Latest / Honey Badger Radio / Existential Crises and the need for Cyber Feminism with TL;DR

Transcript

Existential Crises and the need for Cyber Feminism with TL;DR · Honey Badger Radio

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: All right, looks like we're live. Hello everybody, good morning,
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: good afternoon, good evening, wherever you may be, and welcome
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: back to Honey Badger Radio. My name is Brian. I
• 0:08
  Speaker 1: am here with Alison and special guests Heel Deer, and
• 0:12
  Speaker 1: this is maintaining frame I guess, existential crises and the
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: need for cyberfeminism. That's a real thing. That's a real thing.
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: So we're gonna be looking at this video that was
• 0:26
  Speaker 1: this a request Allison request is entitled Donna Haraway at
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: the Next Nature Museum. It doesn't seem like it would
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: be more commy gobbledegook, but it is. And we're gonna
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: be looking at that. So before we get into that,
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: I'm gonna ask you guys to please like and share
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: the stream. Will excuse me while it's live. This this
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: is actually we've been like picking up a lot more
• 0:54
  Speaker 1: strays lately, so I'm kind of all about that, which
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: is cool, and uh yeah else and you do the
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: things now, all right.
• 1:03
  Speaker 2: Yeah, So I want a big shout out to kron
• 1:06
  Speaker 2: Strong for recommending this, and by shout out, yes, thank
• 1:10
  Speaker 2: you for making my life a little bit worse. All right,
• 1:14
  Speaker 2: if you want to send recommendations or whatever commentary. You
• 1:19
  Speaker 2: have something that's burning in your mind that you have
• 1:21
  Speaker 2: to tell us, do so at feed the Badger dot
• 1:23
  Speaker 2: com slash just the tip. We get the full benefit
• 1:26
  Speaker 2: of whatever funds you send, and you get the benefit
• 1:28
  Speaker 2: of not sending your comment through YouTube's eccentric comment enhancement.
• 1:35
  Speaker 2: So that's feed the Badger dot com slash just the Tip.
• 1:38
  Speaker 2: And if you want to support the show, you can
• 1:40
  Speaker 2: do so at feedbadgery dot com slash support. And if
• 1:43
  Speaker 2: you want to join us in our discord, that's badger
• 1:46
  Speaker 2: Nation dot online. And I highly recommend that because you
• 1:49
  Speaker 2: get to you. I actually write stuff and I post
• 1:53
  Speaker 2: it in the discord. I don't post it anywhere else. Okay,
• 1:57
  Speaker 2: But so if you want to hear more of what
• 2:00
  Speaker 2: I have to say without the squirreling, because when I'm
• 2:03
  Speaker 2: behind a keyboard, I can actually follow a line of
• 2:07
  Speaker 2: thought without branching multiple times and then somehow securitively landing
• 2:14
  Speaker 2: back on it. So if you're interested in that, Badgination
• 2:18
  Speaker 2: dot online, all right, okay, back.
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: So we're gonna be looking at this. I guess it's
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: the talk that doctor Donna Jene Horoway gave I thought
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: I would give you guys a little bit of information
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: on who this is. So. Donna Harroway is a prominent
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: American scholar and Distinguished Professor Emerita at the University of California,
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: Santa Cruz, specializing in science and technology studies, feminist theory
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: because those things totally fit together, and multi species studies.
• 2:54
  Speaker 1: She is best known for her foundational essay A Cyborg Manifesto,
• 2:59
  Speaker 1: which came out nineteen eighty five, which redefined feminist theory
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: by exploring the fusion of machines and organisms, and for
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: her later work on companion species and the Cthulhu scene
• 3:11
  Speaker 1: era like like Lovecraft. So anyway, we're gonna be she
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: basically is going to be giving a talk. We're going
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: to be going through real quick. I don't know if
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: you guys want to say anything before we get started.
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: I do have like some more notes, but go ahead.
• 3:28
  Speaker 2: Yeah, this is the yeah a talk. So basically, Donna
• 3:31
  Speaker 2: Hathaway is going to present Donna Hathaway, and she's going
• 3:36
  Speaker 2: to make you know, she's going to be seen, which
• 3:39
  Speaker 2: is like Donna Harroway, but yeah Haway, Yeah, Johnna Harroway is.
• 3:44
  Speaker 1: Going to Donna Donna, Yeah, Donna.
• 3:47
  Speaker 2: Horror Away is going to present Donna Harroway in a
• 3:51
  Speaker 2: lecture by Donna Harroway, and and and she is going
• 3:56
  Speaker 2: to be seen seen by the audience, which is the
• 4:02
  Speaker 2: most important thing. This is what I've discovered in my
• 4:05
  Speaker 2: analysis of cognitive modalities that men and women employ. Being
• 4:11
  Speaker 2: seen is the pinnacle of success for the relational modality
• 4:18
  Speaker 2: that typifies most women. Maybe not most, like no, I
• 4:21
  Speaker 2: would say a majority of women. So it's being seen
• 4:24
  Speaker 2: if you can believe it, Just imagine that the most
• 4:27
  Speaker 2: important thing in your life is being seen. What does
• 4:31
  Speaker 2: that mean?
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: What is that? What this is about?
• 4:35
  Speaker 2: Yes, that's what all of this is. It's being seen.
• 4:38
  Speaker 2: That you know, the nail thing with the that was about.
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: Being it's having a conversation about having a conversation, about
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: having a conversation.
• 4:47
  Speaker 2: But it's about being seen. It's being comprehended somehow, Like
• 4:54
  Speaker 2: I'm still I'm I'm I'm analyzing this phenomenon and when
• 4:59
  Speaker 2: I understand it, I'll explain it to y'all because I
• 5:01
  Speaker 2: don't know what why that's so important, Like why that's
• 5:06
  Speaker 2: more important than being able to have functional skills? But
• 5:09
  Speaker 2: apparently it is. It's like the most critical thing. So
• 5:12
  Speaker 2: we're gonna watch Donna Harroway be seen, and then her
• 5:18
  Speaker 2: audience is going to feel seen, and everybody is going
• 5:22
  Speaker 2: to be seen for what they are, which is deeply
• 5:26
  Speaker 2: compassionate people who none nonetheless do absolutely nothing for the
• 5:31
  Speaker 2: things that they are deeply compassionate about and for. So yeah,
• 5:35
  Speaker 2: that's that's a Maybe maybe I put too many spoilers
• 5:39
  Speaker 2: in that, but those are my thoughts from this whole thing.
• 5:42
  Speaker 1: Mm hmmm, Well we haven't watched it yet, so okay,
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: how about that. Okay, so uh, let me see I
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: have some time codes here and be okay, let's let's
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: let her do her little intro first. This my be
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: a bit low, and I apologize it's the video itself
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: was low. So I'm not sure there's much I can
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: do about it, and like, I can crank it up
• 6:07
  Speaker 1: on my end, which I did, but I don't know
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: if you guys, Alison and tildarrem for you guys are
• 6:12
  Speaker 1: gonna be able to hear this. But anyway, let's keep going.
• 6:26
  Speaker 3: Well, I have to say I've often, I have long
• 6:29
  Speaker 3: been of the view that the only people who should
• 6:32
  Speaker 3: hear introductions like this are one's parents because they earned it,
• 6:37
  Speaker 3: and so in a significant way, I'd like to honor
• 6:41
  Speaker 3: my mother and my father and those who have come
• 6:44
  Speaker 3: before who make us all.
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: Well, she's acting like she's getting an oscar or grammy.
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: All right, let me.
• 6:51
  Speaker 2: See here, yeah, relationally web mapping. So this entire lecture
• 6:59
  Speaker 2: is about the magnify us an existence of her.
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: Yeah, oh.
• 7:06
  Speaker 2: Yeah. I want to thank my parents for producing me,
• 7:12
  Speaker 2: as you all should thank them. Because here I am,
• 7:17
  Speaker 2: you may gaze upon me and we shall all be
• 7:20
  Speaker 2: seen together. Okay, all right.
• 7:23
  Speaker 4: That also lives on our stove in Santa Cruz.
• 7:27
  Speaker 3: It seems to me a perfect joining of entities for
• 7:30
  Speaker 3: next nature. Now, it's not hard for any of us
• 7:35
  Speaker 3: to think of the troubles that we are in, in
• 7:37
  Speaker 3: particular the hatred of migrants all over the world, not
• 7:42
  Speaker 3: just in the Netherlands, not just in the United States,
• 7:46
  Speaker 3: not just in in Sudan, not.
• 7:50
  Speaker 2: Just wall Wait, wait, why can't we hate migrants though?
• 7:58
  Speaker 1: Because it's bad, And because it's bad, some of.
• 8:02
  Speaker 2: Them are hatable, some of them. Well yeah, okay, go ahead.
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: Yeah, no, no, okay, go ahead and make your point.
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: I want to say something about this, but I'll let
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: you go first.
• 8:15
  Speaker 2: All right, I'm trouncing you, I'm silencing you. Even if
• 8:23
  Speaker 2: we don't aren't allowed to hate migrants? Can we hate migration? Like,
• 8:28
  Speaker 2: if you don't hate the people who are migrating necessarily,
• 8:32
  Speaker 2: can we hate the policies that are leading to indiscriminate
• 8:36
  Speaker 2: migration that's hurting everyone?
• 8:39
  Speaker 5: Right?
• 8:39
  Speaker 2: Can we can we hate the people who put these
• 8:42
  Speaker 2: policies in place and do things like bring in a
• 8:45
  Speaker 2: whole bunch of individuals who don't acclimatize well to our
• 8:51
  Speaker 2: society and then use them as shields for their bureaucratic
• 8:57
  Speaker 2: graft or whatever financial scheme that they have up their sleeve. Like,
• 9:02
  Speaker 2: can we hate those people? Or is it just that
• 9:05
  Speaker 2: you say any kind of criticism of migration? Or I mean,
• 9:11
  Speaker 2: if you, if you go far enough, you could slavery's migration.
• 9:15
  Speaker 2: Does that mean we can't hate slavery? It's forced migration,
• 9:19
  Speaker 2: but it was migration, right, I mean, because she's basically
• 9:23
  Speaker 2: saying that any kind of criticism because a lot a
• 9:27
  Speaker 2: lot of people who do not like migration policies are
• 9:31
  Speaker 2: themselves migrants, but they.
• 9:35
  Speaker 1: Take immigrants, immigrants.
• 9:38
  Speaker 2: Immigrants, sorry who were there? They themselves immigrants who absorbed
• 9:44
  Speaker 2: into the culture because that's where they wanted to be
• 9:47
  Speaker 2: and became like productive members of their community. And they're
• 9:51
  Speaker 2: turning around and seeing this new waves of migration under
• 9:55
  Speaker 2: completely different rules, and it's they consider it to be
• 9:57
  Speaker 2: unfair or destruct to what they saw they wanted in
• 10:02
  Speaker 2: the culture that they migrated too. So she's creating right now,
• 10:09
  Speaker 2: she is black. She's point creating a gigantic black category
• 10:14
  Speaker 2: around the entire criticism of migration by casting it as
• 10:18
  Speaker 2: hating migrants and thus wrong. I feel like we're going
• 10:23
  Speaker 2: to see a lot of that, but go ahead, Brian.
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: So the thing I was going to say about this
• 10:27
  Speaker 1: is that this is just the latest purse puppy. So
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: you know that she is a feminist, and that's like
• 10:36
  Speaker 1: one of the central things that's important here. But the
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: thing is is that every let's say, every so often,
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: there becomes a new purse puppy, the new thing that
• 10:47
  Speaker 1: all the feminists and all the leftists have to toe the
• 10:49
  Speaker 1: line on immigration is the thing right now because of this,
• 10:54
  Speaker 1: you know, overwhelming call from Western countries to eliminate or
• 11:01
  Speaker 1: limit immigration even like send people back, remigrate people. And
• 11:06
  Speaker 1: because that's like an issue that people have, and I
• 11:09
  Speaker 1: don't even want to call it the right because it's
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: just normal people want to sane immigration policy in the
• 11:14
  Speaker 1: West because that's the thing that we're all talking about now.
• 11:18
  Speaker 1: Then these people have to take the opposite position. A
• 11:21
  Speaker 1: few years ago it was trans rights. But the trans
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: rights thing or the queer theory stuff, it's falling out
• 11:27
  Speaker 1: of fashion. So now we're doing immigration. So what she's
• 11:31
  Speaker 1: saying is it's not something that I think she really
• 11:35
  Speaker 1: believes anyway. She's just like, this is the thing we
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: have to talk about, so I'm going to talk about
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: it now. That's what my opinion on it is. Ultimately, though,
• 11:42
  Speaker 1: this is what intersectional feminism is. It's basically, how can
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: I keep feminism relevant no matter what is going on
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: in the world, so that we're always the people you
• 11:52
  Speaker 1: go to for your information, for your talking points, for
• 11:55
  Speaker 1: your arguments, for your activism. Oh, I know, we'll call
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: it intersectional feminist. We'll throw everything in there that is
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: anything that we can use as a kind of like,
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: you know, way of dividing people in some and then
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: we're just going to make that the issue. So right now,
• 12:11
  Speaker 1: it's immigration. So she's just doing That's why I scrolled
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: down to see how old this video was because I
• 12:16
  Speaker 1: was I figured it had to be very recent four
• 12:18
  Speaker 1: months ago, because ever since twenty twenty four, immigration has
• 12:22
  Speaker 1: been like the predominant woke talking point, right, So she's
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: just going along with that as the thing. She doesn't
• 12:30
  Speaker 1: actually care about it. She doesn't really care about like
• 12:34
  Speaker 1: you know, the because she doesn't have to deal with
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: the consequences. She probably lives in like a highly safe,
• 12:40
  Speaker 1: gated community away from all that stuff, so she gets
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: And that's another thing too that she's going to do
• 12:46
  Speaker 1: with this talk. I'm going to get to the time code.
• 12:49
  Speaker 1: She's also creating a crisis, So she's constructing a crisis
• 12:52
  Speaker 1: of hatred against migrants. I don't think anyone actually hates migrants.
• 12:59
  Speaker 1: I think they hate mass migration like the policies, right,
• 13:04
  Speaker 1: or if there are people who hate them, they're very
• 13:06
  Speaker 1: small percentage. But I highly doubt that. Most of the time,
• 13:10
  Speaker 1: when people have a problem with something, it's on the
• 13:13
  Speaker 1: grounds of its ideas, not even like you know, for example,
• 13:17
  Speaker 1: there are people who you would say are racist against
• 13:20
  Speaker 1: black people because of crime, but what it is that
• 13:22
  Speaker 1: they don't like is crime itself. So it's not like
• 13:25
  Speaker 1: that's just not the like, you know what I'm saying,
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: The issue is not the issue. So I think that
• 13:31
  Speaker 1: she's trying to she's constructing a crisis that is there,
• 13:36
  Speaker 1: we are we should be afraid because and it could
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: be you can throw in a bunch of stuff, but
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: migration is one of them. And in fact, I think
• 13:43
  Speaker 1: she also goes into other crises, you know, climate change
• 13:49
  Speaker 1: and misogyny and whatever, like they're all crises that and
• 13:53
  Speaker 1: it's to create a sense of existential panic so that
• 13:58
  Speaker 1: people will you know, run out do whatever. This is
• 14:01
  Speaker 1: the reason why you have people like you know, like
• 14:04
  Speaker 1: those those activists in Minnesota that got killed because they
• 14:08
  Speaker 1: thought that they were actually fighting evil and so they
• 14:11
  Speaker 1: were they got they got caught up in that. So
• 14:14
  Speaker 1: but anyway, and.
• 14:16
  Speaker 2: Also being seen she's going to be seen as a
• 14:20
  Speaker 2: compassionate person unlike those other people who are not compassionate,
• 14:25
  Speaker 2: and that and that isn't creating a moral hierarchy and
• 14:28
  Speaker 2: depersoning the non compassionate people. By the way, Tielda, did
• 14:33
  Speaker 2: you want to add anything to this or are you
• 14:35
  Speaker 2: still just cruising chilling?
• 14:39
  Speaker 1: No?
• 14:40
  Speaker 6: I am also here. Hello, Yeah, No, I I think yeah,
• 14:46
  Speaker 6: I would echo a lot of what Brian has just said. There.
• 14:49
  Speaker 6: This is a woman, she's an upper middle class woman.
• 14:52
  Speaker 6: She's lived an isolated life and isolated career in academia.
• 14:58
  Speaker 6: I don't like using the phrase like has no life experience.
• 15:01
  Speaker 6: It's like, you're alive, You've done things, you have experienced things.
• 15:06
  Speaker 6: But I think that it's a very sort of narrow
• 15:10
  Speaker 6: slice of society, a very narrow slice of existence that
• 15:13
  Speaker 6: this woman has experienced. Most of this talk that she
• 15:17
  Speaker 6: goes through, it's just pseudo intellectual, semi philosophical, midwip deepities.
• 15:22
  Speaker 6: A lot of it doesn't actually mean anything. There's a
• 15:25
  Speaker 6: bunch of this hippie dippy bollocks about like things that
• 15:30
  Speaker 6: are unrelated, but they sound profound, like she was talking
• 15:33
  Speaker 6: about like oh, this weirdly shaped lemon that I grew
• 15:37
  Speaker 6: and this chicken egg timer ooh, look at them. That
• 15:42
  Speaker 6: they're like two different things that exist. One is natural,
• 15:46
  Speaker 6: the other is not. One goes through the time of
• 15:49
  Speaker 6: nature and the other measures the time of nature as
• 15:53
  Speaker 6: seen by man. Oh look, it's this is what this
• 15:56
  Speaker 6: woman does. Everything she does is always narrativizing. This is
• 16:02
  Speaker 6: actually the main point of her talk. She has to
• 16:03
  Speaker 6: Everything has to be a narrative. Everything has to be
• 16:06
  Speaker 6: a story. Nothing can be objective or anything like that.
• 16:09
  Speaker 6: It's all it's all just stories that we tell ourselves
• 16:12
  Speaker 6: and tell each other.
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: And that's well, you're just saying that because you're operating
• 16:16
  Speaker 1: within the white male system.
• 16:18
  Speaker 6: So I mean, I am right. I need to decolonize
• 16:22
  Speaker 6: my mind and go into that female system of process
• 16:24
  Speaker 6: never ending and it ends my vibrational frequency, and then
• 16:29
  Speaker 6: I'll realize that everything actually is just a social construct
• 16:32
  Speaker 6: and we can, as this woman says, so nothing is
• 16:36
  Speaker 6: ever created by subtraction, you know, evolution is it's everything.
• 16:40
  Speaker 6: It's only ever created by addition and by synthesizing things together.
• 16:46
  Speaker 6: Almost like it's a bunch of Hegelian nonsense that I
• 16:49
  Speaker 6: don't want to talk about for the millionth time. Yeah almost,
• 16:53
  Speaker 6: But yeah, this this is just her virtue signaling the
• 16:57
  Speaker 6: purse puppies of the left. Now she talks about, well,
• 17:01
  Speaker 6: you know, oh, the rising fascism of Donald Trump and
• 17:05
  Speaker 6: the censorship of the Internet. Ooh, not a single word
• 17:10
  Speaker 6: about how we literally have evidence that the Biden White
• 17:14
  Speaker 6: House in the US was actively in discussion with Google
• 17:20
  Speaker 6: about censoring topics that they did not want covered.
• 17:24
  Speaker 1: Well, censoring the people that like the bad people is
• 17:28
  Speaker 1: always good because they're bad people and we have to
• 17:30
  Speaker 1: do something to bad people otherwise they'll do bad things.
• 17:35
  Speaker 1: And if you believe the good things and you're a
• 17:37
  Speaker 1: good person and good people never do anything wrong, even
• 17:40
  Speaker 1: if it's like you could say it's morally wrong to
• 17:43
  Speaker 1: censor people, but not if you're censoring bad people. I mean,
• 17:48
  Speaker 1: I'm sorry, I know it sounds childish, but that's that's
• 17:50
  Speaker 1: literally the way they think.
• 17:52
  Speaker 6: And yeah, yeah, yeah it is. Oh, if if anything
• 17:57
  Speaker 6: governmental under Donald Trump, anything that any of the previous
• 18:02
  Speaker 6: administrations did well, then it's fascism and it's bad. It So,
• 18:06
  Speaker 6: how many people were deported by ICE under the Biden administration?
• 18:10
  Speaker 6: Was it? Several million? Is in far more than are
• 18:13
  Speaker 6: actually being done now under the Trump don't say anything
• 18:17
  Speaker 6: about that. That didn't happen. No, Ice now is the
• 18:20
  Speaker 6: big thing because that's about migration and Trumps a fascist?
• 18:24
  Speaker 6: And why do you hate immigrants? Why are you so racist?
• 18:27
  Speaker 1: You know?
• 18:27
  Speaker 6: Why is it that there are these problems with migrants
• 18:30
  Speaker 6: that are rising? Might it be because migrants are increasing
• 18:33
  Speaker 6: into European countries? Might it be that, as crime statistics
• 18:37
  Speaker 6: have shown, they are per capita in some cases several
• 18:40
  Speaker 6: hundred percent more likely to engage in things like rape,
• 18:44
  Speaker 6: sexual assault, violence, welfare fraud, anything. Might any of those
• 18:48
  Speaker 6: things have anything to do with it? Might the fact
• 18:50
  Speaker 6: that Ireland is currently on fire as a result of
• 18:53
  Speaker 6: migrants having demonstrably engaged in the rape and sexual assault
• 18:57
  Speaker 6: of young white Irish girls. Is the fact that there's
• 19:01
  Speaker 6: a police force in Dumfries in Scotland that I think
• 19:04
  Speaker 6: two or three days ago decided that all the girls
• 19:07
  Speaker 6: in a local primary school needed to now carry rape
• 19:11
  Speaker 6: alarms because a nearby hotel was beginning to accept large
• 19:15
  Speaker 6: numbers of migrants. I wonder if any of this stuff
• 19:18
  Speaker 6: is connected and why there might be some sort of
• 19:20
  Speaker 6: rising anti migrant sentiment. It really is kind of a mystery.
• 19:24
  Speaker 6: But what you also have to realize is very similar
• 19:26
  Speaker 6: to any sort of crimes of racism and migration and
• 19:30
  Speaker 6: hatred and all of these things. If you look at
• 19:32
  Speaker 6: any of the areas where all of this so called
• 19:35
  Speaker 6: hatred and all this so called racism happens, they are
• 19:38
  Speaker 6: only ever in the most diverse areas. The most diverse
• 19:42
  Speaker 6: areas are the most racist areas. They're the most anti
• 19:45
  Speaker 6: everything areas. This is because racism, what these people call racism,
• 19:50
  Speaker 6: racism is not a prejudice based on ignorance. It is
• 19:54
  Speaker 6: a postjudice based on experience. People like this do not
• 20:01
  Speaker 6: want to acknowledge that because she lives in this isolated,
• 20:05
  Speaker 6: academic far left bubble. She openly cites communists and thanks
• 20:10
  Speaker 6: them for inspiring the work that she did. She doesn't
• 20:14
  Speaker 6: have to deal with any of that stuff. She lives
• 20:16
  Speaker 6: this nice, sheltered, comfortable life. For her, immigration and migration,
• 20:19
  Speaker 6: all of those problems, they don't exist. That's just right
• 20:21
  Speaker 6: wing conspiracy theories. Because for her, migrants and the other races, Oh,
• 20:26
  Speaker 6: that's just that lovely little restaurant that opened up on
• 20:29
  Speaker 6: the corner. You just have to try it. It's so
• 20:32
  Speaker 6: foreign and exotic. That's as far as she gets affected
• 20:35
  Speaker 6: by it.
• 20:38
  Speaker 2: Yeah, And it's interesting because they don't even seem to
• 20:40
  Speaker 2: recognize that the sentiment is increasing for a reason. And
• 20:44
  Speaker 2: it's not because people hate the individuals who migrate. I mean,
• 20:48
  Speaker 2: in some cases they do, because again they're hateable. It's
• 20:51
  Speaker 2: because the policies have shifted right, so they're conflating a
• 20:55
  Speaker 2: hatred of people with a distaste for particular types of.
• 21:01
  Speaker 6: That don't work.
• 21:03
  Speaker 2: Yeah, all right, well anyway, but you're interrupting, like the
• 21:08
  Speaker 2: bad people interrupt her feeling seen. What migrants are important
• 21:13
  Speaker 2: for her is that she be seen as a compassionate
• 21:18
  Speaker 2: person in a network of compassionate people. That's what that's
• 21:22
  Speaker 2: why they exist. They have no other weight in the
• 21:26
  Speaker 2: world except that. And that is entirely in relation to
• 21:30
  Speaker 2: how Donna Haraway is seen in the social web. I
• 21:37
  Speaker 2: get the feeling like this makes no sense, but it
• 21:41
  Speaker 2: makes perfect sense to and I think this is one
• 21:43
  Speaker 2: of the reasons why people on the outside of the
• 21:46
  Speaker 2: relational modality they don't you don't understand what they're doing here.
• 21:55
  Speaker 6: It's just I am seen to do this cause I
• 21:57
  Speaker 6: am seen to do this thing. I am seen to
• 21:58
  Speaker 6: hold these positions. So all it is, and they talk
• 22:01
  Speaker 6: about it very openly. If you go to any of
• 22:03
  Speaker 6: those or look at any of the left wing protests
• 22:05
  Speaker 6: or anything like that, the first thing they talk about
• 22:08
  Speaker 6: is people need to be seen, you know, the minorities
• 22:11
  Speaker 6: need to be seen, the disabled, people need to be seen,
• 22:16
  Speaker 6: all of these. Yeah, it's very important. It's representation. Yeah,
• 22:20
  Speaker 6: it's it's the same thing. They've been literally saying it
• 22:22
  Speaker 6: for years that that's the most important thing, but they
• 22:25
  Speaker 6: don't actually necessarily have to do things about it. You
• 22:28
  Speaker 6: just have to know that things are there the most
• 22:33
  Speaker 6: important thing.
• 22:34
  Speaker 2: So when they're trying to be seen as compassionate people
• 22:38
  Speaker 2: and an operational thinker, that's like a more mechanistic Men
• 22:42
  Speaker 2: think in terms of the machine. I'll call it like
• 22:47
  Speaker 2: it's like a mechanic type of thinking, technician type of thinking.
• 22:51
  Speaker 2: What are the inputs, how does the machine work? What
• 22:54
  Speaker 2: are the outputs?
• 22:55
  Speaker 1: Right?
• 22:55
  Speaker 2: Women don't think that way generally. They think, well, honestly,
• 22:58
  Speaker 2: I haven't. I've only found a few exceptions, and I
• 23:01
  Speaker 2: will leave that as a as a as an exercise
• 23:06
  Speaker 2: for the viewer who those exceptions were. That women think
• 23:10
  Speaker 2: in terms of relationship topologies, so they are a node
• 23:15
  Speaker 2: in a web of relationships and that's why they do
• 23:22
  Speaker 2: what they do. And in that relational top topological processing,
• 23:26
  Speaker 2: so you're mapping the web of relationships and yourself as
• 23:29
  Speaker 2: a node within it. It's why you know that meme
• 23:32
  Speaker 2: of the woman taking a picture of an object and
• 23:36
  Speaker 2: she's like half obscuring, like the the female astronaut taking
• 23:40
  Speaker 2: a picture of the moon that went around that went viral.
• 23:43
  Speaker 6: You guys remember that, Yeah, okay, the rocket in the
• 23:50
  Speaker 6: reflection of the glosses, and just like, oh, yes, there's
• 23:53
  Speaker 6: another one.
• 23:54
  Speaker 2: The female astronaut in the Artemis spacecraft took a picture
• 24:00
  Speaker 2: of the moon, and she basically replicated the woman takes
• 24:05
  Speaker 2: a picture of an object meme. Her face was like
• 24:08
  Speaker 2: at least two thirds of the shot, and then the moon.
• 24:12
  Speaker 6: And then the moon.
• 24:16
  Speaker 2: Yeah, or when you're when you're flying to the moon.
• 24:21
  Speaker 2: And then there was a man who took a picture,
• 24:24
  Speaker 2: one of the male astronauts who took a picture of
• 24:26
  Speaker 2: the moon, and you can sort of see him because
• 24:30
  Speaker 2: I think it it was he it was or it
• 24:33
  Speaker 2: was another guy who was sort of in the shot
• 24:35
  Speaker 2: and he couldn't help it. But it was just like
• 24:37
  Speaker 2: this silhouette, dark silhouette. You could just see like little
• 24:40
  Speaker 2: bits of the nose and forehead, and then the moon
• 24:42
  Speaker 2: was centered as the primary object, and it was just
• 24:47
  Speaker 2: like I said, it's just but that is relational topographical thinking.
• 24:51
  Speaker 2: She sees herself as a node in a network, so
• 24:55
  Speaker 2: the picture doesn't exist unless she's in it, So she
• 24:59
  Speaker 2: can say this is the this is where I am.
• 25:00
  Speaker 2: This is my node. These are the awesome things that
• 25:03
  Speaker 2: I am doing. See me, I shall be seen. And
• 25:08
  Speaker 2: it's because in relational topographical processing, you exist to the
• 25:12
  Speaker 2: degree that you are a node in the web. If
• 25:15
  Speaker 2: no one is tracking you your position, or reading your
• 25:18
  Speaker 2: signals or mapping their connection to you, you have no position.
• 25:22
  Speaker 2: You're not in the network. For someone whose primary cognitive
• 25:25
  Speaker 2: channel is relational mapping, that's not like a social inconvenience
• 25:29
  Speaker 2: or just a minor problem. It's an existential threat. So
• 25:33
  Speaker 2: if these women aren't in the relational map as a node,
• 25:37
  Speaker 2: they don't exist. They cease to exist, and it's the
• 25:45
  Speaker 2: equivalent of a operative modality thinker having their hands cut off.
• 25:51
  Speaker 2: So the channel through which you engage with reality is severed.
• 25:54
  Speaker 2: That's why they when you fail or you interrupt the
• 25:59
  Speaker 2: process of being seen, they instantaneously turn into horrific raiths,
• 26:05
  Speaker 2: an attempt to eat your face right, because you have
• 26:09
  Speaker 2: you are literally interrupting the process their existential process of existing,
• 26:15
  Speaker 2: like their their their perception of their own existence. So
• 26:18
  Speaker 2: that's why they just immediately lash back into horrific violence.
• 26:23
  Speaker 2: You know, if they're not capable of physical violence of course,
• 26:25
  Speaker 2: it's gonna be relational social, social assassination. Whatever is at
• 26:31
  Speaker 2: hand they will destroy, which is why they have this
• 26:35
  Speaker 2: incredible contradiction, which is this, this crowd of people are
• 26:39
  Speaker 2: all sitting, and how compassionate and lovely they are. They're
• 26:43
  Speaker 2: all being seen in their relational web, all nodes of
• 26:46
  Speaker 2: pure compassion and kindness and openness and wanting people to
• 26:52
  Speaker 2: be happy and have good things. But the instant you say, well, yeah,
• 26:58
  Speaker 2: that's all lovely, but this intersects with reality and this
• 27:03
  Speaker 2: these measurable ways. Therefore it's not possible. They immediately turn
• 27:10
  Speaker 2: into the most savage, brutal and psychotic groups of violent
• 27:15
  Speaker 2: thugs you could possibly imagine. Yeah, yeah, you just you
• 27:24
  Speaker 2: just brought. You just brought the operational frame of can
• 27:28
  Speaker 2: we actually and can we do this? Can we create
• 27:31
  Speaker 2: heaven on earth? Maybe not? Maybe we should accept that
• 27:35
  Speaker 2: there is some crime or there will probably always be
• 27:37
  Speaker 2: crime as long as we have single mothers, you know, so,
• 27:40
  Speaker 2: I mean maybe we should just accept that and live
• 27:43
  Speaker 2: with it and try to mitigate it. They can't handle that,
• 27:46
  Speaker 2: and it's not because they're gonna do anything about it.
• 27:49
  Speaker 2: It's like it's not like the feminists are ever going
• 27:51
  Speaker 2: to create woman Land. It's just that you have to
• 27:54
  Speaker 2: be loyal to the imagined utopia even though nobody's actually
• 27:59
  Speaker 2: creating it, and being loyal to the imagined utopia means
• 28:03
  Speaker 2: being incredibly cruel to men. But you just have to
• 28:06
  Speaker 2: stay because that means you're part of the web and
• 28:08
  Speaker 2: you're seeing seeing how much they want the utopia that
• 28:13
  Speaker 2: they will never do a single fucking thing to create. Okay,
• 28:18
  Speaker 2: rant over, we should probably watch more of this.
• 28:20
  Speaker 1: Yeah, okay, so let's get she's gonna do more, Like
• 28:24
  Speaker 1: I said, crisis, She's going to form more crises. This
• 28:27
  Speaker 1: is like how you have to open up your talks
• 28:29
  Speaker 1: because you want to be seen as a good person
• 28:33
  Speaker 1: that knows what is actually wrong with the world, and
• 28:35
  Speaker 1: it's none of the things that the haters believe.
• 28:38
  Speaker 3: Yeah, not just in Israel Palestine. The hatred of migrants,
• 28:42
  Speaker 3: the hatreds of people, the hatred of peoples on the
• 28:45
  Speaker 3: move even as they are forced to move by conditions
• 28:49
  Speaker 3: absolutely outside of their control, and the absolute necessity to
• 28:54
  Speaker 3: stay with the trouble of these peoples on the move
• 28:57
  Speaker 3: and to care for them and ourselves, to get other
• 29:00
  Speaker 3: to make home places. Also the troubles of intensified climate disasters.
• 29:06
  Speaker 1: Okay, so now we got to talk about climate change, Okay.
• 29:11
  Speaker 6: Because the climate sometimes changes, and that just forces people
• 29:15
  Speaker 6: to do things people have never overcome natural obstacles before.
• 29:19
  Speaker 6: It's going to force dark people to move into white countries.
• 29:25
  Speaker 6: It's never going to force climate change. Is never going
• 29:28
  Speaker 6: to make white people in white countries have to move
• 29:30
  Speaker 6: anywhere else, though. You See, it's just interesting how that
• 29:34
  Speaker 6: that always works. Funny, how it's always that way around,
• 29:38
  Speaker 6: and how it's always Oh, they're being forced to move
• 29:40
  Speaker 6: by circumstances beyond their control. And I sit here on
• 29:44
  Speaker 6: an island in the North Atlantic and say, who is
• 29:48
  Speaker 6: forcing these people across the channel onto my island from France,
• 29:53
  Speaker 6: which is a country that is not a war and
• 29:56
  Speaker 6: has no humanitarian problems in it, no environment mental problems
• 30:00
  Speaker 6: in it. It's a very safe country, except for the
• 30:04
  Speaker 6: cities which are now full of island criminals who just
• 30:08
  Speaker 6: appeared from nowhere one day. But how are they being
• 30:13
  Speaker 6: forced to come here? By?
• 30:15
  Speaker 2: What?
• 30:18
  Speaker 1: Good question?
• 30:19
  Speaker 3: The Pacific of coastal communities in Alaska, of extreme flooding
• 30:24
  Speaker 3: in Asia, extreme heat and fire across Europe, in the
• 30:29
  Speaker 3: United States, and elsewhere the current fascist attacks on schools, universities, libraries, museums.
• 30:37
  Speaker 1: So now we're talking about fascist attacks. See how she
• 30:40
  Speaker 1: bombards the audience with like all of these crises that
• 30:44
  Speaker 1: are happening, and it's all it's not a crisis of
• 30:48
  Speaker 1: you know, other things that are I guess would be
• 30:50
  Speaker 1: considered immoral from her perspective, like people concerned about climate,
• 30:56
  Speaker 1: people concerned about fraud from you know, welfare fraud, people
• 31:00
  Speaker 1: concerned about inflation, people concerned about like what like the
• 31:05
  Speaker 1: fact that men could be drafted to fight in wars.
• 31:07
  Speaker 1: They don't want to be involved with, you know, stuff
• 31:10
  Speaker 1: like that. The birth rates. No, none of these things
• 31:12
  Speaker 1: are an issue. It's it's it's it's fascist governments that
• 31:17
  Speaker 1: are defunding schools. That's what makes them fascists, you see,
• 31:20
  Speaker 1: because then they can't afford to like indoctrinate your kids.
• 31:25
  Speaker 6: The fascist attack on the Lowering Center, Yeah, yeah, the center. Yeah,
• 31:32
  Speaker 6: they have to stay open because they just do okay.
• 31:36
  Speaker 1: Yeah, they just do. Right, we just need that.
• 31:39
  Speaker 2: You know. It's funny how the fascist attacks that are
• 31:43
  Speaker 2: defunding academic institutions presumably, well, first of all, what what
• 31:49
  Speaker 2: they don't have a right to people's tax payer tax taxes.
• 31:55
  Speaker 2: It's not fascist. Like telling somebody they don't get to
• 31:59
  Speaker 2: steal from you isn't fascist. But what's interesting is somehow
• 32:03
  Speaker 2: the defunding of these institutions doesn't hit the supposed fascists,
• 32:07
  Speaker 2: even though I'm pretty sure that, if, for example, an
• 32:10
  Speaker 2: actual fascist country started to defund academia in that fascist country,
• 32:17
  Speaker 2: they would be defunding fascism. You see what I'm saying.
• 32:22
  Speaker 6: Fascist countries, whenever these things happened, they basically removed the
• 32:26
  Speaker 6: intellectuals and established.
• 32:27
  Speaker 2: Their own Yeah, exactly.
• 32:29
  Speaker 6: Happened in Mussolini's Italy. That's what happened in National socialist Germany.
• 32:35
  Speaker 6: The academics who were there, they were all taken out,
• 32:39
  Speaker 6: like either just removed from offices and just allowed to live,
• 32:43
  Speaker 6: or in some cases just disappeared, you know, because they
• 32:47
  Speaker 6: looked at them and they were like, oh, the things
• 32:48
  Speaker 6: that you're teaching, these things, the things you're teaching, they're
• 32:51
  Speaker 6: too communists, they're too leftists, they're too Jewish, they're too
• 32:54
  Speaker 6: whatever the hell. And then they put their own people
• 32:58
  Speaker 6: in those institutions. They stayed there, actually funded them more.
• 33:01
  Speaker 6: I mean school. Yeah, if you look at like the
• 33:06
  Speaker 6: sort of policies that you had in places like that.
• 33:09
  Speaker 6: It's a very interesting book you can read on this
• 33:10
  Speaker 6: about national socialist journey. It's called Hitler's Revolution I think
• 33:16
  Speaker 6: it is, which actually explains a bunch of their economic policy.
• 33:19
  Speaker 6: It's very interesting. But no, they actually increased funding things
• 33:23
  Speaker 6: like schools and higher education institutes because they wanted to
• 33:25
  Speaker 6: make their people better. It's the exact opposite of what
• 33:28
  Speaker 6: this woman is asserting would happen.
• 33:30
  Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly, that's.
• 33:32
  Speaker 6: Fact that these institutions, it's like, oh, we have to
• 33:35
  Speaker 6: be able to steal state money from it. Well, a
• 33:38
  Speaker 6: bunch of them were privatized. They're not being run by
• 33:40
  Speaker 6: the state anymore. You know. Fascists very well known for
• 33:44
  Speaker 6: opening their institutions up to private contribution all that, you know,
• 33:48
  Speaker 6: pushing it away from the state, very commons apparently.
• 33:54
  Speaker 2: I think basically what she means by the word fascist
• 33:57
  Speaker 2: is men. It's just basically there are two genders, women
• 34:02
  Speaker 2: and fascists. Uh and uh, I know that sort of
• 34:06
  Speaker 2: puts like the gender fluid out, but technically technically the
• 34:13
  Speaker 2: gender fluid are women. And uh so there's really only
• 34:18
  Speaker 2: one legitimate pole of like a like cognitive process, which
• 34:22
  Speaker 2: is female, and then and then then the fascists who
• 34:26
  Speaker 2: are the immoral ones. So I don't know how you
• 34:29
  Speaker 2: get a spectrum out of that, but apparently apparently you
• 34:33
  Speaker 2: can have a spectrum in one singular pole. Uh So, anyway,
• 34:37
  Speaker 2: I just I wanted to put that out because it
• 34:38
  Speaker 2: always sort of baffles me because it seems like, you know,
• 34:42
  Speaker 2: feminists talk about how they want to they want to
• 34:44
  Speaker 2: pluralism when it comes to gender. There's all kinds of
• 34:49
  Speaker 2: gender flavors and colors and notes, and yet the only
• 34:54
  Speaker 2: cognitive modality they accept as legitimate and human is they're
• 34:59
  Speaker 2: so social relational modality. So they've taken a situation where
• 35:05
  Speaker 2: there's men and women and they've cut out one pole
• 35:09
  Speaker 2: entirely and then called that liberation. Bus we cut away
• 35:16
  Speaker 2: you're any kind of any kind of potential choice at all,
• 35:21
  Speaker 2: and that that's liberation. I don't know if choice is
• 35:23
  Speaker 2: the right word here. Anyway, I just wanted to point
• 35:27
  Speaker 2: out that here fascists are also anyone who says no
• 35:32
  Speaker 2: to the utopia, which is really funny because if you
• 35:35
  Speaker 2: think about it, the money that they're taking they are
• 35:40
  Speaker 2: not using to benefit any of the causes that they
• 35:44
  Speaker 2: talk about. They are using it to create these collective
• 35:48
  Speaker 2: hug boxes where they use other people's pain to signal
• 35:53
  Speaker 2: how compassionate they are in their relational web so that
• 35:57
  Speaker 2: they can feel seen, right, but they don't actually do
• 36:02
  Speaker 2: anything for anyone, so they're taking money. In fact, it's
• 36:08
  Speaker 2: really ironic because they would call fascist anybody who said,
• 36:12
  Speaker 2: you know what, we are no longer going to be
• 36:14
  Speaker 2: funding your hug boxes where you get to feel seen
• 36:17
  Speaker 2: as compassionate people who care about things you don't do
• 36:20
  Speaker 2: anything about. We're gonna actually divert that money to actually
• 36:24
  Speaker 2: trying to help people, the very people you say you
• 36:27
  Speaker 2: care about, like maybe women, we're gonna divert it to
• 36:31
  Speaker 2: actually helping them. I know they don't care about men,
• 36:34
  Speaker 2: so I won't say men. I would like funds diverted
• 36:37
  Speaker 2: to help men in need. But that's you know, is
• 36:41
  Speaker 2: that ever gonna happen? Who knows, but anyway, so it
• 36:43
  Speaker 2: will divert those funds that would otherwise go to creating
• 36:46
  Speaker 2: your hug boxes where you all get seen in your
• 36:49
  Speaker 2: relational network, to actually helping the people you're hugboxing each
• 36:52
  Speaker 2: other about. And they would call that fascism because goddamn,
• 36:57
  Speaker 2: how dare some men tell them that money should go
• 37:02
  Speaker 2: to the causes that they say they champion, rather than
• 37:07
  Speaker 2: them championing those causes. Okay, yeah, I just find that hilarious.
• 37:15
  Speaker 7: Okay, more more catastrophizing artusis for constituting knowledges for building
• 37:22
  Speaker 7: the strong objectilogy that feminist science.
• 37:26
  Speaker 1: Yeah, so she said that they let me go back
• 37:29
  Speaker 1: a little bit here, because.
• 37:30
  Speaker 3: We that's off in the middle fascist attacks on schools, universities, libraries, museums, laboratories,
• 37:40
  Speaker 3: the attacks on science and its apparatuses for constituting knowledges
• 37:45
  Speaker 3: for building the strong objectivity that feminist science. Studies scholar
• 37:49
  Speaker 3: Sandra Harding argued for many years ago.
• 37:53
  Speaker 1: He argued, for objective hards feminist sciences. Do you guys
• 37:58
  Speaker 1: know that feminist science is actually hard science? Hard science
• 38:06
  Speaker 1: sounds yeah, yeah.
• 38:11
  Speaker 2: Would step up, like, but do you see how how
• 38:15
  Speaker 2: freaking weasley what she just said. She didn't even say
• 38:19
  Speaker 2: the hard objective science of feminism, but just the hard
• 38:22
  Speaker 2: objective science of feminism that some feminists argued at some point,
• 38:26
  Speaker 2: It's like, ah, this this woman said maybe we should
• 38:29
  Speaker 2: be more objective my sisters, and probably got crucified, and
• 38:34
  Speaker 2: now she's using it as a talking point to defend
• 38:38
  Speaker 2: or sorry, to to condemn, defunding feminist quackery. Some feminists
• 38:48
  Speaker 2: somewhere probably criticized it sounds like it might have been
• 38:52
  Speaker 2: I might be wrong, but it really doesn't matter. Maybe
• 38:55
  Speaker 2: she criticized the fact that feminism is so full of
• 38:58
  Speaker 2: bullshit it's not science. No, maybe maybe maybe, or or
• 39:04
  Speaker 2: she simply asserted that feminism is rigorous science, and now
• 39:11
  Speaker 2: we're gonna have to take that as fact instead of
• 39:14
  Speaker 2: actually test it, because that's rigorous science.
• 39:17
  Speaker 1: It's proved by the fact that there's so much consensus, Alison,
• 39:20
  Speaker 1: it means that all of them figured out, they all
• 39:23
  Speaker 1: landed in the same place. This is how we determine truth.
• 39:26
  Speaker 1: You know, all right, they're all seen. Yeah, well no,
• 39:30
  Speaker 1: they that's right. All of the all of the feminist
• 39:34
  Speaker 1: academics put their opinions in, everyone made sure to affirm
• 39:38
  Speaker 1: each other's view, and then they all came to a consensus.
• 39:41
  Speaker 1: And it is man bad. And yes, fascism is basically
• 39:46
  Speaker 1: a stand in for the masculine way of operating, which
• 39:51
  Speaker 1: is basically, like, you know, trying to fix problems in
• 39:54
  Speaker 1: a practical dispassionate way. This generally, I think how it
• 39:58
  Speaker 1: works not that they're there's no passion. There's obviously got
• 40:01
  Speaker 1: to be a passion to sort of like you know,
• 40:04
  Speaker 1: kickstart the desire to address something, but after that you
• 40:08
  Speaker 1: have to be like pretty much objective, and objective objectivity
• 40:12
  Speaker 1: is fascist. You see.
• 40:14
  Speaker 2: Well, Emo, if women have a role in this, maybe
• 40:17
  Speaker 2: it is in kickstarting the actually giving a crap about
• 40:20
  Speaker 2: a problem, which would suggest that we need a better
• 40:24
  Speaker 2: caliber of women significantly or perhaps replaced with sex spots.
• 40:31
  Speaker 2: Uh you know, not even sax spots, just uh woman boughts, right,
• 40:38
  Speaker 2: just just something that woman's better than women currently women
• 40:42
  Speaker 2: if that is a necessary function, but fascion. Like, when
• 40:48
  Speaker 2: I started this, I was not somebody who necessarily believed
• 40:53
  Speaker 2: very strongly and the I believe more in the blank
• 40:59
  Speaker 2: slate as I did come from a feminist liberal kind
• 41:03
  Speaker 2: of of situation. But over time, as I have researched it,
• 41:08
  Speaker 2: I've realized that it's absolutely right what Brian says. Men
• 41:12
  Speaker 2: and women think very differently. And it's not that women
• 41:16
  Speaker 2: are incapable of thinking in terms of like an operative way,
• 41:21
  Speaker 2: like a mechanistic way, but they just don't tend towards
• 41:26
  Speaker 2: it because it's just not that.
• 41:30
  Speaker 1: It has its place.
• 41:32
  Speaker 2: Yeah, but overall it because I've had to come to
• 41:36
  Speaker 2: the conclusion, especially as a result of my literature work,
• 41:39
  Speaker 2: because you take a man and a woman and you
• 41:42
  Speaker 2: give him a blank piece of paper and the ability
• 41:45
  Speaker 2: to write about anything they want. So it's complete freedom.
• 41:48
  Speaker 2: So you're that is the moment you're going to get
• 41:50
  Speaker 2: the most clear representation of how men and women think
• 41:54
  Speaker 2: about the world, what men and women want to attend
• 41:57
  Speaker 2: to in the world, because there's nothing's constrained them at all.
• 42:01
  Speaker 2: It's complete freedom, and inevitably there is a stark difference
• 42:09
  Speaker 2: in what men write about, what they attend to, how
• 42:12
  Speaker 2: they process things versus women. So I'm like, I can't
• 42:15
  Speaker 2: deny it. I mean I was, I wasn't really inclined
• 42:19
  Speaker 2: to deny it for years prior to that, but now
• 42:21
  Speaker 2: I'm like, yeah, this is there is absolutely no basis
• 42:25
  Speaker 2: to say that men and women don't think differently. And
• 42:28
  Speaker 2: the fact is that if you marginalize the way men think,
• 42:31
  Speaker 2: you're not going very far as a society. Like it's
• 42:35
  Speaker 2: just not because you can't do this, you cannot have
• 42:40
  Speaker 2: a society that is entirely run by hugboxes. It's going
• 42:45
  Speaker 2: and not just hug boxes. But because that's not just
• 42:48
  Speaker 2: the only thing that these hug boxes do, they also
• 42:53
  Speaker 2: when they're hugboxing is interrupted, turn absolutely lethal. So they're
• 42:59
  Speaker 2: like this this incredible combination, this bipolar combination of not
• 43:04
  Speaker 2: wanting to do anything to interrupt the hug boxing, and
• 43:07
  Speaker 2: then if in reality intervenes in the hug box, they
• 43:12
  Speaker 2: immediately switch gears with no intermediary point to excessive violence.
• 43:19
  Speaker 2: So you got these weaponized hug boxes just floating around everywhere.
• 43:23
  Speaker 2: How do you have a society with that? You don't?
• 43:25
  Speaker 2: That's a minefield? All right?
• 43:28
  Speaker 1: All right? I jumped ahead to the next thing. She's
• 43:31
  Speaker 1: gonna be talking about her interest in technologies as thinking technologies.
• 43:37
  Speaker 1: So remember this is a she's sort of like a
• 43:40
  Speaker 1: futurist feminist type. You might even say a technocrat, but
• 43:45
  Speaker 1: I don't know, let's keep going.
• 43:47
  Speaker 6: I'm just gonna jump in on the oh yeah, I'm sorry,
• 43:49
  Speaker 6: go ahead, womanlyness, malely womanly thing, just because it's interesting. So,
• 43:57
  Speaker 6: you know, there's a bunch of these conformancy experiments. We've
• 44:00
  Speaker 6: talked about, the you know, the the glass test, the water, Yes,
• 44:05
  Speaker 6: the water levelation test thing. Yeah, well, we know that
• 44:11
  Speaker 6: the women perform differently on that to men. The women
• 44:15
  Speaker 6: are more likely to basically fail it in so far
• 44:18
  Speaker 6: as they will draw the line relative to the glass
• 44:21
  Speaker 6: as opposed to being relative to the horizon. Well, there's
• 44:24
  Speaker 6: a bunch of other studies like this as well, and
• 44:27
  Speaker 6: it is basically to do with this sort of female
• 44:31
  Speaker 6: mode of thinking, male mode of thinking. So you know
• 44:33
  Speaker 6: the ash conformity experiment, the one with the line mm hmmm.
• 44:39
  Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, the water level right, is that what we're
• 44:42
  Speaker 1: talking about now?
• 44:42
  Speaker 6: No, the ash conformity experiment is a different one.
• 44:45
  Speaker 1: Oh oh, I know, the one where there's three lines
• 44:47
  Speaker 1: and there are different lengths and they ask which one
• 44:50
  Speaker 1: is either shorter or longer, and then there's like only
• 44:54
  Speaker 1: one person that's actually a subject of the test, and
• 44:56
  Speaker 1: the others are actors, and they all pick like an
• 44:59
  Speaker 1: op wrong answer, and so the idea is to see
• 45:02
  Speaker 1: if the man conforms and picks the wrong answer just
• 45:05
  Speaker 1: so he doesn't go against the grain. Yep, exactly one.
• 45:08
  Speaker 6: That is exactly that experiment. And one of the very
• 45:12
  Speaker 6: interesting things about that one is again women are more
• 45:15
  Speaker 6: likely to fail. It's anything from about fifty to sixty
• 45:18
  Speaker 6: percent of women will just go along with the group
• 45:22
  Speaker 6: men it's closer to a third, it's about thirty forty.
• 45:26
  Speaker 6: So this is just confirms things that we've known for
• 45:30
  Speaker 6: a very long time when it comes to how men
• 45:31
  Speaker 6: and women operate in society. Women look for more consensus
• 45:36
  Speaker 6: regarding things generally. Men are a lot more happy to
• 45:39
  Speaker 6: go sort of against the grain, to do things like no,
• 45:42
  Speaker 6: this is objectively true, I don't care what anyone says.
• 45:47
  Speaker 2: That.
• 45:47
  Speaker 6: I think just speaks to two very different mental profiles.
• 45:50
  Speaker 6: And this, I think also comes back to what we were
• 45:52
  Speaker 6: saying earlier about how, oh, well, when women do these things,
• 45:55
  Speaker 6: they have these webs, and they like to sort of
• 45:56
  Speaker 6: be seen to do these things. We seem to care
• 45:58
  Speaker 6: about these things, and then get very complaintative when you
• 46:02
  Speaker 6: then go to the next step, which is, how do
• 46:05
  Speaker 6: we change the thing? The how do we change the
• 46:09
  Speaker 6: thing that that bit now never seems to happen. That
• 46:13
  Speaker 6: bit is evil. And I think a lot of this
• 46:16
  Speaker 6: is just for the fundamentally ingrained in people. I've never
• 46:20
  Speaker 6: been a blank slate person because it is just obviously
• 46:24
  Speaker 6: not true. We know that there are genes that influence behavior.
• 46:30
  Speaker 6: That this is just not up for debate anymore. Anyone
• 46:33
  Speaker 6: who tries to blank slate theory, I just as far
• 46:37
  Speaker 6: as I'm okay you, you not only have not even
• 46:40
  Speaker 6: tried to understand this topic, you have actively chosen to
• 46:45
  Speaker 6: ignore it, and you have actively chosen to be wrong.
• 46:50
  Speaker 6: And even if you just look at other differences, like,
• 46:54
  Speaker 6: for instance, brain structure, I mean men, men's and brain
• 46:57
  Speaker 6: men men's and women's brains are fundamentally different. Female brains
• 46:59
  Speaker 6: to have more intra hemispherical connections, things that bounce, sort of,
• 47:08
  Speaker 6: more crossways, neural connections, more from left to right hemisphere.
• 47:11
  Speaker 6: Men's brains have more forward to backwards connecting atmosphere connectings
• 47:16
  Speaker 6: within their hemispheres of their brains. These sorts of things, again,
• 47:20
  Speaker 6: they just point to there are fundamental differences here. Men's brains,
• 47:25
  Speaker 6: because of those forward backwards connections, tend towards being a
• 47:30
  Speaker 6: little bit more towards motor skills and actual sort of
• 47:34
  Speaker 6: engineering tasks. Women's brains they tend to be a little
• 47:39
  Speaker 6: not not only in total volume smaller, but those areas
• 47:41
  Speaker 6: of the brain also tend to be smaller and tend
• 47:43
  Speaker 6: to have more gray matter. Thus as a total, the
• 47:46
  Speaker 6: total blob that is the brain. Now, this is where
• 47:50
  Speaker 6: you get people who like to go, oh manuroplasticity. Yes,
• 47:53
  Speaker 6: the brain is very plastic. Yes, it can work itself out.
• 47:56
  Speaker 6: It can grow areas, areas can atrophy, all this stuff.
• 47:59
  Speaker 6: It's not in a nut. There are necessarily limits that
• 48:03
  Speaker 6: are put on that. So you can't just say, oh,
• 48:06
  Speaker 6: we can just teach women to have male brains. We
• 48:09
  Speaker 6: can just teach men to have women's brains. No, you
• 48:13
  Speaker 6: just can't. That's not gonna work. Mm hmm. And I
• 48:19
  Speaker 6: don't know how useful any of that was, but it's
• 48:22
  Speaker 6: just when you run up to people like this woman,
• 48:25
  Speaker 6: it's late you. You're odds with existence in so many
• 48:31
  Speaker 6: ways that it is astounding. Yep.
• 48:38
  Speaker 1: Okay, so should we keep going? Yeah, let's keep going.
• 48:45
  Speaker 3: From states and international bodies or from we the people?
• 48:50
  Speaker 4: Now yeah, I was muted.
• 48:53
  Speaker 1: Oh god, okay, oh god, she's able to talk again.
• 49:02
  Speaker 2: Why it's gonna say? When til Deer was saying, can
• 49:12
  Speaker 2: we can't teach women's brains? Can we teach them a
• 49:15
  Speaker 2: little bit to be more male? Like? Is it possible?
• 49:18
  Speaker 2: Just a bit more just to the point where they
• 49:21
  Speaker 2: can recognize that there is another cognitive modality that exists
• 49:24
  Speaker 2: that isn't theirs, and they could be like, oh, well
• 49:27
  Speaker 2: maybe I should listen to men. That's so funny. Okay,
• 49:32
  Speaker 2: I'll go back to being here.
• 49:33
  Speaker 1: Well, yeah you said that. Not you know that this
• 49:36
  Speaker 1: isn't like an absolute and that there are some women
• 49:38
  Speaker 1: that are more inclined to like have that modality, right,
• 49:42
  Speaker 1: So all we gotta do is get enough of those
• 49:44
  Speaker 1: women on board, and then the other women will just
• 49:47
  Speaker 1: they'll just fall in line. Because most of the time,
• 49:50
  Speaker 1: I think women just do whatever they think is safest
• 49:54
  Speaker 1: for their survival, which is to agree with whatever the
• 49:58
  Speaker 1: predominant belief system is. That's why I think they're more
• 50:01
  Speaker 1: susceptible to propaganda than men. So yeah, we just we
• 50:05
  Speaker 1: just need we just need to bring back patriarchy.
• 50:08
  Speaker 2: Unfortunately, men are susceptible to women.
• 50:11
  Speaker 1: They are, and that's why that's why we need like that, Well,
• 50:15
  Speaker 1: we need to undo that too. I don't think that
• 50:17
  Speaker 1: that is I don't think that that is normal for
• 50:22
  Speaker 1: men to be like susceptible to the point of being irrational.
• 50:26
  Speaker 1: I think that they want to say because of the anyway, go.
• 50:29
  Speaker 2: Ahead, you know, I got you, I got you. But
• 50:32
  Speaker 2: the thing is like uh vasap press and takes no prisoners.
• 50:35
  Speaker 2: But what I wanted to say to that is my
• 50:41
  Speaker 2: research into literature suggests that you talk about neural no.
• 50:46
  Speaker 2: This is this is extremely typed. There's almost no crossover.
• 50:52
  Speaker 2: Like men who can who can write in a more
• 50:55
  Speaker 2: female relational modality are Henry James and Prausse that's it,
• 51:05
  Speaker 2: and that's across like centuries and women who can write
• 51:08
  Speaker 2: in a male modellion. Here's the critical thing. Women can
• 51:13
  Speaker 2: have operative content often if they've studied like men doing
• 51:18
  Speaker 2: something or the process of doing something like this. This,
• 51:22
  Speaker 2: this lady, Donna half her away has operative content. She
• 51:28
  Speaker 2: has mech like technical technical content in her speech. It's
• 51:34
  Speaker 2: around her dog agility work. It's the only technical content
• 51:38
  Speaker 2: in her entire speech. And in fact, in a sane world,
• 51:41
  Speaker 2: she would probably be a dog agility trainer. And that's
• 51:45
  Speaker 2: it because that is the contribution she gives to the world,
• 51:49
  Speaker 2: not this training dogs or training her dog. That's it,
• 51:54
  Speaker 2: at least based on her freaking lecture. So women can
• 51:57
  Speaker 2: reproduce it, they cannot sustain it. And usually when they
• 52:02
  Speaker 2: reproduce that content, uh it's mimicry, and it immediately goes
• 52:07
  Speaker 2: back to what it says about the relational map of
• 52:10
  Speaker 2: the story. And this is so strong over centuries. I've
• 52:15
  Speaker 2: only found two women UH who genuinely access operational or
• 52:22
  Speaker 2: technical content and Ann Rand and Emily Bronte did it
• 52:27
  Speaker 2: briefly with some of the stuff that she she wrote
• 52:29
  Speaker 2: about in Weathering Heights and Ann Rand. But Ann Rand
• 52:33
  Speaker 2: is actually not even a female modality or male modality.
• 52:38
  Speaker 2: She's philo philosopher modality, which is a completely like they're
• 52:41
  Speaker 2: just weirdos on their own. It's it's Anne Rand and
• 52:45
  Speaker 2: goth Gothie. How do you go the Gotha? How do
• 52:49
  Speaker 2: you see g e O t h e?
• 52:53
  Speaker 1: How do you see this? Goth?
• 52:58
  Speaker 2: And I think Faust and Ann Rand are basically just
• 53:03
  Speaker 2: philosophical weirdos off in their own little realm, and everything
• 53:07
  Speaker 2: they write about falls back down on their philosophy. So
• 53:11
  Speaker 2: that's it. And the two exceptions that I've found in
• 53:16
  Speaker 2: terms of women writing in UH relational versus operative modality
• 53:23
  Speaker 2: are myself, I'm not I'm not sure if anybody's surprised.
• 53:27
  Speaker 2: And another woman in my writing group that also that
• 53:32
  Speaker 2: can also write in that. But here's the here's the catch.
• 53:36
  Speaker 2: It's not pure operative modality. Even I don't write in
• 53:39
  Speaker 2: a purely operative modality, it's still it is actually a
• 53:44
  Speaker 2: fused channel, so it's it's both relational and operative at
• 53:50
  Speaker 2: the same time. And she and the other woman that
• 53:53
  Speaker 2: I work with, same thing, so it's it's a it's like,
• 53:59
  Speaker 2: it is a really strong by furcation between men and
• 54:05
  Speaker 2: how men and women think. And it's even more obvious.
• 54:08
  Speaker 2: The more you give men and women the freedom to
• 54:12
  Speaker 2: describe how they think, to attend to whatever they want
• 54:16
  Speaker 2: to attend to, to describe whatever they want to describe,
• 54:19
  Speaker 2: to land on whatever interests them, the more clearly there
• 54:23
  Speaker 2: is a difference between men and women. And it's uh,
• 54:29
  Speaker 2: I think honestly, just bridging that gap and being able
• 54:33
  Speaker 2: to bridge that gap is probably one of those valuable
• 54:36
  Speaker 2: skills a society can have. And instead of bridging that gap,
• 54:41
  Speaker 2: our society has chosen to embrace feminism. Which what does
• 54:46
  Speaker 2: feminism due to that gap? Bombs the bridge? Oh shit,
• 54:51
  Speaker 2: I just got this this video.
• 54:53
  Speaker 1: You monetized with bombs?
• 54:59
  Speaker 4: What are you?
• 55:00
  Speaker 2: I'm bringing in that operational thinking, I'm living in the
• 55:03
  Speaker 2: utopia where honey, Badger Radio actually has millions of subscribers.
• 55:10
  Speaker 2: Don't break your reality, Brian.
• 55:12
  Speaker 1: I have to. I have to otherwise I get my
• 55:15
  Speaker 1: whole family killed for the delusion. Okay, so we keep going. Yes,
• 55:20
  Speaker 1: she's still catastrophizing, Okay, in.
• 55:22
  Speaker 3: The mode of anger, hope, thoughtfulness, action, and creative imagination
• 55:29
  Speaker 3: all are vital if we are to survive these times. Now,
• 55:35
  Speaker 3: I am particularly interested in technologies as you have, as
• 55:38
  Speaker 3: you know, and I'm interested in thinking and the technologies.
• 55:42
  Speaker 4: That thinking engages.
• 55:44
  Speaker 3: That in some significant sense, thinking is not abstract, it
• 55:49
  Speaker 3: is a technological process. Then there are different apparatuses for thinking,
• 55:54
  Speaker 3: and it matters which thoughts think thoughts, which technologies build
• 55:58
  Speaker 3: which technology.
• 56:02
  Speaker 1: Okay, so she's getting into the intellectual is intellectualization of
• 56:09
  Speaker 1: her religion, and so yeah, she's going to introduce this
• 56:17
  Speaker 1: idea that thinking is a technology and that we have
• 56:20
  Speaker 1: to use that technology of thought to create thoughts and
• 56:25
  Speaker 1: in yeah, anyway, that there's a bit more of this.
• 56:28
  Speaker 6: Pseudo intellectual, semi philosophical bollocks and midwi depties.
• 56:32
  Speaker 1: Yes, yes, but she probably got paid thousands of dollars
• 56:38
  Speaker 1: to go up here and say this stuff. So tens
• 56:42
  Speaker 1: of thousands, yes, tens of thousands.
• 56:46
  Speaker 3: Two thinking technologies that have been terribly important to me.
• 56:50
  Speaker 3: The first is situated knowledges. Now, situated knowledgis does not
• 56:56
  Speaker 3: mean perspective. It does not mean one's particular local point
• 57:00
  Speaker 3: of view.
• 57:01
  Speaker 1: Rather, oh, this could be juicy. It sounds like she's
• 57:05
  Speaker 1: about to make an argument for objectivity. Hold your hold
• 57:11
  Speaker 1: on to your nuts.
• 57:11
  Speaker 3: Though technology. Situated technologies means strong, critical, historical and contemporary
• 57:21
  Speaker 3: excavations of the possibilities and the apparatuses for making what is.
• 57:29
  Speaker 1: Explain what she's saying. It's basically dreaming about what's possible.
• 57:39
  Speaker 1: That's all she said. You want to hear that again.
• 57:45
  Speaker 1: It's a it's nonsense. But let's let's go back and
• 57:47
  Speaker 1: listen to it again. She's just saying, here, this is what's.
• 57:51
  Speaker 4: Possible, Jeemes.
• 57:54
  Speaker 3: Situated technologies means strong, critical, historical and temporary excavations of
• 58:02
  Speaker 3: the possibilities and the apparatuses for making what is.
• 58:09
  Speaker 1: Come on, guys, she said a bunch of big words.
• 58:14
  Speaker 1: This is this is she said. She said, the possible.
• 58:18
  Speaker 1: That's the word that means the most there, possibilities, excavations, historical.
• 58:27
  Speaker 6: We have to be able to engage in process never ending.
• 58:31
  Speaker 1: Yes, it's process never ending exactly.
• 58:34
  Speaker 2: Okay, I'm gonna I'm gonna introduce something different. This is
• 58:38
  Speaker 2: relational modality. Trying to understand how operational modality does stuff
• 58:43
  Speaker 2: and concluding that it's magic. It's incantations. You make words
• 58:47
  Speaker 2: and things happen.
• 58:49
  Speaker 1: No, she's doing the incantations right.
• 58:52
  Speaker 2: Yes, yes, yes, this is yes.
• 58:54
  Speaker 1: This is this is witchcraft. That's what this is. She's
• 58:57
  Speaker 1: trying to change reality with words. That's what. Yeah, that's
• 59:02
  Speaker 1: what all of this postmodern shit is.
• 59:04
  Speaker 2: Yeah, but but consider that that's how women do they
• 59:08
  Speaker 2: They they say a word, or they say a series
• 59:11
  Speaker 2: of words, and men do something and then reality changes.
• 59:16
  Speaker 2: Consider that that this works for women generally. Of course,
• 59:22
  Speaker 2: in previous eras that was related to farm you know,
• 59:26
  Speaker 2: so you say words like could you till the field
• 59:29
  Speaker 2: so we have potatoes for the winter, and the dude
• 59:31
  Speaker 2: does it, and then you have potatoes for winter. Probably
• 59:34
  Speaker 2: more functional. This is, this is incantating into the void. Hello, voidcat. Okay,
• 59:46
  Speaker 2: she looks down upon us, She watches all now.
• 59:50
  Speaker 3: And situated knowledges are necessary at all scales and temporalities,
• 59:55
  Speaker 3: from the intimate and and particularly here. They're particularly local
• 1:00:00
  Speaker 3: or small in that sense, and globally, but always situated
• 1:00:05
  Speaker 3: in the material semiotic conditions of being in this way
• 1:00:09
  Speaker 3: rather than some other situated and not general in that sense.
• 1:00:14
  Speaker 6: It doesn't the material semiotic what was that? Semiotic conditions? Okay,
• 1:00:22
  Speaker 6: material is in things that are that are solidly semiotics.
• 1:00:28
  Speaker 6: The study or understanding of signs modality. How yeah, sure, okay,
• 1:00:38
  Speaker 6: these are words.
• 1:00:39
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it's nonsense. It's it really makes her appear that
• 1:00:43
  Speaker 1: people are watching like, wow, she's so educated, she's so smart.
• 1:00:49
  Speaker 6: Okay, yeah, this is how these people speak, and it's
• 1:00:53
  Speaker 6: very frustrating.
• 1:00:54
  Speaker 5: It It is this sort of bizarre skin suit costume
• 1:01:00
  Speaker 5: of academia, like they attempt to make their things as.
• 1:01:06
  Speaker 6: Difficult to mentally penetrate and mentally pass as possible, and
• 1:01:12
  Speaker 6: then they use the fact that it takes you a
• 1:01:14
  Speaker 6: few moments to say, wait, what the fuck did you
• 1:01:16
  Speaker 6: just say? And then they use that to go, ah, well,
• 1:01:19
  Speaker 6: you see, that's just because you don't understand. Yes, you're
• 1:01:23
  Speaker 6: not intelligent enough to be having this conversation.
• 1:01:26
  Speaker 1: You see.
• 1:01:26
  Speaker 6: Did you even know when she said, like, oh, across
• 1:01:29
  Speaker 6: all all all the places and temporalities mm, hmm, you
• 1:01:33
  Speaker 6: mean everywhere all the time.
• 1:01:36
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but that's too like, that's too it's not intellectual
• 1:01:42
  Speaker 1: understand it. Yeah, normal people might get it. I can't.
• 1:01:45
  Speaker 1: I can't like, you know, dazzle them with my knowledge
• 1:01:48
  Speaker 1: of bomitgy Basically, I mean, are you familiar with Agrippa's
• 1:01:55
  Speaker 1: trime trilemma? Just I'm just kidding. Okay, that was a
• 1:01:59
  Speaker 1: I was taking a jaz But another person that's been
• 1:02:02
  Speaker 1: throwing these big words around. Okay, there's a little bit
• 1:02:06
  Speaker 1: more left in this sound clip.
• 1:02:08
  Speaker 3: So not mean identity or perspective. Very important point now.
• 1:02:15
  Speaker 1: It does not mean identity or perspective. So she's trying
• 1:02:19
  Speaker 1: to elevate herself above the normal sort of standpoint theory,
• 1:02:25
  Speaker 1: postmodern feminist talking points of lived experience. So she's elevating
• 1:02:31
  Speaker 1: herself beyond to say no, no, no, it's not I
• 1:02:33
  Speaker 1: don't operate in that. That's kind of because that's another
• 1:02:36
  Speaker 1: thing that these people do, is they kind of compete
• 1:02:38
  Speaker 1: with each other too on intellectual grounds, like who's the
• 1:02:42
  Speaker 1: smartest feminist, who's the most well spoken, it's it's it's
• 1:02:46
  Speaker 1: a competition. That's why she's bringing the thesaurus. You know,
• 1:02:49
  Speaker 1: it's actually, you know what it reminds me of. Do
• 1:02:51
  Speaker 1: you guys remember Michael Eric Dyson when he debated uh,
• 1:02:55
  Speaker 1: Jordan Peterson a long time ago about ah, what were
• 1:02:59
  Speaker 1: they to debate? Was it privilege, like white privilege or something,
• 1:03:03
  Speaker 1: or male privilege. Yeah, and he was just throwing a
• 1:03:06
  Speaker 1: bunch of big words at him. It's the same thing,
• 1:03:09
  Speaker 1: just that that was in a debate context. All right,
• 1:03:13
  Speaker 1: let's see. So that was her elaborating on situated knowledges,
• 1:03:18
  Speaker 1: clarifying it does not mean mere perspective or identity, but
• 1:03:21
  Speaker 1: involves strong critical historical and contemporary. So critical historical which
• 1:03:28
  Speaker 1: means the past, and contemporary which means now, excavations of
• 1:03:33
  Speaker 1: how knowledge is made situated materially and temporally necessary at
• 1:03:39
  Speaker 1: all scales, from the logical to the global.
• 1:03:43
  Speaker 6: So, Lily, we have because the critical, I think the
• 1:03:46
  Speaker 6: critical there is deliberate. I think she's literally referring to well,
• 1:03:50
  Speaker 6: as we all know, critical theory. It's the feminist theory,
• 1:03:53
  Speaker 6: the Marxist theory. That's what they mean. Whenever they say critical,
• 1:03:57
  Speaker 6: Whenever they say oh, we need a critical investigation of
• 1:04:00
  Speaker 6: this thing, they don't mean it's important. They mean no,
• 1:04:02
  Speaker 6: we need to understand it via this framework. So we
• 1:04:05
  Speaker 6: need a critical understanding. It's not just your individual standpoint.
• 1:04:10
  Speaker 6: It's the Marxist standpoint of all of the words everything, everywhere,
• 1:04:18
  Speaker 6: all the time, because that's easier to say than vomiting
• 1:04:23
  Speaker 6: a thesaurus to say the exact same thing.
• 1:04:25
  Speaker 2: Oh, I'm really sorry, I sneezed and I forgot.
• 1:04:29
  Speaker 1: Now you're not muting visa me concordingly.
• 1:04:34
  Speaker 2: Sorry, guys.
• 1:04:38
  Speaker 1: All right, so let's let's keep Let me see what's
• 1:04:43
  Speaker 1: the next one. Seven okay, seven minutes. She's gonna go
• 1:04:47
  Speaker 1: into uh string, oh, string figuring. This is this is wild.
• 1:04:51
  Speaker 1: This is a wild one. Let me go back a
• 1:04:56
  Speaker 1: little bit. She's gonna be throwing more like. Now she's
• 1:04:59
  Speaker 1: gonna show us how many different languages she can.
• 1:05:02
  Speaker 3: Speak to the need for my second technology, which is
• 1:05:08
  Speaker 3: s F or string figuring. Now SF for me has
• 1:05:12
  Speaker 3: has meant SF rest of all means.
• 1:05:16
  Speaker 1: My next technology isn't Like this is like the Batman
• 1:05:21
  Speaker 1: villain that that just doesn't take off, you know, like
• 1:05:26
  Speaker 1: her whole thing is making up technologies in her own
• 1:05:29
  Speaker 1: mind that don't actually have any like functional use in
• 1:05:33
  Speaker 1: the real world. But anyway, Yeah, SF situated no string figures.
• 1:05:39
  Speaker 6: Yeah, well, yeah, yeah, this is her doing the s intellectual,
• 1:05:48
  Speaker 6: semi philosophical woo thing, this hippie dippy nonsense, just like, oh,
• 1:05:53
  Speaker 6: people in the past may have thought of technologies to
• 1:05:57
  Speaker 6: solve problems or abuse technology is so problems that don't
• 1:06:00
  Speaker 6: really exist yet. And now I'm going to go hippie
• 1:06:04
  Speaker 6: dippy on this and make it sound really profound. String figures.
• 1:06:07
  Speaker 6: String figures. It's a game that children play, like CAP's Cradle,
• 1:06:12
  Speaker 6: where you pull bits of string and you make loops
• 1:06:14
  Speaker 6: around their hands. But you need two people. But you
• 1:06:18
  Speaker 6: can't do it alone because even when you play it
• 1:06:20
  Speaker 6: by yourself, you've got multiple fingers and your fingers have
• 1:06:23
  Speaker 6: cells and string figures. It begins with SF and all
• 1:06:28
  Speaker 6: of these other phrases begin with with SF and oh
• 1:06:32
  Speaker 6: it makes me think so much. But literally where she
• 1:06:35
  Speaker 6: goes with it, and it's incredibly stupid. I'm going to
• 1:06:41
  Speaker 6: do what she does here. She is engaging in a
• 1:06:46
  Speaker 6: paraginess display. Okay, right, I'm just going to explain it
• 1:06:55
  Speaker 6: having a characteristic of a far ago, which is a
• 1:06:58
  Speaker 6: hodgepodge or a disordered mixture of something.
• 1:07:01
  Speaker 1: Mm hmm.
• 1:07:03
  Speaker 6: I I feel like I should try to put some
• 1:07:06
  Speaker 6: more of these in there. There's funny books you can buy.
• 1:07:08
  Speaker 6: This is actually what I have. It's called The Superior
• 1:07:10
  Speaker 6: Person's Second Book of Words. It's literally just books, just
• 1:07:14
  Speaker 6: a book full of really interesting and weird words that
• 1:07:17
  Speaker 6: just go on and on and on, just like lists
• 1:07:20
  Speaker 6: of very strange things.
• 1:07:23
  Speaker 1: Yeah, all right, Alison, Are you.
• 1:07:28
  Speaker 6: Flip as many of them men as I can, just
• 1:07:30
  Speaker 6: to match the energy of this woman?
• 1:07:33
  Speaker 2: Yeah? No, and it helps at least is something interesting
• 1:07:37
  Speaker 2: to think about. Phara genus what was it the word
• 1:07:41
  Speaker 2: foragunus or phagoniss this this woman is a very foreragenous
• 1:07:48
  Speaker 2: herod inus.
• 1:07:50
  Speaker 1: Okay, let's let's listen to string figures. We're gonna learn something.
• 1:07:56
  Speaker 1: She created this.
• 1:07:59
  Speaker 3: Cat Jio deficel Juego de Gato's courtiguran or in navajo
• 1:08:07
  Speaker 3: natlo in Indonesian.
• 1:08:08
  Speaker 4: Still another word.
• 1:08:10
  Speaker 3: It is a global game with very particular kinds of format.
• 1:08:15
  Speaker 1: Well, let me just pause it there for a second.
• 1:08:18
  Speaker 1: You guys know what Cat's Cradle is. It was like
• 1:08:20
  Speaker 1: a little game that girls, you know, they take strings
• 1:08:23
  Speaker 1: and they make like a like a net in their
• 1:08:25
  Speaker 1: fingers and then you do pull a thing. I think.
• 1:08:27
  Speaker 1: I don't know how it works because it looked lame
• 1:08:30
  Speaker 1: to me. But it was a game that little girls
• 1:08:33
  Speaker 1: played in school with string. She just tried to take
• 1:08:37
  Speaker 1: that and turn it into some kind of like high
• 1:08:40
  Speaker 1: IQ global thing. That's why she repeated it in multiple languages,
• 1:08:44
  Speaker 1: so that you guys know she is well learned. She
• 1:08:48
  Speaker 1: is a well learned person. She know how to say
• 1:08:50
  Speaker 1: cat's cradle in like four languages, and so she used
• 1:08:54
  Speaker 1: this as like an opportunity for her to cram that
• 1:08:56
  Speaker 1: into this talk so that people would be to be
• 1:08:59
  Speaker 1: dazzled by her knowledge of the you know, the spoken word. So,
• 1:09:04
  Speaker 1: but it's just a child's game. So how is she
• 1:09:07
  Speaker 1: going to connect this to something that is going to
• 1:09:10
  Speaker 1: at least address all of the various crises of racism
• 1:09:14
  Speaker 1: and sexism and capitalism and immigration, anger and stuff. Well,
• 1:09:19
  Speaker 1: let's find.
• 1:09:20
  Speaker 3: Out relations to cosmologies, the relationships to seasons of the years,
• 1:09:24
  Speaker 3: seasons of the year.
• 1:09:25
  Speaker 4: And practices of storytelling.
• 1:09:28
  Speaker 3: But always string figuring involves the taking up of threads
• 1:09:32
  Speaker 3: with in exchange with each other, the dropping of some threads,
• 1:09:37
  Speaker 3: the breaking of patterns, the making of traditional patterns, or
• 1:09:41
  Speaker 3: the inventing of new patterns.
• 1:09:43
  Speaker 4: It is a kind.
• 1:09:43
  Speaker 2: Of what the Let the let her finish. I want
• 1:09:51
  Speaker 2: to speak to this.
• 1:09:52
  Speaker 1: But I want all right, all right, let me let
• 1:09:54
  Speaker 1: her finish.
• 1:09:56
  Speaker 2: I'm hoping that she lands somewhere, but I don't think
• 1:09:58
  Speaker 2: she will that.
• 1:10:00
  Speaker 1: Alison Landing implies that the that the conversation is over,
• 1:10:03
  Speaker 1: she is in. She is orbiting around this. He's never
• 1:10:07
  Speaker 1: gonna end. She's like a satellite.
• 1:10:10
  Speaker 4: Fabric art for weaving worlds.
• 1:10:13
  Speaker 3: String figuring is the making of worlds and a kind
• 1:10:16
  Speaker 3: of reciprocal induction, a kind of inducing in each other
• 1:10:19
  Speaker 3: the patterning. You cannot okay figuring alone.
• 1:10:24
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 1:10:25
  Speaker 2: This literally is her describing her cognitive modality as somehow
• 1:10:31
  Speaker 2: producing reality, even though it doesn't that that. She's literally
• 1:10:36
  Speaker 2: describing her cognitive modality the relational modality the social network,
• 1:10:42
  Speaker 2: and that's what creates reality. That's what she's saying. This
• 1:10:45
  Speaker 2: is feminist nosis and uh no recognition of the operational
• 1:10:52
  Speaker 2: reality that underlies all of this, Like the social web
• 1:10:55
  Speaker 2: doesn't exist unless the operational uh individual has constructed the
• 1:11:04
  Speaker 2: yurts like the tribe of the yurt community, or the
• 1:11:08
  Speaker 2: suburban community, or some place where the relational web can
• 1:11:12
  Speaker 2: actually exist without running away from the saber toothed tiger
• 1:11:15
  Speaker 2: every five minutes, Like you get what I'm saying. She
• 1:11:19
  Speaker 2: doesn't understand that, and she's trying to say that the
• 1:11:28
  Speaker 2: operational layer that underpins everything, the container within which she operates,
• 1:11:39
  Speaker 2: isn't what creates reality. It's actually this this social network
• 1:11:44
  Speaker 2: that somehow creates reality, which is absolutely true from her position,
• 1:11:49
  Speaker 2: because again, if she were to be removed from her
• 1:11:53
  Speaker 2: from her node, the node that she occupies in the
• 1:11:56
  Speaker 2: social topology, she would cease to exist. Therefore, recognition within
• 1:12:01
  Speaker 2: the social topology to her is existence. It does create
• 1:12:06
  Speaker 2: the world. She cannot conceive the fact that underneath that
• 1:12:12
  Speaker 2: social web that she exists within are pillars that are
• 1:12:17
  Speaker 2: held up by fascists. You know, the web is attached
• 1:12:24
  Speaker 2: to these pillars. Guess who is holding up the pillars, lady,
• 1:12:28
  Speaker 2: the fascists aka men and maybe a few women who
• 1:12:35
  Speaker 2: can actually conceive of this stuff. Who actually passed the
• 1:12:37
  Speaker 2: water level pest? All right?
• 1:12:41
  Speaker 1: All right, yeap oh that I gotta move on to
• 1:12:45
  Speaker 1: the next time code. So we got string string figure.
• 1:12:50
  Speaker 2: Did you read the superchowd that was sent through?
• 1:12:51
  Speaker 1: There was a superchow I didn't see it.
• 1:12:54
  Speaker 2: No, super chat. Maybe you already read.
• 1:12:56
  Speaker 1: It super chat.
• 1:12:58
  Speaker 2: Yeah, Gabriel, me let me.
• 1:13:00
  Speaker 1: No, I got it, I got it. I didn't know
• 1:13:02
  Speaker 1: Ted dance in transition. It was a membership comment. The
• 1:13:05
  Speaker 1: membership comments didn't pop up on my chat and they
• 1:13:09
  Speaker 1: don't show up as super chats, so I just go
• 1:13:12
  Speaker 1: back and look. But it's okay, yeah, Ted danceing, dude,
• 1:13:15
  Speaker 1: don't insult Ted dancing like that.
• 1:13:18
  Speaker 2: By the way, Gabriel, I have I've figured Jonathan has
• 1:13:22
  Speaker 2: figured out for me how I can use an actual
• 1:13:25
  Speaker 2: controller to play repo. So maybe I will.
• 1:13:29
  Speaker 1: Oh maybe, I don't know. I kind of prefer the
• 1:13:32
  Speaker 1: mouse and keyboard for repo.
• 1:13:34
  Speaker 2: But yeah, I do not prefer the mouse. Yeah, I
• 1:13:37
  Speaker 2: don't prefer that. That's not for me, especially not the
• 1:13:42
  Speaker 2: way that I have to. And plus also the the
• 1:13:45
  Speaker 2: controller allows me to sit on the couch and look
• 1:13:47
  Speaker 2: at the That's the reasonable.
• 1:13:50
  Speaker 1: That's the reason to use it. Right there, Sitting on
• 1:13:53
  Speaker 1: the couch is the best. Yeah.
• 1:13:55
  Speaker 2: Yeah, so now I can sit on the couch, but
• 1:13:58
  Speaker 2: I can also I feel like I might be able
• 1:13:59
  Speaker 2: to control things and understand them better. So I hope
• 1:14:02
  Speaker 2: to earn the right to be called a moron by Gabriel.
• 1:14:09
  Speaker 1: The idiots. All right, anyway, so let's see. Oh yeah,
• 1:14:15
  Speaker 1: let's go to the next time code. Now she's going
• 1:14:18
  Speaker 1: to deepen her explanation of string figuring as a serious
• 1:14:25
  Speaker 1: philosophical technology. This is serious stuff, guys, very weird.
• 1:14:30
  Speaker 6: Things like this before on past streams going through some
• 1:14:33
  Speaker 6: of their papers, where some of these things will literally
• 1:14:36
  Speaker 6: just spot some random thing in their life and turn
• 1:14:41
  Speaker 6: it into every auto ethnography we've ever covered. It just
• 1:14:47
  Speaker 6: seems to literally be feminists finding some random shit in
• 1:14:51
  Speaker 6: their life and saying, this is some grand theory of reality.
• 1:14:57
  Speaker 6: It's some microcosm of how do you of use actually functions?
• 1:15:03
  Speaker 1: Mm hmmm, No, I'm you know what it all? It
• 1:15:10
  Speaker 1: all blends together for me, man, I'm I'm Was.
• 1:15:14
  Speaker 6: It the water lily?
• 1:15:15
  Speaker 1: Was it the beaver? The women, the.
• 1:15:20
  Speaker 2: Water lily, the semiotics of the water lily.
• 1:15:26
  Speaker 6: Yeah, I don't even remember if that was one of
• 1:15:29
  Speaker 6: the real ones or one of the fake ones.
• 1:15:31
  Speaker 2: Gender validity of the badger, not the badger of the beaver.
• 1:15:37
  Speaker 2: There was one where they talked that they were looking
• 1:15:39
  Speaker 2: at there was like a feminist ecology and they were
• 1:15:41
  Speaker 2: looking at beavers, and I think it was a trans
• 1:15:46
  Speaker 2: woman who was writing a paper on beavers, although I
• 1:15:51
  Speaker 2: got the feeling at one point that this was just
• 1:15:53
  Speaker 2: her bullshitting and she knew it or he knew it.
• 1:15:57
  Speaker 2: Whatever they knew.
• 1:15:59
  Speaker 6: I don't think so they people like this, They actually
• 1:16:02
  Speaker 6: genuinely just see random ship and like pseudo intellectualize these
• 1:16:06
  Speaker 6: massive mind webs of nonsense about them. It's like, yeah,
• 1:16:11
  Speaker 6: when she was talking about like, oh, you do Cat's
• 1:16:13
  Speaker 6: Cradle with the with the thing, it's yeah, well you, yeah,
• 1:16:16
  Speaker 6: you make little symmetrical things with the string and then
• 1:16:19
  Speaker 6: you pull bits out and put them back in you
• 1:16:21
  Speaker 6: even together. They have to be symmetrical because that's how
• 1:16:24
  Speaker 6: the game's played. If you can't do it, then then
• 1:16:27
  Speaker 6: then you lose at the game. That's how. And then
• 1:16:30
  Speaker 6: she just turns that into some oh, it's actually a
• 1:16:33
  Speaker 6: grand narrative about how society happens. You pick up some
• 1:16:37
  Speaker 6: bits of string and then you let other ones go away,
• 1:16:40
  Speaker 6: and you make a new pattern out of the old thing.
• 1:16:43
  Speaker 6: And it's well, yeah, but you're you're trying to read
• 1:16:48
  Speaker 6: into something here, like just something that isn't there, Like
• 1:16:53
  Speaker 6: you're trying to take a very basic thing and extrapolate
• 1:16:58
  Speaker 6: it into this grand philosophical narrative, which is all this
• 1:17:03
  Speaker 6: woman does throughout this talk. She she just talks about
• 1:17:05
  Speaker 6: how everything needs to be narrativized, like she talks about
• 1:17:09
  Speaker 6: the biology that she does. Oh, we need we need
• 1:17:11
  Speaker 6: narrative biology. Not not the actual objective you know, Oh,
• 1:17:16
  Speaker 6: DNA creates r n AR and uh programs for protein
• 1:17:21
  Speaker 6: molecules and all that stuff. No, no, no, no, no, we
• 1:17:23
  Speaker 6: need to go into the Cunion perspective. We need to
• 1:17:25
  Speaker 6: go into the Postcunion perspective. Even we need to make
• 1:17:29
  Speaker 6: science subjective. It's not objective or anything like that. We
• 1:17:32
  Speaker 6: we need to we need to understand the narrative of biology.
• 1:17:36
  Speaker 6: You see, when when animals evolve, we don't just need
• 1:17:39
  Speaker 6: to describe the evolution. We need to tell the story
• 1:17:44
  Speaker 6: about why the evolution is. And women like this are
• 1:17:50
  Speaker 6: why the Critical Race Theory textbook that I have behind
• 1:17:53
  Speaker 6: me has fucking poetry in it. Science. I really should
• 1:17:59
  Speaker 6: take a photograph of those pages and send them to you.
• 1:18:02
  Speaker 6: They are that is science to these people.
• 1:18:09
  Speaker 1: No, I'm I'm glad that that exists like that because
• 1:18:13
  Speaker 1: it shouldn't be taken seriously. So all right, send it
• 1:18:18
  Speaker 1: to us.
• 1:18:19
  Speaker 2: Also, what are the rules of the thread?
• 1:18:22
  Speaker 1: Right?
• 1:18:22
  Speaker 2: If you're going to propose a thread based reality, at
• 1:18:25
  Speaker 2: the very least, you should make a reasonable rule system
• 1:18:28
  Speaker 2: explains how the threads move. Right, then we can make predictions.
• 1:18:33
  Speaker 2: I think string theory might also already have you covered there,
• 1:18:37
  Speaker 2: But you know we could.
• 1:18:38
  Speaker 6: We couldn't feminist enough. We need a feminist string theory.
• 1:18:42
  Speaker 6: We're gonna call it thread theory, thread.
• 1:18:45
  Speaker 1: Theory, yarn theory for people who are.
• 1:18:50
  Speaker 6: Yond theory, why tea? And it begins with what you
• 1:18:54
  Speaker 6: know what else begins with what it makes me think of?
• 1:18:56
  Speaker 6: Of YouTube? And that's some means of communicating with each other.
• 1:19:01
  Speaker 6: And you have these threads that go via the Internet
• 1:19:05
  Speaker 6: is composed of threads, much like YouTube is composed of threads.
• 1:19:12
  Speaker 6: Y it makes me think of other things, like your turn.
• 1:19:16
  Speaker 6: So we have we have yarn theory going to YouTube
• 1:19:21
  Speaker 6: and it's your turn to talk, and we have these
• 1:19:25
  Speaker 6: grand threads that pull us all together in this yarn theory,
• 1:19:30
  Speaker 6: and we create these networks of knowledge where your turn
• 1:19:35
  Speaker 6: via YouTube from the yard theory and we can all
• 1:19:39
  Speaker 6: come together in a grand understand. That's all this woman's
• 1:19:43
  Speaker 6: doing mm hmm. I know I dragged that on a
• 1:19:48
  Speaker 6: little bit, but if really is what she's doing this
• 1:19:50
  Speaker 6: story for.
• 1:19:50
  Speaker 1: Tred absolutely absolutely, it's fine.
• 1:19:54
  Speaker 2: It's like, it's okay that you dragged it on. It
• 1:19:58
  Speaker 2: deserves to be dragged on because we're this video is
• 1:20:01
  Speaker 2: dragging on.
• 1:20:02
  Speaker 1: It is dragging on, and I got about a half
• 1:20:05
  Speaker 1: an hour, so let's let's try to get more of
• 1:20:07
  Speaker 1: this knocked out ordered.
• 1:20:09
  Speaker 4: To connect otherwise so far not knowing now.
• 1:20:14
  Speaker 3: String figures is of course a metaphor, but it's more
• 1:20:17
  Speaker 3: than that.
• 1:20:17
  Speaker 4: It's an actual practice.
• 1:20:19
  Speaker 3: It's a serious proposal of a technology for thinking.
• 1:20:23
  Speaker 4: Does not work by triads, does not work.
• 1:20:25
  Speaker 3: By hierarchical ordering, does not work, by binaries, does not work.
• 1:20:33
  Speaker 6: I just love this. This is just some bullocks that
• 1:20:35
  Speaker 6: she pulled out of her ass about children's games. She's like,
• 1:20:37
  Speaker 6: it's a modality of understanding things?
• 1:20:41
  Speaker 4: Is it?
• 1:20:42
  Speaker 6: When did that happen?
• 1:20:44
  Speaker 1: Because it isn't hierarchical, it isn't binary. Those things are
• 1:20:48
  Speaker 1: very important to not be, so can't be those things?
• 1:20:53
  Speaker 2: Really?
• 1:20:55
  Speaker 4: Why?
• 1:20:56
  Speaker 2: Because the big contribution of feminism to philosophy, like social philosophy,
• 1:21:02
  Speaker 2: is intersectionality, and intersectionality is a rigid hierarchy of recognition
• 1:21:09
  Speaker 2: of your humanity. Like it's basically a hierarchy of who
• 1:21:13
  Speaker 2: gets human rights or recognition that they deserve rights or
• 1:21:17
  Speaker 2: autonomy or to.
• 1:21:18
  Speaker 1: Eliminate hierarchies, you need a hierarchy, Alison.
• 1:21:22
  Speaker 2: Yeah, well, I mean, I'm just I'm I'm thinking when
• 1:21:24
  Speaker 2: I look at men's hierarchies, they tend to be hierarchies
• 1:21:28
  Speaker 2: of merit and skills, and they also tend to be
• 1:21:32
  Speaker 2: weirdly distributed. Not I shouldn't say weirdly distributed, because you know,
• 1:21:37
  Speaker 2: the guy who's who fishes best will be in charge
• 1:21:42
  Speaker 2: of fishing, and then the guy who dissalinates the you know,
• 1:21:46
  Speaker 2: like there's different competencies, and then they'll have a working
• 1:21:52
  Speaker 2: basically way of communicating between these different competencies to get
• 1:21:55
  Speaker 2: something done, which isn't really a hierarchy of human wors worth.
• 1:22:00
  Speaker 2: It's just a hierarchy of do who does what. And
• 1:22:03
  Speaker 2: then they look at that and they're like, oh, manage
• 1:22:05
  Speaker 2: the hierarchical. Not no, they're only hierarchical in so far
• 1:22:09
  Speaker 2: as there's a goal that they want to achieve or
• 1:22:14
  Speaker 2: you know, am I wrong about that? Like that's what
• 1:22:17
  Speaker 2: I've observed. I mean, maybe there's a social hierarchy there too,
• 1:22:22
  Speaker 2: but women have one. I don't even think it's necessarily
• 1:22:26
  Speaker 2: flatter than men's. It's just more ambiguous and more churney.
• 1:22:34
  Speaker 2: Am I am I out to lunch here, Like, please
• 1:22:37
  Speaker 2: correct me.
• 1:22:38
  Speaker 1: Look, hierarchies are natural and there's nothing wrong with them.
• 1:22:42
  Speaker 1: So if we're going to have them, and we're not
• 1:22:44
  Speaker 1: going to be able to get rid of them, we
• 1:22:45
  Speaker 1: might as well have good ones. And I think men
• 1:22:48
  Speaker 1: that are actually interested in being productive not destructive, will
• 1:22:53
  Speaker 1: form hierarchies that are good and healthy and effective, Like
• 1:22:57
  Speaker 1: how have we built everything we have? Weren't for some
• 1:23:01
  Speaker 1: you know, concept of a hierarchy that sort of said, okay,
• 1:23:04
  Speaker 1: we need to we're gonna get these things done, let's
• 1:23:07
  Speaker 1: do it. And I think that in particular, I'm just
• 1:23:10
  Speaker 1: gonna have to say this, because it's true people who
• 1:23:14
  Speaker 1: come from like northern and western Europe were the men
• 1:23:18
  Speaker 1: who were there probably formed the best hierarchies because they
• 1:23:22
  Speaker 1: got the most done. And the reason for that probably
• 1:23:24
  Speaker 1: had a lot to do with the conditions they were
• 1:23:26
  Speaker 1: living under. So if you're living in a climate that's
• 1:23:29
  Speaker 1: you know, gonna kill you when it gets cold, like
• 1:23:32
  Speaker 1: in the winter months, then you're going to like figure
• 1:23:34
  Speaker 1: out ways to innovate and work together and coexist, and
• 1:23:37
  Speaker 1: you're gonna form a social like, I don't know, a
• 1:23:41
  Speaker 1: social I guess you could say contract, don't I don't
• 1:23:44
  Speaker 1: know if that's the right word, but a way of
• 1:23:46
  Speaker 1: like living together that doesn't result in people killing each
• 1:23:50
  Speaker 1: other and eating each other and cooperating. And in order
• 1:23:53
  Speaker 1: for that to happen, you have to have a hierarchy.
• 1:23:55
  Speaker 1: There has to be like people making the calling the shots,
• 1:23:59
  Speaker 1: and and that's I think the you know, I guess
• 1:24:04
  Speaker 1: in a simple way, that's basically the world that we
• 1:24:07
  Speaker 1: have to think. You know that we have to thank
• 1:24:10
  Speaker 1: everybody else, Like everybody else that doesn't have the same
• 1:24:16
  Speaker 1: systems that the Western and Northern Europe have built, they
• 1:24:22
  Speaker 1: have to thank them for that. And that's why she's
• 1:24:24
  Speaker 1: people like this would try to tear it down because
• 1:24:26
  Speaker 1: they take it for granted.
• 1:24:28
  Speaker 2: Yeah, they take it for granted, so they think it's
• 1:24:30
  Speaker 2: infinitely exploitable. Yeah, I think, well, I mean you look
• 1:24:34
  Speaker 2: at the way Bear gillis Island Survivor Island. Right. Men
• 1:24:41
  Speaker 2: want a leader who makes competent decisions. But you know, often,
• 1:24:47
  Speaker 2: like I find that guys can just do things without
• 1:24:50
  Speaker 2: leaders period, as long as there's uh, you know, respect
• 1:24:54
  Speaker 2: for skills, and then whoever has the necessary understanding takes
• 1:25:00
  Speaker 2: the leadership at that point.
• 1:25:02
  Speaker 1: That's what I'm saying, though it happens organically like they're yeah,
• 1:25:06
  Speaker 1: like they just they just you know, there's usually somebody
• 1:25:09
  Speaker 1: one of the men who is going to like or
• 1:25:13
  Speaker 1: you know, take the lead in a project, and the
• 1:25:16
  Speaker 1: other men are just going to fall in line and
• 1:25:18
  Speaker 1: you know for the yah.
• 1:25:19
  Speaker 2: But there's also the feedback, which is if he makes
• 1:25:22
  Speaker 2: your decisions, he's going to be deposed pretty quickly.
• 1:25:27
  Speaker 1: And yeah, there's going to be accountability and all that.
• 1:25:30
  Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, And that's that's another thing. Like I've been
• 1:25:33
  Speaker 2: doing a lot of reading of specifically romance novels, because
• 1:25:38
  Speaker 2: I think that the actual subject of romance is is
• 1:25:42
  Speaker 2: it has more gravitass than we give it because it's
• 1:25:44
  Speaker 2: basically the bond between men and women and in explorations
• 1:25:49
  Speaker 2: thereof and I know that romance is a genre has
• 1:25:52
  Speaker 2: a lot of slot, but consider that the alternative is
• 1:25:56
  Speaker 2: to continue to allow feminism to define the relationship between
• 1:25:59
  Speaker 2: men and women. But anyway, I've been looking at it,
• 1:26:01
  Speaker 2: and I've noticed that women really struggle with understanding how
• 1:26:05
  Speaker 2: men's hierarchies work. That's why I asked, if I'm completely
• 1:26:09
  Speaker 2: out to lunch, I'm basing it on my observations that
• 1:26:13
  Speaker 2: it is almost entirely merit based, and it's really conditional
• 1:26:19
  Speaker 2: on whether or not you make sensible decisions in the
• 1:26:23
  Speaker 2: situation that you're in, and if you don't, then you're
• 1:26:27
  Speaker 2: going to be deposed by someone other men find more competent.
• 1:26:32
  Speaker 2: And also it doesn't seem to come with as like
• 1:26:35
  Speaker 2: the thing is that with the Queen Bee, only one
• 1:26:40
  Speaker 2: woman can be that, and it's entirely about control. Be
• 1:26:43
  Speaker 2: controlling the narrative, controlling the distribution of social tension, controlling
• 1:26:49
  Speaker 2: whether or not you have access to the web at all.
• 1:26:51
  Speaker 2: That's what the Queen Bee does, so's it's entirely a
• 1:26:55
  Speaker 2: position of tyrannical control. It does not necessarily have any
• 1:26:59
  Speaker 2: merit or benefit to anyone. It's just the one woman
• 1:27:02
  Speaker 2: who's able to do these things and enact her will
• 1:27:06
  Speaker 2: upon the other women, and then they project that onto
• 1:27:09
  Speaker 2: men because they don't they don't really understand how operational
• 1:27:16
  Speaker 2: like that how the operational modality do. So they think
• 1:27:20
  Speaker 2: that men are creating hierarchies like their hierarchies, and maybe
• 1:27:25
  Speaker 2: it is more lateral, but it's more lateral because there's
• 1:27:29
  Speaker 2: only really one woman who can have that kind of power.
• 1:27:33
  Speaker 2: Once you have two women with that kind of power,
• 1:27:34
  Speaker 2: you have two webs. You know, you only have one
• 1:27:37
  Speaker 2: spider at the center, one spider who's choosing who gets
• 1:27:42
  Speaker 2: cut out and who gets to be seen and who
• 1:27:45
  Speaker 2: gets a tattoo be closer to the center. And then they,
• 1:27:49
  Speaker 2: just like I said, they project it onto men. And
• 1:27:53
  Speaker 2: then they say, ah, men are hierarchical. It's like, are
• 1:27:58
  Speaker 2: you sure, because women really are are quite hierarchical. Your
• 1:28:04
  Speaker 2: philosophical meanderings have landed on one of the worst and
• 1:28:08
  Speaker 2: most destructive hierarchies in human history, which is intersectionality. I mean,
• 1:28:13
  Speaker 2: god damn imagine you are part of a philosophical group
• 1:28:17
  Speaker 2: that has constructed a hierarchy of who you have to
• 1:28:20
  Speaker 2: regard as human, and that hierarchy is narrowing who you
• 1:28:24
  Speaker 2: have to regard as human to the smallest, teeny tiniest
• 1:28:29
  Speaker 2: percentage of people imaginable, and then turning around and telling
• 1:28:33
  Speaker 2: everybody how compassionate you are as a sex like. I
• 1:28:37
  Speaker 2: would like to see that compassion, ma'am. It seems very
• 1:28:41
  Speaker 2: scarce from where I'm looking.
• 1:28:43
  Speaker 3: Okay, Okay, distributed distributed distributed order the way ant he'lls work,
• 1:28:52
  Speaker 3: for example, distributed distributed.
• 1:28:54
  Speaker 2: I don't think she knows how ant he'll work. Uh what,
• 1:29:03
  Speaker 2: I don't think she understands how ant hills work. And also,
• 1:29:06
  Speaker 2: you know that men have used these kinds of distributed
• 1:29:11
  Speaker 2: problem like to solve problems of sorting and stuff like,
• 1:29:15
  Speaker 2: it's already there. I mean, you could just look at
• 1:29:18
  Speaker 2: sorting algorithms for like distributed intelligence, well not intelligence, but
• 1:29:23
  Speaker 2: like rules applied in a distributed fashion locally to achieve
• 1:29:29
  Speaker 2: an outcome. But she's not interested in that because that's operational. Okay,
• 1:29:34
  Speaker 2: all right? Uh.
• 1:29:35
  Speaker 1: Nova Fan twenty one gave us a dollar and said,
• 1:29:39
  Speaker 1: my guess, women who can operate in operative modality need
• 1:29:42
  Speaker 1: to be disciplined, which requires us to hold women accountable. Therefore,
• 1:29:46
  Speaker 1: I'm a patriarchy. Okay, let's keep going.
• 1:29:51
  Speaker 4: Ants did it first?
• 1:29:52
  Speaker 1: I assure you so's she's saying that the way I
• 1:29:55
  Speaker 1: guess the way that ANTS live, I e. Communism, Okay
• 1:29:59
  Speaker 1: is something.
• 1:30:00
  Speaker 6: Well, the way that those things and some bees and
• 1:30:05
  Speaker 6: things like, the way they work is kind of interesting, right,
• 1:30:08
  Speaker 6: So because I don't think she's making the point that
• 1:30:12
  Speaker 6: she didn't think she is. Yeah, because in those sorts
• 1:30:15
  Speaker 6: of things, yeah, you have a queen who's at the
• 1:30:17
  Speaker 6: middle of it. The males in the things, there's only
• 1:30:21
  Speaker 6: a very small number of them who exist entirely to
• 1:30:26
  Speaker 6: impregnate that one queen, and then all of the drones
• 1:30:29
  Speaker 6: are sterile females. I don't think she's making the point.
• 1:30:35
  Speaker 1: Of yeah, of course not. But she's also counting on
• 1:30:39
  Speaker 1: she she probably doesn't like put that together, but she's
• 1:30:43
  Speaker 1: also probably counting on the hope that her the people
• 1:30:47
  Speaker 1: in her audience also don't know that. So yeah, yeah, okay.
• 1:30:54
  Speaker 6: Because yeah, it's literally the exact opposite of the how
• 1:30:58
  Speaker 6: society works. It's not a bunch of non reproducing women
• 1:31:03
  Speaker 6: bringing all of the value into everything.
• 1:31:08
  Speaker 1: Yeah, well we tried.
• 1:31:13
  Speaker 2: Well, honestly, I would I would argue that it might
• 1:31:16
  Speaker 2: actually relate to our society. You have the reproducing women
• 1:31:21
  Speaker 2: on top and all of the serile female drones that
• 1:31:24
  Speaker 2: they've constructed by and inculcating them with feminism, and like
• 1:31:31
  Speaker 2: if if you look at the if you look at
• 1:31:32
  Speaker 2: how women structure their intersectional competition, that would be the
• 1:31:37
  Speaker 2: ideal situation for Queen Bee. Would be at the center
• 1:31:41
  Speaker 2: of the web, surrounded by sterile females who all attend
• 1:31:46
  Speaker 2: only to her so that she might be seen. And
• 1:31:51
  Speaker 2: then she has complete monopoly over the sexuality of a
• 1:31:55
  Speaker 2: you know, the five percent top five percent of men.
• 1:32:01
  Speaker 2: He like that, that seems like.
• 1:32:02
  Speaker 6: It that, and then the rest of those males, for
• 1:32:04
  Speaker 6: the excess ones they don't need, get terminated when they're larvae.
• 1:32:09
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 1:32:10
  Speaker 6: I don't think she's making the point that she thinks
• 1:32:11
  Speaker 6: she's making though, but yeah.
• 1:32:13
  Speaker 2: M m m, maybe subconsciously. Okay, let's keep going, all right.
• 1:32:22
  Speaker 3: Technology for thinking SF works by attunement and addition, not
• 1:32:28
  Speaker 3: by subtraction.
• 1:32:30
  Speaker 4: It works with discernment embodied in.
• 1:32:33
  Speaker 6: But let from the threads fall aside, my darling, if
• 1:32:39
  Speaker 6: you don't subtract them when they fall aside somehow mm hm.
• 1:32:45
  Speaker 3: Collectively, it works in ways that Vancy and Dispray taught me.
• 1:32:50
  Speaker 3: As I said before, through attunement, SF is also relentlessly feminist,
• 1:32:57
  Speaker 3: drawing on all the genres and genders that Foundanism has liberated.
• 1:33:01
  Speaker 4: From fixed category.
• 1:33:03
  Speaker 3: String figuring is a fiber art for making more livable worlds.
• 1:33:10
  Speaker 1: There it is. It's aggressively feminist, and that's why I'm
• 1:33:14
  Speaker 1: selling it.
• 1:33:16
  Speaker 6: And I just made up right now. It's aggressively feminist.
• 1:33:20
  Speaker 6: That makes the world livable. Yep, it's aggressively cradle makes
• 1:33:26
  Speaker 6: society function.
• 1:33:30
  Speaker 1: Because a little boy Blue and the man in the moon.
• 1:33:34
  Speaker 1: It's a song cats in the in the silverspoon.
• 1:33:38
  Speaker 2: It makes about as much sense, and it's as about
• 1:33:40
  Speaker 2: as really we could. We could do our own conjecture.
• 1:33:44
  Speaker 2: That song that Brian just sung when INCU invoked in
• 1:33:51
  Speaker 2: the correct ritual sequence of the correct time, the crack
• 1:33:54
  Speaker 2: location causes the world to run, and only Brian can
• 1:33:58
  Speaker 2: do it. So you know we need NGO's for Brian, Like.
• 1:34:04
  Speaker 1: Ye send me money.
• 1:34:07
  Speaker 2: We could make crap up too, We could make in
• 1:34:12
  Speaker 2: this this nonsense. But none of what she's saying. How
• 1:34:16
  Speaker 2: does the string How does the string theory balance a
• 1:34:18
  Speaker 2: budget right? How does the string theory refine silver? How
• 1:34:23
  Speaker 2: does the string theory even feed children? Our string fingers
• 1:34:27
  Speaker 2: or whatever the frick she's talking about? How does it
• 1:34:30
  Speaker 2: do anything that's never specified? It's just string fingers.
• 1:34:36
  Speaker 1: Its string fur.
• 1:34:39
  Speaker 2: I like string fingers better. String fingers exist, and the
• 1:34:45
  Speaker 2: world is better for it. And she is the one
• 1:34:46
  Speaker 2: who constructed string fingers. Therefore you should see her. She
• 1:34:52
  Speaker 2: should be seen. It all works, guys. If you don't
• 1:34:57
  Speaker 2: believe that this makes the world better, then you're a fascist.
• 1:35:02
  Speaker 2: If you don't want to fund this, if you would
• 1:35:04
  Speaker 2: prefer to be able to purchase food for your family
• 1:35:08
  Speaker 2: rather than this woman inventing string fingers and telling us
• 1:35:14
  Speaker 2: all how disinvention is going to improve the world because
• 1:35:19
  Speaker 2: she invented it. And if you don't want to fund
• 1:35:21
  Speaker 2: her being seen because you'd prefer to feed your kids,
• 1:35:25
  Speaker 2: you're a fascist. If you want her to actually deliver
• 1:35:31
  Speaker 2: something that improves the world, you're a fascist. You want
• 1:35:36
  Speaker 2: her to do something that makes another human beings life
• 1:35:39
  Speaker 2: better in a concrete way, like just making a sandwich,
• 1:35:43
  Speaker 2: which is like the making a sandwich is the smallest
• 1:35:48
  Speaker 2: unit of benefiting another human being. It requires almost no
• 1:35:54
  Speaker 2: skill because it comes. The bread is pre prepared, probably presliced.
• 1:36:00
  Speaker 2: The meat doesn't need to be processed, doesn't need to
• 1:36:02
  Speaker 2: be slaughtered and processed or cured. It also probably comes presliced.
• 1:36:06
  Speaker 2: Hell the lettuce is probably prewashed, So all you have
• 1:36:10
  Speaker 2: to do is have the motor skills of a toddler
• 1:36:12
  Speaker 2: and just assemble it and then give it to somebody
• 1:36:15
  Speaker 2: who might be hungry. And she cannot even do that.
• 1:36:18
  Speaker 2: In fact, it is offensive to her for you to
• 1:36:21
  Speaker 2: even say, demonstrate the least unit of being useful to
• 1:36:26
  Speaker 2: another human being. Demonstrate the least unit, lady, why do
• 1:36:30
  Speaker 2: you deserve probably one hundred and twenty thousand a year
• 1:36:34
  Speaker 2: to invent crap that you say, with no evidence is
• 1:36:38
  Speaker 2: going to benefit the world and be seen while doing it,
• 1:36:43
  Speaker 2: and get another couple tens of thousands in speaker's fees
• 1:36:48
  Speaker 2: to say that, why do you deserve that? Why do
• 1:36:53
  Speaker 2: you deserve people sacrificing their labor and their wellbeing for
• 1:37:01
  Speaker 2: you when you won't even make a sandwich?
• 1:37:04
  Speaker 1: Done?
• 1:37:05
  Speaker 3: A harroway?
• 1:37:09
  Speaker 1: Okay, all right, so now we're gonna talk about cyberfeminism.
• 1:37:14
  Speaker 6: I'm getting him with a joke because I have to
• 1:37:17
  Speaker 6: string fingers and making money. That is the power of
• 1:37:20
  Speaker 6: this woman's stand string fingers. It has to be done.
• 1:37:27
  Speaker 6: It's one of the one one of the less good localizations.
• 1:37:35
  Speaker 1: Okay, that's good. I relate, okays.
• 1:37:39
  Speaker 3: Beautifully illustrated and drawn books. They've been very popular. They
• 1:37:43
  Speaker 3: are used as teaching tools, and it's the kind of
• 1:37:46
  Speaker 3: pedagogical object that I.
• 1:37:48
  Speaker 4: See in Stark in Stark.
• 1:37:50
  Speaker 3: Contrast to the giant of Karasimbi in the halls of
• 1:37:53
  Speaker 3: the American Museum of Natural History.
• 1:37:57
  Speaker 1: All Right, sorry, that wasn't the clip. It's it's coming up,
• 1:37:59
  Speaker 1: I think.
• 1:38:03
  Speaker 3: So at this point I want to start talking. Here
• 1:38:09
  Speaker 3: we are about the litter to which I think I belong,
• 1:38:13
  Speaker 3: the litters of odd kin, the litters of familiars, those.
• 1:38:18
  Speaker 4: Of us who make up a family. And I will
• 1:38:21
  Speaker 4: begin with cyborgs. Now, mind you.
• 1:38:23
  Speaker 3: Cyborgs are sympoetic, sympoetic reciprocal inductions of organisms and machines,
• 1:38:31
  Speaker 3: but not just any machines, digital machines, machines indebted to
• 1:38:36
  Speaker 3: the digital revolutions of the Bell telephone era and subsequently,
• 1:38:40
  Speaker 3: particularly of the practices of World War Two and subsequently
• 1:38:44
  Speaker 3: and maybe especially to the practices of the electronic battlefield
• 1:38:49
  Speaker 3: in the wars in Southeast Asia, the US War in
• 1:38:52
  Speaker 3: Vietnam that established the Pacific the Pacific Zone as an
• 1:38:56
  Speaker 3: electronic battlefield command center.
• 1:39:00
  Speaker 1: Cyborgs, guys, what do cyborgs have to do with feminism. Well,
• 1:39:07
  Speaker 1: we'll I guess we'll find out. Okay, this is this
• 1:39:13
  Speaker 1: is this is the absolute state of academia.
• 1:39:15
  Speaker 2: Okay, I might I feel like the cyborg question might
• 1:39:20
  Speaker 2: be its own show.
• 1:39:23
  Speaker 1: You want to, like, you want to do this another time?
• 1:39:26
  Speaker 4: I do? What?
• 1:39:27
  Speaker 2: How do you feel till deer? Do you feel like?
• 1:39:29
  Speaker 2: This might be.
• 1:39:30
  Speaker 6: Another probably because even just the way she defines the
• 1:39:36
  Speaker 6: concept of the cyborg is not how you think it
• 1:39:41
  Speaker 6: is most people, Like she even used this like, oh,
• 1:39:44
  Speaker 6: what when you talk about drones and how humans use drones,
• 1:39:48
  Speaker 6: that's a cyborg. Yeah, No, it isn't.
• 1:39:53
  Speaker 1: Basically, she she does. She believe that because I've seen
• 1:39:57
  Speaker 1: this too. People who use l phones are cyborgs. Yeah,
• 1:40:03
  Speaker 1: Like if you have a smartphone and you're on your smartphone,
• 1:40:05
  Speaker 1: you're a cyborg. Basically. Yeah. It's kind of this luddite
• 1:40:11
  Speaker 1: like way of seeing the world.
• 1:40:14
  Speaker 2: Besides, I want to I want to get into the
• 1:40:16
  Speaker 2: string fingering a bit, because it is demonstrates her absolute
• 1:40:24
  Speaker 2: disconnect with reality, because in order for something to work right,
• 1:40:32
  Speaker 2: it would have to have it would have to interface
• 1:40:36
  Speaker 2: with physical reality, which means it needs to have operative
• 1:40:39
  Speaker 2: content or like an operative analysis. So string fingers has
• 1:40:46
  Speaker 2: to interface with the physical world in ways that we
• 1:40:51
  Speaker 2: can test and replicate and do something with. You get
• 1:40:55
  Speaker 2: what I'm saying, mm hmm, and and what she's constructed.
• 1:41:03
  Speaker 2: String figuring the most physically embodied concept in the lecture,
• 1:41:06
  Speaker 2: aside from her dog agility, right, which again I maintain
• 1:41:10
  Speaker 2: that she would probably be an excellent dog trainer, and
• 1:41:15
  Speaker 2: that's probably what she should have done with her life,
• 1:41:19
  Speaker 2: and not this, but whatever actual fiber art, taking up threads,
• 1:41:22
  Speaker 2: dropping threads, making patterns with other hands, and yet it
• 1:41:27
  Speaker 2: never gets to the point of being something that could
• 1:41:31
  Speaker 2: interface with reality and affect outcomes to benefit anyone. So
• 1:41:36
  Speaker 2: she just presents this is and you could replace string
• 1:41:40
  Speaker 2: figuring with a different collaborative embodied practice like weaving, quilting,
• 1:41:44
  Speaker 2: partner dancing, improvisational music, and you'd preserve the entirety of
• 1:41:49
  Speaker 2: what she's telling people. So if you can take if
• 1:41:53
  Speaker 2: your recommendation for intervention to make the world a better
• 1:41:59
  Speaker 2: place could its self be swapped with anything, it probably
• 1:42:03
  Speaker 2: isn't going to make the world a better place because
• 1:42:07
  Speaker 2: it's there's there's no substance to engage with, there's no
• 1:42:11
  Speaker 2: surface to apply to reality. Do you get what I'm saying.
• 1:42:18
  Speaker 2: It's not a tool. It's not a tool because there's
• 1:42:21
  Speaker 2: no parameters of how it interacts with reality. You can
• 1:42:24
  Speaker 2: just swap it with any other form of activity and
• 1:42:29
  Speaker 2: the same content, because the entire content of this is
• 1:42:34
  Speaker 2: it functions only as a metaphors. So, and she even
• 1:42:41
  Speaker 2: tells you this is that the string figuring is a
• 1:42:43
  Speaker 2: course of metaphor. But it's more than that, except in
• 1:42:46
  Speaker 2: the lecture, it only functions as a metaphor. So she's
• 1:42:48
  Speaker 2: saying she's going to improve the world and situating herself
• 1:42:53
  Speaker 2: is morally better than the fascists who say, well, we'd
• 1:42:57
  Speaker 2: like to see some results from your that you can
• 1:43:00
  Speaker 2: improve the world. Otherwise we're gonna, you know, end your
• 1:43:04
  Speaker 2: funding and maybe divert it to people who actually show
• 1:43:07
  Speaker 2: that they can improve the world. And so she presents
• 1:43:10
  Speaker 2: this as what makes her more moral than the fascists.
• 1:43:14
  Speaker 2: But it only functions as a metaphor, right. She never
• 1:43:17
  Speaker 2: describes the specific hand movements, the tension of specific threads,
• 1:43:20
  Speaker 2: the physical problem solving of a specific pattern, or how
• 1:43:23
  Speaker 2: any of this is going to resolve the go like
• 1:43:26
  Speaker 2: what's happening in Gaza or among immigration or monarch butterflies
• 1:43:34
  Speaker 2: or whatever the hell else she's bringing up because it
• 1:43:36
  Speaker 2: makes her seem like a like a sympathetic person. She
• 1:43:41
  Speaker 2: describes what string figuring symbolizes reciprocal induction, collaborative world making,
• 1:43:46
  Speaker 2: non hierarchical patterning, none of which interfaces with the world
• 1:43:50
  Speaker 2: to create a positive result for anyone. But because it
• 1:43:54
  Speaker 2: feels good, it is good, and she is seen, and
• 1:44:00
  Speaker 2: that's what matters.
• 1:44:03
  Speaker 4: Yep, you know.
• 1:44:05
  Speaker 2: And really we need to get away from this, we
• 1:44:08
  Speaker 2: get we need to get away from allowing people to say, well,
• 1:44:13
  Speaker 2: I can dream of something more beautiful than you can.
• 1:44:18
  Speaker 2: That makes me a better person. No, you you work
• 1:44:26
  Speaker 2: in the world of constraints and deliverables and things that
• 1:44:33
  Speaker 2: are fascist, and that makes you a bad person, even
• 1:44:38
  Speaker 2: even if you are actually helping people, even if you
• 1:44:42
  Speaker 2: want funds to be diverted to real world projects that
• 1:44:46
  Speaker 2: I don't know, create pottable water, damn create hydraulic uh,
• 1:44:53
  Speaker 2: you know, electricity, whatever, improve people's lives in measurable ways,
• 1:44:58
  Speaker 2: even if you would rather divert, if you would rather
• 1:45:00
  Speaker 2: divert funds to that rather than to me imagining how
• 1:45:06
  Speaker 2: string fingers will save the world, while in no way
• 1:45:11
  Speaker 2: explaining how to actualize that. But but I'm imagining this
• 1:45:18
  Speaker 2: with my fellow imaginers, and we are being seen in
• 1:45:22
  Speaker 2: our web of imagination and compassion, and that makes us
• 1:45:27
  Speaker 2: so much better because we can imagine a better world.
• 1:45:32
  Speaker 2: And everybody else who says, but what you're imagining has
• 1:45:36
  Speaker 2: physical constraints, and you should be judged based on how
• 1:45:40
  Speaker 2: well you improve the world by metrics that actually exist
• 1:45:45
  Speaker 2: in the world. Is a fascist?
• 1:45:48
  Speaker 1: Yep?
• 1:45:49
  Speaker 2: Like, how did we get to the point where people
• 1:45:52
  Speaker 2: like this are even allowed to frame themselves as more
• 1:45:56
  Speaker 2: moral than people who are like, no, we should probably
• 1:45:59
  Speaker 2: build drainage ditches, proper sewer systems, make sure communities have
• 1:46:03
  Speaker 2: water that they can drink, you know, make sure kids
• 1:46:06
  Speaker 2: get fed. How did people who work in that world
• 1:46:10
  Speaker 2: become the fascists and people who just dream beautiful dreams
• 1:46:16
  Speaker 2: get to situate themselves as the ones who are helping, Like,
• 1:46:20
  Speaker 2: how did the fuck did that happen? Why does anybody?
• 1:46:25
  Speaker 2: Why does a single cent of anyone's taxpayer money go
• 1:46:30
  Speaker 2: to this ship?
• 1:46:32
  Speaker 1: Well they don't have a choice, though, do they. That's
• 1:46:35
  Speaker 1: no way it got taxpayer money.
• 1:46:39
  Speaker 2: Like this is this is absolutely all right? Drek and
• 1:46:45
  Speaker 2: I just you guys, if you wanted to add anything
• 1:46:48
  Speaker 2: to that, I'm good, like I have a bit more
• 1:46:53
  Speaker 2: that I wanted to talk about.
• 1:46:55
  Speaker 1: Okay, yeah, go ahead, I mean it's yeah, this is
• 1:46:59
  Speaker 1: comedy gobbledygook. I think I say that at the beginning.
• 1:47:01
  Speaker 2: So what is this relational display for? It's for other
• 1:47:05
  Speaker 2: social readers. The lecture is a status display within a
• 1:47:08
  Speaker 2: relational network. The audience Erasmus University is the immediate network
• 1:47:15
  Speaker 2: fellow academics, graduate students, activists, and the performance establishes Harroway's
• 1:47:19
  Speaker 2: position within it. Who she knows, who she's worked with,
• 1:47:23
  Speaker 2: who she cares about, which suffering she's attuned to. Of
• 1:47:26
  Speaker 2: course she's not attuned to certain types of suffering and
• 1:47:29
  Speaker 2: certain types of thinking about the world verboding they're black category.
• 1:47:34
  Speaker 2: The standing ovation confirms the position was received and ratified
• 1:47:37
  Speaker 2: by the group. God damn, aren't you happy that your
• 1:47:41
  Speaker 2: tax money goes to this? Doesn't it give you a
• 1:47:44
  Speaker 2: warm fuzzy And also, at the end of the day,
• 1:47:47
  Speaker 2: they can all congratulate themselves on being superior to you,
• 1:47:51
  Speaker 2: morally superior because of their beautiful world that they imagine
• 1:47:57
  Speaker 2: with such passion. It's not for operational readers, anybody in
• 1:48:05
  Speaker 2: this audience. Men would leave after ten minutes because there's nothing,
• 1:48:09
  Speaker 2: there's nothing actionable. It's all just feel goods. It's not
• 1:48:13
  Speaker 2: for the migrants, the gasms, the lemurs, or the butterflies.
• 1:48:16
  Speaker 2: None of them are in the room and none of
• 1:48:18
  Speaker 2: them benefit from it. It's for the people whose primary
• 1:48:20
  Speaker 2: cognitive activity is tracking who is connected to whom and
• 1:48:24
  Speaker 2: where they stand in the web, and who will leave
• 1:48:27
  Speaker 2: the lecture having updated their own map. I was in
• 1:48:29
  Speaker 2: the room when Donna spoke, I.
• 1:48:32
  Speaker 4: Am in the web.
• 1:48:34
  Speaker 2: Fucking good lord. This is this is how societies die
• 1:48:40
  Speaker 2: when people like this become they they they accrue in
• 1:48:47
  Speaker 2: the choke points of decision making, and then they make
• 1:48:51
  Speaker 2: the stupidest fucking decisions possible, always in terms of being
• 1:48:56
  Speaker 2: seen and also getting money. This is like the central
• 1:49:01
  Speaker 2: moral claim of this, this entire lecture, is that Donna
• 1:49:05
  Speaker 2: Hathaway is being targeted by fascists because she's losing her
• 1:49:09
  Speaker 2: funding and she again string fingers guys like she's doing
• 1:49:15
  Speaker 2: the real work of making the world better. Not men
• 1:49:19
  Speaker 2: who are providing electricity to communities or making sure they
• 1:49:22
  Speaker 2: have sewer and water, you know, not the men who
• 1:49:25
  Speaker 2: are making sure that precious metals are refined or rare
• 1:49:28
  Speaker 2: earth's are refined. No, no, no, it's Donna. She's the
• 1:49:33
  Speaker 2: one making the world a better place with string fingers.
• 1:49:38
  Speaker 2: And you, all of you who say you do you
• 1:49:40
  Speaker 2: shouldn't have to pay for it. You're the fascist. How
• 1:49:43
  Speaker 2: dare how dare you prefer your money go to benefit
• 1:49:47
  Speaker 2: you and your families when it should be going to
• 1:49:50
  Speaker 2: benefit Donna, who is so much better than you because
• 1:49:53
  Speaker 2: she can imagine such a beautiful world that is all
• 1:49:56
  Speaker 2: about Donna and all about Donna's thoughts and all about
• 1:50:00
  Speaker 2: Donna's imaginings. It really bothers me that this is a
• 1:50:05
  Speaker 2: dog person, this woman is a dog person, because I
• 1:50:09
  Speaker 2: also like dogs. Oh, I also have a little bit
• 1:50:14
  Speaker 2: more on on how these modalities work. I can continue
• 1:50:23
  Speaker 2: on that if you guys are did you want to
• 1:50:26
  Speaker 2: say anything to you, dear Brian to what I'm.
• 1:50:28
  Speaker 1: Saying, I'm good, I mean I'm good. I'm a little
• 1:50:32
  Speaker 1: concerned because I have to go soon.
• 1:50:34
  Speaker 2: But okay, this is this is quick, all right, all right,
• 1:50:40
  Speaker 2: So just to revisit it. In relational topographical poach processing
• 1:50:45
  Speaker 2: exists to the degree that they are a note in
• 1:50:46
  Speaker 2: a web. If no one is tracking your position, reading
• 1:50:49
  Speaker 2: your signals, or mapping their connection to you, you have
• 1:50:51
  Speaker 2: no position. Now, an operational reader or operational thinker exists
• 1:50:56
  Speaker 2: through what they do in the world. The work is there,
• 1:50:59
  Speaker 2: whether anyone's it or not. The bridge holds, the code runs,
• 1:51:02
  Speaker 2: the crop comes in. Visibility is nice, but it's not
• 1:51:05
  Speaker 2: the verification mechanism. The world pushes back the material either
• 1:51:10
  Speaker 2: works or it doesn't, and that pushback is what confirms
• 1:51:13
  Speaker 2: you exist and are competent. A social reader exists through
• 1:51:16
  Speaker 2: their position in the web. The verification mechanism is other
• 1:51:19
  Speaker 2: people's attentions being read, being mapped, being placed. It's not vanity,
• 1:51:23
  Speaker 2: it's the entire epistemology. While it is vanity, I am seen. Therefore,
• 1:51:27
  Speaker 2: I am is what happens when your cognitive channel for
• 1:51:30
  Speaker 2: processing reality runs through other minds rather than material resistance.
• 1:51:35
  Speaker 2: But here's the thing. Material resistance is where survival lives.
• 1:51:40
  Speaker 2: And this is why deplatforming, social exclusion, and reputational destruction
• 1:51:44
  Speaker 2: are experienced. Is violence by social readers, well, but they
• 1:51:48
  Speaker 2: don't experience it when they apply it to other people,
• 1:51:50
  Speaker 2: because you know, no bad tactics, only bad targets for
• 1:51:55
  Speaker 2: a social reader. Being excluded from the network is being
• 1:51:58
  Speaker 2: deleted from reality. It's also why Halfaway's lecture is structured
• 1:52:02
  Speaker 2: as a relational display rather than an argument. An argument
• 1:52:04
  Speaker 2: succeeds or fails on its operational merits, does it hold,
• 1:52:07
  Speaker 2: is it fouls a fiable does it predict? A relational
• 1:52:10
  Speaker 2: display succeeds or fails, and whether or not the network
• 1:52:13
  Speaker 2: receives it and ratifies it ratifies your position. The lecture
• 1:52:17
  Speaker 2: isn't trying to be right, It's trying to be seen.
• 1:52:23
  Speaker 2: Don't we all want to pay? Like, don't we all
• 1:52:26
  Speaker 2: want to get these large chunks out of our take
• 1:52:29
  Speaker 2: home and just give it to people whose only contribution
• 1:52:33
  Speaker 2: to the world is being seen.
• 1:52:38
  Speaker 1: Okay, I'm done, all right, I got a super child
• 1:52:42
  Speaker 1: that I should read out really quick and then uh yeah,
• 1:52:46
  Speaker 1: we'll get final thoughts from untiled here and then close
• 1:52:49
  Speaker 1: it out. So grad indoors slash qoran strong gave us
• 1:52:52
  Speaker 1: five dollars and says, hi, there, yes here is the
• 1:52:56
  Speaker 1: one who suggested to watch this gobbledygook. You may ask
• 1:52:59
  Speaker 1: yourself why in this vast online sea of feminist slash
• 1:53:02
  Speaker 1: socialist gnostic nonsense, why pick this woman? Well, it's because
• 1:53:07
  Speaker 1: there exists another video of this exact same speech where
• 1:53:10
  Speaker 1: you can watch this woman receiving a prize. What why why?
• 1:53:15
  Speaker 2: You might ask yourself, why are you watching this horrible lecture?
• 1:53:19
  Speaker 2: You might ask you, So, why are you I'm sorry, Yeah, no.
• 1:53:24
  Speaker 1: It's all right. You may ask yourself this is not
• 1:53:28
  Speaker 1: my beautiful house. Well it is because there exists another
• 1:53:32
  Speaker 1: video of this exact same speech where you can watch
• 1:53:35
  Speaker 1: this woman receiving a prize from other, none other than
• 1:53:39
  Speaker 1: our own Dutch king. It indicates to what extent the
• 1:53:42
  Speaker 1: establishment in my own country praises this babble and how
• 1:53:45
  Speaker 1: absolutely crooked or cooked the Dutch educational slash media landscape is.
• 1:53:51
  Speaker 1: To no one's surprised in the HBr Hub, of course.
• 1:53:54
  Speaker 1: Yeah this is all over the West though, so but yeah,
• 1:53:57
  Speaker 1: thank you for that, And I'm gonna go ahead and
• 1:53:59
  Speaker 1: high that because it's hiding teal deer. Okay, so I
• 1:54:03
  Speaker 1: read it. Yeah, not surprising.
• 1:54:06
  Speaker 2: Okay, did you want to add anything to that, teal
• 1:54:11
  Speaker 2: deer or are you glossed over at this point?
• 1:54:15
  Speaker 6: Ship? Like? This is what happens when women are allowed
• 1:54:18
  Speaker 6: off the bottom tier of Maslow's hierarchy.
• 1:54:25
  Speaker 1: That's that's a deer take, all right, Okay, so I
• 1:54:31
  Speaker 1: guess uh, we'll just do the things Allison.
• 1:54:38
  Speaker 2: All right, so if you like this content, please support
• 1:54:43
  Speaker 2: us a feed the Battery.
• 1:54:43
  Speaker 1: What is wrong with you? First of all, I'm sorry, go.
• 1:54:49
  Speaker 2: Ahead, yeah, okay, if you if you would like to
• 1:54:55
  Speaker 2: send us a message, we can still receive them even
• 1:54:57
  Speaker 2: after the show is over, so the conversation continues at
• 1:55:01
  Speaker 2: feed the Badger dot com slash just the tip, So
• 1:55:03
  Speaker 2: go there and send us a message. Really appreciated. It
• 1:55:06
  Speaker 2: helps us continue to bring you this content, and it
• 1:55:08
  Speaker 2: gives you a way to contact us that YouTube doesn't control,
• 1:55:12
  Speaker 2: which is which is good. It's a good thing. And
• 1:55:15
  Speaker 2: if again, if you want to support the show, Feedbadger
• 1:55:16
  Speaker 2: dot com slash support. If you want to hear more
• 1:55:19
  Speaker 2: about all of the shenanigans I get up to with
• 1:55:23
  Speaker 2: my analysis of things, go to feed the Badger No sorry,
• 1:55:27
  Speaker 2: badg your nation dot online and get a spot in
• 1:55:29
  Speaker 2: our discord and you will have access to my thoughts
• 1:55:35
  Speaker 2: which I write about, and that includes the operational versus
• 1:55:40
  Speaker 2: relational modalities and how men and women slot very neatly
• 1:55:44
  Speaker 2: into either. And I think that we honestly need to
• 1:55:50
  Speaker 2: understand that relational modality. Thinking that you can imagine beautiful
• 1:55:57
  Speaker 2: utopias does not make you better than the men who
• 1:55:59
  Speaker 2: build the infrastructure that allow you to sit in comfort
• 1:56:03
  Speaker 2: thinking about how beautiful your utopia would be if only
• 1:56:07
  Speaker 2: if only men would listen to.
• 1:56:08
  Speaker 4: You like that?
• 1:56:10
  Speaker 2: Is that? That is not Women shouldn't be allowed to
• 1:56:14
  Speaker 2: sit like that with those thoughts that that should There
• 1:56:18
  Speaker 2: should be some mechanism to prevent it, but there isn't
• 1:56:21
  Speaker 2: except for Honey Badger Radio. So if you want to
• 1:56:23
  Speaker 2: hear more about that, feed Vadgination down online to join
• 1:56:27
  Speaker 2: our discord where that is available, because I don't really
• 1:56:29
  Speaker 2: put it out anywhere else. I don't know, I don't
• 1:56:32
  Speaker 2: like I don't really like blogging. I don't know what
• 1:56:35
  Speaker 2: it is. It's just I just like to talk to
• 1:56:38
  Speaker 2: people in a context of a community where they can
• 1:56:41
  Speaker 2: talk back and not in comments in real time. So anyway,
• 1:56:46
  Speaker 2: vagination down online you can you can read more of
• 1:56:50
  Speaker 2: my weird thoughts. All right, back to you, Brian.
• 1:56:53
  Speaker 1: All right, Well, first of all, I just want to
• 1:56:54
  Speaker 1: thank TiAl dear for coming on to deal with.
• 1:56:56
  Speaker 2: This wonder what makes me relational?
• 1:57:00
  Speaker 1: A little bit all right, So yeah, thanks Ceil Dear
• 1:57:03
  Speaker 1: for joining me on this so that I don't feel alone,
• 1:57:06
  Speaker 1: and thank you guys for watching the stream with us.
• 1:57:09
  Speaker 1: If you guys like this video, please hit like subscribe.
• 1:57:12
  Speaker 1: If you're not already subscribed, hit the Bellfloti Vacations leap
• 1:57:14
  Speaker 1: as a comment. Let us know what you guys think
• 1:57:16
  Speaker 1: ab what we talked about on the show, and you
• 1:57:18
  Speaker 1: can watch the full thing in the description. I think
• 1:57:21
  Speaker 1: I put a link to the video so you should
• 1:57:24
  Speaker 1: be able to watch it there yourself if you want to,
• 1:57:26
  Speaker 1: and share the video because sharing is caring. Thank you
• 1:57:28
  Speaker 1: guys so much for coming on this episode of Maintaining
• 1:57:30
  Speaker 1: Frame with Til Dear, and we'll talk to you guys
• 1:57:32
  Speaker 1: in the next one. Have a good weekend, everybody.
• 1:57:34
  Speaker 8: Men's ride activists are machines, dude. Okay, they are literal machines.
• 1:57:41
  Speaker 8: They are talking point machines. They are impossible to fucking
• 1:57:44
  Speaker 8: deal with, especially if you have like especially if you
• 1:57:46
  Speaker 8: have like a couple of dudes who have good memory.
• 1:57:49
  Speaker 8: On top of that too, holy shit, you're fucked