 4: immediately out the gate. And that's normally because they'll look
• 17:05
  Speaker 4: at your paper and say, ah, it's not for the
• 17:07
  Speaker 4: right journal, Go submit somewhere else or something like that.
• 17:10
  Speaker 4: And after that they'll pass it on to a certain
• 17:12
  Speaker 4: number of peers. You know, if they say, okay, we're
• 17:14
  Speaker 4: gonna look at it, they'll send it on to other
• 17:16
  Speaker 4: people for review, and obviously when you get the review back,
• 17:20
  Speaker 4: some people they'll either just green light it or they'll
• 17:22
  Speaker 4: send it back with notes. And those notes are things
• 17:25
  Speaker 4: that you're supposed to improve. Now we've known that there
• 17:28
  Speaker 4: are problems with this in general, Sometimes people do get
• 17:31
  Speaker 4: notes back from people that do just say things like, hey,
• 17:35
  Speaker 4: I wrote a paper on this subject. Perhaps you should
• 17:38
  Speaker 4: cite it. Wink wink. You know, basically the academic version
• 17:42
  Speaker 4: of nice shop. You've got here would be a shame
• 17:45
  Speaker 4: if etc. But this guy actually received from his fifth
• 17:49
  Speaker 4: reviewer on this. The reviewer was not happy with this
• 17:55
  Speaker 4: guy's notion that women are in fact not being underserved
• 18:00
  Speaker 4: in sports science despite their underrepresentation underrepresentation as population, They
• 18:06
  Speaker 4: were in fact being served either proportional to or greater than.
• 18:10
  Speaker 4: And reviewer five stated, and this is the direct quote
• 18:13
  Speaker 4: from their review of this peer reviewed piece. Data be damned.
• 18:17
  Speaker 4: I know women are understudied, and you will not convince
• 18:21
  Speaker 4: me otherwise. Perceptions trump data, and that is a peer
• 18:28
  Speaker 4: in the Journal of Sports Science. Just literally telling someone, hey,
• 18:33
  Speaker 4: you've found something that goes against my a priori assumption.
• 18:38
  Speaker 4: Or my ideological worldview on this particular topic. I refuse
• 18:42
  Speaker 4: to peer review your paper because it proves me wrong.
• 18:49
  Speaker 3: Yeah. Yeah, this is our academia, which is why academia
• 18:55
  Speaker 3: is a total joke.
• 18:59
  Speaker 2: Okay, So let's get back to the paper.
• 19:02
  Speaker 3: Mm hmm.
• 19:04
  Speaker 4: But it's interesting, and I'm gonna I will try and
• 19:08
  Speaker 4: avoid doings from now.
• 19:10
  Speaker 2: I suspect we'll be doing it.
• 19:12
  Speaker 3: It's suspective derailing will be persistent and avoidable. I mean,
• 19:17
  Speaker 3: I want to talk about all the endocrine findings in
• 19:21
  Speaker 3: like pair bonding and how it is completely opposite to
• 19:24
  Speaker 3: feminist theory and and even hookup culture. But that, uh,
• 19:30
  Speaker 3: that's probably in conversation for another day.
• 19:33
  Speaker 1: It's because you're in the white male frame, Alison. You
• 19:35
  Speaker 1: don't understand.
• 19:37
  Speaker 3: I'm not in anybody's frame. Dude.
• 19:39
  Speaker 2: You're in the white male frame.
• 19:41
  Speaker 1: I know, yeah, I know.
• 19:42
  Speaker 3: I'm in the white male frame. Except nobody is pulling
• 19:45
  Speaker 3: this stuff together. As far as I can tell. Everybody's
• 19:48
  Speaker 3: in their own little their own little field. But anyway,
• 19:53
  Speaker 3: let's go, let's go, let's continue, all right.
• 19:56
  Speaker 1: So I got another super chow. I'll read it and
• 19:58
  Speaker 1: then I'll continue the article. Okay, Kinoko's Evil Twin gave
• 20:02
  Speaker 1: us five dollars. Thank you, Conoko's Evil Twin, and he says, no,
• 20:07
  Speaker 1: you altered the Badger Chan animation to exclude the bouncing
• 20:10
  Speaker 1: booby action.
• 20:10
  Speaker 2: I liked it.
• 20:11
  Speaker 1: You should be proud of a job well done and
• 20:13
  Speaker 1: show off your artwork after you put the work into
• 20:15
  Speaker 1: those animated avatars. I look forward to the animated avatars
• 20:19
  Speaker 1: for Hannah, Karen and the two mics. Please reinstate the
• 20:22
  Speaker 1: original version of Badger Chan. Wait, the two mics. Oh,
• 20:26
  Speaker 1: if you watch the hbar talk already, I already have
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: an animated one for Hannah, Mike, Lauren, and even the guest.
• 20:35
  Speaker 1: I gave him an animated avatar. So yeah, but thank you,
• 20:38
  Speaker 1: Kinoko's Evil Twin.
• 20:39
  Speaker 2: It's okay.
• 20:39
  Speaker 1: If you want to see the fully the full size
• 20:42
  Speaker 1: Badger Chan one, come to the fundraisers. That's where she resides. Okay,
• 20:48
  Speaker 1: thank you, insulted?
• 20:49
  Speaker 4: Is my rack not good enough for you?
• 20:51
  Speaker 2: No, you have no one.
• 20:53
  Speaker 1: You're doing it right now. He should be able to
• 20:55
  Speaker 1: see it. Actually, it's one of my favorites, the til
• 20:58
  Speaker 1: Deer one. I also have a til Deer one inside
• 21:00
  Speaker 1: of Space Marine armor, but seems a little like No,
• 21:03
  Speaker 1: I don't know, like not quite relevant to this.
• 21:06
  Speaker 2: Kind of discussion, all right, Okay.
• 21:12
  Speaker 1: Anyway, through the combination of parenting and the development of
• 21:17
  Speaker 1: boys's masculinity and girl's femininity, they are socialized to be heterosexual.
• 21:23
  Speaker 1: A young girl's relationship to her father is an essential
• 21:26
  Speaker 1: element in her heterosexual development. In essence, she is competing
• 21:30
  Speaker 1: with her mother for her father's attention. But that's snow,
• 21:36
  Speaker 1: isn't it. Like what the attention that a daughter gets
• 21:40
  Speaker 1: from the father and the mother gets from her husband
• 21:44
  Speaker 1: are not the same kind. But never mind. I think
• 21:47
  Speaker 1: you guys know that. But they're they're treating it like
• 21:50
  Speaker 1: it's a competition.
• 21:50
  Speaker 2: Okay.
• 21:52
  Speaker 1: Due to her father's emotional and often physical absence, she
• 21:55
  Speaker 1: remains emotionally attached to her mother, never completely leaving her.
• 21:59
  Speaker 1: As always move from their pre edible to the edible stage,
• 22:03
  Speaker 1: they develop a sense of sexual or romantic love for
• 22:05
  Speaker 1: their mothers, partially due to their physical otherness. As they
• 22:09
  Speaker 1: enter the edible stage, there is a realization that they
• 22:12
  Speaker 1: cannot compete with their father for their mother's attention. Therefore,
• 22:16
  Speaker 1: they begin to emotionally separate from their mothers. All right,
• 22:20
  Speaker 1: so I'm I'm pretty much convinced that these people write
• 22:24
  Speaker 1: this stuff because they want to diddle kids, and they
• 22:26
  Speaker 1: just have to like create an entire you know, discipline
• 22:30
  Speaker 1: of education to justify them wanting to diddle kids.
• 22:33
  Speaker 2: That's what I think. That's just me. I don't know.
• 22:36
  Speaker 1: I'm not a I don't consider myself super intelligent, but
• 22:39
  Speaker 1: that's what my gut says.
• 22:42
  Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, it's like, why this obsession with children and
• 22:46
  Speaker 3: their sexuality.
• 22:47
  Speaker 1: Lloyd is just a good It's a good way to
• 22:49
  Speaker 1: get to them. That's what they're doing. This is all Freud, right,
• 22:52
  Speaker 1: this is what they're using is Freud and Lacan.
• 22:54
  Speaker 3: I think, yeah, yeah, yeah, it starts to feel a
• 22:58
  Speaker 3: little bit disturbing this session.
• 23:00
  Speaker 2: I'm sorry, go ahead.
• 23:06
  Speaker 3: Yeah, you're not gonna get an argument for me. That's
• 23:08
  Speaker 3: the first place I went. I knew that this was
• 23:10
  Speaker 3: going there. I knew it would give those creepy feelings.
• 23:17
  Speaker 4: Okay, now it does. Of course, you can actually expand
• 23:20
  Speaker 4: this a little further. I suppose it's somewhat with the
• 23:26
  Speaker 4: benefit of hindsight a little bit to say. They talk
• 23:31
  Speaker 4: about so basically a woman becomes unattainable for the man,
• 23:36
  Speaker 4: and so they move away from that particular woman. It's
• 23:42
  Speaker 4: just sort of interesting that they're phrasing it in that way.
• 23:44
  Speaker 4: There wasn't a point which I wanted to expand upon
• 23:46
  Speaker 4: there and it just seems to have vanished out my brain.
• 23:49
  Speaker 4: It's rather annoying.
• 23:51
  Speaker 1: It was about the pre post edible, the thing about
• 23:53
  Speaker 1: attention given to the parents. Like as boys realize they
• 24:00
  Speaker 1: they develop a sense of sexual or romantic love for
• 24:02
  Speaker 1: their mothers, and when they enter the edible space, they
• 24:06
  Speaker 1: realize they cannot compete with their father for their mother's attention,
• 24:09
  Speaker 1: so they begin to emotionally separate from their mothers.
• 24:12
  Speaker 4: Yes, that was it. They emotionally separate from their mother's
• 24:15
  Speaker 4: part It's basically if you wanted to phrase it this way.
• 24:18
  Speaker 4: Has a lot of feminists to do. They like to
• 24:20
  Speaker 4: talk about how, for instance, society teaches boys to be
• 24:24
  Speaker 4: independent and whatnot, and this is why you know, girls
• 24:26
  Speaker 4: become more. They just fail more because they never developed
• 24:31
  Speaker 4: this independent, competitive etc. This is again that that's kind
• 24:36
  Speaker 4: of an outgrowth of this, as you can see so here.
• 24:40
  Speaker 4: Because boys can't fuck their mothers because their fathers are
• 24:43
  Speaker 4: fucking their mothers, those boys have to learn to be
• 24:47
  Speaker 4: independent and of course, if boys get independent, they're going
• 24:52
  Speaker 4: to end up achieving other things in their life as
• 24:56
  Speaker 4: they grow up, because you know, now that is going
• 24:58
  Speaker 4: to be considered an unfair and page in these ways.
• 25:02
  Speaker 4: It's like I think you've mentioned it many times on
• 25:04
  Speaker 4: any Badger radio before. Basically society puts these burdens on
• 25:10
  Speaker 4: men and then complains when men carry those burdens and
• 25:13
  Speaker 4: end up out succeeding women because they've had to do
• 25:17
  Speaker 4: all of this self improvement. They've had to do all
• 25:20
  Speaker 4: that building and that work on themselves. But basically the
• 25:23
  Speaker 4: feminist position is, well, you've done all that work on yourself,
• 25:26
  Speaker 4: but you shouldn't have any benefit or recognition of it.
• 25:30
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 25:30
  Speaker 2: Yeah. It's like men are basically tasked to.
• 25:36
  Speaker 1: Or like put in a situation where they have to
• 25:39
  Speaker 1: basically like strengthen themselves and prepare themselves and work hard
• 25:44
  Speaker 1: and do everything they need to do because there's just
• 25:46
  Speaker 1: there's nobody really helping them. And then they do that
• 25:49
  Speaker 1: and then become stronger as a result, and then feminists say,
• 25:52
  Speaker 1: why are you so strong?
• 25:53
  Speaker 2: It's not fair. Yeah, but you did this to them,
• 25:57
  Speaker 2: like you made them this way, you know, And.
• 26:00
  Speaker 4: This is basically giving them one in into being able
• 26:04
  Speaker 4: to say that this starts happening when they're children, which
• 26:07
  Speaker 4: is of course another reason why they have to be
• 26:09
  Speaker 4: separated from their parents. And of course you can also
• 26:12
  Speaker 4: then make the point, well why do we have to
• 26:13
  Speaker 4: separate children from their parents in general? Well, if you
• 26:16
  Speaker 4: do it to both of them, then both the daughters
• 26:18
  Speaker 4: and the sons will be separated, so they both become
• 26:21
  Speaker 4: stronger and more independent and able to function, almost like
• 26:26
  Speaker 4: they could become a new person, almost like they could
• 26:31
  Speaker 4: then become revolutionary.
• 26:33
  Speaker 3: Oh of course, yeah, I mean it's that is another
• 26:39
  Speaker 3: form of exploitation of children. It's it's exploiting them to
• 26:43
  Speaker 3: become ponds and foot soldiers in your revolutionary army instead
• 26:49
  Speaker 3: of developing their own independence.
• 26:53
  Speaker 4: Well, because they have no sense of family or anything
• 26:55
  Speaker 4: like that, then of course they end up losing senses
• 26:59
  Speaker 4: of things like me, my community, my nation, etc. They
• 27:02
  Speaker 4: become isolated from that. So it's another reason that that
• 27:05
  Speaker 4: works very nicely, because of course it removes senophobia and
• 27:09
  Speaker 4: all of that stuff, because there's there's no nos.
• 27:15
  Speaker 3: Yeah, except for people who don't believe, who don't want
• 27:18
  Speaker 3: to sit in the pard and eat the bugs. Then
• 27:21
  Speaker 3: that's okay, that that's that's okay to consider not yourself
• 27:24
  Speaker 3: and worthy of being destroyed.
• 27:27
  Speaker 4: Well, they're not human. They chose, they actively choose evil
• 27:31
  Speaker 4: within this framework, because everything's a social construct. So if
• 27:33
  Speaker 4: you don't think the right to good thing or the
• 27:36
  Speaker 4: left good things that they think, that's because you've chosen
• 27:40
  Speaker 4: not to know it. If you're ignorant of that or
• 27:41
  Speaker 4: you have no opinion of it, you've chosen to be
• 27:44
  Speaker 4: ignorant or have no opinion, which means you're just as
• 27:45
  Speaker 4: bad as people who actively choose it, which means anything
• 27:49
  Speaker 4: that isn't them isn't being evil by choice. That's that's
• 27:54
  Speaker 4: how they justify it within that framework.
• 27:56
  Speaker 3: Of course, of course, and uh, a war based on
• 28:03
  Speaker 3: conscience is not the worst kind of It's a civil
• 28:07
  Speaker 3: war based on two competing camps with different beliefs, different
• 28:14
  Speaker 3: sense of conscience. That's not the most unbelievably horrific war
• 28:18
  Speaker 3: you could possibly ask for. But I'm guessing they're gonna
• 28:21
  Speaker 3: they love it. They'll have their child soldiers who don't
• 28:24
  Speaker 3: know anything better, who have no life but this conflict
• 28:28
  Speaker 3: that they've been born into. Lovely, lovely utopia. This is
• 28:31
  Speaker 3: being sketched out here. I'm just I'm looking at my my.
• 28:35
  Speaker 3: You made me achieve me. That's that's that's really cute. Yeah, okay.
• 28:42
  Speaker 2: Kind of makes you a little less threatening when you're angry.
• 28:44
  Speaker 2: But okay.
• 28:45
  Speaker 1: So this draws them closer to males, thus making the
• 28:51
  Speaker 1: separation less painful and important to their male identity. This
• 28:55
  Speaker 1: process reinforces the sexual and familial divisions that the children
• 28:59
  Speaker 1: witness from birth.
• 29:01
  Speaker 2: Boys and girls. Oh, did you want to say something?
• 29:05
  Speaker 3: No?
• 29:05
  Speaker 1: Okay, boys and girls adopt their father's and mother's roles. Thus,
• 29:09
  Speaker 1: boys join a larger collective group of males, who in
• 29:12
  Speaker 1: turn dominate women, whereas girls remain close to their mothers,
• 29:16
  Speaker 1: remaining on the margins of society being ruled by men. Wow,
• 29:19
  Speaker 1: they escalated quickly, Wow, all of a sudden. Oh man,
• 29:27
  Speaker 1: uh okay, So should I just keep going?
• 29:31
  Speaker 2: Unts? You guys want to say anything about that that sentence?
• 29:35
  Speaker 4: No, okay, it's just continuing with what they said in
• 29:39
  Speaker 4: the very first Yeah, yeah, men have this inherent need.
• 29:42
  Speaker 4: Well where did the inherent nemat need come from? Because
• 29:46
  Speaker 4: they're raised within a society, because they live in a society.
• 29:49
  Speaker 4: So what do we have to do? Yeah, Okay, we
• 29:53
  Speaker 4: know how that ends. I've said enough times.
• 29:55
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I think we've Yeah, we've definitely done that. Okay.
• 29:58
  Speaker 1: When entering into romantic and or sexual relationships, men and
• 30:02
  Speaker 1: women seek different things, often due to the separateness created
• 30:05
  Speaker 1: from the construction of masculinity and femininity. So then the
• 30:09
  Speaker 1: theory is that masculinity and feminity are not They are separate,
• 30:14
  Speaker 1: like I don't know, isolated, like atomized identities that because
• 30:20
  Speaker 1: of patriarchy, never shall the twain, shall the two meet.
• 30:26
  Speaker 1: And because of that, women only know feminity because they're
• 30:29
  Speaker 1: forced into it, and men only know masculinity because they're
• 30:32
  Speaker 1: socialized into it. I guess women desire are constructs.
• 30:37
  Speaker 4: They there is nothing biological about them within this ye,
• 30:41
  Speaker 4: So even though we know that there are biological bases
• 30:45
  Speaker 4: for things like sexual attraction, even if you go by
• 30:49
  Speaker 4: studies of things like waste hip ratio on women and
• 30:53
  Speaker 4: shower to waste ratio in men, these things you find
• 30:56
  Speaker 4: them there cross cultural, they're cross ethnic boundaries, they cross political,
• 31:00
  Speaker 4: these class economic boundaries. Even if you want to say, oh,
• 31:03
  Speaker 4: all those people have been inculcated with that patriarchal propaganda
• 31:07
  Speaker 4: of things like pornography and whatnot. Well, okay, let's just
• 31:10
  Speaker 4: do it with congenitally blind people. We've done that. They
• 31:13
  Speaker 4: still have the same preference for the thing wass point
• 31:16
  Speaker 4: seven wasted hip in women and one point I want
• 31:21
  Speaker 4: to say, one point two or one point one something
• 31:24
  Speaker 4: like shouldering what shoulder to waste in men? When you
• 31:27
  Speaker 4: have all of that stuff pointing in the same direction,
• 31:30
  Speaker 4: and obviously that the congenitally blind people confirmed that as well.
• 31:33
  Speaker 4: It's like you're looking at something there that is not
• 31:36
  Speaker 4: socially constructed at that point. It crosses so many different
• 31:40
  Speaker 4: kinds of society and is in a bunch of people
• 31:43
  Speaker 4: who literally cannot be like visually told these are the
• 31:48
  Speaker 4: numbers that you should aim for. It's just being done
• 31:50
  Speaker 4: by adjustable mannequins and touch now. I mean, I guess
• 31:52
  Speaker 4: you could argue, as these people no doubt would. Oh, well,
• 31:55
  Speaker 4: they were told that men are supposed to have broad joles,
• 31:57
  Speaker 4: they were told women are supposed to become Well, yeah,
• 32:00
  Speaker 4: but why didn't they just pick the most ones? Then?
• 32:02
  Speaker 4: Why didn't they pick the super stimulus? Why did they
• 32:05
  Speaker 4: pick the stimulus that just so happens to be the
• 32:07
  Speaker 4: one that everyone else goes to as opposed to the
• 32:09
  Speaker 4: most extreme, because you think if it was, oh, you're
• 32:12
  Speaker 4: just being told this, you'd go for the biggest one,
• 32:15
  Speaker 4: surely because it's super stimulus. But no, they don't, and
• 32:19
  Speaker 4: that points to underlying something.
• 32:23
  Speaker 3: Yeah, I'm keeping all of my bonding architecture autism and
• 32:28
  Speaker 3: check during this conversation. I want head pats for that.
• 32:36
  Speaker 3: I could talk to the next of the half hour
• 32:38
  Speaker 3: of what I've found and how this, what we're listening
• 32:42
  Speaker 3: to is completely counter to reality on every level. And
• 32:50
  Speaker 3: this is the architecture, the whole nonal architecture for pair
• 32:53
  Speaker 3: bonding is in humans. Attraction, yes, but also pair bonding
• 32:59
  Speaker 3: for humans is so total totalizing that it's it's ridiculous
• 33:06
  Speaker 3: that this was ever entertained as as as scientific, Like,
• 33:10
  Speaker 3: what this woman is spouting is just absolute nonsense. And ironically,
• 33:18
  Speaker 3: I've heard more intelligent things to say about para bonding
• 33:22
  Speaker 3: from Christians than feminists. Is that ironic? I guess that
• 33:28
  Speaker 3: that probably isn't ironic because we're talking about a culture
• 33:32
  Speaker 3: on a religious corpus that has a lot of experience
• 33:38
  Speaker 3: with maintaining a civilization. But anyway, I won't go any
• 33:43
  Speaker 3: further into it and less ask.
• 33:45
  Speaker 1: So let's just keep reading.
• 33:46
  Speaker 2: Well, I mean, you can jump in whatever.
• 33:49
  Speaker 1: Uh okay, So I'll try and read some more because
• 33:51
  Speaker 1: I kind of want to know, like how they justify
• 33:54
  Speaker 1: all of this madness. So women desire completeness, intimacy and
• 33:59
  Speaker 1: end to emptiness, and therefore they seek men for completeness.
• 34:03
  Speaker 1: Men remain uncomfortable with intimacy, often criticizing women for their emotions,
• 34:08
  Speaker 1: thus reinforcing their position as.
• 34:10
  Speaker 3: That's it, that's it. I gotta get in here, I
• 34:14
  Speaker 3: got I got to I gotta correct this. This is
• 34:17
  Speaker 3: absolutely wrong. And anybody who's who's followed this show knows
• 34:26
  Speaker 3: that who which which sex is more likely to kill
• 34:30
  Speaker 3: themselves after a pair bond is broken, all right, So
• 34:33
  Speaker 3: this is nonsense even just from the level of those statistics.
• 34:37
  Speaker 3: And what's what's actually happening is the way that men
• 34:44
  Speaker 3: pair bond is being interrupted by the particular social landscape
• 34:53
  Speaker 3: that feminism has created, like feminism actually okay, femine and
• 35:00
  Speaker 3: puts men in a state of high high cortisol, which
• 35:04
  Speaker 3: impedes pair bonding. And the reason why feminism puts men
• 35:08
  Speaker 3: into a state of high cortisol is because it's a
• 35:11
  Speaker 3: constant attack on their identity, a constant, low level undermining
• 35:16
  Speaker 3: of men's status in society, which, if you look at
• 35:20
  Speaker 3: the literature, is precisely what you need to do to
• 35:23
  Speaker 3: keep men in a state of constant cortisol. And state
• 35:27
  Speaker 3: of constant cortisol makes men who are avoidant don't attach.
• 35:34
  Speaker 3: So this is something that feminism itself is constructing and
• 35:37
  Speaker 3: not observing. And then the Okay, I'll just leave it
• 35:42
  Speaker 3: at that, let's keep going. This is just it's driving
• 35:45
  Speaker 3: me nuts.
• 35:48
  Speaker 4: It's actually I'm sorry, I yeah, not in significant amount
• 35:54
  Speaker 4: of my work is around sociobiology anyway, so I also
• 35:58
  Speaker 4: get annoyed by this. Yeah, so of course, Yeah, when
• 36:02
  Speaker 4: you talk about the the cortisol thing, you have to
• 36:03
  Speaker 4: deal with the fact that there are there's two main
• 36:05
  Speaker 4: systems of stress the people have as the adrenaline adrenaline
• 36:09
  Speaker 4: system of the cortles. You've got the adrenaline, which is
• 36:11
  Speaker 4: the short, sharp one goes up to leaves the body
• 36:14
  Speaker 4: within about now or cortisol levels peak. They take about
• 36:18
  Speaker 4: it's a few minutes to peak, but then they remain
• 36:21
  Speaker 4: consistently elevated, and cortisol levels remain elevated for pretty much
• 36:26
  Speaker 4: anything up to twenty four hours after a particular event.
• 36:29
  Speaker 4: I think the half life of it is I want
• 36:32
  Speaker 4: to say, twelve hours off the top of my head
• 36:35
  Speaker 4: something like that. So it's a very long term stress response.
• 36:41
  Speaker 4: So when you keep people in high stress, they end
• 36:43
  Speaker 4: up with this relentless cortsal thing. Now, cortisol in the
• 36:46
  Speaker 4: body is quite a when you have too much of
• 36:52
  Speaker 4: it in your body, it ends up being quite destructive
• 36:55
  Speaker 4: your body. Removing it ends up causing inflammatory problems because
• 36:59
  Speaker 4: it just causes information throughout your body. And more interestingly
• 37:03
  Speaker 4: and importantly, it's one of the things that I'm just
• 37:09
  Speaker 4: gonna say, the process of oxigzation of it can cause
• 37:12
  Speaker 4: U tilomere damage. Tell me it's supposed to be telling me.
• 37:16
  Speaker 4: I always call it tell me because that's what my teacher.
• 37:18
  Speaker 2: Pronounced it, So I I see what you did there.
• 37:23
  Speaker 4: It's the fact that it's like one of my teachers
• 37:25
  Speaker 4: used to pronounce it that way. It's like it took
• 37:27
  Speaker 4: me ages to say efficacy instead of efficisy because I
• 37:33
  Speaker 4: had a teacher and he was French, and I guess
• 37:34
  Speaker 4: when he said efficacy instead of something being effective, he
• 37:39
  Speaker 4: was phrasing efficacy as ephicis because it was like as
• 37:42
  Speaker 4: in something being efficient. So I just said it like
• 37:46
  Speaker 4: that even though it was wrong because teacher, and it
• 37:48
  Speaker 4: wasn't until I got on the internet and people were like,
• 37:51
  Speaker 4: that's wrong. Stop being a dumbass, because in real life
• 37:53
  Speaker 4: people are too polite to do that. So, yeah, corsis
• 37:57
  Speaker 4: all levels being constantly raised can actually call can cause
• 38:00
  Speaker 4: telomere damage. Now, telomeres are in your cells. You've got
• 38:05
  Speaker 4: your nucleus, and inside your nucleus you've got this little
• 38:07
  Speaker 4: spirally dunked up lump of DNA in there. You know,
• 38:12
  Speaker 4: the helix of DNA. Now, your DNA basically has a
• 38:15
  Speaker 4: bunch of junk sequences on the end of it. So
• 38:17
  Speaker 4: you have a cell, you've got basically the necessary strand
• 38:20
  Speaker 4: of DNA for that cell the function, and then you've
• 38:22
  Speaker 4: got these things on the end called telomeres, which is
• 38:24
  Speaker 4: basically just kind of repeating sequences of that DNA. It's
• 38:28
  Speaker 4: for the most part, it's just junk that's just there.
• 38:30
  Speaker 4: And anytime your cell splits, it goes through that myosis process,
• 38:34
  Speaker 4: it splits itself. Telomeres get shortened. Now, telomeres don't get
• 38:38
  Speaker 4: shortened consistently based on just the cell splitting, there's a
• 38:42
  Speaker 4: bunch of other things that can affect it as well.
• 38:44
  Speaker 4: Cortisol and high stress levels is one of them. It
• 38:46
  Speaker 4: actually makes the telomere's degrade faster during that process. So
• 38:51
  Speaker 4: what you're going to be looking at when you're doing
• 38:53
  Speaker 4: that is basically prematurely killing people. Because once a cell
• 38:58
  Speaker 4: once the nuclear so that cell wants the DNA in there,
• 39:01
  Speaker 4: loses all for tellome isn't. It goes down to that
• 39:04
  Speaker 4: single point, it can't split anymore. So of course then
• 39:07
  Speaker 4: the cell just lives out the rest of its existence
• 39:09
  Speaker 4: and dies. It can't reproduce. So this is why chronic
• 39:12
  Speaker 4: high stress things like having your quarters all levels constantly
• 39:16
  Speaker 4: elevated by constantly being in this high stress on guard's situation,
• 39:20
  Speaker 4: which feminism is causing for men, by constantly attacking masculinity,
• 39:24
  Speaker 4: constantly attacking men just like you are wrong, you are
• 39:26
  Speaker 4: everything that's wrong in the world. This is causing this
• 39:28
  Speaker 4: increased stress level, which is causing the increases anxiety, the
• 39:32
  Speaker 4: increases in withdrawal. This old men are checking out, they're
• 39:36
  Speaker 4: failing to launch, and all of this stuff. Well, it's
• 39:38
  Speaker 4: because they're in a high stress scenario, and that is
• 39:40
  Speaker 4: actually just going to start killing people eventually if they
• 39:43
  Speaker 4: don't pull the trigger themselves. You're gonna start having a
• 39:48
  Speaker 4: bunch of problems. And though some of them, I wouldn't
• 39:52
  Speaker 4: be surprised if you started seeing problems with like perhaps
• 39:55
  Speaker 4: increased genetic conditions in the future because of that sort
• 39:58
  Speaker 4: of damage, it wouldn't be surprise. But you're definitely going
• 40:01
  Speaker 4: to start seeing upticks. And well, i'd argue that you
• 40:03
  Speaker 4: already are of long term chronic conditions in young people.
• 40:07
  Speaker 4: If you look at young to old people, young people
• 40:10
  Speaker 4: seem to be getting chronic conditions at higher rates than
• 40:13
  Speaker 4: old people did when they were in their age range.
• 40:16
  Speaker 4: And I know some people like to sort of say, oh,
• 40:19
  Speaker 4: the microplastics and all this stuff in diets and the
• 40:23
  Speaker 4: food is fake, especially in America. Yes, that's all true,
• 40:28
  Speaker 4: but I think you're also seeing the effect of something
• 40:30
  Speaker 4: other than that. And I wouldn't be surprised given the
• 40:33
  Speaker 4: amount of rampant male hating propaganda that children are exposed to,
• 40:38
  Speaker 4: because remember Adolescence, that UK TV show that was a
• 40:42
  Speaker 4: documentary according to our Prime Minister and a bunch of
• 40:47
  Speaker 4: our MPs. Yeah, and that children need to be subjected
• 40:52
  Speaker 4: to that. They need to see that all the time
• 40:54
  Speaker 4: and be constantly told, hey, are you a boy. You're
• 40:57
  Speaker 4: a danger to all of the girls around yours, to
• 41:00
  Speaker 4: all of those What is that going to do to children?
• 41:02
  Speaker 4: When you start increasing their stress levels? And when, of course,
• 41:05
  Speaker 4: you put a growing organism and developing organism like a
• 41:09
  Speaker 4: child into a constant high stress scenario, they end up
• 41:13
  Speaker 4: with stunted growth and all sorts of other problems. Now,
• 41:17
  Speaker 4: there's actually another thing that is very interesting regarding that.
• 41:25
  Speaker 4: I'll do it really quickly. Children are being increasingly isolated
• 41:30
  Speaker 4: in society, particularly boys. Now there's a very interesting problem
• 41:36
  Speaker 4: that happens with this, and it comes from social isolation,
• 41:39
  Speaker 4: not only mental isolation, but physical isolation as well. Children
• 41:45
  Speaker 4: basically need to be touched, They need to be interacted with,
• 41:47
  Speaker 4: They need to be played with. The oxytocin that is
• 41:49
  Speaker 4: released when people physically touch with each other is actually
• 41:52
  Speaker 4: very important. And there's a condition which is called psychosocial
• 41:56
  Speaker 4: dwarfism or socially induced dwarfism. And this is something that
• 42:00
  Speaker 4: we've known about for a number of decades. When you
• 42:01
  Speaker 4: get children, you give them everything that they need to grow.
• 42:05
  Speaker 4: You know, suitable nutrition and suitable exercise, suitable sleep, all
• 42:09
  Speaker 4: that stuff. But you don't touch them, you don't play
• 42:10
  Speaker 4: with them, you don't interact them. They develop a short stature.
• 42:16
  Speaker 4: And so that sort of gives you an idea again
• 42:17
  Speaker 4: of how this high stress stuff is going to start
• 42:20
  Speaker 4: affecting people. And I would not be surprised if you
• 42:23
  Speaker 4: start doing all of this to children, you start following
• 42:26
  Speaker 4: the advice of this sort of paper, you're going to
• 42:30
  Speaker 4: start seeing. But like I said, I think an optic
• 42:33
  Speaker 4: in chronic problems in young people that you shouldn't be seeing.
• 42:40
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 42:41
  Speaker 2: Plus, if it's affecting the stature of boys, then it's
• 42:44
  Speaker 2: actually going to be hurting their chances of finding Women
• 42:49
  Speaker 2: are measuring the worth of a man based on his height.
• 42:52
  Speaker 4: Yeah, so.
• 42:55
  Speaker 1: All right, yeah, this stuff is that's monstrous. All right,
• 43:02
  Speaker 1: both Freud and Lacan, Oh, they're perentially just gonna say it.
• 43:06
  Speaker 1: I didn't even realize it was in the next sentence.
• 43:08
  Speaker 1: Both Freud and Lacan provide a valuable framework for understanding
• 43:11
  Speaker 1: the mechanics of sexual desire. Freud focused on his analysis
• 43:16
  Speaker 1: on the biological foundations of sexuality and placed the fallus
• 43:20
  Speaker 1: as central to sexual desire and sexual difference rather than
• 43:24
  Speaker 1: constructions of masculinity and femininity. Therefore, men and women place
• 43:28
  Speaker 1: the fallus at the symbolic center of sexual behavior and
• 43:31
  Speaker 1: leave their own personal understandings and desires for themselves to
• 43:35
  Speaker 1: a level of internal fantasy. Lacan concentrates on sexual behavior
• 43:41
  Speaker 1: as the desire for unity between men and women, moving
• 43:44
  Speaker 1: beyond biological understandings of sexuality. Men and women are sexual
• 43:48
  Speaker 1: together in order to fulfill fantasies that are culturally produced
• 43:51
  Speaker 1: but not a result of being male or female due
• 43:53
  Speaker 1: to essentialist definitions.
• 43:56
  Speaker 2: This concept is then extended.
• 43:57
  Speaker 1: To understanding sized society as construct it as a fallocentric patriarchy,
• 44:03
  Speaker 1: which represses female sexuality, particularly female desire, thus reinforcing women's
• 44:09
  Speaker 1: position as other, remaining defined in opposition to men's desire.
• 44:17
  Speaker 2: Anybody wants anything on that jumping there.
• 44:20
  Speaker 4: Our househol is not a luned behavior. Sorry, your sexual
• 44:24
  Speaker 4: arousal is not alone behavior. It's something that is implicit
• 44:27
  Speaker 4: to humans.
• 44:29
  Speaker 3: Also, what the heck is this feminist doing talking about
• 44:32
  Speaker 3: female sexual desire. Feminism has been waging a war against
• 44:37
  Speaker 3: female sexual desire for men for seventy years, to the
• 44:41
  Speaker 3: point where it's like literally in an arms war with romance,
• 44:46
  Speaker 3: specifically dark romance, and I won't get into it, but
• 44:49
  Speaker 3: essentially dark romance is women trying to metabolize the feminist
• 44:55
  Speaker 3: attempt to pathologize female sexuality for sexual interest in men.
• 45:00
  Speaker 3: And so it's like that the feminism is literally if
• 45:03
  Speaker 3: it had a button and said, Okay, what's the one
• 45:07
  Speaker 3: thing you'd like to eradicate feminists? It probably would be
• 45:10
  Speaker 3: female sexual desire for men. They fucking loathe it on
• 45:15
  Speaker 3: an ideological level. So what the hell is she getting
• 45:18
  Speaker 3: off saying, oh, for the phallicentric fac Yo, you're talking
• 45:24
  Speaker 3: about what adult female sexual desire for adult men?
• 45:30
  Speaker 4: Okay, that is what getting rid of the fallacentric patriarchy
• 45:34
  Speaker 4: would do. Because if society which they want to throw
• 45:36
  Speaker 4: out is palacentric and women happen to quite enjoy penises,
• 45:40
  Speaker 4: as it turns out, you need to get rid of that.
• 45:44
  Speaker 4: And why what a surprise was it that when you
• 45:47
  Speaker 4: had the free of movements and all that stuff, female
• 45:50
  Speaker 4: masturbation and masturbatory aids exploded. This is why another there's
• 45:54
  Speaker 4: that other certain irony that there's a lot of feminist
• 45:58
  Speaker 4: outrage about things like sex, but some men using them
• 46:03
  Speaker 4: when it's just sort of an irony. It's like, right,
• 46:06
  Speaker 4: So for the last fifty years, we've been having disembodied penises,
• 46:10
  Speaker 4: millions of them on shelves around in shops around the world,
• 46:15
  Speaker 4: and this is an act of empowerment. And that's what
• 46:18
  Speaker 4: you know that that's the woman fantasy, that's the woman desire.
• 46:22
  Speaker 4: And when men want to do something similar to that, they,
• 46:26
  Speaker 4: as it turns out, want to construct an entire human
• 46:30
  Speaker 4: and work to replicate a human with a personality and
• 46:36
  Speaker 4: moving and something that's going to actually imitate, desiring them
• 46:42
  Speaker 4: for who and what they are, as opposed to a
• 46:44
  Speaker 4: disembodied organ It's a very interesting difference, and I don't
• 46:49
  Speaker 4: think it's one that the people who are making those
• 46:52
  Speaker 4: objections are ready to face as to what it says
• 46:56
  Speaker 4: regarding the difference between men and women.
• 46:59
  Speaker 1: H Okay, I got a couple of I got a
• 47:03
  Speaker 1: couple of super childs. I should read before I go on,
• 47:05
  Speaker 1: because they're starting to stack up. So Knokos's Knokos Evil
• 47:09
  Speaker 1: Twin gives us another five dollars he Superchild does earlier,
• 47:14
  Speaker 1: and he says head pats for Allison the cutest honey
• 47:16
  Speaker 1: Badger on earth, your self control is here by publicly acknowledged.
• 47:20
  Speaker 1: Hannah would be proud, and then great Indoors, it's only
• 47:24
  Speaker 1: because of the cartoon, Great Indoors, not kidding ols. It
• 47:28
  Speaker 1: gives us five dollars and says, to what degree has
• 47:31
  Speaker 1: Freud's Oedipus complex theory ever been proven? Because I have
• 47:34
  Speaker 1: the feeling that it belongs to the same realm as
• 47:37
  Speaker 1: patriarchy theory? Or is this just my repressed ego trying
• 47:40
  Speaker 1: to come up with excuses pick me, mommy, stab stab.
• 47:47
  Speaker 2: I mean I don't think. Yeah, I don't know. I
• 47:50
  Speaker 2: don't think that I think personally. But I thought they'd
• 47:55
  Speaker 2: been debunked for a while.
• 47:56
  Speaker 3: In fact, yes, yes, so they've built this entire edifice
• 48:00
  Speaker 3: on a foundation that's been debunked. Okay, about the only
• 48:05
  Speaker 3: thing that's left of Freud is psychoanaly analyst anal analysis. Yeah,
• 48:11
  Speaker 3: that's it. Like it just the process of talking to
• 48:13
  Speaker 3: a person about the things that have happened to him them,
• 48:16
  Speaker 3: and that's it. Everything else has been debunked. I don't
• 48:21
  Speaker 3: know about the Thanatos instinct. The last time I called
• 48:25
  Speaker 3: it the Thanos instinct, is someone jumped out my throat
• 48:27
  Speaker 3: the thanatose instinct. I mean, I found that really intriguing,
• 48:32
  Speaker 3: But I don't think that's really common in any of
• 48:36
  Speaker 3: the people who have built on his theories. They don't
• 48:39
  Speaker 3: they don't go for that one because it's, I guess
• 48:41
  Speaker 3: it's not sexy, even though when I read it, I'm like, yeah,
• 48:44
  Speaker 3: that makes a lot of sense. So the one theory
• 48:47
  Speaker 3: that I think or can hypothesis that I think Freud
• 48:50
  Speaker 3: did that actually has merit, nobody talks about and they
• 48:53
  Speaker 3: and feminists have built this corpus around Fallow centrism based
• 49:00
  Speaker 3: on something that's been discredited. So this is like multiple
• 49:05
  Speaker 3: layers of bullshit, Like this is a ship fox stack, No,
• 49:12
  Speaker 3: a ship fuck stack of epic proportions. You did the
• 49:16
  Speaker 3: song you get you get a glass bull and you
• 49:19
  Speaker 3: put some ship in the glass bowl, and you get
• 49:22
  Speaker 3: another glass bowl and he puts some fuck in the
• 49:24
  Speaker 3: glass and then you stack them. This is a ship
• 49:27
  Speaker 3: a ship fox stack.
• 49:29
  Speaker 4: That's you have a really strange concept of what is
• 49:33
  Speaker 4: a healthy, round, well rounded breakfast in Canada.
• 49:40
  Speaker 5: Syrup on it, I guess, yeah, yeah, uh, but yeah,
• 49:45
  Speaker 5: it's like this is just this is it's it's it's
• 49:48
  Speaker 5: it's founded on a foundation that has been discredited and it's.
• 49:53
  Speaker 3: A bunch of nonsense about men and women, like it's
• 49:56
  Speaker 3: just invented. This is just they She just sat down
• 50:00
  Speaker 3: one day and said, what what what? What can I conjecture?
• 50:07
  Speaker 3: What can I say? That's extreme? And and feminists have
• 50:13
  Speaker 3: actually like that. There is a statement in their corpus
• 50:18
  Speaker 3: where they laid out their plan. They said they were
• 50:21
  Speaker 3: going to define men and women in the relationship between
• 50:24
  Speaker 3: men and women in order to benefit feminism. And what
• 50:28
  Speaker 3: benefits feminism is gaining political power and money so they
• 50:34
  Speaker 3: can This is all a construct, Like everything that we're
• 50:38
  Speaker 3: listening to is a construct to hit buttons so that
• 50:42
  Speaker 3: these women can gain political clout and money. So they're
• 50:47
  Speaker 3: actually just beating on men's tolerance, men's willing to bend
• 50:54
  Speaker 3: for women's bullshit, men's concern that they might be a
• 50:58
  Speaker 3: threat to women. That's a big one. That's what feminists.
• 51:02
  Speaker 3: That's the button feminists keep hitting because it's it's like
• 51:05
  Speaker 3: a it's like a rat with a lever and the
• 51:07
  Speaker 3: lever releases pellets. That's all that's happening here. Just imagine
• 51:11
  Speaker 3: Andreid Dwarkin in a cave with whiskers in a cage
• 51:15
  Speaker 3: with whiskers and a tail, and she knows. Every time
• 51:17
  Speaker 3: she says something horrific about men, men throw her pellets
• 51:21
  Speaker 3: of food, which she then siphons up into a little
• 51:25
  Speaker 3: rat gullet. That's what's going on with all of the
• 51:28
  Speaker 3: feminists and we. The great horror is that nobody said,
• 51:33
  Speaker 3: what the hell are we doing? Why are we giving
• 51:37
  Speaker 3: these medusas power over the most fundamental relationships in our society.
• 51:44
  Speaker 3: That's what's really astounding. Why was there no point where
• 51:47
  Speaker 3: we were like, wait, nah, no, no, no, no, if,
• 51:52
  Speaker 3: if all, if men used rape as a means to
• 51:56
  Speaker 3: uphold society, then society would vastly different than it does. Therefore,
• 52:02
  Speaker 3: this is wrong. Therefore, you, you ladies, you need to
• 52:04
  Speaker 3: be quiet. You need to be muzzled. Now go into
• 52:07
  Speaker 3: the sandwich mines with you. But that never happened. No, Instead,
• 52:14
  Speaker 3: we need to we we have these these treatises by
• 52:18
  Speaker 3: these women explaining to us how it's completely legitimate and
• 52:23
  Speaker 3: smarlly self righteous, why they should be able to put
• 52:26
  Speaker 3: their ideological fingers up our children's brains. Right, that's that's
• 52:34
  Speaker 3: just okay, all right, I'm I'm I'm done with my
• 52:38
  Speaker 3: little rant Okay, I know it must sound really strange
• 52:42
  Speaker 3: coming from the.
• 52:42
  Speaker 1: No no, no, this is I mean, like, I think
• 52:45
  Speaker 1: that's just kind of hitting on what's really going on here.
• 52:47
  Speaker 1: I mean, obviously there's no real science or desire to
• 52:51
  Speaker 1: like make the world better.
• 52:53
  Speaker 2: Through this stuff. It's just, uh it's gross and predatory.
• 52:58
  Speaker 2: But anyway, uh so where were we?
• 53:00
  Speaker 4: Oh?
• 53:00
  Speaker 1: Yes, we live in a phallocentric society patriarchy that is,
• 53:04
  Speaker 1: which represses female sexuality, particularly female desire, thus reinforcing women's
• 53:09
  Speaker 1: position as other, remaining defined in opposition to men's desire.
• 53:14
  Speaker 2: Iri Gare, that's I guess.
• 53:16
  Speaker 1: Another thinker challenges the cons theory and his central focus
• 53:20
  Speaker 1: on the penis and definition of the clitterists as a
• 53:23
  Speaker 1: little penis. Instead, she knows that women experience pleasure everywhere,
• 53:27
  Speaker 1: forcing a shift in the analysis and placing women in
• 53:30
  Speaker 1: an equal position to men rather than remaining defined in
• 53:33
  Speaker 1: relationship to men. So you notice how like you have
• 53:37
  Speaker 1: like they brought up like three different people so far right,
• 53:39
  Speaker 1: We got we got Freud, we got Lakhana, we got
• 53:42
  Speaker 1: this person named Eric Iri Gare, and they're probably gonna
• 53:47
  Speaker 1: be other ones. Christeva is another one. Notice that all
• 53:50
  Speaker 1: these people are already wrong, but they're just debating on
• 53:53
  Speaker 1: like the nuances they're all wrong about, like human nature,
• 53:59
  Speaker 1: they're all they're all starting from a false premise of
• 54:02
  Speaker 1: like everything is socialized, and they're just disagreeing on like
• 54:06
  Speaker 1: whether or not it's you know, the women's desire is repressed,
• 54:10
  Speaker 1: or if it's everywhere or whatever. But you see what
• 54:13
  Speaker 1: I'm saying, It's like the entire conversation is already taking place,
• 54:19
  Speaker 1: I would say, at least not entirely in reality, if
• 54:23
  Speaker 1: not like completely outside of reality. But they all disagree, guys.
• 54:26
  Speaker 1: So this is really it's actually a battlefield of ideas
• 54:29
  Speaker 1: because all of these people, despite the fact that they're wrong,
• 54:33
  Speaker 1: are all like different wrong, they're different, you know, so
• 54:37
  Speaker 1: they fact with each other.
• 54:39
  Speaker 2: Exciting stuff, you know what, Yeah.
• 54:45
  Speaker 3: Go ahead, The clown College produces robust debate, Brian, Exactly.
• 54:52
  Speaker 3: You have to understand, you know, like Bozo is really going.
• 54:57
  Speaker 2: At it with his horn and but we see. But
• 55:01
  Speaker 2: my point is is that.
• 55:03
  Speaker 1: Whoever wins this, this discussion is just gonna be celebrated
• 55:08
  Speaker 1: and they're gonna write papers and articles and they're gonna
• 55:11
  Speaker 1: do interviews.
• 55:12
  Speaker 2: And they're gonna have books.
• 55:13
  Speaker 1: But they're wrong, like they're still because they're they're I mean,
• 55:17
  Speaker 1: I think they're just starting from an awful premise and
• 55:20
  Speaker 1: so but the premise is what has to be accepted.
• 55:24
  Speaker 1: You can't begin to be a part of the academic
• 55:26
  Speaker 1: discussion if you don't accept the premise. So this is
• 55:30
  Speaker 1: where how you get into like the situation where we
• 55:32
  Speaker 1: have where we have like feminist literature and and feminist
• 55:36
  Speaker 1: academic rigor studies and peer reviewed papers and everyone looking
• 55:41
  Speaker 1: at it is all in the same They're all in
• 55:44
  Speaker 1: the same cult.
• 55:45
  Speaker 2: They just differ on like whether you know to.
• 55:47
  Speaker 1: Use like the the the I don't know, like the
• 55:50
  Speaker 1: the the Chris dagger for the sacrifice or like or
• 55:53
  Speaker 1: a spoon or maybe a spatula. Like they're just disagreeing
• 55:57
  Speaker 1: on how to go about like what the new wants
• 56:00
  Speaker 1: of their cult is right?
• 56:01
  Speaker 2: Do you pull out the brain or the heart?
• 56:04
  Speaker 1: But like this is why we can't get anywhere, because
• 56:08
  Speaker 1: the whole thing is run like it's all run on
• 56:11
  Speaker 1: a false premise and by well retards to be fair,
• 56:14
  Speaker 1: I mean, I don't know what else to call them,
• 56:16
  Speaker 1: So I don't know, I just had to rant about that.
• 56:20
  Speaker 3: They're brilliant no, no, it's fine, grant away. How could
• 56:23
  Speaker 3: I possibly complain about your ranting. They're brilliant at extorting
• 56:28
  Speaker 3: stuff from people through lies. I mean, you got to
• 56:31
  Speaker 3: give them that, But they are lies. These are all
• 56:34
  Speaker 3: very carefully manufactured lies around human nature in order to
• 56:38
  Speaker 3: trigger the instincts to do what they want them to do.
• 56:44
  Speaker 3: You tell men that they're dangerous to women, and men
• 56:46
  Speaker 3: will turn themselves inside out to prove that's not so.
• 56:51
  Speaker 3: It's like a woman will just walk up to some dude,
• 56:54
  Speaker 3: you know, maybe a millionaire, and you'd be like, you know,
• 56:56
  Speaker 3: I think that you're a danger to women. And if
• 56:59
  Speaker 3: you don't give me, you know, a couple million dollars,
• 57:02
  Speaker 3: I might tell people, what's his first thing he does,
• 57:07
  Speaker 3: just opens up his wallet, because that's his instinct. But
• 57:12
  Speaker 3: it's also they have the ability to black male people
• 57:15
  Speaker 3: on a reputational level. It's it's a gigantic, pervasive, institutionalized drift.
• 57:22
  Speaker 3: And again, none of these things are true. And honestly,
• 57:26
  Speaker 3: if you really wanted to look at how fe male
• 57:29
  Speaker 3: and female sexuality and pair bonding and how men and
• 57:33
  Speaker 3: women relate, you should start on the level of endocrinology
• 57:39
  Speaker 3: and how all of that stuff is structured, because on
• 57:43
  Speaker 3: that level, every single one of the feminist assertions about
• 57:47
  Speaker 3: men and women and how they relate is wrong on
• 57:52
  Speaker 3: an end, like on a chemical level, it is wrong, wrong.
• 57:58
  Speaker 3: You're if you want a reasonable approach to how men
• 58:05
  Speaker 3: and women bond and relate and who they are, you're
• 58:08
  Speaker 3: better off with any religion. Any religion has a better
• 58:12
  Speaker 3: understanding of these things than feminism. So literally, the central
• 58:17
  Speaker 3: moral organizing force of our society has gone backwards when
• 58:22
  Speaker 3: it comes to understanding those essential fundamental relationships. A man's
• 58:26
  Speaker 3: relationship to himself to other men, a woman's relationship to
• 58:30
  Speaker 3: herself to other women, and their relationship to each other
• 58:32
  Speaker 3: and their children. We have gone backwards, really speed running
• 58:38
  Speaker 3: regression when it comes to an understanding. Okay, even Israel
• 58:45
  Speaker 3: is better, Allison, we're the grifters, you know.
• 58:51
  Speaker 2: I just bought my third house this week with my
• 58:53
  Speaker 2: grift money. I thought you.
• 59:01
  Speaker 3: All right, anyway, only people with a pathological relationship to
• 59:06
  Speaker 3: the truth could do what we do. Maybe not pathological.
• 59:10
  Speaker 2: And is it really all that wrong that the clitorius
• 59:12
  Speaker 2: is a little penis.
• 59:14
  Speaker 3: Well, I mean, is it is anatomically wrong? But it's
• 59:19
  Speaker 3: I mean that's the other thing. If you want to
• 59:22
  Speaker 3: talk about female desire, maybe you should have a working
• 59:24
  Speaker 3: understanding of female anatomy. A lot of feminists don't because
• 59:30
  Speaker 3: they compare female genital mutilation to male genital or they
• 59:35
  Speaker 3: say that female genital mutilation is worse than circumcision. Well,
• 59:38
  Speaker 3: the instant you do say that you are expressing complete
• 59:42
  Speaker 3: ignorance over male and female sexual anatomy. But I mean
• 59:46
  Speaker 3: that's another side. I mean we could, we could, We
• 59:49
  Speaker 3: could talk for days about what feminists are ignorant of, days, weeks,
• 59:54
  Speaker 3: even possibly months. Actually we've been doing this for twelve years,
• 59:57
  Speaker 3: so obviously twelve years. We could talk about what feminists
• 1:00:01
  Speaker 3: or ignorant of. It is a subject with absolutely no bottom.
• 1:00:07
  Speaker 3: All right, do you want to read some more? Till deer?
• 1:00:09
  Speaker 3: Did you want I want to read some more?
• 1:00:11
  Speaker 2: Or did till dear I want to say anything?
• 1:00:13
  Speaker 4: Or we have reading to do? We must get all right,
• 1:00:16
  Speaker 4: let's do that.
• 1:00:18
  Speaker 1: The centrality of the fallas extends to the organization of society.
• 1:00:23
  Speaker 2: Of society.
• 1:00:24
  Speaker 1: Psychoanalytic feminism describes society as representative of men's egos, their
• 1:00:29
  Speaker 1: sense of self importance, and desire for immortality. Therefore, structures
• 1:00:33
  Speaker 1: such as buildings, machines, bridges, and towers are made to
• 1:00:36
  Speaker 1: outlast them while also replicating shapes that are most pleasing
• 1:00:39
  Speaker 1: to them.
• 1:00:40
  Speaker 2: Oh, here we go again.
• 1:00:42
  Speaker 1: If we were gonna do this for women, would what
• 1:00:43
  Speaker 1: would it be like caves like when we just live underground?
• 1:00:47
  Speaker 1: Is that what she wants for us to be morlocks.
• 1:00:51
  Speaker 4: Like we would?
• 1:00:54
  Speaker 3: I guess?
• 1:00:57
  Speaker 2: Okay.
• 1:01:00
  Speaker 1: M Ban three thousands gives us uh a super chat
• 1:01:04
  Speaker 1: for two pounds and says clitteris is literally Greek for
• 1:01:07
  Speaker 1: a little hill.
• 1:01:09
  Speaker 2: It's an interesting bit of trivia.
• 1:01:11
  Speaker 3: Uh.
• 1:01:11
  Speaker 1: Kinoko's evil twin gives us five dollars again, Thank you,
• 1:01:14
  Speaker 1: Conoco's evil twin, says feminist scholarship fiction source. Falsehoods asserted
• 1:01:19
  Speaker 1: about reality by utterly self serving liars that are willfully
• 1:01:23
  Speaker 1: ignorant and wilfully insane.
• 1:01:27
  Speaker 2: Yeah all right, social systems are.
• 1:01:30
  Speaker 4: Pointing something out.
• 1:01:32
  Speaker 2: Oh yeah, go ahead.
• 1:01:33
  Speaker 4: Yeah, So men replicate shapes that are most pleasing to them.
• 1:01:39
  Speaker 4: That's why all buildings are shaped like boobs. Of course, apparently,
• 1:01:45
  Speaker 4: because it's just funny. It's like most pleasing to them. Obviously,
• 1:01:48
  Speaker 4: they're going for the They build giant towers because penis
• 1:01:52
  Speaker 4: is because over compensation. Heard her. These are the same
• 1:01:56
  Speaker 4: feminist people who will talk about men being dangerous because
• 1:01:59
  Speaker 4: of light latent homophobia and unaddressed homophobian subconsciousness and all
• 1:02:04
  Speaker 4: of this stuff. And the reason that you're scared of,
• 1:02:06
  Speaker 4: you know, anal penetration is because like repressed homosexuality and
• 1:02:10
  Speaker 4: all of this sort of stuff. So it's like, Okay,
• 1:02:12
  Speaker 4: do you do you really want to be going down
• 1:02:14
  Speaker 4: that route given all the other stuff that you believe
• 1:02:18
  Speaker 4: about how men hate homosexuality and all that stuff, and
• 1:02:22
  Speaker 4: it just it doesn't strike at all. And again I
• 1:02:27
  Speaker 4: come back to what are things that are most pleasing?
• 1:02:31
  Speaker 4: I go back to the sex toy thing earlier. What
• 1:02:33
  Speaker 4: did women make or what did what was made for
• 1:02:36
  Speaker 4: women and what's being made for men? Men are attempting
• 1:02:42
  Speaker 4: to reproduce an entire person. So yes, I guess we
• 1:02:46
  Speaker 4: know what's pleasure, what's pleasant to them as opposed to
• 1:02:50
  Speaker 4: disembodying anatomy.
• 1:02:53
  Speaker 3: Yeah, that is a lot creepy. Women are just focused
• 1:02:56
  Speaker 3: on whatever the partner does to their body. It's very
• 1:03:02
  Speaker 3: sylopsistic and narcissistic and self focused. That is that is
• 1:03:08
  Speaker 3: that is an interesting implication all right, Brian, let's.
• 1:03:12
  Speaker 1: Keep going, all right. Social systems are patriarchal, maintaining maleness
• 1:03:16
  Speaker 1: and masculinity as central to their structures and operations. Some
• 1:03:20
  Speaker 1: areas of examination by psychoanalytic feminists include the division of
• 1:03:24
  Speaker 1: labor and economic systems, science, all and philosophy, as well
• 1:03:29
  Speaker 1: as symbols and language. They seek to understand these systems
• 1:03:32
  Speaker 1: while also using psychoanalytic techniques as a method for examining
• 1:03:36
  Speaker 1: the reproduction of the status quo and as a means
• 1:03:39
  Speaker 1: for social change.
• 1:03:42
  Speaker 2: Okay.
• 1:03:44
  Speaker 1: Division of labor begins in the home, with women operating
• 1:03:47
  Speaker 1: as the primary caretakers in society. Men are propelled into
• 1:03:52
  Speaker 1: the work world due to their sense of independence, competitiveness,
• 1:03:56
  Speaker 1: and desire to achieve, which developed during early childhood and
• 1:03:59
  Speaker 1: the newest of as propelled like it's just like a
• 1:04:03
  Speaker 1: greater thing.
• 1:04:04
  Speaker 2: But go ahead to you there. I'm sorry, I was just.
• 1:04:06
  Speaker 4: Going to say, there you go. Well remember what I
• 1:04:09
  Speaker 4: said earlier when they were going to be like, oh,
• 1:04:10
  Speaker 4: you're a child, and being a boy is just an
• 1:04:13
  Speaker 4: advantage because you get separated earlier.
• 1:04:16
  Speaker 3: There you go.
• 1:04:16
  Speaker 4: There's the payoff, I mean, the propelled into the work world.
• 1:04:22
  Speaker 4: I mean yeah, but not because of this sense of
• 1:04:25
  Speaker 4: independence and all this stuff. No, it's because they want
• 1:04:29
  Speaker 4: to attract women and women of them. We know this,
• 1:04:35
  Speaker 4: but you know, just ignore that.
• 1:04:37
  Speaker 3: Now.
• 1:04:37
  Speaker 4: It's just your ego talking. It's it's not to form
• 1:04:42
  Speaker 4: a family and live a life and all that stuff. No, No,
• 1:04:45
  Speaker 4: it's just you being petty and egotistical.
• 1:04:48
  Speaker 2: Yep.
• 1:04:50
  Speaker 1: This process produces the ideology and psychology of male dominance
• 1:04:55
  Speaker 1: and denial of their dependence on women to help maintain
• 1:04:58
  Speaker 1: the home, raise that you're and provide support for their needs. Yeah,
• 1:05:02
  Speaker 1: because men don't recognize that women, if they're helpful, will
• 1:05:06
  Speaker 1: do that. Male behavior is the norm of success. Therefore,
• 1:05:10
  Speaker 1: if women have a desire to be successful in the
• 1:05:12
  Speaker 1: paid work world, they are expected to act and often
• 1:05:15
  Speaker 1: dressed like a man. Often there is some dev wait
• 1:05:21
  Speaker 1: often there is some deviation from this, but usually with
• 1:05:25
  Speaker 1: unfavorable circumstances. Utilizing Marxist theory with psychoanalysis, shocker, the reproduction
• 1:05:31
  Speaker 1: of mothering is viewed as the basis for the reinforcement
• 1:05:34
  Speaker 1: of women's responsibilities in the domestic, largely unpaid work spear
• 1:05:39
  Speaker 1: of society. I just like dispel this idea that a
• 1:05:43
  Speaker 1: woman's work, even if she's a say, at home mom,
• 1:05:47
  Speaker 1: is not in fact unpaid because she is literally being
• 1:05:50
  Speaker 1: housed and clothed and fed by the man's money, like
• 1:05:55
  Speaker 1: outside of the satisfaction of being a wife and mother
• 1:05:58
  Speaker 1: and that you know, he's he's not your boss, he's
• 1:06:01
  Speaker 1: your husband. Those kids, those are your kids, that's your legacy.
• 1:06:05
  Speaker 4: I'm just saying, yeah, no, they like to ignore that. Yeah,
• 1:06:10
  Speaker 4: there was a big push for this unpaid work. They've
• 1:06:13
  Speaker 4: basically just had to sort of say the house and
• 1:06:15
  Speaker 4: everything that should be treated as a business effectively. And
• 1:06:20
  Speaker 4: I think a bunch of that comes back to the
• 1:06:22
  Speaker 4: loss of the home economy which men gave women during
• 1:06:25
  Speaker 4: the Industrial Revolution. You know, you invented all of these
• 1:06:29
  Speaker 4: wonderful labor saving devices that meant all of these things
• 1:06:33
  Speaker 4: that you had to do at home, you know, as
• 1:06:35
  Speaker 4: an actual homemaker, you know, taking the rugs outside and
• 1:06:38
  Speaker 4: bludgeoning them, and taking your clothes down to the river
• 1:06:41
  Speaker 4: and bashing them with rocks to remove the dirt and
• 1:06:44
  Speaker 4: all of that stuff. You know, men just invented all
• 1:06:46
  Speaker 4: of these things to give women infinite spare time so
• 1:06:49
  Speaker 4: they don't have to do that. And as it turns out,
• 1:06:52
  Speaker 4: when men give women infinite spare time, the women never
• 1:06:55
  Speaker 4: forgave them for doing that and decided to use all
• 1:06:57
  Speaker 4: of that spare time to destroy society. Yep, as it
• 1:07:03
  Speaker 4: turns out, not only did women not forgive men from
• 1:07:06
  Speaker 4: doing that, apparently it also drove them mad.
• 1:07:13
  Speaker 3: I think, I think, I I've heard that before. Okay,
• 1:07:19
  Speaker 3: all right back to this.
• 1:07:20
  Speaker 1: Yeah, as wives and mothers, women contribute to the continual
• 1:07:25
  Speaker 1: production of people. Girls are socialized as caretakers, responsible for
• 1:07:30
  Speaker 1: supporting their husbands and families. Boys are socialized as workers
• 1:07:35
  Speaker 1: who are responsible for activities outside of the domestic arena
• 1:07:38
  Speaker 1: and therefore for continual support of capitalistic production.
• 1:07:44
  Speaker 4: Right.
• 1:07:45
  Speaker 2: They don't do that to attract girls.
• 1:07:48
  Speaker 4: No, apparently not. No, it's just for capitalism. That that's
• 1:07:51
  Speaker 4: the only reason men work. It's for capitalism. It's not
• 1:07:53
  Speaker 4: because women want them to they want to be provided
• 1:07:55
  Speaker 4: for and all that stuff. Oh yeah, No, all of
• 1:07:57
  Speaker 4: this stuff is socialized. It's definitely that there's not anatomical
• 1:08:01
  Speaker 4: differences and innate differences between boys and girls when it
• 1:08:05
  Speaker 4: comes to anything like this. Again, we reference studies which
• 1:08:09
  Speaker 4: have been done on children, especially in the pre socialization stage.
• 1:08:12
  Speaker 4: If you show faces to boys and girls. Or you
• 1:08:16
  Speaker 4: show interesting mechanical objects like cogs turning or things like that.
• 1:08:20
  Speaker 4: The boys are more interested in things like that are mechanical.
• 1:08:23
  Speaker 4: Girls more interested in faces and things like that. If
• 1:08:25
  Speaker 4: you just even look at kids play when they actually
• 1:08:27
  Speaker 4: start reaching the socialization stage, the boys are into the
• 1:08:31
  Speaker 4: things which are more mechanical. Girls are into things which
• 1:08:33
  Speaker 4: are more social. This is not something that they're taught
• 1:08:36
  Speaker 4: to do. This is something they gravitate to by themselves.
• 1:08:39
  Speaker 4: If you give them a variety of things, they will
• 1:08:43
  Speaker 4: just gravitate to what they want. It's the gender equality
• 1:08:46
  Speaker 4: paradox which is first mentioned in Norway. As it turns out,
• 1:08:50
  Speaker 4: when you give people total freedom, gender expression actually increases.
• 1:08:55
  Speaker 4: The scope actually widens, because people can go for the
• 1:08:58
  Speaker 4: thing that they actually want to as opposed to what
• 1:09:01
  Speaker 4: they basically have to do for immediate survival. And second
• 1:09:05
  Speaker 4: to this continual sport of capitalistic production, why didn't capitalists
• 1:09:10
  Speaker 4: just make everyone work?
• 1:09:13
  Speaker 2: Yeah, mh, well.
• 1:09:18
  Speaker 3: Work?
• 1:09:18
  Speaker 4: Because we're constantly told that capitalists are these terrible, evil
• 1:09:21
  Speaker 4: people who don't give a damn about anything, only money.
• 1:09:25
  Speaker 4: Why don't they make everyone work? Why did they? Why
• 1:09:28
  Speaker 4: did capitalists encourage people to keep reproducing, you know, because
• 1:09:32
  Speaker 4: we're constantly told that they don't care about that and
• 1:09:34
  Speaker 4: that they just they would actually kill everyone if they
• 1:09:37
  Speaker 4: could make a profit out of it. So well, why
• 1:09:39
  Speaker 4: not just have everyone work and then make infinitely more money.
• 1:09:43
  Speaker 4: You're just like double your money if you don't care
• 1:09:45
  Speaker 4: about the people existing, why not do that? Because you know,
• 1:09:48
  Speaker 4: capital is the only thing that matters. But that's a
• 1:09:51
  Speaker 4: contradiction in their argument, and they don't want to address that.
• 1:09:54
  Speaker 4: At some point, they then have to come down to
• 1:09:56
  Speaker 4: oh no, no, no, the capitalists do want people to live,
• 1:09:59
  Speaker 4: but only only a certain number of them men. Therefore,
• 1:10:04
  Speaker 4: at that point they just like conceding the arguments. Right,
• 1:10:07
  Speaker 4: So capitalists don't only care about money, They do care
• 1:10:11
  Speaker 4: about other things, right, Okay, I just want.
• 1:10:17
  Speaker 3: To point out that I am doing a analysis of literature.
• 1:10:22
  Speaker 3: I think I've mentioned this before, and one hundred percent,
• 1:10:26
  Speaker 3: when you give men and women a blank piece of paper,
• 1:10:28
  Speaker 3: they write very different things on a structural level. So
• 1:10:33
  Speaker 3: women write relationships and a relationship map in a social
• 1:10:38
  Speaker 3: sphere in terms of a topology, and men write things
• 1:10:43
  Speaker 3: in terms of material that they operate on. And if
• 1:10:47
  Speaker 3: they read people, it's because they want to figure out
• 1:10:50
  Speaker 3: the mechanism in order to take the next action to
• 1:10:54
  Speaker 3: affect a particular outcome. So men and women, their cognitive
• 1:10:58
  Speaker 3: function is noticeably different. And you can see it when
• 1:11:04
  Speaker 3: you just give them a paper and complete freedom to
• 1:11:06
  Speaker 3: do whatever they want to think however they want with
• 1:11:09
  Speaker 3: no constraints. Sort of ties back to the Nordic paradox.
• 1:11:13
  Speaker 3: You give them the opportunity to think in a realm
• 1:11:16
  Speaker 3: with no constraints, and you see the differences, and they're
• 1:11:20
  Speaker 3: pretty stark. Again, the only two women that I've found
• 1:11:23
  Speaker 3: that buck the trend are Emily Bronte Weathering Heights and
• 1:11:27
  Speaker 3: Anne Rand and Henry James and Faust not no, not
• 1:11:34
  Speaker 3: Faust Proust. So two those are the four who buck
• 1:11:40
  Speaker 3: the trend. So I just want to put that out there.
• 1:11:43
  Speaker 3: This is like, this is the fact, is that men
• 1:11:46
  Speaker 3: and women think differently on average.
• 1:11:49
  Speaker 4: Yeah, and we know that this is genetic because there's
• 1:11:52
  Speaker 4: another very interesting thing that has happened. We know that
• 1:11:56
  Speaker 4: there's sexual dimorphism in humans. We know that sexual dime
• 1:12:00
  Speaker 4: morphism is biological. Men are on average taller than on average,
• 1:12:03
  Speaker 4: larger muscle mass, on all of those sorts of things.
• 1:12:06
  Speaker 4: The interesting thing about sexual dimorphism in humans is that
• 1:12:11
  Speaker 4: it has increased over time. So if you went back
• 1:12:15
  Speaker 4: in time five hundred years, men and women were more similar,
• 1:12:19
  Speaker 4: men were well, everyone was kind of shorter because lack
• 1:12:22
  Speaker 4: of nutrition and whatnot. But if you look at the
• 1:12:25
  Speaker 4: skulls of men and women, males and females going back
• 1:12:28
  Speaker 4: in time, the male skulls are smaller and more effeminate.
• 1:12:31
  Speaker 4: Women's skulls are heavier and larger. There is still a
• 1:12:35
  Speaker 4: difference in that the men are still more than the women,
• 1:12:37
  Speaker 4: but the difference is less in time. So as time
• 1:12:42
  Speaker 4: has gone on and we've improved the conditions, and what's
• 1:12:45
  Speaker 4: actually happened is the sexes have diverged even further away
• 1:12:48
  Speaker 4: than they already were in centuries past. And that speaks,
• 1:12:52
  Speaker 4: of course, not only to what people find attractive in
• 1:12:55
  Speaker 4: the opposite sex, but it also indicates another very important thing,
• 1:12:59
  Speaker 4: and that is true. Whatever extent, anything is social, even
• 1:13:03
  Speaker 4: if you want to say, oh, it's social, it's social
• 1:13:05
  Speaker 4: that women prefer to all men, it's social that men
• 1:13:08
  Speaker 4: prefer more curvy women, or whatever like that. To whatever extent,
• 1:13:11
  Speaker 4: any behavior is social. To whatever extent any behavior in
• 1:13:14
  Speaker 4: any animal is environmental, it will be genetically selected for.
• 1:13:19
  Speaker 4: That is, any gene that is providing any degree of
• 1:13:22
  Speaker 4: variance in that socially constructed thing. That gene will therefore
• 1:13:28
  Speaker 4: be able to manifest more within the population if it
• 1:13:30
  Speaker 4: provides some sort of advantage to it. And then if
• 1:13:34
  Speaker 4: you tie that onto something like the sort of extension
• 1:13:38
  Speaker 4: of the phenotype of animals, the way genes meshin with
• 1:13:42
  Speaker 4: the environment, you can start finding genes affecting things that
• 1:13:48
  Speaker 4: you think is entirely environmental. But an example of this
• 1:13:53
  Speaker 4: is something like, okay, say you've got like, let's just
• 1:13:57
  Speaker 4: use a deer population. Sure, why not. Let's stay on braws. Here.
• 1:14:00
  Speaker 4: You have a deer population. Some of the deer have
• 1:14:02
  Speaker 4: slightly lark light, lighter pelts, some of them have slightly
• 1:14:05
  Speaker 4: darker belts. As it turns out, the ones that are
• 1:14:08
  Speaker 4: lighter get hunted more because they're easy to be seen. Well,
• 1:14:10
  Speaker 4: why are they easy to be seen while they're lighter?
• 1:14:12
  Speaker 4: Why are they lighter? Well, they spend a bit more
• 1:14:14
  Speaker 4: time in the sun, and then they rub themselves on
• 1:14:17
  Speaker 4: some trees more. Oh, okay, well it's environmental. They're just
• 1:14:19
  Speaker 4: picking to do that, right, Well, what if we look
• 1:14:22
  Speaker 4: at the genes of the animals and we find that
• 1:14:24
  Speaker 4: in that circumstance, Oh, actually there's genetic variation within this population,
• 1:14:29
  Speaker 4: and the ones with the lighter pelts happen to have
• 1:14:31
  Speaker 4: a gene or a gene variant that encourages additional sebum
• 1:14:35
  Speaker 4: production in their skin. So what's actually happening is they're
• 1:14:38
  Speaker 4: sitting in the sun to dry out this excess oil,
• 1:14:41
  Speaker 4: and then because they've got excess oil and more dandruft,
• 1:14:43
  Speaker 4: they rub themselves on trees more. Wait, so that difference
• 1:14:46
  Speaker 4: that is environmental is actually genetic. We're moving further and
• 1:14:50
  Speaker 4: further away from that. So when you hunt a population
• 1:14:54
  Speaker 4: like that, you're altering the genes of a population, even
• 1:14:57
  Speaker 4: though the thing that you're looking for or is environmental supposedly,
• 1:15:04
  Speaker 4: And this is just something that they like to avoid.
• 1:15:06
  Speaker 4: Here and again, it comes back to that diversion of humanity,
• 1:15:11
  Speaker 4: even if you were the diversion of the sex it
• 1:15:13
  Speaker 4: So even if you wanted to say somehow everything that
• 1:15:17
  Speaker 4: is attractive to people is socially constructed, well, that social
• 1:15:21
  Speaker 4: construct has been genetically selected for within the species. And therefore,
• 1:15:26
  Speaker 4: if there is any gene that causes that, but also
• 1:15:29
  Speaker 4: any gene that contributes to that attraction, those will be
• 1:15:33
  Speaker 4: reproduced more within the population, which again points to no,
• 1:15:40
  Speaker 4: there is something inherent in this, because there has to be.
• 1:15:43
  Speaker 4: There can't not be.
• 1:15:46
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I want to just something that I noticed about
• 1:15:51
  Speaker 1: this as I've been reading in this is what I
• 1:15:52
  Speaker 1: notice about like basically all feminist writings, they treat the
• 1:15:56
  Speaker 1: relationship between men and women as purely transactional. I mean,
• 1:16:00
  Speaker 1: and I'm not talking about like in everyday life. I
• 1:16:02
  Speaker 1: mean like in marriages with children involved. And what's really
• 1:16:07
  Speaker 1: weird about that is that it is in by their
• 1:16:10
  Speaker 1: own logic, what they're presenting is something that they would
• 1:16:13
  Speaker 1: criticize as capitalists in nature, or maybe that's the reason
• 1:16:18
  Speaker 1: why they frame it this way, so that they can
• 1:16:20
  Speaker 1: criticize it and they can criticize the family and capitalism
• 1:16:24
  Speaker 1: at the same time by treating a relationship between men
• 1:16:26
  Speaker 1: and women as just transactional. And the thing is is
• 1:16:30
  Speaker 1: that that's not what love is, at least not as
• 1:16:33
  Speaker 1: I understand it. And this is assuming that you know,
• 1:16:36
  Speaker 1: a man and women are getting together because they love
• 1:16:38
  Speaker 1: each other. In maybe this a bit of a digression,
• 1:16:43
  Speaker 1: and I'm sorry if it is, but Sir Tom, I
• 1:16:45
  Speaker 1: mean's not a Sir Thomas. The quin is to find
• 1:16:47
  Speaker 1: love as to will the good of the other, and
• 1:16:50
  Speaker 1: basically it is a It is putting your trust and
• 1:16:53
  Speaker 1: faith in someone else without expecting anything in return, and
• 1:16:59
  Speaker 1: that is feling the good.
• 1:17:00
  Speaker 2: It is inherently sacrificial.
• 1:17:03
  Speaker 1: And I think men and the reason why I'm saying
• 1:17:05
  Speaker 1: this is because I think men do this all the time,
• 1:17:07
  Speaker 1: not just for women, but for each other as well,
• 1:17:10
  Speaker 1: and it's not recognized for what it is. And that
• 1:17:15
  Speaker 1: is not even I mean, I'm sure that there are
• 1:17:18
  Speaker 1: cases where women do it too, but it's not even
• 1:17:19
  Speaker 1: something that is asked because everything has.
• 1:17:22
  Speaker 2: To come out to what do I get out of it?
• 1:17:24
  Speaker 2: What do they get out of it? What do women get?
• 1:17:26
  Speaker 3: You know?
• 1:17:27
  Speaker 2: And I think they miss that, And I mean that's
• 1:17:30
  Speaker 2: what I think.
• 1:17:31
  Speaker 1: I think that true love involves actively desiring and working
• 1:17:34
  Speaker 1: towards what is genuinely good for the other person. They're
• 1:17:37
  Speaker 1: flourishing their well being the truth, which is why I
• 1:17:41
  Speaker 1: do this show happiness in the deepest sense. Ultimately, you know,
• 1:17:47
  Speaker 1: it's a selfless act and that's the only way you
• 1:17:50
  Speaker 1: can call it that. So I'm just saying that they're
• 1:17:53
  Speaker 1: talking about a relationship between a woman and a man,
• 1:17:59
  Speaker 1: and a woman and and a man and their children
• 1:18:03
  Speaker 1: as purely transactional where someone is benefiting and therefore someone
• 1:18:07
  Speaker 1: else must be losing if there isn't like an equal exchange.
• 1:18:10
  Speaker 1: And yet they use that criticism and then they call
• 1:18:14
  Speaker 1: like patriarchy a kind of capital that needs to be
• 1:18:18
  Speaker 1: flattened and redistributed.
• 1:18:20
  Speaker 3: You see what I'm saying, Yeah, I see what you're saying,
• 1:18:24
  Speaker 3: because you're saying that they're saying patriarchy looks at everything
• 1:18:29
  Speaker 3: is transactional, and that's exactly what they're doing. But the
• 1:18:33
  Speaker 3: thing is that what they're saying is they are correctly
• 1:18:35
  Speaker 3: interpreting that patriarchy sees everything is transactional. Even though if
• 1:18:40
  Speaker 3: you if you even spend a moment to think about
• 1:18:43
  Speaker 3: it and think about what, for example, fathers will sacrifice
• 1:18:46
  Speaker 3: for their children, you realize that it's at a bullshit
• 1:18:50
  Speaker 3: what they're saying. But they think that they're correctly identifying
• 1:18:54
  Speaker 3: their decoding patriarchy as a transactional. But you have to
• 1:18:57
  Speaker 3: consider that these are these are these are predators, that
• 1:19:02
  Speaker 3: are this woman who's writing this analytic feminism She's a predator,
• 1:19:10
  Speaker 3: and not the nice kind. She's like one of those.
• 1:19:13
  Speaker 3: She's more like a crocodile. No, maybe crocodiles are too nice.
• 1:19:18
  Speaker 3: She's like the predator and alien. Just all she everything
• 1:19:24
  Speaker 3: is is status, power, consumption because she doesn't have the
• 1:19:31
  Speaker 3: mammalian architecture. She doesn't understand mammals. I don't know if
• 1:19:36
  Speaker 3: it's because she literally is a reptilian alien, or if
• 1:19:40
  Speaker 3: she's just a psychopath, a sociopath, an extreme narcissist. But
• 1:19:47
  Speaker 3: only somebody like that could assert this stuff, and she
• 1:19:50
  Speaker 3: does it because it gives her power over others. She's
• 1:19:53
  Speaker 3: a predator, but not like the wolf. Predator like a wolf,
• 1:19:56
  Speaker 3: because you know, wolves have social structure, they bond, you know,
• 1:20:02
  Speaker 3: they have a very intimate and tender courtship. She's something else.
• 1:20:06
  Speaker 3: She's something primal and dark. And unfortunately, instead of the
• 1:20:13
  Speaker 3: peer review, instead of saying, hey, I think you're evil,
• 1:20:17
  Speaker 3: they said, oh, give us more. This is great stuff.
• 1:20:21
  Speaker 2: Yeah, all right, anyway, back to the article.
• 1:20:27
  Speaker 1: As wives and mothers, women contribute to the continual production
• 1:20:31
  Speaker 1: of people. Girls are socialized as caretakers. I already read that, right, I'm.
• 1:20:34
  Speaker 3: Sorry, I'm going to get in here, I got to
• 1:20:37
  Speaker 3: say something. She wants the stolen valor of women doing
• 1:20:42
  Speaker 3: this role, but at the same time she wants to
• 1:20:45
  Speaker 3: say that that patriarchy forces it on women, right, And
• 1:20:50
  Speaker 3: it's like, well, then, uh, you don't get the stolen valor,
• 1:20:55
  Speaker 3: all right. You don't get to appeal to the fact
• 1:20:57
  Speaker 3: that women have done all of these things if they
• 1:21:00
  Speaker 3: were forced to by someone else, right, that's it. That's
• 1:21:05
  Speaker 3: fundamentally Yeah. No, I'll stop you there. Oh oh, women
• 1:21:08
  Speaker 3: give birth the neck. No, they were forced to by patriarchy.
• 1:21:12
  Speaker 3: Therefore patriarchy has the valor of perpetuating the sphs. You
• 1:21:18
  Speaker 3: don't get it, you don't deserve it. It wasn't your choice.
• 1:21:22
  Speaker 3: Your choice is apparently abortion and hookup culture. So anyway,
• 1:21:29
  Speaker 3: I just wanted to put that out.
• 1:21:31
  Speaker 2: You can keep going, no problem, all right.
• 1:21:37
  Speaker 1: Experiences from the pre edible and edipal stages of life
• 1:21:39
  Speaker 1: shape are conceptions of science and philosophy. Western approaches to
• 1:21:44
  Speaker 1: knowledge are founded in a male worldview, a male understanding
• 1:21:47
  Speaker 1: of the world where there is a desire for separation
• 1:21:49
  Speaker 1: and individual individuation. Early psychoanalytic feminist studies sought to reveal
• 1:21:56
  Speaker 1: the male bias in academics, art, philosophy, and science. Then
• 1:22:00
  Speaker 1: they name a bunch of citations Eliot, flax Irregare, Gilligan, Cresiva.
• 1:22:06
  Speaker 1: For example, Carol Gilligan studied the work of Lawrence Kohlberg
• 1:22:10
  Speaker 1: in his theory of moral development, in which he concluded
• 1:22:13
  Speaker 1: that girls were morally inferior.
• 1:22:18
  Speaker 2: Okay, we'll touch that.
• 1:22:19
  Speaker 1: Gilligan exposed the bias in his work. Kolberg used only
• 1:22:25
  Speaker 1: boys's stories in his model. She argues that both cognitive
• 1:22:28
  Speaker 1: and developmental psychology are biased due to their use of
• 1:22:32
  Speaker 1: male subjects to establish a standard of normality. Gilligan reformulated
• 1:22:37
  Speaker 1: the theory, concluding that morality is a negotiated path where
• 1:22:41
  Speaker 1: people balance self needs and interests while caring for the other.
• 1:22:45
  Speaker 1: Within this body of research of uncovering the male biases
• 1:22:48
  Speaker 1: inherent within the practices and structures of science, philosophy, and
• 1:22:52
  Speaker 1: the overall quest for knowledge, these scholars offer a solution
• 1:22:55
  Speaker 1: through the reformulation of epistemology and metaphysics. In our society,
• 1:23:01
  Speaker 1: Holy run on sentence, batman, Oh.
• 1:23:04
  Speaker 3: Good lord, just throw just throw the word salad at
• 1:23:09
  Speaker 3: the screen. Let's see if any of it sticks. God,
• 1:23:12
  Speaker 3: this is this isn't a thesis. This is just endless.
• 1:23:15
  Speaker 3: So we're oppressed.
• 1:23:17
  Speaker 4: Yo, we found one guy who did a test and
• 1:23:22
  Speaker 4: he only tested boys destroy science. Okay, a reasonable conclusion.
• 1:23:32
  Speaker 4: Remember what we said yesterday, yesterday, last week, you know,
• 1:23:35
  Speaker 4: the Theorizing Patriarchy book again. Yet women's opinions are science
• 1:23:39
  Speaker 4: because science is biased and patriarchal. This is all all this,
• 1:23:43
  Speaker 4: it's all the same stuff again. And how they have
• 1:23:48
  Speaker 4: to undermine religion as well spirituality. All it's all got
• 1:23:53
  Speaker 4: to go. That's why they talk about dualism.
• 1:23:57
  Speaker 1: Shortly, Yeah, dualistic thinking. The split between subject, object and
• 1:24:04
  Speaker 1: mind body must be replaced by thinking that accepts differences
• 1:24:08
  Speaker 1: without creating a hierarchy of superiority. This can be achieved
• 1:24:12
  Speaker 1: by studying and reshaping early childhood experiences which create and
• 1:24:16
  Speaker 1: reinforce the existing system of patriarchy and dominance.
• 1:24:21
  Speaker 2: Certainly, there are.
• 1:24:22
  Speaker 1: Critiques about psychoanalytic feminism and the approaches used by its scholars.
• 1:24:26
  Speaker 1: Oh okay, so there are critiques, but we're about to
• 1:24:28
  Speaker 1: dismiss them all right. I don't know, I'm predicting, So
• 1:24:34
  Speaker 1: I think we're getting close to the end of this article. Oh,
• 1:24:36
  Speaker 1: I got another super child. All right, let's do this
• 1:24:39
  Speaker 1: one really quick before I get into the meat of that.
• 1:24:42
  Speaker 1: Kinoco's Evil Twin gives another five dollars, Thank you, Kinoco's
• 1:24:44
  Speaker 1: Evil Twin, and says Alison regarding the studies into revealed preferences.
• 1:24:50
  Speaker 1: Would prim Reaper or Tielder be able to construct a
• 1:24:52
  Speaker 1: survey to gather useful data on women's actual interest in men,
• 1:24:57
  Speaker 1: not the heavily pushed propaganda from social media, especially like
• 1:25:01
  Speaker 1: to choose the bear bs Or maybe Aidan Paladin might
• 1:25:04
  Speaker 1: know of some relevant past studies that could form the
• 1:25:08
  Speaker 1: basis of a meta study. Young men need good information.
• 1:25:12
  Speaker 1: It's damn hard to find.
• 1:25:16
  Speaker 2: I mean, like the only I mean, there should be studies,
• 1:25:20
  Speaker 2: but I don't know.
• 1:25:22
  Speaker 1: The thing is that people who have the resources to
• 1:25:24
  Speaker 1: conduct such studies have no interest in those findings, so
• 1:25:27
  Speaker 1: they won't conduct those studies.
• 1:25:28
  Speaker 4: Useful women are actually interested in men?
• 1:25:33
  Speaker 2: Was that?
• 1:25:35
  Speaker 4: Yeah, we already know that resources. That's it's it's resource
• 1:25:41
  Speaker 4: provision and resource gathering. That's it. I can't remember the
• 1:25:44
  Speaker 4: name of the research you did it, but there was one,
• 1:25:46
  Speaker 4: and it took into account all sorts of things like uh,
• 1:25:50
  Speaker 4: you know, high parents, hellline, whatever, the hell else, and
• 1:25:55
  Speaker 4: women were always willing to sacrifice other traits even if
• 1:26:00
  Speaker 4: they said they would deal breakers like height, if the
• 1:26:04
  Speaker 4: money was suitably large. So, in other words, money trumped
• 1:26:08
  Speaker 4: everything else ultimately, or resource provision more generally, that was it. Yes,
• 1:26:13
  Speaker 4: it really is that simple.
• 1:26:16
  Speaker 2: Hmm.
• 1:26:18
  Speaker 4: I know that sounds horrible because people are gonna be like, oh,
• 1:26:20
  Speaker 4: so you're seeing women just gold diggers and a lesson. Well,
• 1:26:25
  Speaker 4: I mean, if that's what they tell you that they're
• 1:26:28
  Speaker 4: interested in, I mean, what do you want me to say, No,
• 1:26:32
  Speaker 4: you're not. You don't know what you want, Okay, I
• 1:26:36
  Speaker 4: mean I can't.
• 1:26:38
  Speaker 1: We don't want women.
• 1:26:44
  Speaker 3: Yeah, well, I mean and also it's like it probably
• 1:26:47
  Speaker 3: was somewhat uh ameliorated, that's the right way of pronouncing
• 1:26:54
  Speaker 3: that world word in societies where women have their own
• 1:26:57
  Speaker 3: work that's productive. Like is this I mean this, this
• 1:27:01
  Speaker 3: idea that women just sort of sit there and all
• 1:27:06
  Speaker 3: they produce is abortions and degrees. That's really new, very new,
• 1:27:13
  Speaker 3: and it had it had to have a whole bunch
• 1:27:16
  Speaker 3: of narrative revolutions before it flowered into that, and one
• 1:27:22
  Speaker 3: of them was this idea of the homemaker. Because prior
• 1:27:25
  Speaker 3: to the Hollywood and the fifties, women were productive like
• 1:27:30
  Speaker 3: they were. The home was a unit of production, produced things,
• 1:27:35
  Speaker 3: and the further back you go, the more things it produced,
• 1:27:38
  Speaker 3: and women were responsible for that production. So in that context,
• 1:27:42
  Speaker 3: if women are and if you even look at hunter
• 1:27:45
  Speaker 3: gatherer tribes, women aren't doing nothing. They're usually doing quite
• 1:27:49
  Speaker 3: a bit of work in terms of making sure that
• 1:27:53
  Speaker 3: food is available in seasons where prey is scarcer, they're
• 1:27:59
  Speaker 3: doing work too maintain the dwellings. They're doing work to gather,
• 1:28:07
  Speaker 3: to do the basketry, weaving, all kinds of like domestic
• 1:28:11
  Speaker 3: stuff that is really necessary for the survival of their tribe.
• 1:28:16
  Speaker 3: In some cases, they're providing the majority of the calories,
• 1:28:19
  Speaker 3: even though the male, the male the gap the hunters
• 1:28:23
  Speaker 3: will be probably going after the prestigious food items. So
• 1:28:29
  Speaker 3: it's it's like this is this is a very new situation,
• 1:28:33
  Speaker 3: the complete absence of not just women being able to
• 1:28:39
  Speaker 3: provide for themselves because they can sort of do that now,
• 1:28:42
  Speaker 3: but the complete absence of a female form of provision
• 1:28:46
  Speaker 3: because that's what it was in the past. It was
• 1:28:49
  Speaker 3: this was your job, women's job. Women did it. Men
• 1:28:52
  Speaker 3: didn't do it. Women did it, and it was necessary
• 1:28:55
  Speaker 3: for the survival of everyone, and that's gone. And I
• 1:29:00
  Speaker 3: mean you said originally, you know men women lost until
• 1:29:03
  Speaker 3: their women lost their minds. It's something I said too,
• 1:29:06
  Speaker 3: but it's not, you know, almost in a way is
• 1:29:10
  Speaker 3: not an awful thing. They lost their particular female form
• 1:29:16
  Speaker 3: of provision and lost their ever living, fucking minds in
• 1:29:20
  Speaker 3: the process. And it's because they don't have anything to
• 1:29:24
  Speaker 3: do that ties back to who they are as women,
• 1:29:29
  Speaker 3: and that's really orphaning if you think about it. So
• 1:29:33
  Speaker 3: the finding that they want resources, I'm just curious what
• 1:29:37
  Speaker 3: that would be in a society where women are expected
• 1:29:41
  Speaker 3: or women's families are expected to provide dowry, where women
• 1:29:44
  Speaker 3: are expected to work in the home to provide like,
• 1:29:48
  Speaker 3: what would what would be the situation there? And then
• 1:29:51
  Speaker 3: the division is, yes, men have to provide resources from
• 1:29:55
  Speaker 3: their sphere, but women are providing resources from their sphere
• 1:30:00
  Speaker 3: also expected to do that, so it's more of an
• 1:30:03
  Speaker 3: equal situation unlike now where the ideal used to be
• 1:30:09
  Speaker 3: and in some ways still is, is a woman just
• 1:30:11
  Speaker 3: sitting on her ass producing absolutely nothing except shit and
• 1:30:17
  Speaker 3: complaints in a house that the man pays for using equipment,
• 1:30:24
  Speaker 3: you know, dryer vacuum, all of this stuff that he
• 1:30:30
  Speaker 3: pays for, electricity in dear plumbing, everything that he pays for,
• 1:30:35
  Speaker 3: and that has never been in the history of humanity,
• 1:30:39
  Speaker 3: never And I wonder if it's just created, like it's
• 1:30:43
  Speaker 3: not only has it created like a very mercenary form
• 1:30:46
  Speaker 3: of resource acquisition in women and also insanity, but if
• 1:30:50
  Speaker 3: it hasn't also created tremendous insecurity in women, And no,
• 1:30:59
  Speaker 3: that is answer. So I mean a lot of people
• 1:31:02
  Speaker 3: are A couple of days ago, Brian did a Twitter
• 1:31:06
  Speaker 3: space and the guy who one of the guys who
• 1:31:09
  Speaker 3: was talking was talking about how women have no interest
• 1:31:14
  Speaker 3: in men, and I'm like, well, maybe we could get
• 1:31:18
  Speaker 3: rid of feminism. I know, that's like almost maybe it's
• 1:31:21
  Speaker 3: not impossible once we figure out that it's an existential crisis,
• 1:31:25
  Speaker 3: like feminism is pushing our entire society towards the brink
• 1:31:29
  Speaker 3: of absolute destruction in multiple factors, not just because of
• 1:31:33
  Speaker 3: men and women, but also because of its influence on commodities,
• 1:31:36
  Speaker 3: markets and production generally. That's punishing us to the brink
• 1:31:40
  Speaker 3: of destruction. And maybe we'll wake up and be like, oh,
• 1:31:44
  Speaker 3: we shouldn't do that any further. And then if we
• 1:31:47
  Speaker 3: directly start challenging it. Maybe we'll see a difference in
• 1:31:51
  Speaker 3: how much women actually like men once we get rid
• 1:31:53
  Speaker 3: of feminism constantly undercutting men as women's partners and as
• 1:32:00
  Speaker 3: value in and of themselves. Like, if we could just
• 1:32:03
  Speaker 3: try it for a bit and see what happens, Because
• 1:32:06
  Speaker 3: if I were to predict something, then I would predict
• 1:32:09
  Speaker 3: that if you get rid of that, women's desire for
• 1:32:14
  Speaker 3: men might recover along additional channels than just resources. But
• 1:32:20
  Speaker 3: I could be wrong as well, because I mean, again,
• 1:32:25
  Speaker 3: if you go back far enough, women are also producing
• 1:32:29
  Speaker 3: to survive that They're not lazy in hunter gatherer cultures,
• 1:32:34
  Speaker 3: they're not lazy in peasant cultures. They're not even lazy
• 1:32:38
  Speaker 3: in the beginning of industrial cultures. They only start to
• 1:32:42
  Speaker 3: have this sort of like associating lascissitude sloth with women
• 1:32:53
  Speaker 3: in the fifties with the rise of the homemaker nonsense.
• 1:32:57
  Speaker 3: So there you go, like that's something to consider, Okay, okay, okay, Yeah, So.
• 1:33:12
  Speaker 4: One thing you've got to defeat, not only on that ground,
• 1:33:15
  Speaker 4: is of feminism regarding the destruction for hunit like that,
• 1:33:18
  Speaker 4: but you also now have to start defeating the trad
• 1:33:21
  Speaker 4: cons because unfortunately and the number of times I've watched
• 1:33:26
  Speaker 4: any sort of conservative or anything like that and they
• 1:33:28
  Speaker 4: start talking about this, It's like, I want to go
• 1:33:30
  Speaker 4: out and work and have my woman at home. Okay,
• 1:33:33
  Speaker 4: that's not tradition. That's you literally buying into this fairy
• 1:33:38
  Speaker 4: tale paradigm of modernity. You're not You're not being in
• 1:33:43
  Speaker 4: any way traditional for that. So this is why, you know,
• 1:33:46
  Speaker 4: there's sort of the observation the trad cons or the
• 1:33:50
  Speaker 4: trad cuts. I should stop calling them that, but I
• 1:33:53
  Speaker 4: really struggle with it because of how they behave as
• 1:33:56
  Speaker 4: they are just feminism in another form they believe.
• 1:34:02
  Speaker 2: Years ago or something.
• 1:34:03
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 1:34:03
  Speaker 4: Yeah, Also, there is a major problem regarding feminism and
• 1:34:07
  Speaker 4: their ability to predict and well just formulate marriages in general.
• 1:34:11
  Speaker 4: You may remember in many many centuries were not centuries
• 1:34:15
  Speaker 4: decades past. One of the big things that feminists predicted
• 1:34:20
  Speaker 4: when they said, oh, if we are able to get
• 1:34:23
  Speaker 4: women free of material dependence on men, you're not going
• 1:34:29
  Speaker 4: to see marriages being undertaken for economic reasons, which is
• 1:34:32
  Speaker 4: what is happening now. All women need to be attached
• 1:34:35
  Speaker 4: to men in order to life. They the feminist position was,
• 1:34:38
  Speaker 4: once women are free, you will start seeing more marriages, relationships,
• 1:34:44
  Speaker 4: cohabitations around that based on actual love, based on actually
• 1:34:49
  Speaker 4: wanting to be with people, because there is no economic
• 1:34:53
  Speaker 4: benefit to it. And of course what happened was the
• 1:34:57
  Speaker 4: exact opposite got freed from all of these reliances. On
• 1:35:03
  Speaker 4: meant when I say that is, given the how the
• 1:35:07
  Speaker 4: welfare state goes and who is paying on average about
• 1:35:12
  Speaker 4: two thirds to three quarters of the taxes being men, Well, yeah,
• 1:35:16
  Speaker 4: we can see how that ended up happening. You know,
• 1:35:19
  Speaker 4: it's still provision, it's just done via the state instead
• 1:35:22
  Speaker 4: of an individual guy. That didn't happen. And we all know,
• 1:35:29
  Speaker 4: of course that this is basically something that seems to
• 1:35:31
  Speaker 4: have just been uncovered as a result of removing that,
• 1:35:37
  Speaker 4: and it does also I want sort of go back
• 1:35:39
  Speaker 4: a little bit point to some sort of underlying behavior
• 1:35:41
  Speaker 4: on the part of men and on the part of women.
• 1:35:44
  Speaker 4: When I mentioned earlier about like the resource provision that
• 1:35:47
  Speaker 4: women prefer in those things which have been studied. Another
• 1:35:50
  Speaker 4: excellent way of just looking at the self reports of
• 1:35:52
  Speaker 4: women is what do they actually do, like, what are
• 1:35:55
  Speaker 4: they self reporting? Well, look at the icklists that they publish.
• 1:35:59
  Speaker 4: Another slight more objective one is when you give them
• 1:36:02
  Speaker 4: things like dating apps. I don't particularly like dating apps,
• 1:36:04
  Speaker 4: but they are unfortunately a good thing of just actually
• 1:36:08
  Speaker 4: looking at how people behave what they pick. Well, what
• 1:36:11
  Speaker 4: a hype what does what does a hype filter show you? Well,
• 1:36:15
  Speaker 4: it's it's six foot and then it's a massive drop off.
• 1:36:19
  Speaker 4: What is the requirement for income? You know, it's six
• 1:36:22
  Speaker 4: figures and then there's a massive drop off if it
• 1:36:25
  Speaker 4: goes down to five. You know, this is what people
• 1:36:28
  Speaker 4: are saying, you know, this is what I want, but
• 1:36:30
  Speaker 4: it's literally self reporting. So what what feminism promised decades
• 1:36:36
  Speaker 4: ago did not come to pass. What actually happened was
• 1:36:40
  Speaker 4: the opposite. They predicted relationships of love because of economic freedom.
• 1:36:46
  Speaker 4: That didn't happen. Relationships became even more economically mercenary, which
• 1:36:51
  Speaker 4: again speaks to the predictive validity of this model.
• 1:36:57
  Speaker 3: But however, you could look at it this other The
• 1:37:03
  Speaker 3: people who said they wanted to destroy the pair bond
• 1:37:07
  Speaker 3: lied to men about what was going to happen in
• 1:37:13
  Speaker 3: order to get them on board, and they knew that
• 1:37:19
  Speaker 3: this was going to be the result. They knew that
• 1:37:23
  Speaker 3: this would destroy human pair bonding. Because the thing is
• 1:37:27
  Speaker 3: that they didn't just challenge women's economic contributions, which is
• 1:37:33
  Speaker 3: absolutely ridiculous. Women always contributed economically throughout all of human
• 1:37:38
  Speaker 3: history until those periods of times where they switched to
• 1:37:41
  Speaker 3: being consumers because of the surplus that industrialization created and
• 1:37:49
  Speaker 3: they wanted to distribute the surplus. But like, aside from that,
• 1:37:55
  Speaker 3: women have always been productive and honestly, Proverbs thirty one
• 1:37:59
  Speaker 3: specifically said, the godly woman does not have idle hands.
• 1:38:05
  Speaker 3: I guess Christians don't really or at least the the
• 1:38:09
  Speaker 3: ones you're talking about, Tilder, don't really read that or
• 1:38:13
  Speaker 3: internalize it.
• 1:38:14
  Speaker 1: But they buy into like the posts like you, like
• 1:38:17
  Speaker 1: you said, the modern Chiveric romantic model of relationships and marriage.
• 1:38:23
  Speaker 1: So they that's where they get that I'm going to
• 1:38:25
  Speaker 1: work and she's not.
• 1:38:26
  Speaker 2: Gonna have to kind of thing. And even a lot
• 1:38:28
  Speaker 2: of so called red pill guys do that too.
• 1:38:30
  Speaker 1: A lot of these manisphere guys they buy into the
• 1:38:32
  Speaker 1: same bullshit narrative.
• 1:38:36
  Speaker 3: Yeah, but in addition to pursuing this so called economic
• 1:38:41
  Speaker 3: new economic freedom, which it wasn't or economic expect well,
• 1:38:46
  Speaker 3: it wasn't economic expectations because I guess the difference is
• 1:38:49
  Speaker 3: in the past, women were expected to be their economic
• 1:38:54
  Speaker 3: activities were expected to be in the context of a family,
• 1:38:57
  Speaker 3: whereas now women are freed to have jobs that don't
• 1:39:03
  Speaker 3: support families and to just support themselves, and we congratulate
• 1:39:08
  Speaker 3: this as if it's a great accomplishment, and that would
• 1:39:12
  Speaker 3: never have been congratulated in any period of time. But anyway,
• 1:39:17
  Speaker 3: my point is that not only did feminists pursue this,
• 1:39:21
  Speaker 3: which again wasn't particularly new, but whatever they pursued, all
• 1:39:26
  Speaker 3: of this crap about men, all of this lying about
• 1:39:30
  Speaker 3: what men are and what they're worth, and all of
• 1:39:36
  Speaker 3: this marginalization of masculinity and attacking masculinity, And so the
• 1:39:44
  Speaker 3: fact that they lied to men about what they were
• 1:39:48
  Speaker 3: doing does not surprise me in the slightest. I have
• 1:39:54
  Speaker 3: the inverse of the surprise Pikachu face. I have the
• 1:39:58
  Speaker 3: non surprised Pikachu face, not that surprised. Okay, let's keep
• 1:40:05
  Speaker 3: keep okay.
• 1:40:09
  Speaker 1: Due to the focus on early human development, the few
• 1:40:12
  Speaker 1: strategies offered for creating change primarily concentrate on this period
• 1:40:17
  Speaker 1: and are reliant upon upon parents raising their children in
• 1:40:20
  Speaker 1: different ways. The theories that provide the foundation for a
• 1:40:24
  Speaker 1: large portion of this body of feminism rely on scholarship
• 1:40:27
  Speaker 1: by Freud and Lacan. While this classical body of work
• 1:40:30
  Speaker 1: is viable in that it illustrates that masculinity and femininity
• 1:40:34
  Speaker 1: are achieved and that women have sexual desires and needs,
• 1:40:38
  Speaker 1: many of these theories are also misogynistic and place men
• 1:40:42
  Speaker 1: in positions of superiority over women.
• 1:40:45
  Speaker 2: Oh God, So.
• 1:40:47
  Speaker 1: Freud Lacan's work is basically what we're going to rely on.
• 1:40:50
  Speaker 1: But it's kind of problematic too because it puts like,
• 1:40:55
  Speaker 1: basically the framework of men oppress women all also necessitates
• 1:41:01
  Speaker 1: that men be superior in some way otherwise how could
• 1:41:04
  Speaker 1: they oppress them? And therefore it's misogynistic because it's be
• 1:41:08
  Speaker 1: my god. Okay. Some question the use of basing psychoanalytic
• 1:41:13
  Speaker 1: feminism on theories created by men, particularly since they are
• 1:41:17
  Speaker 1: often presented as truth claims and cures for those who
• 1:41:20
  Speaker 1: are subject to psychoanalysis.
• 1:41:23
  Speaker 2: Okay, can we this prayer? Okay this sentence? All right,
• 1:41:26
  Speaker 2: listen again.
• 1:41:27
  Speaker 1: Some question the use of basing psychoanalytic feminism on theories
• 1:41:31
  Speaker 1: created by men. So just the fact that men even
• 1:41:34
  Speaker 1: did this work is a problem, and according to some
• 1:41:39
  Speaker 1: and another thing is because so the problem is that
• 1:41:43
  Speaker 1: because it's created by men, they are often presented as
• 1:41:47
  Speaker 1: truth claims and cures for those who are subject to psychoanalysis.
• 1:41:53
  Speaker 1: So this is a little bit too a little bit
• 1:41:55
  Speaker 1: too objective in its claims when we should continue live
• 1:42:00
  Speaker 1: in the world of the subjective. So we don't like that.
• 1:42:04
  Speaker 2: We don't like that.
• 1:42:04
  Speaker 1: It's actually like like Freud was looking for answers. Even
• 1:42:08
  Speaker 1: though we like his baseline, we don't like the fact
• 1:42:12
  Speaker 1: that he's male, sad accident. And also the fact that
• 1:42:15
  Speaker 1: he actually made truth claims and provided solutions for those
• 1:42:20
  Speaker 1: who are subject or cures for those who are even
• 1:42:23
  Speaker 1: if you disagree with that, the fact that that they
• 1:42:26
  Speaker 1: basically have a problem with the fact that men look
• 1:42:29
  Speaker 1: at the world in an objective way and only what
• 1:42:32
  Speaker 1: is measurable. And when they when they diagnose issues, they
• 1:42:39
  Speaker 1: make claims which they think are true, and then if
• 1:42:42
  Speaker 1: they if they can prove that they're true, like they
• 1:42:44
  Speaker 1: follow the scientific method. I guess I don't think Freud did,
• 1:42:46
  Speaker 1: but you know, and then they look for solutions. All
• 1:42:50
  Speaker 1: of these things are bad, apparently, you see. Additionally, women's
• 1:42:55
  Speaker 1: opinions see yeah, because it's not women's opinions exactly, Ryan.
• 1:43:02
  Speaker 3: The struggle session must continue and be eternal. Yeah, and
• 1:43:09
  Speaker 3: you know, I could actually I could actually get into
• 1:43:13
  Speaker 3: this on the level of literature analysis and how women
• 1:43:17
  Speaker 3: when they write, they are always decoding a social web
• 1:43:21
  Speaker 3: and the process never stops. We could like the process
• 1:43:26
  Speaker 3: of metabolizing whose positioned relative to who, who feels what
• 1:43:31
  Speaker 3: about who, who's lying about what? It never stops to
• 1:43:36
  Speaker 3: the point where an action is formed and performed. It's
• 1:43:41
  Speaker 3: always continuous analysis. And I'll just leave it as an
• 1:43:46
  Speaker 3: exercise to the viewer. What continuous deconstruction of the social
• 1:43:52
  Speaker 3: web resembles continuous deconstruction of everything in terms of latent
• 1:44:00
  Speaker 3: meaning everywhere, forever, And at no point do you stop
• 1:44:05
  Speaker 3: the process to actually do something that creates an effect
• 1:44:10
  Speaker 3: in the greater world outside of genocide. Okay, I'll step
• 1:44:17
  Speaker 3: off mine, let's.
• 1:44:18
  Speaker 4: Get it on.
• 1:44:21
  Speaker 1: Additionally, psychological theory interpreted the feminine experience largely in relation
• 1:44:26
  Speaker 1: to masculinity, which is one of the critiques of science
• 1:44:30
  Speaker 1: and knowledge offered by psychoanalytic feminism.
• 1:44:33
  Speaker 2: So you know it should be it.
• 1:44:34
  Speaker 1: I guess we have to like interpret the feminine experience
• 1:44:38
  Speaker 1: in a vacuum. While there is an acknowledgment of the
• 1:44:42
  Speaker 1: need to change dualistic thinking. By framing the examination of
• 1:44:45
  Speaker 1: women's subordination on the differences between genders, the either or
• 1:44:49
  Speaker 1: split that is being challenged by psychoanalytic feminism is actually
• 1:44:53
  Speaker 1: being revit reifiedfi. Yeah, women are assumed to now actually
• 1:45:00
  Speaker 1: want to have and raise children, and men are assumed
• 1:45:03
  Speaker 1: to be satisfied being away from their families, both physically
• 1:45:06
  Speaker 1: and emotionally. But that's not true, Like men want to
• 1:45:09
  Speaker 1: be with their families, but they never mind. How about
• 1:45:12
  Speaker 1: a man on a farm. What about those people? They're
• 1:45:15
  Speaker 1: with their kids.
• 1:45:15
  Speaker 2: All the time. I guess they only think of it
• 1:45:17
  Speaker 2: if you live in like an industrialized city or something.
• 1:45:21
  Speaker 3: Yeah, well that's that's another thing that's a product of industrialization.
• 1:45:25
  Speaker 3: Like can't she separate that Before industrialization, men were constantly
• 1:45:30
  Speaker 3: with their kids, like the.
• 1:45:34
  Speaker 2: Only yeah, the people.
• 1:45:35
  Speaker 1: But the thing is, it's not even like a thing
• 1:45:38
  Speaker 1: that is post industrial Like there are people on farms
• 1:45:42
  Speaker 1: today right now that are like working together and there
• 1:45:46
  Speaker 1: and there or or even not even then, like like
• 1:45:49
  Speaker 1: you know, people in communities where the father works close
• 1:45:53
  Speaker 1: to his family. So it's not even really like gone,
• 1:45:57
  Speaker 1: it's I mean definitely, it's it's more you know, like
• 1:46:00
  Speaker 1: in the in the.
• 1:46:01
  Speaker 2: Rural areas as opposed to the urban areas.
• 1:46:03
  Speaker 1: But but I mean they're acting like there are no
• 1:46:06
  Speaker 1: rural areas, like those places don't exist, even though literally
• 1:46:09
  Speaker 1: they're part of this invisible backbone of our civilization that
• 1:46:14
  Speaker 1: feminists ignore constantly. Like you, you are always talking about alice,
• 1:46:17
  Speaker 1: and like the the base production, the production of the
• 1:46:22
  Speaker 1: things that you know are essentially the let's say, upstream
• 1:46:27
  Speaker 1: from all of the stuff that feminists complain about, you know,
• 1:46:31
  Speaker 1: like sexist their conditioning or whatever, and or like not
• 1:46:35
  Speaker 1: like not having equal pay at like some made up
• 1:46:37
  Speaker 1: you know, daytime daycare, you know, adult daycare job at Google,
• 1:46:43
  Speaker 1: where none of that is even possible if they're not
• 1:46:45
  Speaker 1: getting like raw materials and fossil fuels and lumber and.
• 1:46:50
  Speaker 2: Things and and stuff from farms like food and grain.
• 1:46:55
  Speaker 1: Right, yes, resource extreme is the foundation of the What
• 1:47:00
  Speaker 1: the hell my phone just started talking to me? Okay,
• 1:47:05
  Speaker 1: it agreed, but yeah, out of the blue, my phone
• 1:47:07
  Speaker 1: just started talking. Yeah anyway, Well because it's an objective answer,
• 1:47:17
  Speaker 1: of course it's male.
• 1:47:18
  Speaker 3: Of course, it's all right, let's keep going anyway.
• 1:47:23
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I got a super I got another super chow.
• 1:47:26
  Speaker 1: So great Indoors gives us five dollars and says Teal Deer. Now,
• 1:47:30
  Speaker 1: I'm not saying she's a gold digger, but she ain't
• 1:47:33
  Speaker 1: dealing with a social scientist who thinks his own perception
• 1:47:36
  Speaker 1: speaks louder than facts.
• 1:47:38
  Speaker 2: Citation needed. Thank you, that was a he's That was
• 1:47:42
  Speaker 2: a Kanye song. You guys remember that. Can't take my
• 1:47:45
  Speaker 2: money what I'm in need?
• 1:47:49
  Speaker 3: All right?
• 1:47:49
  Speaker 1: Anyway, Yes, he knew what gold diggers were, So anyway,
• 1:47:54
  Speaker 1: there is no accounting for ambiguity in gender, or that
• 1:47:57
  Speaker 1: sexuality and sexual differences are not in as necessarily related
• 1:48:00
  Speaker 1: to gender. Within this type of feminism, there is no
• 1:48:04
  Speaker 1: space for his sexuality other than heterosexuality. Other assumptions, including
• 1:48:08
  Speaker 1: those of race, ethnicity, class, nation, status, ability, and other
• 1:48:12
  Speaker 1: issues that affect family, structured childhood, and parenting also largely
• 1:48:16
  Speaker 1: remain unacknowledged and unexamined. So now we're getting into the intersections.
• 1:48:20
  Speaker 2: Of course, we are right.
• 1:48:22
  Speaker 4: The problem with Fright is he didn't go far enough. Yeah,
• 1:48:27
  Speaker 4: this is what is Oh, look at all the disagreement
• 1:48:29
  Speaker 4: in feminist scholarship. Yeah, the disagreement is you saying everyone
• 1:48:32
  Speaker 4: wasn't radical enough. Yes, there's never a disagreement that's, hey,
• 1:48:37
  Speaker 4: maybe we're wrong, maybe we've gone too far. No, it's
• 1:48:39
  Speaker 4: always we need to march further and faster into that
• 1:48:43
  Speaker 4: end of history. Let's go. Everything has to be deconstructed, everything,
• 1:48:49
  Speaker 4: nothing shall remain in any sort of piece.
• 1:48:52
  Speaker 2: Yep, it's true.
• 1:48:56
  Speaker 1: Also, by primarily placing the focus of change on individuals,
• 1:49:00
  Speaker 1: either in the realm of parenting or in that of
• 1:49:02
  Speaker 1: creating knowledge, larger societal institutions and systems that create, produce,
• 1:49:07
  Speaker 1: and reproduce oppression continue without question.
• 1:49:11
  Speaker 4: There are scholars within such what was that destroy society?
• 1:49:15
  Speaker 2: Yep, tear it all down?
• 1:49:18
  Speaker 1: There are scholars within psychoanalytic feminism who are actively working
• 1:49:22
  Speaker 1: to answer these critiques and therefore expand this body of feminism.
• 1:49:25
  Speaker 1: This includes integrating concepts of gender that are more fluid, ambiguous,
• 1:49:29
  Speaker 1: and expansive.
• 1:49:31
  Speaker 2: Through through the what.
• 1:49:35
  Speaker 1: Not just destroy society, but destroyed like basically are our
• 1:49:39
  Speaker 1: biology or at least try to.
• 1:49:42
  Speaker 2: I mean they are kind of Remember when they said
• 1:49:44
  Speaker 2: they weren't transing the kids and that wasn't happening anyway.
• 1:49:49
  Speaker 1: There are scholars within psychoanalytic feminism who are actively working
• 1:49:53
  Speaker 1: to answer these critiques and therefore expand this body of feminism.
• 1:49:56
  Speaker 1: This includes integrating concepts of gender that are more fluid, ambiguous,
• 1:49:59
  Speaker 1: and expansive through the incorporations of postmodernist perspective foolish modernism.
• 1:50:06
  Speaker 1: Understandings of gender, particularly female are no longer defined in
• 1:50:10
  Speaker 1: relationship to and from what is male, So they're okay,
• 1:50:16
  Speaker 1: So they want to they want to bring in postmodernism
• 1:50:20
  Speaker 1: to understand gender, but particularly the female gender.
• 1:50:25
  Speaker 2: I think I'm gonna make.
• 1:50:26
  Speaker 1: A video about words I refuse to use, and I
• 1:50:29
  Speaker 1: do one about gender because it's not a It's not
• 1:50:33
  Speaker 1: a thing that's made up. By widening the approach of
• 1:50:36
  Speaker 1: beyond beyond dualistic definitions and assumptions of gender and sexuality,
• 1:50:40
  Speaker 1: this work seeks to encompass the influence of history, politics,
• 1:50:44
  Speaker 1: and cultural influences shaping understandings and experiences of gender and
• 1:50:49
  Speaker 1: women's multiple locations in society. Isn't it weird that they
• 1:50:52
  Speaker 1: talk about gender like it's fluid, but women are totally real,
• 1:50:55
  Speaker 1: They totally exist.
• 1:50:56
  Speaker 2: Women is real. Everything else is not.
• 1:51:02
  Speaker 1: That's it, Alison. See also cultural feminism, feminism in sociology, Freud,
• 1:51:08
  Speaker 1: Sigmund Lacan Jacques, patriarchy, postmodern feminism, psychoanalysis.
• 1:51:14
  Speaker 4: Okay, yeah, Well, the thing is that this is a
• 1:51:17
  Speaker 4: couple of decades old, so obviously we can see where
• 1:51:21
  Speaker 4: this has gone into the modern realms of intersectionality, where
• 1:51:26
  Speaker 4: all of this stuff no longer exists. Everything has to
• 1:51:29
  Speaker 4: be fluid. You know, there's no such thing as you know,
• 1:51:32
  Speaker 4: straight gay anything that everything has to be queer. Everything
• 1:51:36
  Speaker 4: is non binary now, which just encompasses anything and everything necessarily,
• 1:51:42
  Speaker 4: it's anything that just is not one of those two things.
• 1:51:46
  Speaker 4: The expansion has happened, the fluidity has happened, the ambiguity
• 1:51:50
  Speaker 4: has happened. We are now seeing the fruits of this
• 1:51:54
  Speaker 4: particular seed.
• 1:51:57
  Speaker 1: Yep, yep, different I'm sorry and go ahead.
• 1:52:06
  Speaker 3: Yeah, what a bunch of bullshit we just listened to.
• 1:52:11
  Speaker 3: Like I'm actually pretty good at finding patterns and deconstructing
• 1:52:15
  Speaker 3: things down through there. It's like a fundamental substrate, and
• 1:52:19
  Speaker 3: I'm trying to deconstruct this, and it's just more shit
• 1:52:21
  Speaker 3: all the way down, Like it's not turtles all the
• 1:52:25
  Speaker 3: way down, and it's turtle shit all the way down.
• 1:52:31
  Speaker 3: There's no substance here except the framework is. Of course,
• 1:52:37
  Speaker 3: she's making mouth noises that make men do stuff. But
• 1:52:43
  Speaker 3: The problem is that the fact that men do stuff
• 1:52:48
  Speaker 3: because a woman makes mouth noises is the most solid
• 1:52:54
  Speaker 3: counter argument to everything she's claiming here. This woman wouldn't
• 1:52:59
  Speaker 3: exist in the society she says men made, not not
• 1:53:05
  Speaker 3: just because she wouldn't be able to think. She might
• 1:53:06
  Speaker 3: be able to think this stuff, but she would never
• 1:53:08
  Speaker 3: be given a platform for it. She would know one
• 1:53:13
  Speaker 3: would pay for it. She would just be screaming into
• 1:53:17
  Speaker 3: a paper bag in the back of a looney bim,
• 1:53:22
  Speaker 3: which honestly, really is what should have happened, all right,
• 1:53:28
  Speaker 3: so that we got through it, guys, Yeah, did I know.
• 1:53:32
  Speaker 2: I'm kind of surprised.
• 1:53:35
  Speaker 3: I didn't die in the process. Yeah, final words anyway,
• 1:53:41
  Speaker 3: I mean, I could still go through the fact that
• 1:53:47
  Speaker 3: men and women exist. Though my literature analysis has pretty
• 1:53:52
  Speaker 3: much proven I mean it hasn't like I haven't published it.
• 1:53:55
  Speaker 3: It isn't pure reviewed, but so far it's it's it's
• 1:53:59
  Speaker 3: pretty much capable of classifying any author blind into a
• 1:54:06
  Speaker 3: male or female camp based on what they choose to
• 1:54:09
  Speaker 3: attend to, which means that there are significant cognitive differences
• 1:54:13
  Speaker 3: between men and women. And that makes perfect sense because
• 1:54:17
  Speaker 3: those significant cognitive differences rest on significantly different endocrine architectures
• 1:54:26
  Speaker 3: that nevertheless are compatible and evolved to work together to
• 1:54:33
  Speaker 3: produce children. What a surprise, Hey, everybody, humans pair, bond
• 1:54:37
  Speaker 3: and produce children. You heard it here first man, I'm
• 1:54:41
  Speaker 3: going to patent that. Okay, So that's pretty much all
• 1:54:48
  Speaker 3: I have to say, unless Tieldeer wants to say anything further.
• 1:54:52
  Speaker 4: My final thought on this is, once again I'm just
• 1:54:55
  Speaker 4: going to highlight. This is from the Black Roll Encyclopedia
• 1:54:58
  Speaker 4: of Sociology, published in two thousand and seven. Of course,
• 1:55:01
  Speaker 4: the reason that I'm going back through all these things
• 1:55:03
  Speaker 4: is pointing out to people the history of this movement.
• 1:55:06
  Speaker 4: As I said, we are seeing the fruits of this
• 1:55:08
  Speaker 4: particular seed that was planted twenty years ago. Of course,
• 1:55:11
  Speaker 4: the research that this is based on it's older than that,
• 1:55:14
  Speaker 4: from the eighties and the nineties. This stuff was always there.
• 1:55:19
  Speaker 4: People who like to do the old feminism is going
• 1:55:22
  Speaker 4: too far. It's just no, it hasn't gone off the
• 1:55:25
  Speaker 4: rails in the last handful of years. It was always
• 1:55:28
  Speaker 4: off the rails. It was always going to be off
• 1:55:30
  Speaker 4: the rails. And the other reason that I like to
• 1:55:33
  Speaker 4: highlight these things is again, this is an encyclopedia. You
• 1:55:39
  Speaker 4: know those things though, those books that take up an
• 1:55:41
  Speaker 4: entire shelf in a library, something like that, those things
• 1:55:45
  Speaker 4: that are published as being is generally considered to be
• 1:55:50
  Speaker 4: like the gold standard of authority on any particular subject,
• 1:55:55
  Speaker 4: anything like that, Like I'm sure everyone's familiar with, like
• 1:55:57
  Speaker 4: the Encyclopedia Britannica. That's basically like, oh, the gold standard
• 1:56:01
  Speaker 4: of anything. If it's in there, it's true. Pretty much,
• 1:56:05
  Speaker 4: this sort of thing is basically being put in sort
• 1:56:07
  Speaker 4: of a similar category. This is encyclopedic knowledge. This has
• 1:56:10
  Speaker 4: just been put in there as true. So this stuff
• 1:56:16
  Speaker 4: is being taught to people as true, which is then
• 1:56:20
  Speaker 4: perhaps no surprise why these sorts of things have the
• 1:56:23
  Speaker 4: impact that they have. It's been it's a long running thing. Unfortunately,
• 1:56:31
  Speaker 4: I hate kind of using the same bars, words and
• 1:56:33
  Speaker 4: phrases over and over again. But it's true. When you
• 1:56:36
  Speaker 4: deal with academia and things like this, you are dealing
• 1:56:39
  Speaker 4: fundamentally with captured institutions. They are very homodox in their thinking.
• 1:56:45
  Speaker 4: This stuff is the preferred narrative. If you challenge this
• 1:56:49
  Speaker 4: sort of thing, your research will not get anywhere. The
• 1:56:52
  Speaker 4: only way that you can sort of begin challenging some
• 1:56:55
  Speaker 4: of this stuff is by finding very heterodox institutions or
• 1:56:59
  Speaker 4: by going into basically sort of the subjects that these
• 1:57:03
  Speaker 4: people could not fight, where you are looking at things
• 1:57:07
  Speaker 4: like sociobiology, biopsychology, things like that, where you actually begin
• 1:57:12
  Speaker 4: to sort of undermine these ideas on those basal metabolic levels,
• 1:57:17
  Speaker 4: because they couldn't take that on, which is why they've
• 1:57:20
  Speaker 4: spent this several decades building this borderline unassailable castle of
• 1:57:26
  Speaker 4: this because of course, if you point out them that
• 1:57:30
  Speaker 4: something that there is wrong, or even if you just
• 1:57:32
  Speaker 4: question they you get to point at an encyclopedia. They
• 1:57:36
  Speaker 4: get to point at a shelf of encyclopedia and say
• 1:57:41
  Speaker 4: it's in there to invalidate you and your questions and
• 1:57:45
  Speaker 4: anything like that, and that is a very powerful societal
• 1:57:49
  Speaker 4: weapon because unfortunately appeals to authority work. There is a
• 1:57:54
  Speaker 4: lot of dismantling that you need to do if you
• 1:57:57
  Speaker 4: want to fight this, and you have to mantle at
• 1:58:02
  Speaker 4: the very least decades because I'm you know of the
• 1:58:06
  Speaker 4: mind that there is this theological underpinning to feminism, because
• 1:58:09
  Speaker 4: you're going back to the spiritualists, all of whom coincidentally
• 1:58:14
  Speaker 4: bunch of them happen to be Fabian socialists as well,
• 1:58:17
  Speaker 4: back in the eighteen hundreds. I am of the opinion
• 1:58:20
  Speaker 4: that it's two hundreds, two hundred and fifty years in
• 1:58:23
  Speaker 4: the making, But I don't know. I guess I'm just
• 1:58:27
  Speaker 4: making the problem look infinitely bigger than it actually is.
• 1:58:30
  Speaker 4: And maybe that'll put some people off. If I actually
• 1:58:33
  Speaker 4: keep telling them that too much, they might go, oh
• 1:58:35
  Speaker 4: my god, we can't do anything. But it just sort
• 1:58:37
  Speaker 4: of gives you the scale of what you're up against
• 1:58:40
  Speaker 4: when you want to demonstrate how and why this stuff
• 1:58:43
  Speaker 4: is wrong. It's another reason why I go through papers
• 1:58:45
  Speaker 4: like this. You know why I go through their incycopedia,
• 1:58:47
  Speaker 4: Why I've got tax of feminist textbooks behind me which
• 1:58:50
  Speaker 4: I want us to go through in varying degrees, just
• 1:58:55
  Speaker 4: in general, because I think it's very useful only just
• 1:59:00
  Speaker 4: for the audience, but for the panelists as well, because
• 1:59:04
  Speaker 4: it expands what we're familiar with with feminist theory. There's
• 1:59:07
  Speaker 4: always additional insanity that you can cram into your brain
• 1:59:10
  Speaker 4: about this topic. But it also it just gives you
• 1:59:13
  Speaker 4: more and more references when people when they try to
• 1:59:16
  Speaker 4: pull the nonsense that that's not what feminism is, it's
• 1:59:19
  Speaker 4: not my movement, this is not representative of anything like that.
• 1:59:22
  Speaker 4: You get to throw their own scholarship at them, and
• 1:59:24
  Speaker 4: then you have to, you know, watch the inkjet dance
• 1:59:29
  Speaker 4: that they do to try to deny their own canon
• 1:59:33
  Speaker 4: of literature because they find that one of their positions
• 1:59:36
  Speaker 4: becomes untenable, so then they go on to something else.
• 1:59:40
  Speaker 4: It's oh, is it's not patriarchy to capitalism? Capitalism? Did
• 1:59:44
  Speaker 4: they know it's actually racism? That's let's premacy that they'll
• 1:59:47
  Speaker 4: you know, they just pick up the goalposts and sprint
• 1:59:49
  Speaker 4: around them.
• 1:59:50
  Speaker 5: All.
• 1:59:51
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 1:59:52
  Speaker 4: To me, this is just my mental image of trying
• 1:59:55
  Speaker 4: to deal with feminist is just them with a pair
• 1:59:59
  Speaker 4: of gold on their back, just just around a football
• 2:00:03
  Speaker 4: pitch and you're just standing just staring at them holding
• 2:00:07
  Speaker 4: a book, and it's like, but here, this.
• 2:00:11
  Speaker 3: And that.
• 2:00:12
  Speaker 4: That's how that's how it goes. Unfortunately, there's a lot
• 2:00:14
  Speaker 4: of stuff that you need to know and learn to
• 2:00:18
  Speaker 4: fight this stuff. You're going up against decades of entriest
• 2:00:23
  Speaker 4: nonsense because that's how they've done it. One person gets
• 2:00:27
  Speaker 4: in people who don't know what entryism is. Entryism is
• 2:00:30
  Speaker 4: a communist, Marxist strategy of seizing institutions. One person gets
• 2:00:35
  Speaker 4: in and then they basically just say, oh, you're you're
• 2:00:38
  Speaker 4: saying the right things, I'll let you in. And that's
• 2:00:40
  Speaker 4: the reason why I referenced that peer review drama before
• 2:00:46
  Speaker 4: at the beginning where the where one of the peers
• 2:00:49
  Speaker 4: just said women are and the study and this you
• 2:00:52
  Speaker 4: cannot tell me otherwise. That's an example of entryism. Well,
• 2:00:57
  Speaker 4: it's the gatekeeping side of entryism. It's the you're saying
• 2:01:00
  Speaker 4: the wrong things, you're not going to get in. But
• 2:01:02
  Speaker 4: if someone says women are understudied, come on board, my friend, welcome.
• 2:01:06
  Speaker 4: I will peer review your stuff. And this is why
• 2:01:09
  Speaker 4: you have these borderline, unassailable mountains of feminist literature, of
• 2:01:16
  Speaker 4: feminist evidence that they think supports their stuff, but it doesn't.
• 2:01:20
  Speaker 4: But that's another problem. They can throw seemingly infinite citations,
• 2:01:24
  Speaker 4: seemingly infinite papers at you because they've had decades of
• 2:01:28
  Speaker 4: publishing this stuff with borderline Noah oversight.
• 2:01:34
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 2:01:34
  Speaker 1: I made a video about the five stages of entryism
• 2:01:38
  Speaker 1: on my gaming and culture channel, Honey Badger Arcade a
• 2:01:42
  Speaker 1: while ago, and I explain like how gamer gain happened,
• 2:01:47
  Speaker 1: you know, back back in the day, and basically how
• 2:01:50
  Speaker 1: this happens everywhere. I think me too, only if we're
• 2:01:55
  Speaker 1: just to talk about the sort of cultural institutions you
• 2:01:58
  Speaker 1: know what businesses, Hollywood, animation, gaming, whatever it is. And
• 2:02:04
  Speaker 1: they use the same tactics, so you know, and breathe,
• 2:02:07
  Speaker 1: the five and the five stages are first they join
• 2:02:10
  Speaker 1: and act like that they're part of your club. So, oh,
• 2:02:12
  Speaker 1: I like this stuff too. I'm a big old gamer,
• 2:02:15
  Speaker 1: you know. And of course the they welcome them in
• 2:02:17
  Speaker 1: because especially the sort of like nerdier like cultures, because
• 2:02:24
  Speaker 1: they they're looking for more acceptance. They want like to
• 2:02:27
  Speaker 1: be you know, seen as like I don't know, like
• 2:02:30
  Speaker 1: less unpalatable. And women have a really easy time getting
• 2:02:35
  Speaker 1: into those spaces because it's like, oh yeah, we really
• 2:02:37
  Speaker 1: want like female gamers, right, So first they get in
• 2:02:40
  Speaker 1: that way, then they start to recruit sympathizers from internal
• 2:02:45
  Speaker 1: factions or caucuses. They promote allies, and they start to
• 2:02:49
  Speaker 1: essentially criticize the space a little bit like, oh, isn't
• 2:02:53
  Speaker 1: a little bit sexist? Don't you think this could be different?
• 2:02:55
  Speaker 1: You know, how about this little tweak here? And of
• 2:02:57
  Speaker 1: course the usually these been the knee Oh yeah, we
• 2:03:02
  Speaker 1: want to be like inclusive, we don't want to exclude anybody, right,
• 2:03:05
  Speaker 1: then they exploit contradictions, amplify divisions like whatever it is,
• 2:03:11
  Speaker 1: obviously it's usually between men and women, like oh, this
• 2:03:13
  Speaker 1: place is not really safe for women or whatever. And
• 2:03:16
  Speaker 1: of course it never it never comes to people's mind
• 2:03:19
  Speaker 1: that like if they thought it was unsafe, then why
• 2:03:21
  Speaker 1: did they think it was cool in the first place.
• 2:03:23
  Speaker 1: But by that point, the people in that space, they're
• 2:03:26
  Speaker 1: not able to like fight that because they're already in there.
• 2:03:30
  Speaker 1: Right then they take control of they take some kind
• 2:03:34
  Speaker 1: of leadership position within it, like whatever they get into
• 2:03:37
  Speaker 1: the industry, they get some clout, they get some kind
• 2:03:41
  Speaker 1: of like social cachet, and then they basically kick everybody
• 2:03:45
  Speaker 1: else out and they take over. And that's how it
• 2:03:48
  Speaker 1: works at every level, from like little things like cobbies
• 2:03:53
  Speaker 1: to all the way up to governments and corporations. This
• 2:03:55
  Speaker 1: is what happened in Well. I mean, you can you
• 2:03:58
  Speaker 1: name it if you think it got pause. That's what
• 2:04:01
  Speaker 1: I mean when I say this is paused. What I
• 2:04:03
  Speaker 1: mean is a bunch of woke retarts took over, usually women,
• 2:04:07
  Speaker 1: and they basically just you know, control the space and
• 2:04:10
  Speaker 1: they usually run it into the ground after that because
• 2:04:12
  Speaker 1: they don't actually know how to run it. They don't
• 2:04:14
  Speaker 1: know what made it good. They just wanted to take over.
• 2:04:19
  Speaker 1: So yeah, this is just like I made a video
• 2:04:21
  Speaker 1: about it. I'm just saying the five stages of entryism.
• 2:04:26
  Speaker 3: This is why we all need to become machines.
• 2:04:29
  Speaker 1: Yeah yeah, okay, So I did get one more super
• 2:04:35
  Speaker 1: chow and then maybe I don't know if you want
• 2:04:37
  Speaker 1: to look at some see if you got any thank
• 2:04:39
  Speaker 1: yous to give or whatever. But Richard gave us five
• 2:04:42
  Speaker 1: dollars and says, is this the extended play on a
• 2:04:44
  Speaker 1: repeating loop of labor by Paris Polyima.
• 2:04:48
  Speaker 2: I don't get it.
• 2:04:49
  Speaker 1: Sounds like a reference inside joke or something.
• 2:04:52
  Speaker 3: Uh, yeah, you distracted me. I'm gonna blame you, Richard. No,
• 2:04:56
  Speaker 3: this is uh, this has been eternal. It's been eternally
• 2:05:00
  Speaker 3: by Carmila. And I'm not on loop. If I was
• 2:05:03
  Speaker 3: on loop, I wouldn't fail. Okay, I'll go check to
• 2:05:06
  Speaker 3: see if we have any any thank yous to give.
• 2:05:12
  Speaker 3: I'm gonna have to work on that one. I'm not
• 2:05:14
  Speaker 3: able to get through it. Yeah, and if you would
• 2:05:19
  Speaker 3: like to support us, feedbadgery dot com slash support. If
• 2:05:22
  Speaker 3: you do it now, I can do a shout out.
• 2:05:25
  Speaker 3: Oh prior to the show, a shout out to okay
• 2:05:29
  Speaker 3: FS for two hundred and fifty, So thank you, okay.
• 2:05:31
  Speaker 2: F S, thank you.
• 2:05:33
  Speaker 3: Yeah, woman, I feel called out. I feel I don't
• 2:05:41
  Speaker 3: feel called out. All right, okay, just a sec I
• 2:05:45
  Speaker 3: gotta check if this individual wants me to use a name.
• 2:05:51
  Speaker 3: So I gotta open up the dashboard, which is always
• 2:05:56
  Speaker 3: always a trial. It's like an obstacle course. Okay, so, uh,
• 2:06:04
  Speaker 3: thank you to see where are you lab top, labtop,
• 2:06:15
  Speaker 3: Thank you to lab note.
• 2:06:16
  Speaker 2: No no, no that's not laptop laptop.
• 2:06:21
  Speaker 3: Oh yeah, no, no, no, no that was not correct.
• 2:06:24
  Speaker 3: Thank you to Brett Brett for fifty dollars. Thank you Brett.
• 2:06:29
  Speaker 2: All right, thank you Brett. I will eat your ash.
• 2:06:34
  Speaker 3: Now. He's never going to donate again.
• 2:06:39
  Speaker 4: Oh will he donate more?
• 2:06:42
  Speaker 2: Yeah?
• 2:06:45
  Speaker 3: All right, so again, feed the Badger dot com slash
• 2:06:48
  Speaker 3: support to help us out for the month. And if
• 2:06:51
  Speaker 3: any point after the show is over, you want to
• 2:06:53
  Speaker 3: send us a message, you tip With that message, feed
• 2:06:55
  Speaker 3: the Badger dot com slash just the tip, and.
• 2:07:01
  Speaker 2: Yeah, do you want to do another thing? Tell you
• 2:07:04
  Speaker 2: like a different paper or do you need to rest
• 2:07:06
  Speaker 2: your soul?
• 2:07:09
  Speaker 4: Yes, but yes, I do think that the Theorizing Patriarchy
• 2:07:15
  Speaker 4: book is worth a look, especially the epistemology section. The
• 2:07:19
  Speaker 4: introduction isn't too long. The epistemology section, I think is
• 2:07:22
  Speaker 4: only like a couple of pages, a couple of a
• 2:07:26
  Speaker 4: couple of a four pages something like that. I think
• 2:07:28
  Speaker 4: that that is a good one just because it does
• 2:07:31
  Speaker 4: the here is what I am going to define patriarchy
• 2:07:35
  Speaker 4: as thing. It also points more to the just was
• 2:07:41
  Speaker 4: some of the origins of thought for it.
• 2:07:42
  Speaker 2: And yeah, watch the thing about triple systems theory that
• 2:07:46
  Speaker 2: you sent me.
• 2:07:47
  Speaker 4: Yeah, that was another one to look at as well,
• 2:07:50
  Speaker 4: because that is kind of another the dual and triple
• 2:07:53
  Speaker 4: system theory stuff, which is covered a bit in the
• 2:07:57
  Speaker 4: Theorizing Patriarchy book. I think it's mentioned in the epistemology section.
• 2:08:01
  Speaker 4: And the reason that I was interested in that was
• 2:08:04
  Speaker 4: because that is something that is in the uk A
• 2:08:09
  Speaker 4: level syllabus in sociology, so that's children age sixteen to eighteen,
• 2:08:14
  Speaker 4: and it's something that they will be talked about. And
• 2:08:16
  Speaker 4: it's basically just sort of the semi progenitor of intersectionality
• 2:08:21
  Speaker 4: because triple system theory is gender, Marxism, and race.
• 2:08:27
  Speaker 1: Ah, yes, of course. Yeah, it's like the it's like
• 2:08:31
  Speaker 1: the Holy Trinity, but unholy. All right, three separate things
• 2:08:39
  Speaker 1: but one in essence.
• 2:08:42
  Speaker 2: All right.
• 2:08:42
  Speaker 3: I did the post video, the video that I put through,
• 2:08:46
  Speaker 3: although I'm guessing that it's even more word solid than
• 2:08:50
  Speaker 3: everything else.
• 2:08:51
  Speaker 2: What video.
• 2:08:53
  Speaker 3: Oh, it's the Donna Hathaway at the Next Nature Museum
• 2:09:00
  Speaker 3: Extremists Laureate twenty twenty two, twenty five. But you're it
• 2:09:07
  Speaker 3: might just be too instant. Yeah, I'll go through that,
• 2:09:10
  Speaker 3: but it might just be time.
• 2:09:14
  Speaker 4: Minute long talk, so that will be I could probably
• 2:09:18
  Speaker 4: knows who knows?
• 2:09:20
  Speaker 1: You can get like five or five or so time
• 2:09:23
  Speaker 1: codes and we can yeah, something like the top the
• 2:09:27
  Speaker 1: top arguments, the top brain breaking, you know. All right, yeah,
• 2:09:33
  Speaker 1: sounds good. Well, anyway, I'm just trying to get an idea.
• 2:09:36
  Speaker 1: All right, Friday, Yeah, next Friday. Let's do it next Friday.
• 2:09:41
  Speaker 3: Yeah, all right, that's what I was saying.
• 2:09:45
  Speaker 1: Okay, thanks, all right, Well anyway, thanks deal dear for
• 2:09:49
  Speaker 1: coming and hanging out with us while we do this,
• 2:09:52
  Speaker 1: and also humoring me by looking at your animated cartoon
• 2:09:56
  Speaker 1: that I made.
• 2:09:58
  Speaker 3: And.
• 2:10:02
  Speaker 4: Because obviously it's a looped but it's going backwards. I
• 2:10:05
  Speaker 4: just kind of love the like I'm going to exhale
• 2:10:07
  Speaker 4: the smoke and then bring it back in.
• 2:10:09
  Speaker 1: Is might I might just get rid of the smoke altogether,
• 2:10:15
  Speaker 1: and let's see if I can do it without that.
• 2:10:18
  Speaker 1: But I kind of like it.
• 2:10:20
  Speaker 3: M M.
• 2:10:21
  Speaker 2: Maybe I'll just get rid of the pipe.
• 2:10:24
  Speaker 4: It might.
• 2:10:25
  Speaker 1: Maybe I'll add a monocole instead, would that be?
• 2:10:27
  Speaker 2: Okay?
• 2:10:28
  Speaker 3: I like the pipe. Okay, it's a very rude aerodype stag.
• 2:10:35
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 2:10:35
  Speaker 4: Well that's a total misrepresentation of my character. Oh man, Okay,
• 2:10:46
  Speaker 4: you know I'm an illiterate dumbass. That's what I've been
• 2:10:48
  Speaker 4: told so many times by all the feminists on the internet.
• 2:10:51
  Speaker 4: I can't even read, haven't you heard.
• 2:10:55
  Speaker 2: I'm just like you guys.
• 2:11:00
  Speaker 1: Okay, okay, okay, all right.
• 2:11:02
  Speaker 2: I glad to do the things, and we're gonna get.
• 2:11:04
  Speaker 3: Out of here one more time, one more time, all right,
• 2:11:06
  Speaker 3: So feed the badger dot Colm slash support support the
• 2:11:09
  Speaker 3: show so you can keep having these rundowns of feminist
• 2:11:14
  Speaker 3: chicanery everywhere everywhere that the famous chicanery chicane er. We
• 2:11:19
  Speaker 3: will be to point it out. So once again, let's
• 2:11:23
  Speaker 3: feed the badger dot com slash support and if you
• 2:11:26
  Speaker 3: want to send a message, feedbadgery dot com slash just
• 2:11:28
  Speaker 3: a tip, okay, Brian.
• 2:11:31
  Speaker 1: All right, Well, if you guys like this video, please
• 2:11:33
  Speaker 1: hit like subscribe if you're not already subscribed to the
• 2:11:35
  Speaker 1: BELF notifications, leave as comment.
• 2:11:36
  Speaker 2: Let us know what you guys think about.
• 2:11:37
  Speaker 1: What we talked about on the show today, and please
• 2:11:40
  Speaker 1: please please share this video because Sherry's caring. Thank you
• 2:11:43
  Speaker 1: guys so much for coming on today of this episode
• 2:11:45
  Speaker 1: of Maintaining Frame with Til Deer, and we'll see you
• 2:11:47
  Speaker 1: guys in the next one.
• 2:11:48
  Speaker 2: Have a good weekend.