Latest / Honey Badger Radio / Rachel Wilson Ends It AGAIN, NotSoErudite Most Affected

Transcript

Rachel Wilson Ends It AGAIN, NotSoErudite Most Affected · Honey Badger Radio

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Good morning good afternoon good evening wherever you may be
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: and welcome back to honey badger radio my name is
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: brian i'm here with allison and this is maintaining frame
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: uh what's the name of this fucking thing again rachel
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: wilson ends it again not so erudite most affected i
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: don't know why i like what i i yeah i
• 0:18
  Speaker 1: like forgot where i was for a moment i couldn't
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: find the title where i was for a.
• 0:23
  Speaker 2: Moment yeah i got it.
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: It was it was rumble it was rumble being weird
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: All right. So, yeah, we're going to basically continue our journey.
• 0:34
  Speaker 2: It's been sort of an endless sameness in a way.
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: What do you mean?
• 0:40
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Like an endless sameness of, well, I mean, we've
• 0:44
  Speaker 2: done this like three, four times now.
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. So we have to keep
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: coming up with new ways to introduce it. Yeah.
• 0:52
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: But yeah, no, it's a good conversation, I think.
• 0:56
  Speaker 2: Yes, it's great.
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: But we're going to continue going through the debate between
• 1:02
  Speaker 1: Rachel Wilson and Kyla, also known as Not So Erudite,
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: on whether or not feminism is doing more good or harm,
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: which is Rachel Wilson is arguing in the affirmative that
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: it is doing harm, and Not So Erudite is trying
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: to blame anything else. And that's basically the... That's the
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: conversation right now. Yeah.
• 1:24
  Speaker 2: But also it seems to be like she's not wanting
• 1:28
  Speaker 2: to admit that it's a problem that the birth ratings
• 1:32
  Speaker 2: are tanking. I mean, I think that she does admit
• 1:35
  Speaker 2: it at some point.
• 1:36
  Speaker 1: She admits the issue, but she thinks the blame is
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: it can't possibly be feminism. It's anything but.
• 1:43
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: It's anything but that's kind of where we were.
• 1:46
  Speaker 2: Anything, anything but the ideology, the one ideology.
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: Yes.
• 1:52
  Speaker 2: We're going to kill families. We're going to kill we're
• 1:54
  Speaker 2: going to kill pair bonding and women and motherhood. Well,
• 1:58
  Speaker 2: not women, but motherhood, women having children and being wives
• 2:02
  Speaker 2: and mothers. We're going to destroy that. It can't possibly
• 2:06
  Speaker 2: the destruction of those things cannot be credited to the
• 2:09
  Speaker 2: movement that said they were going to destroy them. That's
• 2:15
  Speaker 2: some unique gaslighting, don't you think? That's the next level gaslighting.
• 2:22
  Speaker 2: It's like, I don't know, the U.S. saying, you can't
• 2:26
  Speaker 2: credit us with the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. No,
• 2:32
  Speaker 2: we didn't do that. But you did, and you said
• 2:35
  Speaker 2: you were going to do it, and you did it,
• 2:36
  Speaker 2: and you ended the war. I'm just saying, it's such
• 2:40
  Speaker 2: a manifestly obvious thing. The feminists said they were going
• 2:44
  Speaker 2: to do it and they did it. And now everybody's like, no, no,
• 2:49
  Speaker 2: that didn't happen. Yeah, but it did. I know you're
• 2:56
  Speaker 2: trying to piss on our legs and tell us it's raining,
• 2:58
  Speaker 2: but it did happen. They did say that and they
• 3:00
  Speaker 2: did do it. And they even laid out how they
• 3:03
  Speaker 2: were going to do it. And then they proceeded to
• 3:05
  Speaker 2: do that thing. Their plan. It's just, you know, it's
• 3:09
  Speaker 2: just really like it gets to the point of being
• 3:12
  Speaker 2: absolutely infuriating when anyone denies this. I mean, the biggest
• 3:17
  Speaker 2: and most, the biggest success feminism ever did, their biggest
• 3:21
  Speaker 2: success story is they laid out a plan to destroying
• 3:26
  Speaker 2: the nuclear family, to destroying heterosexuality, destroying pair bonding between
• 3:30
  Speaker 2: men and women and destroying the process of a society
• 3:34
  Speaker 2: replicating itself. They laid out that plan. They said, this
• 3:37
  Speaker 2: is what we're going to do. Yeah, guys, this is
• 3:39
  Speaker 2: what we're going to do. This is how we're going
• 3:41
  Speaker 2: to do it. This is what we're going to promote
• 3:44
  Speaker 2: to this end. And then they did it. And it worked.
• 3:49
  Speaker 2: And everybody's like, no, he's not going to come. We
• 3:55
  Speaker 2: need a logical fallacy here. Just to contain this level
• 4:00
  Speaker 2: of human mendacity. How could it not be them? They're
• 4:08
  Speaker 2: the only ones who wanted to do it. Not even
• 4:10
  Speaker 2: the communists wanted to do that. The Nazis still had
• 4:14
  Speaker 2: children and marriage. The only one, the only of the
• 4:18
  Speaker 2: big ideologies that requires hating a good portion of the
• 4:22
  Speaker 2: human race, the only one that specifically said, hey, we're
• 4:26
  Speaker 2: going to kill family, was feminism. And so they did.
• 4:32
  Speaker 2: And now we're arguing over it. This is a victory
• 4:37
  Speaker 2: lap for feminism. Not only do they kill family and
• 4:40
  Speaker 2: pair bonding and marriage, marriage basically not only did they
• 4:44
  Speaker 2: kill that their victory rap their victory lap over the
• 4:51
  Speaker 2: society whose future they killed is to insist that they
• 4:55
  Speaker 2: didn't do it now we didn't do it but if
• 4:59
  Speaker 2: we did it's pretty awesome and it's exactly what we
• 5:02
  Speaker 2: wanted jesus christ all right anyway let's continue.
• 5:08
  Speaker 1: Well, no, I'm just saying that's the topic, I guess.
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: Do the things.
• 5:13
  Speaker 4: Yeah.
• 5:14
  Speaker 2: Oh, do the things.
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: All right.
• 5:15
  Speaker 2: Sorry, guys. All right. If at any point throughout the
• 5:18
  Speaker 2: show you want to tell me that feminism didn't destroy
• 5:22
  Speaker 2: the family, you want to lay out your thesis of
• 5:26
  Speaker 2: how they're not connected to that thing that they said
• 5:29
  Speaker 2: they would do and laid out their plan, you can
• 5:32
  Speaker 2: do so at feedthebadger.com slash justthetip. That's feedthebadger.com slash justthetip.
• 5:38
  Speaker 2: We very much want to hear from you and your
• 5:41
  Speaker 2: commentary in this long journey into the desert of the real. Anyway,
• 5:48
  Speaker 2: that's feed the badger.com slash just the tip. Very best
• 5:51
  Speaker 2: way for you to send us a comment because it
• 5:52
  Speaker 2: does not go through YouTube's comment enhancement system. And a
• 5:56
  Speaker 2: very best way for you to send us a tip
• 5:57
  Speaker 2: because it does not go through YouTube's comment or sorry,
• 6:02
  Speaker 2: YouTube's currency yoinking system. So anyway, feedthebadger.com slash justthetip. And
• 6:07
  Speaker 2: if you want to support the show, also, if you
• 6:10
  Speaker 2: have supported, attempted to support the show in the past
• 6:13
  Speaker 2: and the fundraiser just yeeted your support, I fixed it. Yes.
• 6:19
  Speaker 2: I did a whole bunch of work over the last
• 6:22
  Speaker 2: week to determine what the heck was going on. And
• 6:26
  Speaker 2: apparently what was happening, if you're interested, is the.
• 6:32
  Speaker 2: The cache, the website caches in order to serve things
• 6:39
  Speaker 2: up quicker, it was serving up a stale form. So
• 6:42
  Speaker 2: if you attempted and were unable to, try again at feedthebadger.com
• 6:46
  Speaker 2: slash support because we like supporters that have determination to
• 6:50
  Speaker 2: support us. We don't want ones that are just make
• 6:52
  Speaker 2: it easy. You got to work for it at feedthebadger.com
• 6:56
  Speaker 2: slash support. And also, if you want to join us
• 7:00
  Speaker 2: in our community, BadgerNation.online. All of these links are in
• 7:05
  Speaker 2: the low bar. So pick your poison. And hope to
• 7:09
  Speaker 2: see you either in the community or supporting or your comment.
• 7:13
  Speaker 5: Whatever.
• 7:14
  Speaker 2: All right. Let's do it.
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: All right. Let's get into it. So we're basically like, well,
• 7:20
  Speaker 1: we're still talking about, again, the debate is, is feminism
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: doing more harm or good or harm? And let's just
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: pick it up.
• 7:32
  Speaker 2: I'm sorry.
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: All right, Rachel, two minutes.
• 7:36
  Speaker 6: So it would.
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: All right, let me like.
• 7:38
  Speaker 2: Ooh, echo.
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 7:40
  Speaker 2: Why do you get the echo fix? And to my argument.
• 7:43
  Speaker 1: What?
• 7:44
  Speaker 2: It's still there. Why do you get the echo fix?
• 7:45
  Speaker 2: I just want to point out, like, I just, I'm astounded. Right.
• 7:50
  Speaker 2: Why do we even have to have this debate? Can
• 7:52
  Speaker 2: we not just have the debate? Hey, feminism destroyed marriage.
• 7:56
  Speaker 2: We sort of need that. Like, how do we fix
• 8:00
  Speaker 2: it now?
• 8:01
  Speaker 1: Yeah, well, the thing is, yes, we should be having
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: that debate, but there are people who are terrified of
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: losing feminism. So they all fight tooth and nail to
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: hold on to it by basically excusing every way that
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: it has engaged in overreach, or just plain attributing things
• 8:24
  Speaker 1: that are observably the consequence of it on something else, because...
• 8:29
  Speaker 1: They can't, they're, they are terrified. Like they see it
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: like a security blanket and they.
• 8:35
  Speaker 2: Don't want to, they don't want to lose it. Huh? Yeah. Yeah. No,
• 8:39
  Speaker 2: I'm saying you're right. Um, it's, there's some kind of emotion.
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: They think that it, it, it's like a ward, like
• 8:46
  Speaker 1: a magical circle that protects against men. Like if, if
• 8:50
  Speaker 1: it goes away, they're just going to like be oppressed suddenly.
• 8:53
  Speaker 1: Like it's the only thing it's literally magical thinking, but
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: it is the thinking. That is what it is.
• 8:59
  Speaker 5: Yeah.
• 9:00
  Speaker 2: And yet feminism is also the thing that conjecturizes that
• 9:03
  Speaker 2: men oppress women in the first place. Actually, before we continue,
• 9:07
  Speaker 2: I did want to do a couple of corrections from
• 9:10
  Speaker 2: the last time we did this. One, in terms of
• 9:14
  Speaker 2: sheer body count, of course, Nazism and communism have a
• 9:20
  Speaker 2: bigger number than feminism, at least until feminism's project. to
• 9:26
  Speaker 2: destroy family and thus the future of civilization, it reaches fruition,
• 9:32
  Speaker 2: which I guess you could argue some of that is already,
• 9:35
  Speaker 2: if you want to count the abortion thing. But yeah,
• 9:38
  Speaker 2: so I wanted to clarify that. But as I said
• 9:41
  Speaker 2: in the beginning, both systems did not attempt to destroy
• 9:44
  Speaker 2: human pair bonding and the family, at least not the
• 9:49
  Speaker 2: Soviet communism. They were very pro-natalist. And the other correction
• 9:53
  Speaker 2: I want to make is I did look at the
• 9:55
  Speaker 2: statistics and yes, the Soviet bloc countries did have a
• 10:00
  Speaker 2: higher fertility than the West prior to the fall of
• 10:03
  Speaker 2: the wall. They did recover after the wall fell to
• 10:10
  Speaker 2: something that was, I think, still higher than the West.
• 10:13
  Speaker 2: And then the international banking feminists attacked, nation attacked. and
• 10:20
  Speaker 2: it started to fall significantly. So that aspect of the argument,
• 10:28
  Speaker 2: both I think Rachel and not so erudite, I don't
• 10:34
  Speaker 2: think they're using the correct stats. And the correct stats,
• 10:38
  Speaker 2: I think, support the point that Western feminism is of
• 10:43
  Speaker 2: the devil. So, okay, let's go. I just want to
• 10:46
  Speaker 2: make that correction, just briefly.
• 10:47
  Speaker 1: That's fine.
• 10:47
  Speaker 2: All right, let's go.
• 10:50
  Speaker 3: Whatsoever, if Martians came down in 1910 and told the
• 10:55
  Speaker 3: women to go join the workforce and that's when it
• 10:58
  Speaker 3: happened or how it happened or why, it doesn't matter
• 11:00
  Speaker 3: to my argument.
• 11:02
  Speaker 1: Yeah, so Erudite was saying before this, do you want
• 11:04
  Speaker 1: me to go back to her saying, here, let's go
• 11:08
  Speaker 1: back a little bit because I think there's some context.
• 11:10
  Speaker 2: I am in your hands, Brian.
• 11:12
  Speaker 3: Huh?
• 11:12
  Speaker 2: Huh? I'm in your hands. I merely attack whatever.
• 11:17
  Speaker 4: You point me to.
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: Yeah, that's fine. It's fine. All right.
• 11:20
  Speaker 5: So it's shorter, but you already brought up the two
• 11:24
  Speaker 5: minute response.
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 11:25
  Speaker 4: Let's talk about the 1970s since you're not going to
• 11:27
  Speaker 4: answer the question and your narrative does hinge it on it.
• 11:29
  Speaker 6: Your argument is fun.
• 11:30
  Speaker 1: So the question she's referring to is like, what, what
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: is your, if it's true that feminism did this and
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: why is it happening to the Gulf States as well?
• 11:39
  Speaker 1: They don't, they obviously like, Erudite would say they obviously
• 11:43
  Speaker 1: don't have feminism in the Middle East. I would argue
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: they do, but they're just a little behind.
• 11:50
  Speaker 2: I will tell you. I can tell you exactly. So
• 11:56
  Speaker 2: she's essentially saying, oh, this is the counter evidence to
• 12:00
  Speaker 2: your proposal. The Gulf states have lowered fertility. And also
• 12:07
  Speaker 2: in the 70s, it was not... a sharp rise in
• 12:12
  Speaker 2: women in the workplace it was just part of a
• 12:15
  Speaker 2: long-term uh increase of women in the workplace now i
• 12:20
  Speaker 2: can answer both of those um do you want me
• 12:23
  Speaker 2: to answer them or shall we get.
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: To let's see what let's see what what what erudite
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: actually says and how rachel.
• 12:28
  Speaker 4: Responds fundamentally this in the 1970s in fact i believe
• 12:32
  Speaker 4: your quote was in the 1970s something changed. And it
• 12:36
  Speaker 4: wasn't these various economic factors that we've been seeing for
• 12:39
  Speaker 4: the last 50 years.
• 12:40
  Speaker 1: Hold on, we have to give her a chance. Go ahead, Carolyn.
• 12:42
  Speaker 3: I didn't say that here, but I said that on
• 12:44
  Speaker 3: Joe Rogan.
• 12:44
  Speaker 1: You're right, it's.
• 12:45
  Speaker 2: Not just economic factors. I don't know why. I'm just
• 12:50
  Speaker 2: finding this amusing. It's like, erudites, well, you pointed out
• 12:53
  Speaker 2: these economic factors, and it's like, yeah, they weren't the issue.
• 13:00
  Speaker 1: Perhaps.
• 13:00
  Speaker 2: I don't know how that helps erudites' argument. that it
• 13:05
  Speaker 2: wasn't feminism. It's just like, well, let's take these factors
• 13:09
  Speaker 2: that aren't feminism off the board. Okay, let's do that.
• 13:13
  Speaker 2: But okay, let's keep going.
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: All right. Kyla, go ahead, finish your point.
• 13:18
  Speaker 5: Okay.
• 13:19
  Speaker 4: In the 1970s, which is what you hinged it to
• 13:22
  Speaker 4: in this conversation when I asked you what time feminism
• 13:25
  Speaker 4: started infusing women into the workforce and the she economy began,
• 13:28
  Speaker 4: you did say that. In the 1970s, the thing that
• 13:31
  Speaker 4: you actually think that was magical that happened is called
• 13:34
  Speaker 4: the quiet revolution. That's what you're citing. Claudia Golden's work,
• 13:38
  Speaker 4: which by the way, I chatted to her before this conversation.
• 13:41
  Speaker 6: She loves your book, by the way.
• 13:43
  Speaker 4: Claudia Golden discovered and coined the term the Quiet Revolution,
• 13:47
  Speaker 4: which in the late 1970s, there was a revolution, not
• 13:50
  Speaker 4: in an infusion of women in the workplace in the 70s,
• 13:53
  Speaker 4: that was the same since the 40s. It's been a
• 13:55
  Speaker 4: consistent progressive trundle up. What was different is women's relationship
• 14:01
  Speaker 4: to work. Pre the Quiet Revolution, work was temporary, acute,
• 14:07
  Speaker 4: and low skilled for women because they understood they would
• 14:09
  Speaker 4: have to go home and take care of kids. After
• 14:12
  Speaker 4: the 1970s, they went, I think I could get an
• 14:14
  Speaker 4: education and get long-term career prospects. So that's what's changed
• 14:19
  Speaker 4: in the 1970s, that you're blaming all of the economic downturn,
• 14:22
  Speaker 4: which I agree, there's a lot of economic problems on,
• 14:25
  Speaker 4: which is not feminism.
• 14:27
  Speaker 6: The 1970s, the.
• 14:29
  Speaker 4: Economic problems that started there is connected to the gold
• 14:33
  Speaker 4: standard and the Triffin dilemma.
• 14:34
  Speaker 1: All right. So let's... Real quick, I want to explain
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: what the... I would like to explain what the... No,
• 14:43
  Speaker 1: the silent revolution. The quiet revolution. All right.
• 14:47
  Speaker 2: Okay, sure.
• 14:47
  Speaker 1: So, Claudia Golden is the Harvard economic historian who coined
• 14:52
  Speaker 1: the quiet revolution for a shift. Now, this wasn't something
• 14:55
  Speaker 1: that was created. It was something that was named, you know, like,
• 14:58
  Speaker 1: by this person. So, for a shift in how American
• 15:02
  Speaker 1: women planned work, schooling, and family, she won the 2023
• 15:05
  Speaker 1: Nobel Memorial Prize... in economic sciences for that body of research.
• 15:11
  Speaker 1: The Quiet Revolution that Transformed Women's Employment, Education, and Family
• 15:16
  Speaker 1: is a review paper. That's what it is. So essentially,
• 15:23
  Speaker 1: there were these phases that they're calling organic of women
• 15:30
  Speaker 1: entering the workforce, which of course, women have always worked.
• 15:33
  Speaker 1: This is something we've said on here for a long time.
• 15:38
  Speaker 1: But maybe entering the workforce is something a little bit different.
• 15:41
  Speaker 1: But regardless, she divides the modern economic role of American
• 15:45
  Speaker 1: women into four phases. The first three she calls evolutionary.
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: The last she calls revolutionary. Phase one, 19th century to
• 15:54
  Speaker 1: the 1920s. Phase two, from about 1930 to 1950. Phase three,
• 15:59
  Speaker 1: from 1950 to the late 70s. And phase four, the
• 16:02
  Speaker 1: quiet revolution from the late 70s on.
• 16:03
  Speaker 3: So....
• 16:06
  Speaker 1: I mean, I don't have to read the whole thing,
• 16:08
  Speaker 1: but I just wanted to explain what it is. Now, Alison,
• 16:12
  Speaker 1: if you wanted to say something to that, that's okay.
• 16:15
  Speaker 1: I'm guessing that Claudia Golden is a feminist, though. But
• 16:19
  Speaker 1: go ahead.
• 16:21
  Speaker 2: Yeah, well, what this says is that women's employment has
• 16:25
  Speaker 2: nothing to do with feminism. Thank you, feminists. Thank you
• 16:30
  Speaker 2: for undermining one of the biggest issues arguments you use
• 16:35
  Speaker 2: as a shield for your actual agenda to destroy the
• 16:38
  Speaker 2: relationship between men and women, right? Because they tie it
• 16:41
  Speaker 2: to that, that kind of sense of purpose or efficacy.
• 16:47
  Speaker 2: And they use that as a shield against their true purpose.
• 16:52
  Speaker 2: They say, well, if you get rid of feminism, you'll
• 16:54
  Speaker 2: get rid of women in the workplace. Well, no, because
• 16:57
  Speaker 2: feminism had nothing to do with that. I fully embrace
• 17:01
  Speaker 2: this argument. Thank you, Claudia.
• 17:03
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 17:04
  Speaker 2: I think it's, but at the same time, if you're
• 17:07
  Speaker 2: going to argue that feminism had nothing to do with that,
• 17:10
  Speaker 2: you can't use it as a shield. So women need
• 17:12
  Speaker 2: to know that feminism has nothing to do with whether
• 17:16
  Speaker 2: or not you have a career, has nothing to do
• 17:19
  Speaker 2: with the jobs that you have. This was just a revolution,
• 17:23
  Speaker 2: or as they said, an evolution in people's thinking, probably
• 17:26
  Speaker 2: because the post-industrial household was no longer a unit of production.
• 17:32
  Speaker 2: Simple as that. And also because of men's innovations making
• 17:36
  Speaker 2: the workplace and travel to the workplace safe and something
• 17:42
  Speaker 2: that women could actually do. I mean, if you have
• 17:45
  Speaker 2: to constantly harness up a horse, it's a little bit
• 17:48
  Speaker 2: more difficult to go 40 miles to work a day.
• 17:50
  Speaker 2: In fact, you can't, right? And also when you don't
• 17:54
  Speaker 2: have power steering, you're limited in how much you can
• 17:58
  Speaker 2: actually commute because it's exhausting, right? especially for women who
• 18:02
  Speaker 2: don't have the same upper body strength as men. So
• 18:05
  Speaker 2: all of the innovations that men made to make workplaces safe,
• 18:10
  Speaker 2: travel to workplaces, something that was feasible for women, that
• 18:16
  Speaker 2: resulted in what she's terming the quiet revolution, which is
• 18:19
  Speaker 2: women going into the workplace. And it's understandable, too, because
• 18:24
  Speaker 2: women always had a purpose. They always had ways of
• 18:27
  Speaker 2: contributing to the family in the home. They were always working.
• 18:33
  Speaker 2: So the fact that they wanted to continue to work
• 18:35
  Speaker 2: is not necessarily a bad thing. The assumption is that
• 18:40
  Speaker 2: women wanting to work outside the home is inconsistent with
• 18:44
  Speaker 2: them continuing to be wives and mothers. If you look
• 18:46
  Speaker 2: at the ex-Bloc or the Soviet Bloc nations, that's not
• 18:51
  Speaker 2: the case. They still were wives and mothers. There still
• 18:54
  Speaker 2: was a pro-natalist society. I'm not going to go to
• 18:58
  Speaker 2: the bat for any of the communist economic theories at all,
• 19:02
  Speaker 2: but in terms of their actual social policy, it wasn't
• 19:05
  Speaker 2: as disastrous as Western feminism. Women worked. Women got educations.
• 19:10
  Speaker 2: Women had purpose outside the home because their purpose in
• 19:13
  Speaker 2: the home was no longer there because it was post-industrial.
• 19:17
  Speaker 2: I mean, think about it, like 150 years ago, a
• 19:20
  Speaker 2: woman is working 12-hour days, six days a week to
• 19:23
  Speaker 2: keep her family alive, canning, making candles, hauling wood, or
• 19:27
  Speaker 2: often chopping wood. Doing laundry was an incredible task, right?
• 19:34
  Speaker 2: And hauling water, ensuring that food was edible in the winter,
• 19:38
  Speaker 2: and gathering from her environment, her local environment, All of
• 19:45
  Speaker 2: this stuff is a tremendous amount of work and it
• 19:47
  Speaker 2: gives a sense of purpose that you are serving the
• 19:51
  Speaker 2: survival of your family. So the fact that when that
• 19:55
  Speaker 2: was lost for women, they wanted to replace it with
• 19:58
  Speaker 2: something and the only thing available to them in a
• 20:01
  Speaker 2: post-industrial society was work outside the home, that's just a non-starter, right?
• 20:07
  Speaker 2: We can have this discussion. I mean, I would say
• 20:09
  Speaker 2: that Young children probably need both their parents' attention up
• 20:16
  Speaker 2: to the age of seven. If we want to go
• 20:21
  Speaker 2: totally naturalistic, women's intense involvement probably ends at around two.
• 20:30
  Speaker 2: And then there's a period of socialization. If you look
• 20:32
  Speaker 2: back into what's being revealed to me from the anatomical record,
• 20:38
  Speaker 2: there's probably a period of intense socialization between two and
• 20:41
  Speaker 2: seven where the father is absolutely critical and that's gone.
• 20:45
  Speaker 2: Then had to give that up to the post-industrial system.
• 20:49
  Speaker 2: And nobody's talking about that. And nobody's talking about that
• 20:53
  Speaker 2: effect on the child. So, I mean, there's lots of
• 20:57
  Speaker 2: conversations that have to be had about parents with young
• 21:00
  Speaker 2: children going to work and the deleterious effects on those children.
• 21:05
  Speaker 2: That's fine. But the fact is that when she says, oh,
• 21:08
  Speaker 2: this is a quiet revolution, yeah, it is. It's a
• 21:11
  Speaker 2: quiet revolution because women lost their purpose in the home, right?
• 21:15
  Speaker 2: They decided they wanted to find a purpose and they
• 21:18
  Speaker 2: found it out in the work world, which was made
• 21:22
  Speaker 2: accessible to them by the tremendous amount of work and
• 21:24
  Speaker 2: sacrifice of men, sorry, not women, men. Men made this possible,
• 21:30
  Speaker 2: public toilets. How do women go in public without toilets?
• 21:35
  Speaker 2: And the problem isn't because men horribly hoarded the toilets
• 21:39
  Speaker 2: to themselves. First of all, there were none for the
• 21:41
  Speaker 2: longest time. And second of all, women need more elaborate
• 21:46
  Speaker 2: toiletry facilities than men. And while we were establishing the
• 21:52
  Speaker 2: concept of public toilets, men were easier to serve. And also,
• 21:56
  Speaker 2: men were willing to do it. There was an exhibition
• 22:01
  Speaker 2: where they introduced the concept of public toilets. And women
• 22:06
  Speaker 2: didn't use them like men. Maybe it was privacy concerns.
• 22:11
  Speaker 2: Maybe it was other issues. Maybe it's because men actually
• 22:14
  Speaker 2: get arrested for public indecency for urinating in public and
• 22:17
  Speaker 2: women don't. Who knows? But men adopted it first. They
• 22:22
  Speaker 2: established the infrastructure. Now women benefit from the infrastructure of
• 22:26
  Speaker 2: public toilets, which allows them to be in public. All
• 22:29
  Speaker 2: of this can be laid at the feet of men.
• 22:32
  Speaker 2: Men did this. Men made it possible for women to
• 22:35
  Speaker 2: enter the workforce. Okay, this has nothing to do with feminism.
• 22:39
  Speaker 2: Thank you, Claudia. Thank you for establishing that the quiet
• 22:43
  Speaker 2: revolution is absolutely fuck all to do with feminism. So
• 22:46
  Speaker 2: take that off your arsenal of talking points that defends
• 22:50
  Speaker 2: your actual agenda, which is the destruction of the family, right?
• 22:54
  Speaker 2: And like I said, I'm not gonna stand here and say, oh,
• 22:57
  Speaker 2: women shouldn't work outside at home.
• 22:58
  Speaker 1: I don't know.
• 23:00
  Speaker 2: Should men work outside the home with a child under seven?
• 23:03
  Speaker 2: Possibly not. If we want to rearrange our society for
• 23:07
  Speaker 2: the benefit of children. And again, these conversations are completely
• 23:12
  Speaker 2: separate from whether or not feminism got women out into
• 23:16
  Speaker 2: the workforce.
• 23:18
  Speaker 1: Right?
• 23:20
  Speaker 2: Because it didn't. It has nothing to do with that.
• 23:22
  Speaker 2: That was what men did for women. And it was
• 23:26
  Speaker 2: also women seeking a purpose that they lost in post-industrial household.
• 23:31
  Speaker 2: That's nothing to do with feminism. But that's, again, if
• 23:36
  Speaker 2: you tie the idea that our fertility is declining because
• 23:40
  Speaker 2: of women in the workforce, if you tie those two together,
• 23:44
  Speaker 2: then you hand ammunition to feminists when they say, oh, well,
• 23:49
  Speaker 2: that's not what happened. Feminism isn't responsible for that. No,
• 23:54
  Speaker 2: feminism isn't. Again, it's men's sacrifices, making workplace and public
• 23:59
  Speaker 2: life accessible to women. and women's desire to pursue a purpose,
• 24:05
  Speaker 2: now that their purpose in the home was gone. Okay,
• 24:08
  Speaker 2: so that's off the table. That has nothing to do
• 24:11
  Speaker 2: with the fertility decline that's caused by feminism. Because you
• 24:16
  Speaker 2: can do all that, we've just proven, you can have
• 24:19
  Speaker 2: women in the workplace, right? You can even keep a
• 24:21
  Speaker 2: fertility level, because you proved that with the Soviet bloc countries,
• 24:27
  Speaker 2: if you don't have Western feminism. telling women that being
• 24:31
  Speaker 2: a wife and mother is a source of oppression. Do
• 24:35
  Speaker 2: you see how that works? This is not even an issue. Yes,
• 24:40
  Speaker 2: these are a whole bunch of very important conversations. How
• 24:43
  Speaker 2: much women should work? Should they work outside the home?
• 24:45
  Speaker 2: Should men work outside the home with a kid under seven?
• 24:49
  Speaker 2: All of these things. How post-industrial family life has changed.
• 24:53
  Speaker 2: Is it a good thing? Can we Can we kind
• 24:56
  Speaker 2: of lessen the effects of it? All great conversations, irrelevant
• 25:01
  Speaker 2: to feminist feminism destroying marriage, destroying the relationship between men
• 25:06
  Speaker 2: and women. And thanks to this woman and with her
• 25:08
  Speaker 2: quiet revolution and her Nobel Prize, we now can say
• 25:12
  Speaker 2: that it is irrelevant. So let's zero in on the problem.
• 25:17
  Speaker 2: which is feminism saying they wanted to destroy marriage, telling
• 25:21
  Speaker 2: us how they were going to do it, and then
• 25:22
  Speaker 2: subsequently succeeding in doing so. But again, the problem with this,
• 25:28
  Speaker 2: the argument in terms of Rachel's side of it is
• 25:32
  Speaker 2: she's tying the fertility decline to women in the workplace,
• 25:36
  Speaker 2: which again, the Soviet bloc countries indicate this isn't the case.
• 25:41
  Speaker 2: Women can work and still have children and be mothers.
• 25:45
  Speaker 2: This is possible.
• 25:47
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 25:48
  Speaker 2: And if you tie the fertility decline, and yes, there
• 25:51
  Speaker 2: is a fertility decline involved, but it's not necessarily under replacement.
• 25:55
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 25:57
  Speaker 2: So if you tie these two concepts together, you're sort
• 26:00
  Speaker 2: of handing, she handed not so erudite a surface to
• 26:03
  Speaker 2: attack and there is none.
• 26:05
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 26:07
  Speaker 2: There is none here because it's irrelevant. This argument that
• 26:12
  Speaker 2: not so erudite is irrelevant to feminism and Destroying marriage,
• 26:18
  Speaker 2: destroying the relationship between men and women, and tanking the
• 26:21
  Speaker 2: fertility rate because of that. Now, let's see. So, where
• 26:30
  Speaker 2: are we? Okay, actually, let's listen to a bit more
• 26:31
  Speaker 2: because I've gone on for a while.
• 26:35
  Speaker 5: Yeah.
• 26:35
  Speaker 1: Oh, okay. Yeah, sure. I got some super things to read. So,
• 26:42
  Speaker 1: I got a Rumble rant from Roboto for a dollar,
• 26:45
  Speaker 1: and he says, are you saying feminism is not taking
• 26:47
  Speaker 1: credit for it? That is very strange, considering they are
• 26:50
  Speaker 1: not feeling well. Are they not feeling well?
• 26:52
  Speaker 2: Okay. But they take credit inconsistently.
• 26:56
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it depends on whether or not it makes feminism
• 27:00
  Speaker 1: look good.
• 27:00
  Speaker 2: So... Yeah, if somebody says, wow, you've really done a
• 27:05
  Speaker 2: fantastic work with making the fertility rate decline to under-replacement,
• 27:10
  Speaker 2: that's an amazing thing feminism did. I think they deserve
• 27:13
  Speaker 2: all kinds of money and accolades and awards. Feminisms would
• 27:18
  Speaker 2: be like, oh, yeah, that's totally what we did. But
• 27:22
  Speaker 2: the instant somebody said, you know, we sort of need
• 27:24
  Speaker 2: that fertility rate for the survival of our culture, feminism is, oh,
• 27:28
  Speaker 2: that wasn't something we did. Yeah. It's entirely contingent on
• 27:34
  Speaker 2: whether or not they're being praised or criticized.
• 27:37
  Speaker 3: Exactly.
• 27:37
  Speaker 2: Whether or not they take responsibility for something. Which, you know,
• 27:41
  Speaker 2: if you think about it, isn't like the behavior of
• 27:43
  Speaker 2: a five-year-old.
• 27:46
  Speaker 1: Yeah. But anyway. No, for sure. Okay. Albatross gives us
• 27:51
  Speaker 1: $ 5 Super Chow and says, progressive slash feminist asking why
• 27:54
  Speaker 1: people don't want to get married is literally the Eric
• 27:57
  Speaker 1: Andre shooting meme. It's pretty good. Yeah, anyway, one thing
• 28:02
  Speaker 1: I wanted to say, and I did watch this whole thing. Unfortunately,
• 28:06
  Speaker 1: I do have a criticism of Rachel only insofar as
• 28:12
  Speaker 1: she gets– she kind of takes the bait and ends
• 28:16
  Speaker 1: up in the weeds with this whole birth rate thing.
• 28:22
  Speaker 1: I know that that's her primary objective. It's not even
• 28:25
  Speaker 1: really the debate itself. I don't know if the prompt
• 28:28
  Speaker 1: was something that they discussed. But the prompt being, is
• 28:31
  Speaker 1: feminism doing more harm, good or harm, is I think
• 28:35
  Speaker 1: something that she probably could have focused, like hyper-focused on
• 28:40
  Speaker 1: so that not so erudite couldn't find ways to escape
• 28:44
  Speaker 1: the allegation that feminism is responsible for specifically the birth
• 28:49
  Speaker 1: rate decline. Now, I think it is. I think that
• 28:53
  Speaker 1: you can make the argument and that I think what
• 28:55
  Speaker 1: Rachel would say is that it was feminism that basically
• 28:59
  Speaker 1: pushed women into the workforce. Now, not working, they've always worked,
• 29:04
  Speaker 1: but I think she's referring specifically to entering the workforce,
• 29:07
  Speaker 1: like office jobs, education, nursing, childcare, and these other things
• 29:13
  Speaker 1: that women were already doing before they entered the workforce.
• 29:17
  Speaker 1: Like when, you know, before we had schools, like public schools,
• 29:23
  Speaker 1: women would teach their children or the community would come
• 29:25
  Speaker 1: together and do it. I know that like where I live,
• 29:28
  Speaker 1: It's a city, but it's a small city. And like
• 29:33
  Speaker 1: in my specific church, there's a lot of homeschooling, but
• 29:37
  Speaker 1: the homeschooling isn't like separated. It's not like the the
• 29:40
  Speaker 1: the mother is only homeschooling her children like they collaborate
• 29:44
  Speaker 1: with the other mothers and that's probably what we were
• 29:47
  Speaker 1: doing forever it's just that now women are you know
• 29:51
  Speaker 1: they're working in it's a public job it's paid for
• 29:54
  Speaker 1: by the state it's um it's run sort of top
• 29:57
  Speaker 1: down in that way the department of education or whatever
• 30:01
  Speaker 1: your respective analogs for that are in your respective country,
• 30:06
  Speaker 1: but they're basically doing the same thing, but now there's
• 30:09
  Speaker 1: just more red tape, more bureaucracy that's in there too.
• 30:13
  Speaker 1: Now you have unions, now you have these other entities.
• 30:17
  Speaker 1: So I think that, in my opinion, I would have
• 30:21
  Speaker 1: tried to not get caught up in only discussing the
• 30:26
  Speaker 1: birth rate, I would have specifically talked about what it
• 30:29
  Speaker 1: was that feminism promotes and what are the consequences of
• 30:34
  Speaker 1: it so that not so erdo I can't escape into
• 30:37
  Speaker 1: a grippas trilemma or, you know, the gold standard or
• 30:41
  Speaker 1: these other things that she can use to escape those allegations. Um, that's,
• 30:46
  Speaker 1: that's my, you know, mild criticism, I guess I would
• 30:50
  Speaker 1: have is that You know, you're not dealing with people
• 30:53
  Speaker 1: who care about the truth. You're dealing with sophists. Their
• 30:56
  Speaker 1: job is to use rhetoric to win arguments and make
• 30:59
  Speaker 1: people think they're correct, even if they're not. And they
• 31:02
  Speaker 1: don't care what the consequences of that are going to be. Because,
• 31:06
  Speaker 1: you know, like, I mean, Kyla doesn't have children. Now,
• 31:10
  Speaker 1: she miscarried, according to her, which is unfortunate, but... She
• 31:13
  Speaker 1: doesn't have any children, so that means that the future
• 31:16
  Speaker 1: for her, at least right now, is just her. It's
• 31:19
  Speaker 1: her life. If you don't have kids and you're not
• 31:23
  Speaker 1: the kind of person that would think about other people
• 31:26
  Speaker 1: or the future, then every move you make, every life
• 31:32
  Speaker 1: decision is only going to be... Yeah, every breath you take.
• 31:37
  Speaker 1: It's only going to be for that lifetime. So if,
• 31:41
  Speaker 1: let's say, Not-So-Eradite lives to be 80, let's say, then
• 31:46
  Speaker 1: she's going to be thinking about 80 years, like her
• 31:49
  Speaker 1: entire lifespan, of goals and accomplishments. And whatever happens after
• 31:53
  Speaker 1: she's gone doesn't matter. Rachel can't do that because she
• 31:58
  Speaker 1: has children. So she's got to think about their lifespans
• 32:02
  Speaker 1: and her grandchildren's lifespans and so on. So the way
• 32:06
  Speaker 1: that they approach, you know, accomplishing things and doing things and,
• 32:11
  Speaker 1: you know, the, the, the priority of things is going
• 32:14
  Speaker 1: to be completely different.
• 32:15
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 32:16
  Speaker 1: And so anyway, my, my point is though, you know,
• 32:20
  Speaker 1: I don't know if they, if, if the prompt was
• 32:23
  Speaker 1: something they agreed on, but the prompt being what it is,
• 32:25
  Speaker 1: I think that it will be better if Rachel didn't
• 32:29
  Speaker 1: get caught up in the birth rate thing. But I
• 32:31
  Speaker 1: think that she sees it possibly as the most obvious thing.
• 32:35
  Speaker 1: consequence of feminism, but then she has to prove the correlation.
• 32:41
  Speaker 2: What you mean is not the birth rate thing, but
• 32:43
  Speaker 2: the employment thing, right?
• 32:45
  Speaker 1: Yes. But she's saying that the birth rate thing is
• 32:48
  Speaker 1: a product of the employment thing. And I think that, yeah,
• 32:52
  Speaker 1: that could be true, but all you really have to
• 32:55
  Speaker 1: demonstrate is that feminism is what pushed for these changes,
• 33:00
  Speaker 1: for women's perspective on their role as women in society
• 33:05
  Speaker 1: and by extension, the way that they view men. So, yeah. Well, yeah.
• 33:10
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 33:11
  Speaker 2: I would say that I would say that the way
• 33:12
  Speaker 2: that they view men is the critical factor. And in fact,
• 33:15
  Speaker 2: that is the biggest product of feminism is the marginalization
• 33:18
  Speaker 2: of masculinity, which creates the preconditions for a financialization economy. Um,
• 33:27
  Speaker 2: but I'll get into that in another era.
• 33:29
  Speaker 1: All right.
• 33:30
  Speaker 2: Let's, let's, let's, what are we, What I wanted to
• 33:34
  Speaker 2: point out was I think that Rachel might have the
• 33:37
  Speaker 2: causal arrow reversed here. And I don't think that it's
• 33:42
  Speaker 2: I don't think it's feminism that necessarily encourages women into
• 33:46
  Speaker 2: the workplace, because obviously we now have the other contender,
• 33:50
  Speaker 2: which is this quiet revolution, which I'm sure Claudia doesn't
• 33:54
  Speaker 2: actually say is mostly men making the workplace safe for women. Um,
• 34:03
  Speaker 2: but the, uh, what I think is actually happening is
• 34:05
  Speaker 2: feminism is creating, instilling singledom in women and single women
• 34:12
  Speaker 2: have to work.
• 34:14
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 34:14
  Speaker 2: Right. I think that's what, I think the causal, I
• 34:17
  Speaker 2: think Rachel might have the causal error.
• 34:18
  Speaker 1: Well, and the thing is Claudia Golden was a feminist.
• 34:21
  Speaker 1: She is a feminist. She's still alive. So her, she
• 34:24
  Speaker 1: was basically using sociology or her, her economy rather. She's
• 34:29
  Speaker 1: an economic historian. To sort of like give credence to
• 34:33
  Speaker 1: the idea that women, you know, that's why when it
• 34:36
  Speaker 1: was evolution, i.e. natural, it was just called that. But
• 34:41
  Speaker 1: in the last, the quiet revolution from the late 70s
• 34:45
  Speaker 1: on is probably when the feminist movement really took root
• 34:48
  Speaker 1: in the minds of women. Like to basically get them
• 34:51
  Speaker 1: to change. Like it wasn't just the technology that men
• 34:55
  Speaker 1: just made it easier for women to be women. you know, to,
• 34:58
  Speaker 1: let's say, do the housework with a lot more spare time,
• 35:05
  Speaker 1: you know, because it didn't take, like, all day like
• 35:07
  Speaker 1: it used to. But rather, I think there was, you know,
• 35:10
  Speaker 1: there was a, to call it a revolution already suggests
• 35:13
  Speaker 1: that people were taking an affirmative position on entering the workforce.
• 35:18
  Speaker 1: And it was specifically to, quote, liberate themselves. It also
• 35:23
  Speaker 1: allowed the government to tax double the number of people, so.
• 35:27
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, I would say that the framing, again,
• 35:30
  Speaker 2: if it's feminist, it's going to be feminist laudatory, like
• 35:34
  Speaker 2: we did this or something.
• 35:36
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 35:36
  Speaker 2: But we aren't to blame for it at the same time.
• 35:38
  Speaker 1: Well, I looked up whether she was a feminist, and
• 35:43
  Speaker 1: she basically said that she no longer uses it because
• 35:47
  Speaker 1: it's become a very bad word in America. That's not
• 35:50
  Speaker 1: a condemnation. That's a brand shift. So, yes. Yes. She
• 35:57
  Speaker 1: used to use it. She no longer uses it.
• 35:59
  Speaker 2: Even if she is a spiritual feminist and she's done
• 36:03
  Speaker 2: this work and we can now have a solid argument
• 36:07
  Speaker 2: that all of these changes can't be attributed to feminism.
• 36:09
  Speaker 2: And I would argue and I will argue that the
• 36:12
  Speaker 2: real change happened is the post-industrial household didn't have a
• 36:17
  Speaker 2: purpose like it used to. And so women were seeking
• 36:21
  Speaker 2: a purpose and men made the the external workforce accessible
• 36:27
  Speaker 2: to them, the public life accessible to them. And that's it,
• 36:30
  Speaker 2: that's all you need. You don't need a feminist revolution.
• 36:35
  Speaker 2: You don't even really need like a communist revolution for
• 36:41
  Speaker 2: that to be something that happens to women. But the
• 36:46
  Speaker 2: other thing is that a rate of female workforce participation
• 36:52
  Speaker 2: may be a result of feminists, not women, feminists convincing
• 36:57
  Speaker 2: women that their relationship with men are the source of oppression,
• 37:02
  Speaker 2: which encourages the amount of women who stay single and
• 37:05
  Speaker 2: thus have to derive their sole benefit from a job
• 37:09
  Speaker 2: as well as their source of survival. You see what
• 37:11
  Speaker 2: I'm saying? Yeah, so that's why I say the causal
• 37:15
  Speaker 2: arrow might be reversed. Feminism encourages women to be single
• 37:19
  Speaker 2: and single women have to have jobs. as opposed to
• 37:24
  Speaker 2: feminism encourages women to work. And women working is the factor. Now,
• 37:34
  Speaker 2: I say this having gone through the statistics on the
• 37:38
  Speaker 2: various societies and cultures around the world and how they've
• 37:44
  Speaker 2: responded to feminism and the various ideological shifts of the
• 37:49
  Speaker 2: 20th century. And the thing is that When I talk
• 37:53
  Speaker 2: about the various marriage regimes, so for example, Northern Europe has,
• 37:57
  Speaker 2: I think, a Christian romantic marriage regime. I don't know,
• 38:00
  Speaker 2: there's a lot of controversy over the word romantic, but
• 38:03
  Speaker 2: essentially it involves a courtship, but also consent by the parties.
• 38:09
  Speaker 2: And then you have the Southern Europe, which is a
• 38:11
  Speaker 2: familial romantic model, which also involves a courtship, but veto,
• 38:17
  Speaker 2: the family gets a veto over whether or not the
• 38:21
  Speaker 2: person is appropriate. for their family member. Then you have
• 38:24
  Speaker 2: the kin selection cultures like the Caribbean, the Gulf states,
• 38:29
  Speaker 2: and then you have the marriage broker, social obligation cultures
• 38:33
  Speaker 2: like the Far East, right? So all of these different
• 38:37
  Speaker 2: regimes absorb feminism differently. So you first have to understand that.
• 38:42
  Speaker 2: It's like, and when not so erudite says the Gulf
• 38:47
  Speaker 2: states are a counterexample, It's actually like saying, if you
• 38:56
  Speaker 2: starve a fat person and a thin person, the thin
• 39:00
  Speaker 2: person dies immediately and the fat person survives. After a week,
• 39:04
  Speaker 2: he's still alive, right? Therefore, the issue isn't starvation. It's thinness.
• 39:11
  Speaker 2: That's the logic she's using. Because each of these cultures
• 39:16
  Speaker 2: will respond to feminism in different ways. and see different outcomes.
• 39:22
  Speaker 2: And until you understand how these cultures are different. And
• 39:26
  Speaker 2: the other thing is the Gulf nations or the, kin
• 39:30
  Speaker 2: selection Muslim nations differ on whether they're creditor versus debitor nations.
• 39:36
  Speaker 2: So some of them offer lines of credit to other nations.
• 39:41
  Speaker 2: Others have to take debit or have to take on
• 39:45
  Speaker 2: credit or like a debt in order to develop. So
• 39:50
  Speaker 2: that also changes how feminism is delivered and metabolized in
• 39:55
  Speaker 2: those cultures. It's all very, very different. You have to
• 40:00
  Speaker 2: look at all of it sort of like in its place,
• 40:03
  Speaker 2: or you don't really understand what's going on in terms
• 40:06
  Speaker 2: of feminism and fertility. And I don't think that Not
• 40:10
  Speaker 2: So Erudite has looked at that to that depth. And
• 40:14
  Speaker 2: when you do, you see patterns. The creditor nations, like
• 40:20
  Speaker 2: the Gulf states, first of all, yes, all of the
• 40:25
  Speaker 2: Muslim nations are seeing declines in fertility. But the declines
• 40:29
  Speaker 2: in fertility are concentrated in the debitor nations, not the
• 40:35
  Speaker 2: creditor nations. So does she know that? Does she know
• 40:41
  Speaker 2: what that implies in terms of the adoption of international
• 40:45
  Speaker 2: banking culture? Right. No, probably not. But she'll she'll talk
• 40:49
  Speaker 2: about the gold standard and trifles.
• 40:53
  Speaker 1: Dilemma. Yeah.
• 40:55
  Speaker 2: But she won't talk about this other stuff that actually
• 40:57
  Speaker 2: bears specifically on her question and undermines it. But anyway,
• 41:02
  Speaker 2: let's let's continue.
• 41:03
  Speaker 1: All right. Let's continue. All right.
• 41:05
  Speaker 5: We can kick it back to Rachel. Both speakers have
• 41:08
  Speaker 5: been told by the audience to shut up. So, Bob, Bob,
• 41:12
  Speaker 5: if you can do me a favor, come to the front.
• 41:14
  Speaker 5: is the next time someone does something like that, we're
• 41:16
  Speaker 5: going to take them out of here, regardless of which
• 41:19
  Speaker 5: speaker they're saying it to. I just.
• 41:23
  Speaker 6: Want to get.
• 41:26
  Speaker 1: To the counter-argument part. All right, Rachel, two minutes.
• 41:34
  Speaker 3: So it wouldn't matter to me and to my argument
• 41:38
  Speaker 3: whatsoever if Martians came down in 1910 and told the
• 41:43
  Speaker 3: women to go join the workforce and that's when it
• 41:45
  Speaker 3: happened or how it happened or why.
• 41:47
  Speaker 6: It doesn't matter to.
• 41:48
  Speaker 3: My argument one bit how, when, or why. It just
• 41:53
  Speaker 3: matters that in every nation on planet Earth, when you
• 41:56
  Speaker 3: send all the women into the workforce in huge numbers,
• 41:59
  Speaker 3: they stop having kids. And what happens is what happened
• 42:03
  Speaker 3: to Russia, what happened to China, what happened to South Korea,
• 42:07
  Speaker 3: which is you don't have a future anymore. There is
• 42:10
  Speaker 3: no next generation to continue on. There is no future
• 42:14
  Speaker 3: if you don't show up for it. So if you
• 42:17
  Speaker 3: think you can continue this first world industrialized type of
• 42:21
  Speaker 3: economy that you moved here for because you love the
• 42:24
  Speaker 3: United States, you said we have problems, I agree. I'm
• 42:27
  Speaker 3: not blaming like economic problems on women. I'm saying, well,
• 42:31
  Speaker 3: it's extremely inefficient and it's basically all propped up by
• 42:35
  Speaker 3: men's tax dollars as I proved in my opening.
• 42:38
  Speaker 2: But it wouldn't matter. Like I could just grant everything
• 42:41
  Speaker 2: you're saying.
• 42:42
  Speaker 3: It wouldn't affect my argument whatsoever because we still have
• 42:44
  Speaker 3: this problem, which is do you want a future with
• 42:47
  Speaker 3: human beings in it? Or do you want more crumble
• 42:50
  Speaker 3: cookies and more psychologists and more interior designers at the
• 42:54
  Speaker 3: cost of a future generation that can maintain first world
• 42:59
  Speaker 3: infrastructure and complex systems that feminism relies on?
• 43:04
  Speaker 2: Okay, so I'm going to have to actually go out
• 43:08
  Speaker 2: and say that I disagree with Rachel here, and I
• 43:10
  Speaker 2: think the statistics disagree with her too. Again, the Soviets
• 43:15
  Speaker 2: had higher rates than the West of female labor force participation,
• 43:20
  Speaker 2: maintained a higher fertility, and then after the fall, they
• 43:25
  Speaker 2: saw a reduction in their fertility during the fall of
• 43:28
  Speaker 2: the wall, and then afterwards it recovered and then the
• 43:33
  Speaker 2: international banking nations attacked and they saw a precipitous and decline.
• 43:38
  Speaker 2: In most of those nations, except for one, but that
• 43:41
  Speaker 2: one has a bit of a confound because they had
• 43:43
  Speaker 2: a dictator that was very antinatalist. So once he was gone,
• 43:48
  Speaker 2: there was a bit of a rebound. But anyway, what
• 43:52
  Speaker 2: I'm looking at statistically, and that's the control case relative
• 43:55
  Speaker 2: to the West. That is the pure control case. So
• 44:00
  Speaker 2: women in the workplace can still maintain fertility. And again,
• 44:03
  Speaker 2: we can have the argument. I'm not saying that women
• 44:05
  Speaker 2: have to work or that we can't have the discussion
• 44:09
  Speaker 2: about other deleterious effects, but that isn't the causal relationship here.
• 44:15
  Speaker 2: The causal relationship is squarely with, in my opinion, with feminism.
• 44:18
  Speaker 2: When you remove all of the other factors off the board,
• 44:21
  Speaker 2: the one that remains is telling women that being in
• 44:25
  Speaker 2: a relationship with a man is a site of oppression.
• 44:28
  Speaker 2: that codes men's custodial behaviors towards women, which evolved, guys.
• 44:34
  Speaker 2: Those custodial behaviors evolved for women to be able to
• 44:37
  Speaker 2: survive childbirth, right? That's why I say that a man
• 44:41
  Speaker 2: who shows up, a man who is reliable, a man
• 44:45
  Speaker 2: who provides in whatever way is appropriate for the environment
• 44:49
  Speaker 2: that they're in, that is a precondition for a woman
• 44:53
  Speaker 2: to become reproductive. And when feminists inject toxin directly into
• 44:59
  Speaker 2: that aspect of relationship between men and women, they destroy it.
• 45:03
  Speaker 2: So when they frame men's custodial behavior towards women as
• 45:07
  Speaker 2: inducing dependency, as if the men are the ones creating
• 45:12
  Speaker 2: the biological dependency, which is absurd. And it's not just
• 45:16
  Speaker 2: females' dependency on men, it's the fact that human offspring
• 45:20
  Speaker 2: are so altricial, they're so difficult to raise to adulthood.
• 45:26
  Speaker 2: I mean, inside it, we don't realize how odd our
• 45:29
  Speaker 2: life cycle is. But hominins are extremely difficult breeders. And
• 45:37
  Speaker 2: that's simply because our children's weight outstrips their mobility for years,
• 45:44
  Speaker 2: for decades. So all the hominins are restricted by the
• 45:49
  Speaker 2: fact that they can't move their kids. Right, so this
• 45:53
  Speaker 2: is something that means that there's gonna be a really
• 45:56
  Speaker 2: strong evolutionary pressure to increase the pool of potential resources
• 46:03
  Speaker 2: for a child. And that starts with the father. All right,
• 46:08
  Speaker 2: so for hominins, that invested father is likely a precondition
• 46:12
  Speaker 2: to the fertility of the female. And again, feminists inject
• 46:16
  Speaker 2: poison right there. Then they say, that custodial behavior is
• 46:20
  Speaker 2: men inducing, intentionally inducing dependency in women. A dependency that
• 46:26
  Speaker 2: has been in our evolutionary line from millions upon millions
• 46:29
  Speaker 2: of years. Men have induced it in the last, I
• 46:32
  Speaker 2: don't know how long has civilization, 6,000 years, right? They
• 46:35
  Speaker 2: induced it to create the precondition for man points, right?
• 46:40
  Speaker 2: So they create dependent women because serving the dependency makes
• 46:43
  Speaker 2: them feel like men. This is the formulation. and thus
• 46:49
  Speaker 2: men oppress them. And then they grow up for the
• 46:51
  Speaker 2: worst examples of male behavior to justify how horrible men
• 46:57
  Speaker 2: are to their wives. The one group of people or
• 47:01
  Speaker 2: entities that got human women from the prehistory to now
• 47:09
  Speaker 2: allowed them to survive with their children. The one group
• 47:12
  Speaker 2: that cared that much for millions of years that we
• 47:15
  Speaker 2: still exist. And feminists said that they hate the thing
• 47:19
  Speaker 2: that they exist to provide and protect for. They injected
• 47:23
  Speaker 2: poison right into the relationship. And that's where the destruction is.
• 47:28
  Speaker 1: Okay?
• 47:29
  Speaker 2: I mean, again, maybe women in the workplace isn't ideal. Hell,
• 47:34
  Speaker 2: maybe men in the workplace with a child under seven
• 47:36
  Speaker 2: isn't ideal.
• 47:37
  Speaker 1: Right?
• 47:37
  Speaker 2: These are conversations we can have. But that's not where
• 47:41
  Speaker 2: the destruction in marriage lies. The destruction in marriage lies...
• 47:46
  Speaker 2: with feminists saying that a husband is a woman's enemy.
• 47:52
  Speaker 2: Where else would it be? And then marriage, it isn't like,
• 47:59
  Speaker 2: and here I've looked at this as well, okay? Marriage,
• 48:05
  Speaker 2: East Asian and white women, European women do not have
• 48:10
  Speaker 2: children outside of marriage. There's the occasional single mother But
• 48:16
  Speaker 2: their fertility, those two groups, fertility outside of marriage or
• 48:20
  Speaker 2: whatever is considered a committed relationship in the region, in
• 48:23
  Speaker 2: like Northern Europe, they have cohabitation, but that's considered marriage
• 48:27
  Speaker 2: without the ceremony, right? So whatever is considered a committed
• 48:32
  Speaker 2: relationship in wherever they are culturally, European women do not
• 48:37
  Speaker 2: have children outside of it. Asian women, East Asian women
• 48:41
  Speaker 2: do not have children outside of it. They do not.
• 48:45
  Speaker 2: the fertility of those groups of women outside of some
• 48:49
  Speaker 2: form of a committed relationship is 0.19. It is one
• 48:54
  Speaker 2: fifth of a child. Inside, it's usually over two with
• 48:59
  Speaker 2: East Asian women being lower, right? So you got two
• 49:03
  Speaker 2: groups of women who do not breed outside of pair bonding.
• 49:06
  Speaker 2: They just don't. And then you have groups of women,
• 49:09
  Speaker 2: Hispanic and black women who will, To a much lesser extent.
• 49:15
  Speaker 2: So within a committed relationship, Hispanic and Black women have
• 49:18
  Speaker 2: like 2.6 children. Outside of it, they'll have one. So
• 49:23
  Speaker 2: they have a little bit more flexibility. But all of
• 49:26
  Speaker 2: these statistics point to the fact that marriage is a precondition.
• 49:31
  Speaker 2: A committed relationship is a precondition to unlock women's full fertility.
• 49:37
  Speaker 2: And feminism destroyed it. Everything else is a side story.
• 49:41
  Speaker 2: Women in the workplace, side story. Women in education. There
• 49:45
  Speaker 2: are some cultures where women go into education, like Victorian culture.
• 49:49
  Speaker 2: Women would be highly educated, then they would get married
• 49:53
  Speaker 2: in their mid to late 20s, and they would have children,
• 49:56
  Speaker 2: and then they would be educating those children so that
• 49:59
  Speaker 2: they would excel. So a woman's education became a trousseau,
• 50:03
  Speaker 2: and that's the same in a lot of Gulf nations.
• 50:06
  Speaker 2: And it makes sense because That is investment in the children,
• 50:09
  Speaker 2: ultimate investment in the children, because she's going to use
• 50:12
  Speaker 2: her education to educate the children, right? That's women's education.
• 50:18
  Speaker 2: Another side story. We can manage that. We can manage workplace,
• 50:21
  Speaker 2: like women in the workplace. We can manage women in education, right?
• 50:25
  Speaker 2: We can manage all of that. What we cannot manage,
• 50:29
  Speaker 2: what is ultimately destructive, is feminism saying that marriage is
• 50:35
  Speaker 2: the worst thing that ever happened to women. We cannot
• 50:39
  Speaker 2: manage that.
• 50:39
  Speaker 1: Hold on a second. Somebody's at my door.
• 50:46
  Speaker 2: Oh, boy. Should I just keep going?
• 50:50
  Speaker 1: All right.
• 50:51
  Speaker 2: So regardless of what we decide in terms of women
• 50:56
  Speaker 2: working or don't decide or if women have the freedom
• 50:59
  Speaker 2: to work, the freedom to go into education, we cannot
• 51:02
  Speaker 2: continue to have feminists frame marriage and men in the
• 51:06
  Speaker 2: way that they have. Not only is it a tremendous lie,
• 51:12
  Speaker 2: because there's no evidence ever. Feminists just asserted this. In
• 51:18
  Speaker 2: the 1960s, a bunch of women felt resentment. And then
• 51:24
  Speaker 2: they went and they said, well, we have this feeling.
• 51:26
  Speaker 2: Where does it come from? Obviously, it must come from men.
• 51:30
  Speaker 2: So we are going to develop a conjecture around how
• 51:34
  Speaker 2: men have caused us to feel this resentment. And then
• 51:37
  Speaker 2: we're going to activate this. We're going to take action
• 51:41
  Speaker 2: based on our conjectures about why men cause this sense
• 51:44
  Speaker 2: of resentment. Are you back, Brian? Oh, no, it's not back.
• 51:50
  Speaker 2: All right, so they created this entire farce based on
• 51:55
  Speaker 2: a feeling of resentment. And now this is propagated generation after,
• 52:00
  Speaker 2: like year after year after year into academia to the
• 52:03
  Speaker 2: point where we now have international banking institutions creating surveys
• 52:12
  Speaker 2: that are essentially asking men to tell how much they
• 52:15
  Speaker 2: resemble the caricature women, feminists constructed out of their resentments.
• 52:23
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 52:23
  Speaker 2: And then based on that, they're making funding decisions. And
• 52:28
  Speaker 2: that's the, that's the funny thing. The entire psychology of
• 52:30
  Speaker 2: men and masculinities field is based on on feminists saying,
• 52:36
  Speaker 2: why do we feel this resentment? We're going to look
• 52:38
  Speaker 2: and figure out what men must be in order to
• 52:40
  Speaker 2: explain why we have resentment towards them. And they construct
• 52:44
  Speaker 2: an entire caricature of what men must be in order
• 52:47
  Speaker 2: to justify their resentments towards them. And then that becomes
• 52:51
  Speaker 2: the basis of treating men in the psychology of men
• 52:54
  Speaker 2: and masculinity field. Let me go through that again, because
• 52:57
  Speaker 2: it's astounding to me, right? So we have a bunch
• 53:00
  Speaker 2: of women in the 60s and the 70s who feel
• 53:03
  Speaker 2: resentment because apparently their lives are too easy or they
• 53:06
  Speaker 2: don't have a sense of purpose, they're bored, right? They
• 53:09
  Speaker 2: go out and they develop an explanation for why they
• 53:13
  Speaker 2: feel this resentment. And then they project what men must
• 53:18
  Speaker 2: be to justify their feeling of resentment. And then 25
• 53:22
  Speaker 2: years later, men who have mental health issues are treated
• 53:28
  Speaker 2: based on that. based on all of the academia that
• 53:33
  Speaker 2: came out of trying to determine how much men resemble
• 53:37
  Speaker 2: the caricature they need to be to justify women's resentment.
• 53:40
  Speaker 2: So women's resentments became the basis for medical treatment for men.
• 53:46
  Speaker 2: Just wrap your hands around that. Justified. Okay, Brian, surely
• 53:54
  Speaker 2: you're back yet. I think we've been completely abandoned by
• 53:58
  Speaker 2: the producer. This is an interesting situation. I guess I'll
• 54:02
  Speaker 2: just keep going. I will explain why this has been
• 54:08
  Speaker 2: adopted so widely in the financial system. Because there's one
• 54:12
  Speaker 2: thing where feminism actually constructs this, why do we feel
• 54:17
  Speaker 2: this resentment? Men must look like this in order to
• 54:21
  Speaker 2: justify our resentment. So literally, they're defining men based on
• 54:24
  Speaker 2: women's resentments towards men, okay? They're defining men based on
• 54:29
  Speaker 2: how women feel towards them.
• 54:31
  Speaker 1: All right. I'm back. Sorry. It was building maintenance. They
• 54:35
  Speaker 1: needed to do something.
• 54:37
  Speaker 2: Okay. No evidence for why this, no, no objective evidence
• 54:43
  Speaker 2: for the justification of the resentment. So women just feel
• 54:45
  Speaker 2: this resentment and then they define men, what men need
• 54:50
  Speaker 2: to be in order to justify that resentment. And then
• 54:52
  Speaker 2: that entire thing becomes the foundation of how men are
• 54:56
  Speaker 2: treated in psychology. All right, I filibustered for a while here, Brian.
• 55:00
  Speaker 1: Okay, okay, I appreciate it. Let's get back. I did
• 55:03
  Speaker 1: get a super chow from Dylan for $ 20. Thank you.
• 55:08
  Speaker 1: And he says, they say modern marriage is like a grenade.
• 55:11
  Speaker 1: When you pull the ring, there goes the house. Also,
• 55:13
  Speaker 1: they say the singer from the band, the police glows
• 55:17
  Speaker 1: blue whenever orcs are nearby. What? Oh, sting. I get it.
• 55:21
  Speaker 1: All right, let's go back to this.
• 55:24
  Speaker 3: I want you to answer that question.
• 55:32
  Speaker 4: So if your theory of everything, of all these problems
• 55:35
  Speaker 4: that you've outlined, and I agree, a lot of these
• 55:36
  Speaker 4: are legitimate problems. If your theory of everything is to
• 55:40
  Speaker 4: put it at the feet of feminism, as you did
• 55:42
  Speaker 4: in your intro statement, I'm going to say to you,
• 55:45
  Speaker 4: I think things are probably a little more complex than
• 55:47
  Speaker 4: you're giving it granted for. For example, as we've already agreed,
• 55:51
  Speaker 4: although I think.
• 55:52
  Speaker 1: What?
• 55:53
  Speaker 2: No. Again, I think Rachel's giving her a huge surface
• 55:59
  Speaker 2: to attack on. It's not complex at all. You guys
• 56:01
  Speaker 2: said you wanted to destroy marriage, and you did.
• 56:04
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 56:05
  Speaker 2: Unfortunately, fertility went with it.
• 56:07
  Speaker 1: Oh, well, I mean, that's going to happen. Like, what
• 56:11
  Speaker 1: are you... All right.
• 56:14
  Speaker 4: I think you forgot, it's not when you send women
• 56:16
  Speaker 4: into the workforce that birth rates decline, it's education, as
• 56:19
  Speaker 4: we've already talked about. But again, a really big kink
• 56:23
  Speaker 4: in your armor for that narrative is that.
• 56:25
  Speaker 1: It's chink in the armor, not kink in the armor.
• 56:28
  Speaker 2: Kink, ooh, kinky armor.
• 56:29
  Speaker 1: Yeah, kinky armor.
• 56:31
  Speaker 4: Gulf states don't have feminism, but they do have declining
• 56:35
  Speaker 4: birth rates. And they don't typically let women proudly participate
• 56:40
  Speaker 4: in the workforce. So what's going on in Gulf states?
• 56:43
  Speaker 4: And the major difference is women getting education. Now, if
• 56:46
  Speaker 4: you want to say that women getting education is feminism,
• 56:49
  Speaker 4: I guess my prescription, my question would be what your
• 56:51
  Speaker 4: prescription is, that we just don't educate women at all?
• 56:54
  Speaker 4: Because when you want to talk actually about economy, I
• 56:56
  Speaker 4: would totally grant to you that men are.
• 56:58
  Speaker 1: Well, wait a minute, wait a minute. Let's... I would
• 57:01
  Speaker 1: say that education has to change, because women do learn
• 57:06
  Speaker 1: feminism when they go to school. So yeah, it's not
• 57:09
  Speaker 1: like knowing your ABCs and how to do math, that's
• 57:11
  Speaker 1: the issue. But maybe it's like, I don't know, going
• 57:14
  Speaker 1: to school and learning that men are the enemy and
• 57:16
  Speaker 1: that you should wait until 40 to get married. I mean,
• 57:20
  Speaker 1: that's where it's coming from, so.
• 57:23
  Speaker 2: If you get married.
• 57:25
  Speaker 1: Yeah, if you get married.
• 57:26
  Speaker 6: Of an economy in every single country. And I think
• 57:28
  Speaker 6: that that's awesome.
• 57:29
  Speaker 4: And I think that it's sad that men, I think,
• 57:31
  Speaker 4: oftentimes don't get the credit that maybe you deserve for
• 57:35
  Speaker 4: their ingenuity into.
• 57:37
  Speaker 6: The GDP engine. But the reality.
• 57:40
  Speaker 1: So she's pandering to men a little bit here by saying, oh,
• 57:43
  Speaker 1: men don't get enough credit for, you know, their contributions. Yeah.
• 57:49
  Speaker 2: Of economics.
• 57:50
  Speaker 4: is that what matters most for a country is that
• 57:54
  Speaker 4: you are economically competitive against other global nations. Would you
• 57:58
  Speaker 4: agree that the relative competitiveness is what matters when we're
• 58:02
  Speaker 4: talking about GDP?
• 58:04
  Speaker 2: Oh, boy. Oh, boy. I feel the adrenaline rise in
• 58:10
  Speaker 2: me now. Oh, boy, not so area day. You're moving
• 58:14
  Speaker 2: into my territory. Oh, man, I wish I was there. Ah, yes.
• 58:21
  Speaker 2: I wish I was there. Okay, let's hear.
• 58:23
  Speaker 1: What she says.
• 58:25
  Speaker 3: Okay, so I'll just grant everything you said there. Simone
• 58:30
  Speaker 3: de Beauvoir famously said in an interview with Betty Friedan
• 58:34
  Speaker 3: that if we allow women the choice, most of them
• 58:38
  Speaker 3: are going to want to stay home and have babies.
• 58:40
  Speaker 6: I'm paraphrasing.
• 58:41
  Speaker 3: Which is why she said, we can't allow that. We
• 58:43
  Speaker 3: shouldn't allow that. We should tell them that they have
• 58:45
  Speaker 3: to go to work, which is what the CCP did.
• 58:47
  Speaker 3: That's what the Soviets did. That's what a lot of
• 58:50
  Speaker 3: the Asian nations have done. They've said, like China had
• 58:54
  Speaker 3: a one-child policy because they were like, you ladies need
• 58:56
  Speaker 3: to be working, right? What we see every time is.
• 59:00
  Speaker 2: It was because of overpopulation. This is Malthusian thing stuff.
• 59:06
  Speaker 1: That was concerned for overpopulation, yeah.
• 59:10
  Speaker 2: Yeah.
• 59:10
  Speaker 3: That birth rates crash.
• 59:13
  Speaker 2: Yeah? No, no, I'm just agreeing, yes. It's concerned for overpopulation.
• 59:18
  Speaker 3: Those governments have to correct course. All of them have
• 59:21
  Speaker 3: had to try, and what happens is it doesn't work.
• 59:24
  Speaker 3: You've created an economy that depends on two incomes, that
• 59:27
  Speaker 3: depends on women.
• 59:28
  Speaker 6: Working, like you said.
• 59:29
  Speaker 5: Yeah.
• 59:30
  Speaker 3: If it's the most important thing to be competitive in
• 59:32
  Speaker 3: the global market, and these countries are having all their
• 59:35
  Speaker 3: females work, then we got to do that too. And
• 59:38
  Speaker 3: what I said in my opening is we're trading long-term
• 59:41
  Speaker 3: stability for short-term gains, and it's coming back right now
• 59:44
  Speaker 3: to bite us in the ass. So yes, it's very complex.
• 59:48
  Speaker 3: But how do we make babies? And what are we
• 59:50
  Speaker 3: educating women for? When I say education, I have no
• 59:53
  Speaker 3: college degree. I went to cosmetology school, yet here I
• 59:56
  Speaker 3: am with a best-selling book debating on a world.
• 59:59
  Speaker 2: Stage, doing all kinds of things.
• 1:00:00
  Speaker 3: But I did it after raising five human beings that
• 1:00:05
  Speaker 3: are going to go off into the future and contribute.
• 1:00:13
  Speaker 3: So I'm not now, nor have I ever been making
• 1:00:16
  Speaker 3: the case that women can't learn, be educated. I'm self-educated.
• 1:00:22
  Speaker 3: We have the internet now. We have more access to
• 1:00:24
  Speaker 3: information than ever before in history. What we don't need
• 1:00:27
  Speaker 3: to do is send women to a university, saddle them
• 1:00:29
  Speaker 3: with an average of $ 60, 000 in debt, expect them to
• 1:00:33
  Speaker 3: start a career, and then they don't even start a
• 1:00:35
  Speaker 3: family until they're 31 and it's almost too late.
• 1:00:38
  Speaker 1: Sure.
• 1:00:38
  Speaker 3: That's backwards.
• 1:00:40
  Speaker 2: That's actually not the worst scenario. Because, so for example,
• 1:00:45
  Speaker 2: Prim Reaper started having children at 32, and she has
• 1:00:50
  Speaker 2: two kids now. I've seen this now, is there is,
• 1:00:56
  Speaker 2: at least in our community, even if you start later,
• 1:01:00
  Speaker 2: we have women having children, and we have women having
• 1:01:03
  Speaker 2: children at a replacement level. But the real crux of
• 1:01:09
  Speaker 2: it is that our community heals or at least challenges
• 1:01:16
  Speaker 2: the notion that a relationship with a man is a
• 1:01:20
  Speaker 2: site of oppression, which I think, and also that child
• 1:01:26
  Speaker 2: having children is the destruction of self, right? So I
• 1:01:30
  Speaker 2: think that that does a lot to, even if women
• 1:01:34
  Speaker 2: are having children later, just knowing that they can have,
• 1:01:39
  Speaker 2: recognizing that they have a reliable partner seems to unlock
• 1:01:43
  Speaker 2: that fertility. So even if it's in the 30s, you
• 1:01:46
  Speaker 2: can still get two, three children, right, on average from women,
• 1:01:52
  Speaker 2: but they have to be prepared to start. And the
• 1:01:55
  Speaker 2: other problem is that even in marriage, feminism doesn't prepare
• 1:01:58
  Speaker 2: them to start because it constantly creates this zero-sum game
• 1:02:03
  Speaker 2: between men and women that the relationship is not a
• 1:02:07
  Speaker 2: source of mutual support, but constant fighting over everything. over
• 1:02:12
  Speaker 2: emotional labor, over chores, over how much work he's doing
• 1:02:17
  Speaker 2: or how little work he's doing. So it actually, even
• 1:02:20
  Speaker 2: in a marriage, it undermines the security that women seem
• 1:02:25
  Speaker 2: to need to actually have children. And I don't mean
• 1:02:27
  Speaker 2: security financially, I mean security psychologically. So the other thing
• 1:02:31
  Speaker 2: that improves this is shared parenting. In those states that
• 1:02:36
  Speaker 2: have adopted shared parenting, they've seen an increase in fertility
• 1:02:40
  Speaker 2: because Men who know that their investment in their children
• 1:02:44
  Speaker 2: is not going to be arbitrarily torn away show up
• 1:02:47
  Speaker 2: more reliably and do more work. What a surprise. What
• 1:02:50
  Speaker 2: a shock. They present as more reliable partners. Not that
• 1:02:56
  Speaker 2: men aren't reliable, but it's more difficult for men to
• 1:02:59
  Speaker 2: do so when their investment is not assured. And then
• 1:03:03
  Speaker 2: also the fact that the woman can't easily get away
• 1:03:07
  Speaker 2: from him means that she works with him instead of
• 1:03:09
  Speaker 2: constantly fighting him. And that's what shared parenting does, right?
• 1:03:14
  Speaker 2: And that's not like saying to women, oh, you have
• 1:03:17
  Speaker 2: to have children. And we should probably encourage younger childbirth,
• 1:03:23
  Speaker 2: but it's not a disaster if we do the Northern
• 1:03:25
  Speaker 2: European model, which has been in place for thousands of years,
• 1:03:29
  Speaker 2: or at least a thousand years, where women have children later,
• 1:03:34
  Speaker 2: but once they start, they get down to business. That's
• 1:03:38
  Speaker 2: a very Northern European pattern. You know, you get married
• 1:03:42
  Speaker 2: in your mid to late 20s and you have six
• 1:03:45
  Speaker 2: children by the time you're like 37. Very Northern European pattern.
• 1:03:51
  Speaker 2: And that was workable. But the problem is that at
• 1:03:55
  Speaker 2: every stage, feminism attacks that sense of having a reliable
• 1:04:01
  Speaker 2: partner who cares and is invested for women because it
• 1:04:05
  Speaker 2: attacks men. And you know what it's doing. Okay, so
• 1:04:09
  Speaker 2: I think that you get them married, that'll probably solve
• 1:04:14
  Speaker 2: some of the workplace stuff. And also the birth rate.
• 1:04:19
  Speaker 2: And maybe doing a bit more shaming of this degenerate, like,
• 1:04:24
  Speaker 2: 18 to 25 fuck-everything-that-moves culture. That's gross. And it's... What
• 1:04:33
  Speaker 2: is the word?
• 1:04:33
  Speaker 1: It's disingenic. It's just.
• 1:04:36
  Speaker 2: It is.
• 1:04:39
  Speaker 2: Yeah. It's just like, why should women, and this is
• 1:04:43
  Speaker 2: interesting because I've been doing some research into what colleges
• 1:04:46
  Speaker 2: are actually doing. And I mean, I'm totally on board
• 1:04:50
  Speaker 2: with Rachel being like, yeah, what, what is the education
• 1:04:53
  Speaker 2: we're talking about here?
• 1:04:54
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 1:04:55
  Speaker 2: What, what, because what it looks like colleges are actually
• 1:05:00
  Speaker 2: doing is men's degrees tend to cost more in terms
• 1:05:06
  Speaker 2: of expenses, right? Because they're going into engineering, they're going
• 1:05:09
  Speaker 2: into science, they're going into degrees that require laboratories and
• 1:05:15
  Speaker 2: research budgets and safety protocols and all that kind of stuff.
• 1:05:20
  Speaker 2: Women's degrees are cheaper in terms of expenses, right? Because
• 1:05:27
  Speaker 2: how much do you really need to pay as a
• 1:05:30
  Speaker 2: college to fill a 200 seat seminar room for a
• 1:05:37
  Speaker 2: trans basket weaving humanities course, right? It's comparatively much less, right?
• 1:05:45
  Speaker 2: So you can pack them in like sardines and give
• 1:05:47
  Speaker 2: them an education that's practically worthless and doesn't cost much,
• 1:05:51
  Speaker 2: and you charge them almost the same, right? So what
• 1:05:55
  Speaker 2: happens is there's an incentive to bring in women into
• 1:06:00
  Speaker 2: colleges to get these frankly worthless degrees, But it's more
• 1:06:04
  Speaker 2: about the experience. It's more about how the degree makes
• 1:06:07
  Speaker 2: you feel, makes you feel like a true activist, somebody
• 1:06:10
  Speaker 2: making a change in the world, somebody who cares. You
• 1:06:14
  Speaker 2: know what I mean, Brian? It's like you're not selling
• 1:06:18
  Speaker 2: the increase in your income potential or your job market.
• 1:06:23
  Speaker 2: You're selling how the degree makes you feel. And when
• 1:06:26
  Speaker 2: you sell a degree to a population who cares about that,
• 1:06:30
  Speaker 2: you get more churn, they might spend a couple more years,
• 1:06:34
  Speaker 2: and they spend more at your institution. But here's the
• 1:06:36
  Speaker 2: other thing that they're doing. They have to keep men
• 1:06:41
  Speaker 2: at at least 40% population of colleges because when men
• 1:06:49
  Speaker 2: go under 40% of the college, women stop coming. Men
• 1:06:53
  Speaker 2: will go to a college that's 100% male because they're
• 1:06:57
  Speaker 2: going for different reasons. We have this stereotype of the
• 1:07:01
  Speaker 2: frat bro, but the truth is that most men are
• 1:07:03
  Speaker 2: going to college because for survival, they have to have
• 1:07:07
  Speaker 2: a job. People don't randomly give them a living like
• 1:07:10
  Speaker 2: they do with women. Two, self-respect and the respect of others.
• 1:07:16
  Speaker 2: Their income is a big portion of their respect and
• 1:07:18
  Speaker 2: their ability to be employable is a big portion of
• 1:07:20
  Speaker 2: how they respect themselves and how others respect them. And
• 1:07:24
  Speaker 2: then three, in order to be marriageable. So they have solid, pragmatic,
• 1:07:29
  Speaker 2: concrete reasons to be in the school or in a
• 1:07:33
  Speaker 2: college in order to create a better life for themselves. Women, again,
• 1:07:39
  Speaker 2: appear to be there for a feeling. And because they
• 1:07:44
  Speaker 2: then have that different kind of solid, pragmatic reason for
• 1:07:46
  Speaker 2: being in a college, they will go to a college
• 1:07:51
  Speaker 2: that's 100% male because they're not there for the party culture,
• 1:07:54
  Speaker 2: at least not as consistently as women are. See what
• 1:07:57
  Speaker 2: I'm saying?
• 1:07:58
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:08:00
  Speaker 2: The difference in the behavior. So if men go under 40%,
• 1:08:06
  Speaker 2: women stop coming because women are there for the feeling
• 1:08:10
  Speaker 2: and they're fair for the dick buffet. And that is
• 1:08:14
  Speaker 2: the kind of customer that the college wants because they
• 1:08:19
  Speaker 2: can get them to stay way, way longer for degrees
• 1:08:23
  Speaker 2: that are worthless and Because it's the experience that matters,
• 1:08:26
  Speaker 2: the feeling that matters. And their degrees are cheaper. It's
• 1:08:31
  Speaker 2: like the situation where a lot of gyms, where these
• 1:08:36
  Speaker 2: gyms survive not because of the people who show up regularly,
• 1:08:39
  Speaker 2: but because of the people who get a subscription to
• 1:08:41
  Speaker 2: the gym and never come at all. That's what the
• 1:08:45
  Speaker 2: women in college are. They are... the customers that you
• 1:08:50
  Speaker 2: use in order to keep your business afloat because they
• 1:08:53
  Speaker 2: don't really use the services. They're just there for a vibe.
• 1:08:57
  Speaker 2: They're just there to say they have a membership or
• 1:08:59
  Speaker 2: to pretend like they're ever going to go that's the
• 1:09:02
  Speaker 2: the average call a female college student so what did
• 1:09:05
  Speaker 2: what kind of education is that at the end of
• 1:09:07
  Speaker 2: the day they're literally going to college for a feeling
• 1:09:11
  Speaker 2: it's not pragmatic it's not going to improve their life
• 1:09:14
  Speaker 2: like in terms of their income I guess it might
• 1:09:16
  Speaker 2: get them an avocado toast job if they're on the
• 1:09:18
  Speaker 2: top of their class. And then they're also appear to
• 1:09:21
  Speaker 2: be there for reasons that really are not great. Because
• 1:09:26
  Speaker 2: if men are there because of survival, self-respect, and to
• 1:09:29
  Speaker 2: be marriageable, and women are there for a vibe and
• 1:09:33
  Speaker 2: to fuck around, and again, if the reason, if women
• 1:09:37
  Speaker 2: stop going to college is because men fall below a certain,
• 1:09:41
  Speaker 2: they're there for the men. They're there for their sexual liberation, right?
• 1:09:47
  Speaker 2: They're there to feel like a cool activist who's doing
• 1:09:50
  Speaker 2: things in the world while getting fucked by multiple men. Like,
• 1:09:54
  Speaker 2: why have we constructed this extended, that this is completely new?
• 1:09:58
  Speaker 2: And I know why we have, because colleges have a
• 1:10:01
  Speaker 2: huge financial incentive to churn women through, to bring them in, say, oh,
• 1:10:07
  Speaker 2: it's really about the college life and the experience and
• 1:10:10
  Speaker 2: how you feel about being so activist-y, you know? And
• 1:10:13
  Speaker 2: then the very lifestyle encourages them to drop out or
• 1:10:20
  Speaker 2: spend more or extend their stay, because they're not there
• 1:10:23
  Speaker 2: for a serious reason. And they don't seem to have
• 1:10:25
  Speaker 2: quite as much of an understanding of debt at that
• 1:10:29
  Speaker 2: age for women, right? So they're just accruing this debt,
• 1:10:34
  Speaker 2: which is basically just a extended bacchanal for them. And
• 1:10:40
  Speaker 2: at the end of the day, what do they got?
• 1:10:42
  Speaker 2: They're not more marriageable. Many of them have incredible debt,
• 1:10:46
  Speaker 2: but they're working at Starbucks, right? And they have now
• 1:10:50
  Speaker 2: a huge body count and probably an STD. What was
• 1:10:53
  Speaker 2: that education for? Aside from fattening college's bottom lines. Like,
• 1:11:01
  Speaker 2: so I'm 100% with Rachel. We really need to ask
• 1:11:04
  Speaker 2: these questions. Why are you sending your daughters to a
• 1:11:10
  Speaker 2: six-year cruise? With an all-you-can-eat dick buffet. What is the
• 1:11:16
  Speaker 2: purpose of that? And at the end, she has no more,
• 1:11:21
  Speaker 2: nothing more useful than what she would if she'd had
• 1:11:24
  Speaker 2: gone on a six-year cruise. 100% with Rachel, what the
• 1:11:30
  Speaker 2: hell is this? What is the purpose of this education
• 1:11:34
  Speaker 2: for women? What is the purpose of it? And I
• 1:11:39
  Speaker 2: can tell you what the purpose of it is. It
• 1:11:40
  Speaker 2: doesn't make money for colleges. Anyway, I won't go further
• 1:11:45
  Speaker 2: into it, but I just wanted to elaborate on, I
• 1:11:47
  Speaker 2: agree with Rachel there. I don't think that she's getting
• 1:11:53
  Speaker 2: off course when she starts to bring in the work thing.
• 1:11:56
  Speaker 2: Because again, I've seen cultures that manage that without seeing
• 1:12:01
  Speaker 2: a decline in fertility. I think that we need to
• 1:12:05
  Speaker 2: focus like a laser on what feminism said they were
• 1:12:09
  Speaker 2: going to do. the plan that they had for destroying
• 1:12:12
  Speaker 2: the relationship between men and women, and how they enacted it.
• 1:12:16
  Speaker 2: And everything else becomes secondary. Okay, continue, Brian.
• 1:12:19
  Speaker 1: I'm sorry. All right. No, it's all right. Let's play
• 1:12:21
  Speaker 1: some more.
• 1:12:22
  Speaker 4: And why people invest in early on education is it
• 1:12:25
  Speaker 4: dominantly comes from, again... capitalism and modernization, because what you
• 1:12:29
  Speaker 4: do early on in life is going to have the
• 1:12:31
  Speaker 4: most net returns, right? Anybody who knows anything about investment
• 1:12:34
  Speaker 4: knows this, right? If you, as a young person, invest
• 1:12:37
  Speaker 4: in education early and you are guaranteed a higher income,
• 1:12:40
  Speaker 4: that will have net returns for your whole life longer.
• 1:12:43
  Speaker 4: The reason why men and women are choosing to get
• 1:12:46
  Speaker 4: married later is, frankly, because of what we've taught them
• 1:12:49
  Speaker 4: with the Protestant work ethic and being good stewards of
• 1:12:52
  Speaker 4: their family and their children. The reality is I'm super
• 1:12:56
  Speaker 4: happy that you've been really successful, right?
• 1:12:58
  Speaker 1: So now she's basically saying it's the fault of Protestantism.
• 1:13:03
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Okay.
• 1:13:03
  Speaker 1: Men and women are waiting.
• 1:13:05
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Well, first of all, again, my entire
• 1:13:10
  Speaker 2: long rant about college really begs the question, what is
• 1:13:16
  Speaker 2: it that women are doing or getting from that?
• 1:13:20
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:13:21
  Speaker 2: Is this really an education? No, it's not. Is it
• 1:13:24
  Speaker 2: really increasing their job opportunities? No, it's just making colleges wealthier, right?
• 1:13:30
  Speaker 2: It's making them very, very, very rich. It's fattening their purse,
• 1:13:36
  Speaker 2: which I guess goes to the GDP. There you go. But, um,
• 1:13:41
  Speaker 2: so the, the question is like, well, what is this
• 1:13:43
  Speaker 2: education doing? That's a really good question. And then, sorry, like, uh,
• 1:13:51
  Speaker 2: I briefly got distracted by my cat, and now my
• 1:13:54
  Speaker 2: brain has... I've lost my.
• 1:13:57
  Speaker 1: Train of thought. I'm just saying that she's... Oh, no,
• 1:13:59
  Speaker 1: thought is the Newark ethic. Okay, yeah.
• 1:14:01
  Speaker 2: Yeah, well, she has a... Okay. Judging from Northern European
• 1:14:08
  Speaker 2: societies historically, it could be entirely possible for women and
• 1:14:15
  Speaker 2: men to pursue a K-type strategy in which they focus
• 1:14:18
  Speaker 2: on resource acquisition... and for their offspring, and then they
• 1:14:23
  Speaker 2: marry later. But then you have to address fertility in marriage.
• 1:14:30
  Speaker 2: And here's the issue. Feminist women have declined fertility. Even
• 1:14:34
  Speaker 2: when you get rid of or you just control for
• 1:14:37
  Speaker 2: a singledom, feminist women in marriage see declined fertility. And
• 1:14:43
  Speaker 2: it could entirely, considering the factors that increase fertility, it
• 1:14:46
  Speaker 2: could be entirely because they have invested in a narrative
• 1:14:50
  Speaker 2: That destroys their sense of the reliability of their partner
• 1:14:53
  Speaker 2: as a father and a husband.
• 1:14:55
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 1:14:57
  Speaker 2: So it goes right back to the feminist framing of
• 1:15:00
  Speaker 2: men and women.
• 1:15:02
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 1:15:02
  Speaker 2: Let's like, before we can, we do all of this
• 1:15:04
  Speaker 2: other stuff. Let's just get rid of that. Maybe see,
• 1:15:06
  Speaker 2: see if it improves things. All right, let's keep going.
• 1:15:09
  Speaker 3: All right.
• 1:15:10
  Speaker 1: I got another couple of super comments. So Gary Thomas
• 1:15:14
  Speaker 1: gives us a $ 5 Super Chow and says, So Allison,
• 1:15:16
  Speaker 1: you're advocating for the Ursula von der Leyen life plan.
• 1:15:20
  Speaker 1: No idea. For those who don't know, Ursula von der
• 1:15:26
  Speaker 1: Leyen is the president of the European Commission. She got
• 1:15:29
  Speaker 1: married at 27, and between the ages of 28 and 41,
• 1:15:32
  Speaker 1: she gave birth to seven children while also completing medical
• 1:15:35
  Speaker 1: training to become a doctor. She is who I think
• 1:15:38
  Speaker 1: of when Allison describes the historical marriage and motherhood patterns
• 1:15:41
  Speaker 1: of European women.
• 1:15:43
  Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah. I mean, that's where the Protestant ethic comes,
• 1:15:47
  Speaker 2: work ethic. That's what she's deriding.
• 1:15:50
  Speaker 1: Martin Luther was German.
• 1:15:53
  Speaker 2: Seriously, ladies, you've got to stop being scrubs. Your great-great-great-great-great-grandmother
• 1:16:00
  Speaker 2: had 16 children while pursuing the current-day equivalent of a master's.
• 1:16:05
  Speaker 2: What are you guys doing?
• 1:16:08
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. Uh, Roboto gives us a dollar and says,
• 1:16:12
  Speaker 1: if only there were only female colleges, wait, there are,
• 1:16:15
  Speaker 1: why are feminists not for all female colleges? Who of
• 1:16:18
  Speaker 1: the women benefit from college the most? Is it the
• 1:16:21
  Speaker 1: rich or well women or the working woman? All right.
• 1:16:26
  Speaker 1: Thank you for that. Uh, let's continue. Go ahead.
• 1:16:30
  Speaker 2: I would say that, uh, anybody who can take on
• 1:16:33
  Speaker 2: a gigantic liability as a signal, uh, It probably is
• 1:16:37
  Speaker 2: upper middle class. Probably a lot of this is preying
• 1:16:40
  Speaker 2: on upper middle class social climbers.
• 1:16:43
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 1:16:44
  Speaker 2: Who just want a daughter with a degree because it
• 1:16:47
  Speaker 2: looks good. But anyway, let's keep going.
• 1:16:51
  Speaker 1: All right.
• 1:16:52
  Speaker 4: When Andrew are world level, you've got, I think you
• 1:16:55
  Speaker 4: have a massive income at this point, right? That your
• 1:16:58
  Speaker 4: story isn't everyone's story and it can't be because not
• 1:17:01
  Speaker 4: everyone can be a best selling author or a world
• 1:17:04
  Speaker 4: traveling debater. The reality is that a lot of women
• 1:17:07
  Speaker 4: who opt for the postponing education typically never go back
• 1:17:11
  Speaker 4: to it. They never actually end up achieving. And it's really,
• 1:17:14
  Speaker 4: really hard actually to be 36, no background of education.
• 1:17:19
  Speaker 6: You haven't worked in years.
• 1:17:20
  Speaker 4: To try to vie for now career prospects that will
• 1:17:23
  Speaker 4: be sufficient enough to fund you and your child.
• 1:17:25
  Speaker 6: I agree that the dual income issue.
• 1:17:26
  Speaker 2: Well, don't leave your husband. Don't leave your husband. And
• 1:17:32
  Speaker 2: of course, the argument there is all men are so abusive. Well,
• 1:17:34
  Speaker 2: that's why they suppress evidence of symmetry and abuse. Because
• 1:17:38
  Speaker 2: the truth is that men and women, actually women are
• 1:17:41
  Speaker 2: more physically abusive. They instigate abuse more. So any kind
• 1:17:47
  Speaker 2: of concern over domestic violence and not leaving your spouse
• 1:17:51
  Speaker 2: should at the very least be equally applied to men.
• 1:17:55
  Speaker 2: So when I say, don't leave your partner, right? They
• 1:17:59
  Speaker 2: will say, but what if he's abusive? Well, okay, but
• 1:18:03
  Speaker 2: the same thing applies to men, right? Until we actually
• 1:18:08
  Speaker 2: get services for men and equal care for men, right?
• 1:18:12
  Speaker 2: You can't use that. As an excuse for women to
• 1:18:16
  Speaker 2: leave their partners. As far as I'm concerned. There's no
• 1:18:19
  Speaker 2: moral basis for it.
• 1:18:20
  Speaker 1: Okay?
• 1:18:23
  Speaker 2: Because it's a risk that men run and it looks
• 1:18:27
  Speaker 2: like they run more of it. So how can you
• 1:18:30
  Speaker 2: use that as an excuse for women to leave their
• 1:18:32
  Speaker 2: partners but not men? And still create this situation of
• 1:18:36
  Speaker 2: effective men at fault divorce. Anyway, I wanted to point
• 1:18:39
  Speaker 2: that out. It's like, why are you leaving your partner
• 1:18:42
  Speaker 2: at 36? And again, most women leave their partner for
• 1:18:47
  Speaker 2: no reason because they got bored. yeah right so what
• 1:18:53
  Speaker 2: what and also if you do leave your partner at
• 1:18:56
  Speaker 2: 36 why doesn't he have equal custody okay so why
• 1:19:02
  Speaker 2: isn't he also taking care of the child like half
• 1:19:05
  Speaker 2: the time and at that point why did you get
• 1:19:07
  Speaker 2: divorced in the first place but you know like it's
• 1:19:09
  Speaker 2: just She uses these edge cases in order to argue
• 1:19:16
  Speaker 2: that all women should be educated. Well, okay. So essentially
• 1:19:22
  Speaker 2: what you're saying is that all women have to do
• 1:19:25
  Speaker 2: as much work, get as much education as men, enter
• 1:19:31
  Speaker 2: the workplace, have no reduction in their hours. Because what
• 1:19:37
  Speaker 2: I'm getting at is she's saying that Women should not
• 1:19:42
  Speaker 2: do anything to reduce their employability at any point in
• 1:19:46
  Speaker 2: their life. Well, you're not going to be having kids then, right?
• 1:19:51
  Speaker 2: You're not going to be taking off time to take
• 1:19:53
  Speaker 2: care of them if you do. And for whatever reason,
• 1:19:57
  Speaker 2: feminist women don't like house husbands. So I guess you're
• 1:20:02
  Speaker 2: just going to not have children if this is your attitude.
• 1:20:05
  Speaker 2: And the attitude, again, comes from this belief that husbands.
• 1:20:08
  Speaker 1: Are the enemy.
• 1:20:09
  Speaker 2: Do you see that? It's like, it's sort of like
• 1:20:11
  Speaker 2: she's sneaking it in there, Brian. She's saying all, but
• 1:20:17
  Speaker 2: women always have to be prepared. They have to be
• 1:20:19
  Speaker 2: prepared to enter the workplace at the same terms as
• 1:20:23
  Speaker 2: everybody else, because the husband, that creature from the black
• 1:20:29
  Speaker 2: lagoon that lives in their house with them might turn
• 1:20:33
  Speaker 2: on them.
• 1:20:34
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 1:20:35
  Speaker 2: And then that has to preclude any kind of concession
• 1:20:37
  Speaker 2: to bearing children or getting, you know, being a wife
• 1:20:41
  Speaker 2: and mother and putting that identity first. You see how
• 1:20:45
  Speaker 2: she's framing this? And it all comes back to the
• 1:20:48
  Speaker 2: assumption that men are women's enemies, that the husband is
• 1:20:53
  Speaker 2: the enemy of the wife. That's what she's basing this on.
• 1:20:58
  Speaker 2: Once you get rid of that assumption, you can say, well,
• 1:21:02
  Speaker 2: it's a perfectly valid life choice for a woman to
• 1:21:06
  Speaker 2: rely on a man's income. And then stay at home
• 1:21:08
  Speaker 2: and take care of the kids. And educate them. Homeschool them.
• 1:21:11
  Speaker 1: Whatever.
• 1:21:12
  Speaker 2: Probably homeschool is probably a good idea at this point. Right?
• 1:21:16
  Speaker 2: Maybe have a market garden.
• 1:21:18
  Speaker 1: Okay?
• 1:21:20
  Speaker 2: And that is a perfectly valid choice. I would say that.
• 1:21:24
  Speaker 2: That's a perfectly valid choice. Probably absolutely no harm will
• 1:21:27
  Speaker 2: come to you from that. I mean, almost certainly no
• 1:21:30
  Speaker 2: harm will come to you as a woman. In relying
• 1:21:34
  Speaker 2: on a man like that. But she's saying, oh, no.
• 1:21:37
  Speaker 2: You can't do that. You have to pursue education. You
• 1:21:41
  Speaker 2: have to pursue work. You have to do all of this,
• 1:21:44
  Speaker 2: because even if you live with a man, you never
• 1:21:47
  Speaker 2: know when he's gonna talk on you. And then you'll
• 1:21:52
  Speaker 2: be stuck with Satan. You don't wanna be stuck with Satan, ladies.
• 1:21:58
  Speaker 2: And it's all predicated on the feminist conjecture that again,
• 1:22:04
  Speaker 2: men's custodial behavior, not even their abusive behavior, their custodial
• 1:22:08
  Speaker 2: behavior is oppression of women. Okay, just pointing that out,
• 1:22:12
  Speaker 2: because she's trying to sneak that in. I wonder how
• 1:22:14
  Speaker 2: Rachel responds to it.
• 1:22:16
  Speaker 1: Well, let's find out.
• 1:22:18
  Speaker 4: Poses the biggest issue for families, and it poses a
• 1:22:21
  Speaker 4: problem for men and for women. And the reason that
• 1:22:24
  Speaker 4: that's happening isn't feminism at all. It's runaway inflation, right?
• 1:22:30
  Speaker 4: It is It's called the K-shaped economy, right? You have
• 1:22:36
  Speaker 4: people who are lower income. They have less ability to
• 1:22:39
  Speaker 4: negotiate wages because it is actually more profitable for businesses
• 1:22:43
  Speaker 4: to offshore manufacturing because of the Triffin dilemma. If you
• 1:22:46
  Speaker 4: can build a $ 2 toy and you can build it
• 1:22:49
  Speaker 4: in Vietnam for 50 cents than in America because workers
• 1:22:53
  Speaker 4: are more.
• 1:22:54
  Speaker 2: Triffin dilemma. Okay, so because the U.S. is the world
• 1:22:58
  Speaker 2: reserve currency, there's always a tendency... to take out more
• 1:23:03
  Speaker 2: debt to sell to internationally. So that tends to create
• 1:23:08
  Speaker 2: a situation where offshoring and financialization happens. Because the debt
• 1:23:15
  Speaker 2: encourages a trade deficit with the US as the one
• 1:23:23
  Speaker 2: within deficit. Because the demand is for the dollar. not
• 1:23:31
  Speaker 2: necessarily American products. And because the demand for the dollar
• 1:23:35
  Speaker 2: is greater than the demand for American products, there creates
• 1:23:38
  Speaker 2: a gap. That's what the Triffin dilemma is. All right, madam.
• 1:23:43
  Speaker 3: Okay.
• 1:23:45
  Speaker 2: The Triffin dilemma explains the US's declining fertility rate in
• 1:23:51
  Speaker 2: your model. What explains Canada's, Norway's, UK's, Iran's, South Korea's, Japan's, Russia's.
• 1:24:04
  Speaker 2: All right. What explains Brazil's?
• 1:24:07
  Speaker 6: Okay.
• 1:24:09
  Speaker 2: What explains Costa Rica? What explains Mexico's declining? Not all
• 1:24:14
  Speaker 2: of these countries have the Trifelt dilemma.
• 1:24:18
  Speaker 1: Right?
• 1:24:18
  Speaker 2: They don't all have that. So why are they declining? Huh?
• 1:24:26
  Speaker 2: You see, this is why I say that she just
• 1:24:28
  Speaker 2: is applying these concepts. like a sledgehammer. And it's ridiculous.
• 1:24:37
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Right?
• 1:24:38
  Speaker 2: She's saying, oh, well, look at the Gulf. They're declining
• 1:24:41
  Speaker 2: in fertility. Well, yeah, but the debitor Gulf, the debitor
• 1:24:45
  Speaker 2: Muslim nations are declining less than the creditor. Why?
• 1:24:47
  Speaker 1: Okay?
• 1:24:51
  Speaker 2: She's applying this stuff like a sledgehammer. She's applying these
• 1:24:54
  Speaker 2: talking points not as topics of debate, but as gotchas.
• 1:25:00
  Speaker 1: Yes.
• 1:25:02
  Speaker 2: And it's ridiculous. Okay, let's keep going.
• 1:25:05
  Speaker 1: All right.
• 1:25:05
  Speaker 4: More educated and expect higher income and their dollar is
• 1:25:08
  Speaker 4: worth more. You unfortunately have to offshore it.
• 1:25:12
  Speaker 6: It's more effective. That's why manufacturing left. It's not feminism. Well,
• 1:25:17
  Speaker 6: a lot of early.
• 1:25:20
  Speaker 2: What? I would argue it is, but that is a
• 1:25:25
  Speaker 2: complicated argument. Essentially, what I would argue is the feminism's
• 1:25:29
  Speaker 2: marginalization of men in marriage by the whole men's custodial
• 1:25:34
  Speaker 2: behavior as a source of oppression also led to their
• 1:25:37
  Speaker 2: marginalization of that kind of behavior in the economy, which
• 1:25:40
  Speaker 2: means that, to use an example of what that resulted in,
• 1:25:45
  Speaker 2: prior to the 1970s, okay, so there is a index
• 1:25:48
  Speaker 2: that whose name that I'm blanking on, but it's probably
• 1:25:53
  Speaker 2: not relevant to your interest, that shows the relationship, the
• 1:25:57
  Speaker 2: ratio between a company's buyback of their stocks, which creates
• 1:26:03
  Speaker 2: a signal of value in that company that is, like
• 1:26:07
  Speaker 2: it signals value. It signals an artificial demand for that
• 1:26:11
  Speaker 2: company's stocks, which increases its value, versus a company investing
• 1:26:16
  Speaker 2: in Capex in its capital market, Like investing in capital
• 1:26:20
  Speaker 2: means investing in greater productivity, right? Increasing the value of
• 1:26:26
  Speaker 2: your product that you bring to market in order to
• 1:26:28
  Speaker 2: increase your income. This also corresponds to a shift in
• 1:26:31
  Speaker 2: how CEOs were compensated. So prior, CEOs got compensation that
• 1:26:37
  Speaker 2: was proportionate to the revenue of the company, which itself
• 1:26:41
  Speaker 2: was based on its productivity. So if a company was
• 1:26:44
  Speaker 2: very productive, if, I don't know, Acme Co. created more widgets,
• 1:26:49
  Speaker 2: then Acme Co's CEO would get more money if they
• 1:26:52
  Speaker 2: sold more widgets. So if they supplied the demand in
• 1:26:58
  Speaker 2: the free market, that was what their compensation was tied to,
• 1:27:02
  Speaker 2: what a CEO's compensation was tied to. Now it's tied
• 1:27:05
  Speaker 2: more to stock price. So there's this perpetual incentive to
• 1:27:10
  Speaker 2: buy back stocks to create increased demand to signal worth
• 1:27:17
  Speaker 2: in order to increase the worth of your stock portfolio.
• 1:27:21
  Speaker 2: And this started in the 70s, right? This started then.
• 1:27:26
  Speaker 2: And the problem is that when you invest in buying
• 1:27:29
  Speaker 2: back stocks, you actually don't invest in the maintenance of
• 1:27:33
  Speaker 2: your productivity, the maintenance of your factories. In fact, you
• 1:27:36
  Speaker 2: can even offshore them, get rid of all that, right?
• 1:27:40
  Speaker 2: You don't invest in your labor force. You don't invest
• 1:27:43
  Speaker 2: in anything that is related to your effectiveness and your productivity. Instead,
• 1:27:47
  Speaker 2: you invest in a signal of worth. And I would
• 1:27:51
  Speaker 2: argue that prior to the 70s, that attitude of investing
• 1:27:56
  Speaker 2: and making the thing and doing the thing, it's like, again,
• 1:28:00
  Speaker 2: I go back to that argument you had with Natty, Brian,
• 1:28:02
  Speaker 2: and then you just got so frustrated with her and
• 1:28:04
  Speaker 2: you were like, well, what do we do? Where does
• 1:28:08
  Speaker 2: this touch grass? Where does this become a reality? That
• 1:28:12
  Speaker 2: attitude is masculine. The attitude of when does this, what
• 1:28:17
  Speaker 2: happens if we have to stand for delivery? Like, why
• 1:28:20
  Speaker 2: are we not being compensated for our productivity in the
• 1:28:24
  Speaker 2: real world and switching over to being compensated for how
• 1:28:28
  Speaker 2: well you signal prosperity, right? That signaling is a feminine modality.
• 1:28:35
  Speaker 2: It's a woman's way of thinking. You signal a position
• 1:28:39
  Speaker 2: and you... and the ceos now get value from signaling
• 1:28:43
  Speaker 2: the best position right as opposed from building the best
• 1:28:47
  Speaker 2: product getting down in the dirt making things selling things
• 1:28:52
  Speaker 2: making things work that is a shift in cognitive modality
• 1:28:57
  Speaker 2: in the economy And that difference between buybacks versus investment
• 1:29:01
  Speaker 2: and CAPEX represents, is a symptom of that shift. It
• 1:29:05
  Speaker 2: is a shift from seeing things in terms of making
• 1:29:08
  Speaker 2: stuff and doing the thing to seeing things in terms
• 1:29:10
  Speaker 2: of signaling a position, being the thing of worth. And that,
• 1:29:15
  Speaker 2: I believe, is a result of marginalizing how men think.
• 1:29:19
  Speaker 2: Because that attitude of seeing the substrate, seeing the material,
• 1:29:25
  Speaker 2: seeing the thing that needs to get done, wanting to
• 1:29:28
  Speaker 2: do the thing that, or even just doing it for fun,
• 1:29:30
  Speaker 2: like digging a hole in a beach, that's male. It's
• 1:29:33
  Speaker 2: much more seen in men than women. So when you
• 1:29:36
  Speaker 2: marginalize men's attitude towards things economically, you make this situation
• 1:29:44
  Speaker 2: where things become about signaling and where your position is
• 1:29:48
  Speaker 2: in the stock market, as opposed to what you're actually
• 1:29:52
  Speaker 2: producing as a company.
• 1:29:54
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:29:55
  Speaker 2: So yeah, I would argue that you can lay a
• 1:29:59
  Speaker 2: lot of this at the feet of feminism. Actually, what
• 1:30:01
  Speaker 2: I would argue is that feminism was adopted by individuals
• 1:30:07
  Speaker 2: who had an invested interest in changing the corporate culture
• 1:30:11
  Speaker 2: from things that are made to serve the customer to
• 1:30:15
  Speaker 2: signaling a position and how much more money they could
• 1:30:23
  Speaker 2: make just signaling positions, because that's what creates the K-shaped economy, right?
• 1:30:28
  Speaker 2: You got on top, the top V is all the
• 1:30:31
  Speaker 2: people who are signaling a position, either in the stock
• 1:30:35
  Speaker 2: market or they're signaling a position in relation to funding
• 1:30:41
  Speaker 2: from the government. So, you know, yeah, like this all about,
• 1:30:45
  Speaker 2: the economy is all about signaling positions. That's the top
• 1:30:48
  Speaker 2: of the wedge and the bottom of the wedge is,
• 1:30:51
  Speaker 2: is anything to do with serving somebody and creating a product.
• 1:30:56
  Speaker 2: And here's the kicker. When you have an economy that's
• 1:31:01
  Speaker 2: entirely about signaling with no product, nobody has anything to buy.
• 1:31:04
  Speaker 5: Yeah.
• 1:31:06
  Speaker 2: Unless they're part of the group that actually can leverage
• 1:31:10
  Speaker 2: their signaling into buying things internationally. So this is the causal,
• 1:31:17
  Speaker 2: this is the reason for the enshitification. And it's feminism.
• 1:31:22
  Speaker 2: Feminism marginalizes masculinity, that's its essential product, and vested interests
• 1:31:27
  Speaker 2: took that and said, hey, we can use that to
• 1:31:30
  Speaker 2: change the corporate culture from being productive to signaling position
• 1:31:35
  Speaker 2: and make a whole lot of freaking money on nothing,
• 1:31:40
  Speaker 2: on producing nothing, being accountable to nothing.
• 1:31:45
  Speaker 5: Right?
• 1:31:45
  Speaker 2: I mean, think about it. A CEO just buys back stocks,
• 1:31:48
  Speaker 2: uses whatever money he gets. Usually a loan from the
• 1:31:50
  Speaker 2: government buys back stocks, increases the perception of the worth
• 1:31:54
  Speaker 2: of that company, puts nothing into CAPEX. So they're not
• 1:31:57
  Speaker 2: producing anything more. It's all just a signaling game, a churn,
• 1:32:01
  Speaker 2: a positional signaling with nobody producing anything. Why do you
• 1:32:05
  Speaker 2: think everything is becoming so much more expensive? Because nobody's
• 1:32:08
  Speaker 2: producing everything. Everybody's just creating a position. All right.
• 1:32:14
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:32:16
  Speaker 2: Okay. I don't know if people understood that. So let's
• 1:32:17
  Speaker 2: get back to.
• 1:32:18
  Speaker 1: All right. Let me just see. Cause I did get
• 1:32:20
  Speaker 1: more super comments. I got to read through. So.
• 1:32:23
  Speaker 6: Cool.
• 1:32:23
  Speaker 1: All right. Anonymous gave us $ 5 and said, as someone
• 1:32:27
  Speaker 1: who went to college for electronics engineering, I can confirm.
• 1:32:30
  Speaker 1: Not many women go into STEM. I don't understand the
• 1:32:34
  Speaker 1: frat party lifestyle. The other people claim to have. I
• 1:32:36
  Speaker 1: remember having to study different equations in six weeks. Most
• 1:32:41
  Speaker 1: of my classes were 90% men. The classes I had
• 1:32:44
  Speaker 1: with women were softer courses like philosophy and public speaking.
• 1:32:48
  Speaker 1: Seeing what most of the women there took, I can
• 1:32:52
  Speaker 1: see why they are poor and I am not, but
• 1:32:54
  Speaker 1: I can also see why most media is feminist slash left-leaning.
• 1:32:58
  Speaker 1: Those women are writing man-hate pieces, writing man-hate pieces as
• 1:33:04
  Speaker 1: on systems men like me invented and designed. Absolute thanklessness
• 1:33:09
  Speaker 1: and ignorance. Thank you for the anonymous comment.
• 1:33:11
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and that's... That's a demonstration of what I'm talking about.
• 1:33:15
  Speaker 2: Women went into positional signaling. They don't necessarily get on
• 1:33:19
  Speaker 2: the very tippy top of the positional signaling ziggurat. They
• 1:33:23
  Speaker 2: end up in HR and PR. They end up writing
• 1:33:26
  Speaker 2: screeds in newspapers and stuff like that. Or they end
• 1:33:30
  Speaker 2: up completely destroying the industry and the publishing industry. But yeah,
• 1:33:36
  Speaker 2: that's exactly a demonstration of what I'm talking about. And
• 1:33:40
  Speaker 2: I don't think that many men are actually in college
• 1:33:44
  Speaker 2: for the frat lifestyle. I think they know why they're there.
• 1:33:48
  Speaker 2: But the problem is that when you're young, when you're
• 1:33:51
  Speaker 2: like 18 to 22 as a man, it's very easy
• 1:33:56
  Speaker 2: to be convinced to get into that lifestyle because you're
• 1:34:00
  Speaker 2: lonely or horny, right? And that's when the meat hooks
• 1:34:06
  Speaker 2: come out because... One of the problems with this situation
• 1:34:11
  Speaker 2: is that colleges guarantee a good time for women. And
• 1:34:15
  Speaker 2: they guarantee it by stripping you of your due process
• 1:34:19
  Speaker 2: as a man. That's why they teach the enthusiastic consent.
• 1:34:23
  Speaker 2: It's a sales pitch. You're going to enjoy your time here.
• 1:34:27
  Speaker 2: And if you don't, it's a man's fault. And we
• 1:34:30
  Speaker 2: will make sure to punish him.
• 1:34:32
  Speaker 1: Yep.
• 1:34:34
  Speaker 2: That's the college sales pitch to women. Anyway, let's go.
• 1:34:37
  Speaker 1: All right, another super chat from Josh Hunter, 7742. A
• 1:34:40
  Speaker 1: new one. I've never seen this person before, so welcome
• 1:34:45
  Speaker 1: to the show. 16 kids is literally a classroom. By
• 1:34:49
  Speaker 1: no stretch of the imagination is that digging deep into,
• 1:34:53
  Speaker 1: to ante up to adequate parenting as an example. Do
• 1:34:57
  Speaker 1: whatever on your lives, just don't say the sky is orange.
• 1:35:02
  Speaker 2: That was a new hyperbole, dude.
• 1:35:04
  Speaker 1: Okay. All right. Roboto gives a dollar rumble and says,
• 1:35:09
  Speaker 1: if the profit motive was removed from college, also feminism
• 1:35:12
  Speaker 1: would simply die down like communism, etc. Yeah, I mean,
• 1:35:18
  Speaker 1: women are convinced that college is important. Everyone is, actually.
• 1:35:21
  Speaker 1: They're just told that you should go. And so people go,
• 1:35:25
  Speaker 1: even though people don't need a college education to have
• 1:35:30
  Speaker 1: a satisfying life. I don't even have to say career,
• 1:35:33
  Speaker 1: because I think career... that's like a bloated word with
• 1:35:36
  Speaker 1: a lot of baggage. Like even if you were just
• 1:35:38
  Speaker 1: like you started your own small business or something like that,
• 1:35:41
  Speaker 1: you don't need a college education for most of the things.
• 1:35:44
  Speaker 1: And most people aren't going to benefit from it really.
• 1:35:47
  Speaker 1: So you could argue that it's for profit colleges. I
• 1:35:51
  Speaker 1: just think that's one factor. I think that it would
• 1:35:55
  Speaker 1: require us to look back at what the reasoning behind
• 1:35:59
  Speaker 1: making universities accessible to everyone is. not that it wasn't,
• 1:36:04
  Speaker 1: but you know, it used to be a harder to
• 1:36:07
  Speaker 1: get into. Like you had to meet certain criteria. Now
• 1:36:11
  Speaker 1: anybody can go, but they end up having to, you know,
• 1:36:15
  Speaker 1: put themselves in a lot of debt by getting loans
• 1:36:18
  Speaker 1: and whatnot. And if you don't like take, if you
• 1:36:20
  Speaker 1: don't go into a field or a major, that's actually
• 1:36:23
  Speaker 1: going to allow you the opportunity to make the money
• 1:36:26
  Speaker 1: to pay off those loans. And you're going to end
• 1:36:28
  Speaker 1: up like most people who go to college because they're
• 1:36:30
  Speaker 1: just told to go and they don't really have like
• 1:36:33
  Speaker 1: Any idea what they're capable of, what they should be doing.
• 1:36:37
  Speaker 1: And most of the stuff that kids learn in college today,
• 1:36:39
  Speaker 1: they were learning in high school like years ago, even
• 1:36:42
  Speaker 1: in my generation. When I was going to high school,
• 1:36:46
  Speaker 1: I remember going to high school, graduating, and then I
• 1:36:48
  Speaker 1: took a little break to do some jobs. And then
• 1:36:51
  Speaker 1: I went to college. And when I went to college,
• 1:36:53
  Speaker 1: even though it was probably like a five or six
• 1:36:56
  Speaker 1: year gap, uh, college already was just doing what high
• 1:37:01
  Speaker 1: school was doing. Like I was, you know, and I
• 1:37:03
  Speaker 1: wasn't like in some advanced program or anything like that.
• 1:37:05
  Speaker 1: I just think that the, let's just say the curriculum
• 1:37:08
  Speaker 1: has become watered down. So, you know, you go into
• 1:37:11
  Speaker 1: college to learn stuff you would probably would have learned
• 1:37:13
  Speaker 1: as a sophomore in high school, but that's to justify again,
• 1:37:16
  Speaker 1: having to go to college. Uh, but I don't think
• 1:37:19
  Speaker 1: it's necessary. So anyway, um, Roboto, thank you for that.
• 1:37:25
  Speaker 1: Nobafan gives a dollar and says she blames capitalism for
• 1:37:27
  Speaker 1: the decline in marriage, but we have had several decades
• 1:37:30
  Speaker 1: of the Industrial Revolution and what the left calls capitalism.
• 1:37:34
  Speaker 1: And then he says for another dollar, but it wasn't
• 1:37:37
  Speaker 1: really until the 1960s where women hating men that the
• 1:37:39
  Speaker 1: birth rate actually started to decline. The Industrial Revolution and
• 1:37:43
  Speaker 1: the negative outcomes of it do not explain our recent
• 1:37:46
  Speaker 1: birth rate decline. No, they don't. No, they don't.
• 1:37:51
  Speaker 2: And women in the workplace doesn't really either. And women
• 1:37:54
  Speaker 2: in education doesn't really either. It's like literally, I mean,
• 1:37:58
  Speaker 2: those things don't help. Like we probably should have a
• 1:38:01
  Speaker 2: serious conversation about what the hell we're doing, sending girls
• 1:38:04
  Speaker 2: to the all you can eat Dick buffet for their
• 1:38:08
  Speaker 2: Caribbean cruise dressed up as an education. But, but, you know,
• 1:38:12
  Speaker 2: like that's a really serious conversation. I would also like
• 1:38:15
  Speaker 2: to put on the docket the fact that based on
• 1:38:18
  Speaker 2: my anthropology work, It looks like kids would seriously benefit
• 1:38:24
  Speaker 2: from some intensive socialization by their fathers between the ages
• 1:38:27
  Speaker 2: of two and seven. Like seriously. benefit from that. So
• 1:38:31
  Speaker 2: maybe we can have a conversation about that as well.
• 1:38:34
  Speaker 2: We could bring that back into the conversation because we
• 1:38:36
  Speaker 2: just sort of sacrifice men's time with their children in
• 1:38:40
  Speaker 2: our post-industrial society. And that's a non-starter. Nobody's even talking
• 1:38:44
  Speaker 2: about the deleterious effects of that. And I think that's
• 1:38:47
  Speaker 2: actually possibly worse than women working. But it's a conversation
• 1:38:52
  Speaker 2: we should have. All of these things are conversations. But
• 1:38:55
  Speaker 2: the one thing that's killing us is feminism saying that
• 1:39:01
  Speaker 2: men's custodial behavior towards women is the site of oppression.
• 1:39:05
  Speaker 2: That a husband is a wife's worst enemy. Yet that's
• 1:39:10
  Speaker 2: the thing that's killing it right there. And if you
• 1:39:15
  Speaker 2: actually solve that, you might find... that women decide at
• 1:39:20
  Speaker 2: the age of 19, 20 to settle down with a
• 1:39:22
  Speaker 2: man and maybe have a couple of kids while they're
• 1:39:27
  Speaker 2: in their most fertile years. And that women who get
• 1:39:30
  Speaker 2: an education maybe decide in their late 20s and 30s that, hey,
• 1:39:36
  Speaker 2: you know what? I think I wanna buckle down and
• 1:39:39
  Speaker 2: have some kids with this guy that I have found, right?
• 1:39:43
  Speaker 2: You will discover that they'll make it work if you give,
• 1:39:48
  Speaker 2: if you get rid of this narrative that husbands are
• 1:39:52
  Speaker 2: women or wives oppressors and enemies, that these couples will
• 1:39:58
  Speaker 2: start having children again. Because again, like the thing I
• 1:40:03
  Speaker 2: based that on is shared custody. What does shared custody
• 1:40:06
  Speaker 2: really change in order to increase fertility? It increases the
• 1:40:11
  Speaker 2: investment of the father and his children and also the
• 1:40:15
  Speaker 2: investment of of a woman in the relationship, right? So
• 1:40:20
  Speaker 2: just get rid of everything that's preventing that. And even
• 1:40:23
  Speaker 2: if a woman gets married at 28, she might say,
• 1:40:26
  Speaker 2: you know, actually, I think my life or the way
• 1:40:30
  Speaker 2: I see my life is having this man's kids, right?
• 1:40:33
  Speaker 2: That's something that's overlooked in the entire argument. How critical
• 1:40:39
  Speaker 2: getting women to the point of saying, hey, I want
• 1:40:41
  Speaker 2: this man's children is to the birth rate. Then maybe
• 1:40:46
  Speaker 2: we should be looking at that. And what's impeding that? Okay. Yeah.
• 1:40:53
  Speaker 1: All right. And then Roboto gave a dollar and said,
• 1:40:57
  Speaker 1: has there been a doctorate for the HR path yet? Yeah, right?
• 1:41:04
  Speaker 1: That's an interesting point. All right.
• 1:41:07
  Speaker 3: Feminists wrote a lot about how once we achieved full
• 1:41:10
  Speaker 3: Marxism and communism, because feminism is... There's a capitalist side.
• 1:41:14
  Speaker 3: That's what my first book was about. But the second
• 1:41:16
  Speaker 3: one is about the Marxist communist side, which wanted to
• 1:41:19
  Speaker 3: destroy the family so that we could have women workers
• 1:41:22
  Speaker 3: and we could have communally raised children where everybody's loyalty
• 1:41:26
  Speaker 3: is to the state and nobody can pass down private
• 1:41:30
  Speaker 3: property or anything like that. When you send all the
• 1:41:33
  Speaker 3: women to work early and you tell them they have
• 1:41:35
  Speaker 3: to go to college and they invest.
• 1:41:38
  Speaker 1: She did say that. The feminists just said they want
• 1:41:41
  Speaker 1: to destroy the family. So there is that she knows
• 1:41:43
  Speaker 1: about that.
• 1:41:44
  Speaker 3: All of their fertile years, those feminists over a hundred
• 1:41:48
  Speaker 3: years ago saw that this was going to be a problem.
• 1:41:50
  Speaker 3: And they said in the future, our main obstacle is
• 1:41:54
  Speaker 3: going to be biology. We're going to have to overcome biology.
• 1:41:57
  Speaker 3: We're going to have to have transgenderism. We're going to
• 1:42:00
  Speaker 3: have to have artificial wombs. We're going to need some
• 1:42:02
  Speaker 3: way of dealing with the demographic cliff that's caused by
• 1:42:06
  Speaker 3: pushing mothers out of motherhood and into the workforce because
• 1:42:09
  Speaker 3: you can't do both. Motherhood is not a nights and
• 1:42:13
  Speaker 3: weekends gig that you do when you have time and
• 1:42:16
  Speaker 3: you're not at work.
• 1:42:16
  Speaker 2: You know what just occurred to me? It just occurred
• 1:42:18
  Speaker 2: to me. Maybe... part of the decline in fertility can
• 1:42:24
  Speaker 2: be attributed to men being not having that, like women,
• 1:42:29
  Speaker 2: men not actually having as close or relationship with their children.
• 1:42:35
  Speaker 2: Because if the situation is that women are, and specifically
• 1:42:42
  Speaker 2: they have more children when men not, not general household chores,
• 1:42:47
  Speaker 2: but when men spend more time with their children, women
• 1:42:49
  Speaker 2: are more fertile. Then maybe the process of post-industrial civilization
• 1:42:55
  Speaker 2: of women or men being pushed out of the home
• 1:43:00
  Speaker 2: because they were also, like, usually it would have been, like,
• 1:43:02
  Speaker 2: a family business or a farm, you know, and now
• 1:43:06
  Speaker 2: men don't have that involved relationship with their children. Maybe
• 1:43:10
  Speaker 2: that's part of the original, like, reduction in fertility, if
• 1:43:15
  Speaker 2: you think about it, as a result of post-industrial system. Right? Like,
• 1:43:20
  Speaker 2: maybe that's... part of it and i don't know like
• 1:43:25
  Speaker 2: i mean i don't think anybody's even thought about that
• 1:43:29
  Speaker 2: like maybe maybe the initial reduction in fertility that we
• 1:43:33
  Speaker 2: see as a result of post-industrial civilization is because men
• 1:43:37
  Speaker 2: are no longer taking care of their kids as much
• 1:43:39
  Speaker 2: as they did i don't like that's a possibility i
• 1:43:43
  Speaker 2: don't think anybody's proposed it but let's let's continue All right,
• 1:43:45
  Speaker 2: let's continue.
• 1:43:46
  Speaker 3: Full-time job that deserves full-time attention. And there's never going
• 1:43:50
  Speaker 3: to be a way around that unless you do want.
• 1:43:52
  Speaker 3: everybody to do the Dave Rubin thing and, you know,
• 1:43:55
  Speaker 3: just buy designer babies and we'll just outsource wombs, we'll
• 1:43:59
  Speaker 3: outsource daycare.
• 1:44:00
  Speaker 1: You know.
• 1:44:01
  Speaker 6: And by the way, who's doing that?
• 1:44:02
  Speaker 2: Just other women.
• 1:44:04
  Speaker 3: So for you and I, if we want to have kids,
• 1:44:06
  Speaker 3: our privilege of going to work means some other random
• 1:44:10
  Speaker 3: woman who doesn't care about our child is now going
• 1:44:12
  Speaker 3: to be raising them for 11 or 12 bucks an hour.
• 1:44:16
  Speaker 2: What about her? Another thought. This is against not so
• 1:44:20
  Speaker 2: erudite and her statements about how women need to do education.
• 1:44:25
  Speaker 2: And all right. Do you remember on that dating panel,
• 1:44:28
  Speaker 2: that woman who was like, I didn't want to get
• 1:44:30
  Speaker 2: in a relationship because of pursuing my career.
• 1:44:33
  Speaker 1: She was like an assistant manager at like a, that one.
• 1:44:36
  Speaker 2: Not even a business, just a job. Like my career.
• 1:44:39
  Speaker 1: She just had a job. Yeah.
• 1:44:41
  Speaker 2: Yeah. As an assistant manager of a thrift store. And
• 1:44:43
  Speaker 2: I'm like, are you sure? She isn't like saying like
• 1:44:50
  Speaker 2: something like, ah, My career as a Hollywood, as a
• 1:44:53
  Speaker 2: top corporate lawyer.
• 1:44:54
  Speaker 1: As like a writer and like all these books or yeah, whatever.
• 1:44:57
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 1:44:57
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:44:59
  Speaker 2: I mean, really like, this recalls to me mine that
• 1:45:03
  Speaker 2: what not so erudite was saying about women losing the
• 1:45:08
  Speaker 2: opportunity to go to education and succeed in the workplace.
• 1:45:12
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 1:45:12
  Speaker 2: But most women, like what are you thinking end up being?
• 1:45:15
  Speaker 2: Like a management at a thrift store?
• 1:45:17
  Speaker 5: Yeah.
• 1:45:18
  Speaker 2: Like, is that really that much better than being a
• 1:45:21
  Speaker 2: wife and mother? And furthermore, why can't you do both?
• 1:45:27
  Speaker 2: Why do you have to spend up to 33 working
• 1:45:30
  Speaker 2: so hard to become a manager at a thrift store?
• 1:45:34
  Speaker 2: I mean, from what I'm and I'm not saying that's
• 1:45:37
  Speaker 2: bad or it should be mocked, but I'm saying that
• 1:45:39
  Speaker 2: that doesn't seem incompatible with also being a wife and mother.
• 1:45:43
  Speaker 2: You know what I'm saying?
• 1:45:44
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:45:45
  Speaker 2: I'm pretty sure thrift stores don't demand 14-hour work days
• 1:45:50
  Speaker 2: from their employees.
• 1:45:51
  Speaker 1: No, no, no. And again, yeah, that's not the same
• 1:45:54
  Speaker 1: as what men, what they invest in. When they get
• 1:45:57
  Speaker 1: a job, a lot of times, most of the time,
• 1:46:02
  Speaker 1: they work longer hours, they work riskier jobs, and they
• 1:46:05
  Speaker 1: also work jobs that are just plain more important. They're
• 1:46:09
  Speaker 1: jobs that if they didn't exist, all of the jobs
• 1:46:13
  Speaker 1: that women want to do generally would also not exist.
• 1:46:16
  Speaker 1: They can't exist.
• 1:46:17
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 1:46:18
  Speaker 1: So, yeah.
• 1:46:19
  Speaker 3: But anyway, liberating and empowering for her, is it liberating
• 1:46:23
  Speaker 3: and empowering for me to spend all day at work
• 1:46:26
  Speaker 3: and not see my child take their first steps?
• 1:46:28
  Speaker 2: Or does it make more sense? Is it liberating? I
• 1:46:33
  Speaker 2: think another aspect of this conversation that's never talked about
• 1:46:37
  Speaker 2: is again, men just sacrifice their time with their children.
• 1:46:42
  Speaker 2: in the post-industrial economy, and nobody comments on it. So
• 1:46:49
  Speaker 2: we're sitting on top of a sacrifice made by men
• 1:46:51
  Speaker 2: that nobody talks about. Can we talk about that? And
• 1:46:59
  Speaker 2: when we talk about women being able to spend time
• 1:47:01
  Speaker 2: with their children, can we talk about the fact that
• 1:47:04
  Speaker 2: that's sort of bought on the back of men not
• 1:47:06
  Speaker 2: being able to spend time with their children? I think
• 1:47:10
  Speaker 2: that would make a much more equal conversation about all
• 1:47:13
  Speaker 2: of this. And it would also force feminists to go
• 1:47:16
  Speaker 2: back to that whole thing that they failed to do
• 1:47:22
  Speaker 2: in 1970 to 1985, which is derive the material benefit
• 1:47:26
  Speaker 2: that men get from this current relationship, this current post-industrial
• 1:47:31
  Speaker 2: family life. They couldn't derive the material benefit.
• 1:47:35
  Speaker 3: Right?
• 1:47:35
  Speaker 2: Because it goes to women and children. And fine, if
• 1:47:38
  Speaker 2: that's what you want, but can we at least recognize
• 1:47:41
  Speaker 2: the depth of the sacrifice that men have made? Right?
• 1:47:45
  Speaker 2: And maybe see that maybe it's not so good for
• 1:47:47
  Speaker 2: children either. Like, can we do that? I mean, I
• 1:47:50
  Speaker 2: don't know if we can change it, but can we
• 1:47:53
  Speaker 2: start this conversation with, hey, you know, men had to
• 1:47:56
  Speaker 2: sacrifice so that women could continue. And it's literally in
• 1:48:00
  Speaker 2: the record of what men did during the Industrial Revolution.
• 1:48:06
  Speaker 2: They would take the jobs that were incredibly dangerous and
• 1:48:11
  Speaker 2: uncomfortable and destructive to their health so their wives could
• 1:48:15
  Speaker 2: stay at home or take jobs that were less so.
• 1:48:19
  Speaker 2: This is literally what they did.
• 1:48:20
  Speaker 1: Okay? Yep.
• 1:48:24
  Speaker 3: Right?
• 1:48:25
  Speaker 2: And I want to start this conversation recognizing that. Like
• 1:48:28
  Speaker 2: we talk about, oh, well, what about women having time
• 1:48:31
  Speaker 2: with their children? Yeah, but what about men? Okay? And
• 1:48:34
  Speaker 2: maybe we can't fix it, but we should acknowledge it.
• 1:48:38
  Speaker 2: Men sacrificed a lot. for female homemakers. They sacrificed more
• 1:48:43
  Speaker 2: than they should have, and maybe children shouldn't have sacrificed
• 1:48:46
  Speaker 2: it too. But these are problems that I don't know
• 1:48:49
  Speaker 2: if there is a solution, but the very least they
• 1:48:51
  Speaker 2: should be recognized as having existed, trade-offs that existed, not
• 1:48:55
  Speaker 2: just be silently in the background saying nothing, being referred to,
• 1:49:00
  Speaker 2: not even being recognized. It's like everything, it just infuriates
• 1:49:05
  Speaker 2: me that men make all of these sacrifices and nobody
• 1:49:08
  Speaker 2: recognizes them. Okay, let's keep going.
• 1:49:14
  Speaker 1: All right.
• 1:49:15
  Speaker 3: Look, you can do a lot in this life. There's
• 1:49:18
  Speaker 3: a lot of living after 40. But, you know, focus
• 1:49:22
  Speaker 3: on family first. Find your husband. Build your family. Grow together.
• 1:49:26
  Speaker 3: Your husband's income will grow as your family grows. And
• 1:49:29
  Speaker 3: then after that, there is a ton of stuff that
• 1:49:31
  Speaker 3: you can do. There's all kinds of other options.
• 1:49:35
  Speaker 6: Starting to sound like a Marxist socialist, Rachel.
• 1:49:39
  Speaker 2: What?
• 1:49:40
  Speaker 4: So, I'll be the first to grant you that the
• 1:49:42
  Speaker 4: way that America has its orientation towards mothers, particularly within
• 1:49:46
  Speaker 4: like capitalism and the way that we, for example, don't
• 1:49:49
  Speaker 4: give them any maternity leave. I think in many states
• 1:49:51
  Speaker 4: it's like two weeks here, which is crazy, right? There's
• 1:49:54
  Speaker 4: very little tax credit incentives to make.
• 1:49:56
  Speaker 2: I just boggle that we're arguing over a benefit that
• 1:50:00
  Speaker 2: men sacrifice for and it's not even talked about.
• 1:50:03
  Speaker 1: Enough.
• 1:50:04
  Speaker 3: Oh.
• 1:50:05
  Speaker 2: Enough. Or at all. Like, I mean, I would start
• 1:50:08
  Speaker 2: this argument by saying, You realize that this is an
• 1:50:11
  Speaker 2: argument over a privilege that women have because men sacrifice
• 1:50:15
  Speaker 2: to give it to them. Men sacrifice their time with
• 1:50:20
  Speaker 2: their children in an industrial situation that became sort of
• 1:50:26
  Speaker 2: the foundation of the way we structure our lives now.
• 1:50:29
  Speaker 2: They sacrifice that so women could keep it. They sacrifice that.
• 1:50:35
  Speaker 2: And now we're discussing how best to apportion the thing
• 1:50:38
  Speaker 2: that men gave to women. without even recognizing that they
• 1:50:42
  Speaker 2: did it. Okay, let's continue to argue over how best
• 1:50:49
  Speaker 2: to benefit women. Okay, continue.
• 1:50:52
  Speaker 4: Having a family more affordable for the common man, right?
• 1:50:55
  Speaker 4: So there are many things that I think the government
• 1:50:57
  Speaker 4: can and should do to make it.
• 1:50:59
  Speaker 2: No.
• 1:50:59
  Speaker 6: Oh, good Lord.
• 1:51:02
  Speaker 1: Wait, what happened?
• 1:51:04
  Speaker 6: Is that those marriages are the most likely to dissolve.
• 1:51:06
  Speaker 2: Marxist socialism happened, Brian.
• 1:51:10
  Speaker 1: Say what?
• 1:51:11
  Speaker 2: Marxist socialism.
• 1:51:13
  Speaker 1: No, no, no. I don't think that's what Erudite is saying.
• 1:51:16
  Speaker 1: I think that she's actually blaming capitalism or something.
• 1:51:20
  Speaker 2: Yeah, no, no, no. I know she is.
• 1:51:22
  Speaker 1: Oh, okay, okay.
• 1:51:24
  Speaker 2: Yeah, capitalism. As if what we have now isn't socialism.
• 1:51:28
  Speaker 2: I wish people would recognize that. It's just the socialism
• 1:51:31
  Speaker 2: that actually happens. You think that socialism is giving the
• 1:51:36
  Speaker 2: average person a living. Well, no. And also that does
• 1:51:41
  Speaker 2: not how it works, right? No, socialism is always about,
• 1:51:46
  Speaker 2: it's always for the elites, right? That's how socialism works
• 1:51:50
  Speaker 2: in practice. The elites get it, get it. You get
• 1:51:54
  Speaker 2: the tax burden, right? The corporations get the bailouts. You
• 1:52:01
  Speaker 2: get to pay for them. That's how it works in reality, right?
• 1:52:07
  Speaker 2: That's how it works when you get rid of an
• 1:52:08
  Speaker 2: economy based on men protecting and providing for their families.
• 1:52:14
  Speaker 2: And replace it with an economy that's about positional signaling
• 1:52:17
  Speaker 2: and fed backstopping if those positions blow up for you.
• 1:52:22
  Speaker 2: That's why it's shit now. Because it is socialism. It's
• 1:52:25
  Speaker 2: just corporate socialism. And incidentally, Soviet socialism was party socialism.
• 1:52:31
  Speaker 2: If you weren't part of the party, you got fuck all.
• 1:52:34
  Speaker 2: You got to farm your turnips so you go to
• 1:52:36
  Speaker 2: the gulag. This is what sort of infuriates me about communists.
• 1:52:42
  Speaker 2: They don't realize that we always have it. Like communism
• 1:52:46
  Speaker 2: is the thing we're always fighting. You know, Versailles, like
• 1:52:50
  Speaker 2: Louis XIV, that was communism, but just for the aristocrats.
• 1:52:55
  Speaker 2: That's the way it always works, guys. The ones who
• 1:52:57
  Speaker 2: get a living are the ones on top. The ones
• 1:53:01
  Speaker 2: who pay for their living, whether it's Soviet Russia, or
• 1:53:06
  Speaker 2: the court of the Sun King or modern day non-capitalism. Yeah,
• 1:53:11
  Speaker 2: it's everybody else. The elites get a living, you get
• 1:53:14
  Speaker 2: to pay for their living. That is socialism. All right,
• 1:53:19
  Speaker 2: let's keep going.
• 1:53:20
  Speaker 1: Well, okay, I got about a little bit less than
• 1:53:23
  Speaker 1: 10 minutes.
• 1:53:24
  Speaker 4: And should do to make it so that family rearing
• 1:53:27
  Speaker 4: is more affordable.
• 1:53:29
  Speaker 6: The reality though that- So.
• 1:53:30
  Speaker 1: Basically men have to pay for, and again, I've said
• 1:53:33
  Speaker 1: many times, very poor people Have had many, many children.
• 1:53:37
  Speaker 1: It's not really a matter of not having the money.
• 1:53:40
  Speaker 1: It's just a matter of people willing to make the
• 1:53:42
  Speaker 1: sacrifices and the time to do it. And I think
• 1:53:45
  Speaker 1: it can be done. And you don't have to have
• 1:53:47
  Speaker 1: 10 kids. So I don't think that this works on
• 1:53:51
  Speaker 1: its face. But anyway.
• 1:53:53
  Speaker 4: You're prescribing for people of the young girl who's at 19,
• 1:53:56
  Speaker 4: stays home, gets married, has kids. Number one, the reality
• 1:54:00
  Speaker 4: is that those marriages are the most likely to dissolve.
• 1:54:03
  Speaker 4: It's the highest divorce rate group is young people getting married.
• 1:54:06
  Speaker 6: Second of all- Are you sure about that?
• 1:54:08
  Speaker 1: That's probably because, well, yeah, I don't know if it's true,
• 1:54:12
  Speaker 1: but go ahead.
• 1:54:13
  Speaker 2: Divorce is becoming less of an issue for whatever reason,
• 1:54:16
  Speaker 2: probably because the people who are still getting married are
• 1:54:19
  Speaker 2: a lot more invested in it.
• 1:54:21
  Speaker 1: It might be, but then you also have to ask,
• 1:54:23
  Speaker 1: if divorce is going down, is marriage going down? Because
• 1:54:28
  Speaker 1: the men checking out thing is still happening too.
• 1:54:32
  Speaker 2: Well, I mean, men are checking out, but honestly, I
• 1:54:36
  Speaker 2: don't think the big driver of the divorce reduction is
• 1:54:39
  Speaker 2: men checking out. It's women and their hyperbolegomy.
• 1:54:45
  Speaker 1: Well, the driver of divorce, yeah. Yeah, for sure.
• 1:54:48
  Speaker 2: No, the driver of not even getting in a relationship.
• 1:54:50
  Speaker 1: Or not getting in a relationship, yeah.
• 1:54:53
  Speaker 2: The remaining single. It's hypergamy gone hyperbolic. But yeah, I
• 1:54:59
  Speaker 2: think that's the big driver for the lack of marriages.
• 1:55:02
  Speaker 2: But what's wrong? Why is it that we have such
• 1:55:07
  Speaker 2: a contempt for a 19-year-old woman deciding she likes this
• 1:55:11
  Speaker 2: dude and wants to have children with him Versus a
• 1:55:15
  Speaker 2: 19-year-old deciding she wants to fuck three men at a
• 1:55:19
  Speaker 2: ketamine-fueled party and, you know, give herself a nice case
• 1:55:23
  Speaker 2: of herpes by the time she's 25. So the 19-year-old
• 1:55:27
  Speaker 2: who just settles down has two kids, right? And, you know,
• 1:55:31
  Speaker 2: maybe at 25 she's thinking about some adult education, you know,
• 1:55:34
  Speaker 2: going to college, you know, night classes or whatever as
• 1:55:39
  Speaker 2: her kids go to school. Or maybe she's a homeschooler, whatever, right?
• 1:55:43
  Speaker 2: Why is that life path seen as such an imposition
• 1:55:48
  Speaker 2: and such a corruption of the female soul versus the
• 1:55:51
  Speaker 2: ketamine-fueled orgy in a frat house life path? The life
• 1:55:57
  Speaker 2: path with 25% of women have an STD. Why is
• 1:56:03
  Speaker 2: that one? And honestly, one is more mature. And maybe
• 1:56:07
  Speaker 2: that's part of the issue. Maybe 19 is... But then again,
• 1:56:09
  Speaker 2: 19 is a bit.
• 1:56:13
  Speaker 2: So we can look at the life path where a
• 1:56:16
  Speaker 2: 19-year-old signs on for a college loan that will take
• 1:56:20
  Speaker 2: her until she's in her 45 to pay off, plus
• 1:56:23
  Speaker 2: an STD, plus some drug-fueled orgies. That's a respectable life path, guys.
• 1:56:31
  Speaker 2: But God forbid that 19-year-old marry a dude and have children.
• 1:56:35
  Speaker 2: That's not respectable. Not respectable at all.
• 1:56:41
  Speaker 3: Okay.
• 1:56:44
  Speaker 2: Okay.
• 1:56:45
  Speaker 1: All right. Let's do a little more.
• 1:56:47
  Speaker 4: Reality is that that young man, he basically will have
• 1:56:51
  Speaker 4: to sacrifice if he even wants to begin to having
• 1:56:56
  Speaker 4: any amount of income to be able.
• 1:56:58
  Speaker 6: To afford his five babies.
• 1:57:00
  Speaker 4: For example, the reality is that man is going to
• 1:57:03
  Speaker 4: entirely sacrifice his fatherhood, right? How many men here work
• 1:57:07
  Speaker 4: more than 40 hours a week already?
• 1:57:11
  Speaker 6: I believe, yeah.
• 1:57:11
  Speaker 2: Oh, I can't believe that she's bringing it up. Wow.
• 1:57:15
  Speaker 1: Well, she's going to use it to make her argument
• 1:57:17
  Speaker 1: that feminism saved men from, like, overworking.
• 1:57:20
  Speaker 6: You won't work more than 50.
• 1:57:21
  Speaker 2: Oh, boy.
• 1:57:23
  Speaker 1: Well, I mean, that is the goal here.
• 1:57:25
  Speaker 2: Oh, boy.
• 1:57:28
  Speaker 6: More than 50 hours. Okay. More than 50. You, sir, too? 60.
• 1:57:32
  Speaker 2: Yeah, but do you have children?
• 1:57:33
  Speaker 1: We've got an auction.
• 1:57:33
  Speaker 2: 80, 80.
• 1:57:34
  Speaker 1: Okay, yeah.
• 1:57:35
  Speaker 4: Men work so much. They work so much, and your
• 1:57:39
  Speaker 4: prescription is that they miss their childhood's first steps.
• 1:57:43
  Speaker 6: They miss talking to their.
• 1:57:44
  Speaker 1: Rachel's not prescribing this. I'm just letting you know. This
• 1:57:47
  Speaker 1: is the point where you always know someone's up to
• 1:57:50
  Speaker 1: something when they start telling the audience what someone is
• 1:57:54
  Speaker 1: saying when they're not actually saying it.
• 1:57:57
  Speaker 4: They miss fatherhood because they're attached to their GDP output
• 1:58:01
  Speaker 4: to provide for their family.
• 1:58:03
  Speaker 1: My GDP, my number go up. Again, not that important.
• 1:58:07
  Speaker 4: His mom shouldn't work and shouldn't work for an economically
• 1:58:10
  Speaker 4: viable option.
• 1:58:11
  Speaker 6: That's ridiculous, right?
• 1:58:13
  Speaker 4: That's actually telling young men, abandon your children for the
• 1:58:17
  Speaker 4: next 10 years until you've made it.
• 1:58:19
  Speaker 1: It is.
• 1:58:22
  Speaker 2: Wait. Wait, okay.
• 1:58:25
  Speaker 6: I agree, that's very.
• 1:58:28
  Speaker 2: Okay, so Rachel's going to respond to that.
• 1:58:31
  Speaker 1: Yes, she is.
• 1:58:31
  Speaker 2: Let's listen to Rachel's response.
• 1:58:32
  Speaker 6: It's very bad for Rachel. All right.
• 1:58:37
  Speaker 4: I've miscarried twice, but nice try.
• 1:58:39
  Speaker 1: Relax, relax.
• 1:58:41
  Speaker 6: Didn't dipstick as well as you hoped it would, hey?
• 1:58:44
  Speaker 1: Go ahead, Rachel. We'll give you two minutes. All right,
• 1:58:47
  Speaker 1: in the back. Keep it down.
• 1:58:48
  Speaker 6: Are they going to be exited or just the ones
• 1:58:50
  Speaker 6: that are heckling, by the way? I mean, he said
• 1:58:53
  Speaker 6: weird stuff about my children.
• 1:58:55
  Speaker 2: Okay, all right. I need to respond to this, but
• 1:58:58
  Speaker 2: now we're in this side where she's being precious.
• 1:59:01
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I know. Well, let's get past it. Let's just
• 1:59:03
  Speaker 1: get past it and hear Rachel's response.
• 1:59:06
  Speaker 6: It made some comment about me not having children.
• 1:59:08
  Speaker 3: Listen, we don't need to make any of this personal, guys.
• 1:59:12
  Speaker 3: Totally unnecessary.
• 1:59:14
  Speaker 6: It's i i care about.
• 1:59:15
  Speaker 4: The arguments in the world views uh i miscarried but
• 1:59:18
  Speaker 4: thank you for your concern help us help us find
• 1:59:20
  Speaker 4: that person we're gonna walk them out.
• 1:59:24
  Speaker 1: Is folks.
• 1:59:27
  Speaker 5: Sorry about that i honestly i i thought it was
• 1:59:30
  Speaker 5: like they were agreeing with you i didn't hear what
• 1:59:32
  Speaker 5: they said so i agree with you yeah folks don't
• 1:59:35
  Speaker 5: bring up people's families and again if it's I want
• 1:59:39
  Speaker 5: to be easygoing, so if it's something playful and you
• 1:59:41
  Speaker 5: agree or something, I'm not going to flip out. But
• 1:59:44
  Speaker 5: if it is malevolent toward one of the speakers, then
• 1:59:47
  Speaker 5: we're just going to take you out right now. Who's
• 1:59:50
  Speaker 5: two-minute response?
• 1:59:51
  Speaker 1: Go ahead, Rachel.
• 1:59:52
  Speaker 3: So Elizabeth Warren, of all people, wrote a book called
• 1:59:55
  Speaker 3: The Two-Income Trap. And there's a reason why you could still,
• 1:59:59
  Speaker 3: post-industrialization and post-technological revolution, have a janitor... who could support
• 2:00:05
  Speaker 3: a family of six or something like that on a
• 2:00:07
  Speaker 3: single income, and now you can't. Yes, there's lots of
• 2:00:11
  Speaker 3: economic factors, but the biggest one, and the one that's
• 2:00:14
  Speaker 3: different than every other economic downturn throughout all of history,
• 2:00:18
  Speaker 3: is that when you push, and this is, proponents of
• 2:00:21
  Speaker 3: feminism actually say this. They say, oh, it's great when
• 2:00:24
  Speaker 3: you send all the women and the moms to work,
• 2:00:26
  Speaker 3: you get this much higher luxury standard of living, you
• 2:00:29
  Speaker 3: get a higher GDP. But they'll also admit that this
• 2:00:33
  Speaker 3: does create a reliance on that. So we're building sectors
• 2:00:36
  Speaker 3: of the she economy around things like education. Women dominate
• 2:00:41
  Speaker 3: health care and education over every other type of job.
• 2:00:44
  Speaker 3: And then everything else is like cottage industry stuff like Etsy.
• 2:00:48
  Speaker 3: Like I have an Etsy shop and I have a
• 2:00:49
  Speaker 3: brownie shop. You guys see like the 5,000 different cake
• 2:00:52
  Speaker 3: and cookie shops that are in every single mall now.
• 2:00:55
  Speaker 3: It's like how many of these do we need? We
• 2:00:58
  Speaker 3: started offshoring all of our, you know, manufacturing and all
• 2:01:01
  Speaker 3: of that. This is all bad stuff, but it was
• 2:01:03
  Speaker 3: made possible. It was made possible by pushing all the wind.
• 2:01:06
  Speaker 3: Now we have all this new labor. This was what
• 2:01:09
  Speaker 3: the big industrialists of.
• 2:01:10
  Speaker 2: The Gilded Age did. All right, so does she directly
• 2:01:14
  Speaker 2: address not so erudite's point? Because I'm going to right now.
• 2:01:18
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but.
• 2:01:19
  Speaker 2: I know that we don't have a lot of time.
• 2:01:21
  Speaker 1: I know, I know, but I... Can we let Rachel's
• 2:01:24
  Speaker 1: point finish? And then as soon as, not so, because
• 2:01:27
  Speaker 1: I don't remember, to be honest. So I want to
• 2:01:30
  Speaker 1: let Rachel finish and then you can go ahead and
• 2:01:32
  Speaker 1: say your piece.
• 2:01:33
  Speaker 3: Get the women into the factories, pay them cheap labor
• 2:01:35
  Speaker 3: like you said.
• 2:01:36
  Speaker 6: This was the beginning.
• 2:01:37
  Speaker 3: Then you pass the income tax. Now we're taxing two
• 2:01:40
  Speaker 3: people in the household instead of just one. Then we
• 2:01:42
  Speaker 3: pass compulsory education systems. Now you have to send your
• 2:01:45
  Speaker 3: child to public school and you have to pay the
• 2:01:47
  Speaker 3: taxes for that too. So the net result of all
• 2:01:50
  Speaker 3: of these things coming together and creating this new great
• 2:01:53
  Speaker 3: society is the daddy is your government now.
• 2:01:56
  Speaker 6: Or the government's your daddy now. Sorry, I switched it.
• 2:01:59
  Speaker 3: The government's your daddy now, and all those men who
• 2:02:02
  Speaker 3: just raised their hand who work 50, 60 hours a week,
• 2:02:05
  Speaker 3: how many of you would prefer your wife to go
• 2:02:08
  Speaker 3: to work and your children to be raised in daycare
• 2:02:11
  Speaker 3: so that you can work less?
• 2:02:12
  Speaker 1: None.
• 2:02:13
  Speaker 2: None.
• 2:02:13
  Speaker 1: Of course not.
• 2:02:14
  Speaker 2: Exactly. So, again, my.
• 2:02:16
  Speaker 4: They'd prefer to be home with their kids as well,
• 2:02:18
  Speaker 4: I suspect. They would probably prefer to be able to
• 2:02:21
  Speaker 4: know your kids' first words. You don't want to watch
• 2:02:23
  Speaker 4: your kid walk for the first time?
• 2:02:24
  Speaker 2: You don't want to be there? Yeah, fair enough.
• 2:02:25
  Speaker 6: That's a sacrifice men make.
• 2:02:27
  Speaker 2: Okay so is is i think that this is going
• 2:02:30
  Speaker 2: to go on a while because now it's becoming a
• 2:02:32
  Speaker 2: back and forth so i want to address not to
• 2:02:34
  Speaker 2: erin's point we can pick this up next time all
• 2:02:36
  Speaker 2: right okay one hey if a man starts uh his
• 2:02:43
  Speaker 2: family in his early 20s all right and does not
• 2:02:47
  Speaker 2: have a uh college debt He will end up having
• 2:02:53
  Speaker 2: more children than a man who goes to college and
• 2:02:55
  Speaker 2: takes a college debt and starts his family in the 30s.
• 2:03:00
  Speaker 2: And that guy who goes to college does not actually
• 2:03:04
  Speaker 2: pay off his debt and earn more until he's in
• 2:03:06
  Speaker 2: his 40s because he took himself out of the labor pool.
• 2:03:10
  Speaker 2: So the idea that the man who has a stay-at-home
• 2:03:14
  Speaker 2: wife in his early 20s is working so hard is
• 2:03:18
  Speaker 2: a myth. If you actually look at the statistics, and
• 2:03:23
  Speaker 2: this is the time you study, men with a stay-at-home
• 2:03:26
  Speaker 2: wife actually work less than other men. They work about
• 2:03:31
  Speaker 2: 40 hours, whereas men with a dual-income couple work more.
• 2:03:40
  Speaker 2: How does that make sense? And they have less children.
• 2:03:43
  Speaker 2: And the other thing is that the communities that focus
• 2:03:46
  Speaker 2: on family and recognizing men as providers, because The subtle
• 2:03:51
  Speaker 2: thing that not so erudite is trying to put out
• 2:03:54
  Speaker 2: there is that feminism changed the expectation that men be providers. No,
• 2:04:00
  Speaker 2: it just said provision is oppression.
• 2:04:02
  Speaker 3: Okay.
• 2:04:03
  Speaker 2: Now I'll just look at the communities that still recognize
• 2:04:07
  Speaker 2: men as providers as that being a positive contribution to
• 2:04:10
  Speaker 2: the family. Those communities also are more likely to say
• 2:04:15
  Speaker 2: that a man can invest too much time in his career.
• 2:04:18
  Speaker 2: to the detriment of his family. So they recognize provision,
• 2:04:24
  Speaker 2: but they also recognize it goes too far. That the
• 2:04:28
  Speaker 2: family is the center, that he should not be spending
• 2:04:31
  Speaker 2: so much time on his career that he's avoiding spending
• 2:04:34
  Speaker 2: time with his family, which may be why these men
• 2:04:37
  Speaker 2: with stay homes don't work as much. They aren't working
• 2:04:41
  Speaker 2: the 50 hour jobs. That's the astounding thing about all
• 2:04:44
  Speaker 2: of this. They're having children at lower incomes, not working
• 2:04:49
  Speaker 2: the 50-hour jobs, probably because their wife, in conjunction with
• 2:04:54
  Speaker 2: being a homemaker, maybe takes on local jobs to supplement,
• 2:05:00
  Speaker 2: maybe does homeschooling, maybe has more reasonable expectations in terms
• 2:05:06
  Speaker 2: of furnishing their household, vacations, and other luxury goods. So
• 2:05:12
  Speaker 2: in other words, that household is able to afford their
• 2:05:15
  Speaker 2: kids and able to afford the husband going out less
• 2:05:18
  Speaker 2: to afford the kids because the wife is more interested
• 2:05:22
  Speaker 2: in seeing herself in terms of her family rather than
• 2:05:25
  Speaker 2: a luxury job and luxury goods.
• 2:05:29
  Speaker 4: Okay?
• 2:05:30
  Speaker 2: So this is the entire framework that not so erudite
• 2:05:34
  Speaker 2: is constructing that conservative women, they got the whip on
• 2:05:37
  Speaker 2: the men. They're just whipping them. Yeah, do more work, men.
• 2:05:41
  Speaker 2: That's bullshit. When the women with the whip are liberal women,
• 2:05:49
  Speaker 2: the ones who say that provision is oppression and then
• 2:05:51
  Speaker 2: require 2.3 times more of it to marry men. Right.
• 2:05:57
  Speaker 2: And then the the men who are working the most
• 2:05:59
  Speaker 2: are in the two couple household where the woman wants
• 2:06:02
  Speaker 2: the luxury vacations and the McMansion and to change her
• 2:06:07
  Speaker 2: decor once every three months. Right. Those are the guys
• 2:06:11
  Speaker 2: who are on the grindstone, but they have like one child,
• 2:06:15
  Speaker 2: if that.
• 2:06:16
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 2:06:17
  Speaker 2: Those are the guys who are putting in 50 hours
• 2:06:19
  Speaker 2: of work week. Okay, so her not so erudite point
• 2:06:25
  Speaker 2: is dead in the water. First of all, there is
• 2:06:28
  Speaker 2: no connection between income and having children. People with lower
• 2:06:33
  Speaker 2: incomes have more children.
• 2:06:34
  Speaker 1: Yes.
• 2:06:35
  Speaker 2: Not significantly more, but they do. They manage it. And
• 2:06:39
  Speaker 2: they likely manage it because the woman is part of
• 2:06:41
  Speaker 2: a community where she's actually shamed for vanity and pride
• 2:06:45
  Speaker 2: and excess. So she's not expecting... two vacations a year,
• 2:06:50
  Speaker 2: to change her household decor several times a year, to
• 2:06:54
  Speaker 2: have expensive outfits, to eat out constantly. Her expectations are
• 2:07:01
  Speaker 2: that the man provide for a family, but not too
• 2:07:03
  Speaker 2: much because he should be at home to be with them.
• 2:07:07
  Speaker 2: That is the conservative or the more church-going. And I'm
• 2:07:11
  Speaker 2: just saying this based on the statistics. That's the church-going attitude. Okay?
• 2:07:18
  Speaker 2: I mean, even liberal church, even people who identify as
• 2:07:22
  Speaker 2: liberal but go to church have more of this attitude.
• 2:07:27
  Speaker 2: Family first. No excess displays of wealth. No excess consumption.
• 2:07:33
  Speaker 2: No signaling to the Joneses. Focus on your family. Focus
• 2:07:37
  Speaker 2: on your kids. Make sure the husband has time with
• 2:07:40
  Speaker 2: his kids. So strip it down to what the necessities are,
• 2:07:45
  Speaker 2: the household necessities are. That's the attitude. Where you're in
• 2:07:48
  Speaker 2: a community that shames women for their vanity, for their pride,
• 2:07:53
  Speaker 2: for their greed.
• 2:07:56
  Speaker 1: Right?
• 2:07:57
  Speaker 2: Then they control that. And then everything. works somehow. But
• 2:08:03
  Speaker 2: when you look at the liberal household, a liberal man
• 2:08:07
  Speaker 2: right off the bat needs 2.3 times more income. That's
• 2:08:11
  Speaker 2: where you're going to see the 50, 60, 70 hour
• 2:08:14
  Speaker 2: work week for the men if they want to get married.
• 2:08:17
  Speaker 2: And then what they marry to is a woman who's
• 2:08:19
  Speaker 2: also working, not as much as they are ever. I'll
• 2:08:23
  Speaker 2: point that out. But what she's doing is she's using
• 2:08:27
  Speaker 2: his income to enhance her social standing. All the expensive
• 2:08:33
  Speaker 2: vacations to Europe, to the Caribbean, all of the expensive
• 2:08:38
  Speaker 2: home decor, the expensive outfits, the expensive everything for the children.
• 2:08:43
  Speaker 2: And they have less children overall. That's where the whip
• 2:08:49
  Speaker 2: is being applied. It's liberal men, liberal women to their
• 2:08:54
  Speaker 2: liberal male husbands with their standards, which are insane. And
• 2:09:02
  Speaker 2: why are they insane? Because they do not credit him
• 2:09:05
  Speaker 2: for his provision. They don't credit him for being able
• 2:09:08
  Speaker 2: to provide the necessities of a household. And they don't
• 2:09:12
  Speaker 2: value him as a person. They don't value him. his
• 2:09:16
  Speaker 2: relationship to their children. So this thing that erudite is
• 2:09:20
  Speaker 2: trying to present that conservative or church-going women are putting
• 2:09:25
  Speaker 2: their men to the grindstone and whipping them, work, work, work, men, work.
• 2:09:29
  Speaker 2: And then the liberal women are like, oh no, dear,
• 2:09:32
  Speaker 2: you should have all this time with your children. What children?
• 2:09:35
  Speaker 2: Let's be honest. No, that's not the way it is.
• 2:09:41
  Speaker 2: Liberal men need 2.3 times the same amount of income
• 2:09:43
  Speaker 2: to get the same odds of marriage as a conservative
• 2:09:47
  Speaker 2: or a conservative man or a moderate man for that matter.
• 2:09:51
  Speaker 2: Don't even go conservative. This is just the liberal male penalty.
• 2:09:55
  Speaker 2: This is just the feminist man's penalty. 2.3 times more
• 2:09:59
  Speaker 2: provision or he ain't gonna get a wife. And then
• 2:10:04
  Speaker 2: when he gets a wife, she wants to spend his income,
• 2:10:07
  Speaker 2: his greater income, right? He wants to spend it on her,
• 2:10:11
  Speaker 2: not children. So this guy's at the grindstone for a
• 2:10:19
  Speaker 2: woman's lifestyle. So everything erudite is saying is blown up
• 2:10:26
  Speaker 2: by the statistics. It does not bear out. People don't
• 2:10:31
  Speaker 2: have more children than they have more money. They don't
• 2:10:35
  Speaker 2: have more. The families in which the woman is staying
• 2:10:38
  Speaker 2: at home The man is actually working less somehow, probably
• 2:10:42
  Speaker 2: because her expectations are not enormous in terms of consumer goods.
• 2:10:49
  Speaker 2: All right, and he probably has more time with his kids.
• 2:10:52
  Speaker 2: And not just that, this situation was much more common
• 2:10:55
  Speaker 2: in the 50s and the 60s. Men and women worked
• 2:11:00
  Speaker 2: less in the 50s and the 60s than they do now, less.
• 2:11:06
  Speaker 2: So a 50s father actually had more time with his kids.
• 2:11:10
  Speaker 2: And she's trying to argue that this double income is
• 2:11:14
  Speaker 2: going to give men time with their kids. Every statistical
• 2:11:17
  Speaker 2: factor says the opposite. Now, I say that it is
• 2:11:20
  Speaker 2: a sacrifice that men made. This post-industrial system, they sacrificed
• 2:11:25
  Speaker 2: their time with their children. But it seems like the
• 2:11:28
  Speaker 2: best option for a man right now is a stay-at-home
• 2:11:35
  Speaker 2: wife in a community that actually still shames people for
• 2:11:39
  Speaker 2: their vanity. their excesses, their greed. So her desires, her
• 2:11:44
  Speaker 2: material desires are reasonable and relate to the necessities of
• 2:11:48
  Speaker 2: raising children, right? And then he starts young. So he
• 2:11:53
  Speaker 2: doesn't have a debt. He's going to end up with
• 2:11:56
  Speaker 2: more children and he's going to be earning more than
• 2:11:59
  Speaker 2: the man who went to college until he's in his
• 2:12:01
  Speaker 2: like late thirties. And the guy who went to college
• 2:12:05
  Speaker 2: is still paying off that debt into like the forties.
• 2:12:09
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 2:12:09
  Speaker 2: So college, yeah, like none of this, none of what
• 2:12:12
  Speaker 2: she's saying provides for a life path that is worth having.
• 2:12:17
  Speaker 2: Unless you want women at the age of 25 with herpes,
• 2:12:22
  Speaker 2: orgy body counts, and tremendous amounts of debt for educations
• 2:12:27
  Speaker 2: they don't need. And you want men who, like, there
• 2:12:33
  Speaker 2: is a premium to going to university for men, university
• 2:12:36
  Speaker 2: and college. However, You need to make sure you're not
• 2:12:39
  Speaker 2: a dropout. And you need to be prepared that you
• 2:12:43
  Speaker 2: are probably not going to earn more than a man
• 2:12:45
  Speaker 2: who stayed in the workforce during the time you were
• 2:12:49
  Speaker 2: out of it until your 30s, your late 30s. And
• 2:12:52
  Speaker 2: they're probably not going to pay off that student debt
• 2:12:54
  Speaker 2: until your 40s. And at that point in time, you've sacrificed.
• 2:12:58
  Speaker 2: And guys have this too. Statistically, guys also have a
• 2:13:01
  Speaker 2: fertile window, right? After 44... You're not adding children to
• 2:13:08
  Speaker 2: the pool for men. I mean, you can, some men
• 2:13:11
  Speaker 2: manage that lottery, but most men don't. So you're sacrificing
• 2:13:18
  Speaker 2: your fertile years as a man from 18 to 25
• 2:13:21
  Speaker 2: to make a whole bunch of money in your 40s
• 2:13:24
  Speaker 2: so that you can marry a 40-year-old woman who's gonna
• 2:13:26
  Speaker 2: use that money for your lifestyle, for her lifestyle, right?
• 2:13:31
  Speaker 2: So none of the statistic bears out on what not
• 2:13:36
  Speaker 2: so erudite is trying to say, which is that a
• 2:13:38
  Speaker 2: dual income household somehow frees men from expectations because they're
• 2:13:43
  Speaker 2: with a woman who's working and liberal minded. No, the
• 2:13:48
  Speaker 2: expectations rise and the amount of children lowers because she
• 2:13:54
  Speaker 2: expects your money to go to her and her lifestyle choices.
• 2:14:00
  Speaker 2: And she wants a whole lot more of it. All right. So,
• 2:14:05
  Speaker 2: I mean, I'm done. I know that you need to.
• 2:14:08
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I need to go. I got to go pick
• 2:14:10
  Speaker 1: up the wife. So we'll pick this up next time.
• 2:14:14
  Speaker 1: It is a long debate, but I think it's it's
• 2:14:16
  Speaker 1: worth going through. So we'll just pick this up next week.
• 2:14:20
  Speaker 1: All right.
• 2:14:21
  Speaker 2: Yep.
• 2:14:21
  Speaker 1: Go ahead and do the things that.
• 2:14:22
  Speaker 2: All right. All right. So if at any point after
• 2:14:25
  Speaker 2: the show is over, you want to you're listening. You're like, ah,
• 2:14:29
  Speaker 2: I know something that she doesn't and I need to.
• 2:14:31
  Speaker 2: Tell this ranting woman what's for. Go to feedthebadger.com slash
• 2:14:35
  Speaker 2: justthetip and give us a tip in your comment and
• 2:14:39
  Speaker 2: we'll read it at the next show that we cover
• 2:14:43
  Speaker 2: this topic again or it's reasonably related to this topic.
• 2:14:46
  Speaker 2: So once again, that's feedthebadger.com slash justthetip. And if you
• 2:14:49
  Speaker 2: want to make sure that I'm able to continue my
• 2:14:52
  Speaker 2: research because I think I'm researching. Oh, actually, I know.
• 2:14:55
  Speaker 2: I've only found one Princeton survey from 2009 that does
• 2:14:58
  Speaker 2: the stuff I do. Um, if you want to support
• 2:15:02
  Speaker 2: my research, which is where all of these statistics come
• 2:15:05
  Speaker 2: from and all of this analysis and as well, Brian, um,
• 2:15:10
  Speaker 2: aiming me at things, go to feed the badger.com slash
• 2:15:13
  Speaker 2: support and put a few shekels in the hat for myself,
• 2:15:17
  Speaker 2: Brian and Hannah for the month. And, uh, and if
• 2:15:21
  Speaker 2: you want to join us in our community, that's badger nation.online.
• 2:15:24
  Speaker 2: Don't be shocked. It's a discord. All of these links
• 2:15:27
  Speaker 2: are in the low bar. So pick your poison and
• 2:15:30
  Speaker 2: get in contact with us. All right, Brian.
• 2:15:33
  Speaker 1: All right. Well, that's okay. If you guys like this video,
• 2:15:36
  Speaker 1: please hit like. Subscribe if you're not already subscribed. Hit
• 2:15:39
  Speaker 1: the bell for notifications. Leave us a comment. Let us
• 2:15:42
  Speaker 1: know what you guys think about what we talked about
• 2:15:44
  Speaker 1: on the show today. And share the video because sharing
• 2:15:46
  Speaker 1: is caring. Thanks so much for coming on this episode
• 2:15:49
  Speaker 1: of Maintaining Frame. And we will talk to you guys
• 2:15:51
  Speaker 1: in the next one. Have a good weekend, everybody.