July 17, 2025 • 29 mins
A feminist TikTok star, Kylie Brewer, is going viral thanks to her LEGENDARY meltdown after a debate on the Whatever Podcast with Andrew Wilson. I break down her crash out and wild claims in this episode of the Brad vs Everyone podcast. Plus, I react to a left-wing YouTuber who bashed me over my recent CNN appearance.
Send me a voice note: https://www.speakpipe.com/bradvseveryone
Check out the merch: https://bp-shop.fourthwall.com/
Subscribe to my 2nd channel: https://www.youtube.com/@UCO76JR1mK5X5zbPJnv3NhsQ
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
That's exactly what's going on this podcast. Fell Like, I've
done debate for nine years, so I know things could
get heated. That was in debate, that was assault. I
felt like I was sextually assaulted.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Well, this might actually be the most unhinged TikTok meltdown
I've ever seen, and that's saying something. We're going to
break down a hugely viral feminist meltdown from an influencer
after a podcast debate, and so much more on today's
(00:33):
episode of The Brad Versus Everyone Podcast, my daily show
where I take on the craziest ideas from across the Internet,
our media, and our politics, all from an independent perspective. First,
we're going to talk about a moment that's going megaviral
and to kind of saga kind of a fallout from
something called the Whatever podcast, which is a dating and
(00:56):
gender podcast hosted by someone named Brian At. It's kind
of associated with the like red pill movements, kind of
like a pro men, some would say anti women. I'm
not normally a huge fan of this podcast because I
think the conversations that take place on it sometimes can
be interesting, but are often pretty vapid. They often bring
(01:18):
on professional debater men to go against random Instagram models
or women off the street, and it doesn't really feel
like a fair fight or super interesting or substantive. And
then the whole thing is supposed to be like railing
against like modern women or whatever. Yet it's basically used
as a platform for these women to promote their OnlyFans.
(01:38):
So I'm not a huge fan of the podcast, but
I certainly don't think that appearing on it constitutes rape
or sexual assault. Yet that is actually the claim that
one feminist guest, who a TikTok influencer who went on
the podcast, is now making. And Guys, this woman's name
is Kylie Brewer. She is a cell described queer leftist
(02:01):
feminists who teaches anti racism and has over one hundred
thousand followers on TikTok's Look at our first video on
TikTok complaining about this situation.
Speaker 1 (02:11):
Hi, my name is Kylie, and I've been harassed by
men so severely online that I'm thinking about giving up.
Misogyny has always been really bad as a feminist content creator,
but especially because I talk about intersectionality, which means I'm
often talking about the systems that uphold white supremacy and
racism in the US, which pisses off a number of
uber racist white supremacists. About six weeks ago, I was
misled by some men and they ended up having me
(02:34):
on a podcast that turned out to be red Pill,
And I don't want to go into the details of
it because it was honestly like the most traumatic experience
of my life and really horrible, and I am scared
of these people, so I would prefer to not go
into more detail. But then became a meme known as
crush out Kylie, which here's a photo, But they sent
their hundreds of followers onto me to leave hate comments
and spam report my account until it was removed on
(02:56):
Instagram for child they do the same thing that my
content has been censored, is not appearing on people's for
you pages.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
I become a.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
Target for them, for in cells and red Pill people. Though,
if you see this, if you could just let me know,
because I'm like really close to giving up and I've
been doing this for two years since has been my dream.
Speaker 2 (03:13):
And it's just like, so everything about this is kind
of ridiculous and absurd if you know a little bit
of the context. First of all, she's complaining about being
censored and my videos aren't being shown on the for
you page. This video has one point one million views.
I don't know what she's talking about. I don't know
what happened with her Instagram account. I did look and
see that it's still suspended, and if that whatever reason
(03:36):
it's suspended is from like trolling in spam and she
didn't actually do anything wrong, but of course I don't
support that. But I don't know exactly what happened there.
I do know the hosts and the guests. Other guests
definitely did not tell people to get her banned, at
least I've seen no evidence of that, and they're not
necessarily responsible for what random viewers decide to do afterwards. Also,
(03:57):
like side note, I find it hilarious that she says, oh,
just white supremacists don't like my content because I teach
anti racism or whatever. Actually, she posts like ridiculous, absurd
race baiting content that lots of people object to who
aren't racists or white supremacists because it's absurd and condescending
and probably ignites racial tension where none actually exists. Here's
(04:20):
a little sample of that.
Speaker 1 (04:22):
Hi, this is just your reminder that huss the culture
is white supremacy.
Speaker 3 (04:25):
Prior to colonization, there was no structured idea of time in.
Speaker 1 (04:28):
The sense that we have.
Speaker 2 (04:29):
I also find it funny that she objects to being
depicted as crash out Kylie, but yet chose to upload
multiple crash out videos to TikTok. And on a more
serious note, it is ironic to me that a feminist
content creator would so deceptively portray herself as a victim
(04:53):
and as lacking agency when that is not in fact
the case. So she has produced no evidence that she
was misled about the nature of the podcast, and she
if she only found out that the whatever podcast is
a red pill podcast once appearing on it, then that
is her fault. All their episodes, all their debates, are
(05:14):
publicly available, many of them have millions of views. And
if you did not do the basic diligence to look
up what media program you were appearing on see what
it's like, the tone and tenor of her appearance wasn't
really that different from any other segment I've seen on there.
It is hostile, it is rude, it can be crude,
(05:36):
but it's what she signed up for, and it's a
debate a political debate. Here's an actual clip from this
show to give you a sense of what it was
like when she actually appeared that she is now so
dramatized by By the way, if that's the most traumatic
experience you've ever had in your life, that tells me
you have had a very sheltered life for which you
(05:57):
should be grateful. Let's look at an actual clip from
the show. Now, are you aware that men only got
any rights to vote about a decade roughly before women.
Speaker 3 (06:09):
That is not true. Men have been making The founding
fathers were all men.
Speaker 2 (06:12):
So I have no idea. What you're talking about is
I have to do the right to vote.
Speaker 3 (06:14):
The right to vote was historically withheld from men of color.
It was a also with the general do not cut
me off. Do not cut me off. I'm in the
middle of speaking.
Speaker 2 (06:22):
I don't care if you're in the middle of speaking.
You're in the middle of a debate the right to vote.
You don't have your TikTok mute button, sweetheart.
Speaker 3 (06:30):
I will not be speaking anymore until you have a
conversation with it.
Speaker 4 (06:33):
Well, look, if we can for both people, if we
can allow each other to finish, even if you want
to jump in, just let the other person finish speaking.
If somebody is going on a monologue and they're filibustering,
I'll try to get them to wrap up, but just
if they're making a point, try to let them finish.
Speaker 3 (06:55):
Now, I did not go to school for four years
and build a platform to be taught to like this.
So I will be walking away from the microphone right now,
and I would encourage you to get your guests under control.
I'm going to take two minutes so you can ask
him questions if you'd.
Speaker 2 (07:08):
Like, and I will be right back because I just
won't be back.
Speaker 5 (07:12):
And I don't give a shit.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
What do I here. I'm here to have a debate,
and I listen to your whining. Do you want to
have a debate or not?
Speaker 3 (07:19):
All right, I'm not going to be talking to you
like this.
Speaker 4 (07:21):
Well do you want do you want to just take
a little two minute breathers? Do you want to take
a two minute breather?
Speaker 2 (07:26):
This is feminism. You're the strong woman. You're the strong woman.
This was an l for the feminist community.
Speaker 6 (07:36):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
I mean, there's just everything about this is awful, the
condescending nature of I'm an ivy league educated debater, and
I won't be spoken to like this, Okay, then you
should probably be able to handle a little bit of
just rough debate like Andrew. I'm not a fan of
Andrew Wilson. I think he has very extreme, far right
political views, and I do think I mean, his approached
(07:57):
to debate, at least in this clip, is definitely kind
of hostile and kind of like there is a rudeness
to it, kind of a gotcha vibe to it that
I don't love, and it isn't how I would prefer
to engage in a debate. But the meltdown from her
is proving his point right. If his point is that
like women are sensitive and weak and men are strong,
(08:20):
it's like you didn't have to play so perfectly into
the stereotype here, my dear. The feminism girl bossing didn't
hit the way that we hoped it would in this clip,
and unfortunately that was kind of indicative of how the
event went the rest of the podcast. She kept like
quitting and walking away and then having to be coaxed
(08:42):
back to the table. Now she claims that she only
didn't leave because of financial manipulation or something. Let's listen
to her TikTok video, explaining that aspect of it, how
their promise to reimburse her travel expenses was held over
her head to her there, let's listen to that.
Speaker 3 (09:02):
Hi.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
My name is Kylie and this is part two of
my story of being harassed by inseels. It has rootin
my mental health so severely that I actually ended up
getting Bell's palsy. I will not be naming names specifically
because again I am scared of these people, but you
can do your research. I was misled by these people
and told that I would be reimbursed for traveling out
to California from Chicago. I was not, and I have
yet to receive any money. I am out one thousand
(09:22):
dollars from my appearance on this podcast, and still every
day I am harassed by their fans online telling me
that I got owned, when in reality I was disrespected
blatantly to my face and made to feel unsafe. These
people were talking about harming women. They were drinking alcohol
on set and making me feel generally very uncomfortable and unsafe,
as well as prolonging my dress by holding money and
(09:43):
financial gain over my head because they kept trying to
prolong my stay longer and longer under the conditions in
the contract that they wouldn't pay me into unless I
stay till the end. On the live stream, people would
send in money and be like ten dollars to put
a sock in her mouth, slap the bitch, twenty dollars
in a bunch of other things, obviously scared that they
would take the money and harm me, and at the
end they didn't pay me a single cent.
Speaker 2 (10:06):
Okay, so again I am not buying the melodrama here
that you were tricked into appearing on this podcast. It
is not their fault. You didn't google it and watch
a couple episodes before going on. If you did, you
would have known exactly what to expect. You would have
known that they do belittle their female guests sometimes in
ways that I don't support and don't think are healthy
(10:27):
or productive. They do antagonize their female guests, and I
guess sometimes their male guests as well, and it's not
like a super friendly or casual chat or super substantive either.
That said, you should have known that. You also should
have known that no one gets assaulted on. They don't
(10:47):
punch or hit people, that that's not a thing that
happens on their show, and you had no real reason
to believe that it would. Now, as for the expenses, listen,
if I ran the podcast, if I was this bride guy,
I would probably reimburse her just because she did come
all the way out there. You did get the views
and clicks that you were hoping for. But in his defense,
(11:09):
they had an agreement and a written agreement that she
would come and complete the podcast and he would reimburse her.
And she left early and multiple times disrupted the podcast.
She didn't stay till the end. She didn't really hold
up her end of the deal. So it's not the
craziest thing in the world that you would refuse to
reimburse her. I would probably still reimburse if I was him,
(11:31):
especially to take away, you know, whatever tiny bit of
legitimate grievance she might have to garner sympathy in this fallout.
But I don't think he's crazy for not wanting to
reimburse her when she didn't hold up her end of
the bargain, which again, she should have known what she
was signing up for by doing basic due diligence, and
it's not his fault if she agreed to do something
(11:52):
that she was not emotionally or mentally strong enough to
actually fulfill, and yet expect the full benefits of the contract. Ironically,
that doesn't seem very feminist to me. The feminist position
would be that men and women are equal, and that
a woman is just as capable of fulfilling her obligations
and being held to account to the agreement she signs
up to. Instead, she seems to want the best of
(12:13):
both worlds, that nobody can hostily debate her the same
way they would a man. She can still get her
end of the deal without having to fulfill her obligations.
Like ironically, it doesn't seem actually equal at all. But
here's the part where things just totally lose the plot
because I'm not without any sympathy for her experiences here.
(12:37):
They definitely weren't nice to her. And if she didn't
know that what she that's what she was signing up for.
If she's not used to this kind of you know,
verbal jousting and hostile debate, I wouldn't be phased by it,
because I've done it many times. Again. She should have
looked into it before agreeing to do it, But I
can understand how that would be a very jarring and
upsetting experience for someone. Here's where she totally won one
(13:00):
hundred percent loses me. She claims that men being mean
to her on a podcast feels like the same thing
as rape, as sexual assault. Seriously, that's what she said.
Listen to this, That's exactly what's going on.
Speaker 1 (13:17):
This podcast felt like made me feel violated in so
many ways, disrespected and used. In addition to them having
me fly across the country and front the bill myself
with the promise of paying me back, which they didn't.
I made them so much money that they asked me
to come back three times within twenty four hours, and
when I told them to pay me back, they sent
me a threatening, abusive email. Felt not like a human being.
(13:42):
I was harassed on the basis of being a woman,
told that I was stupid, talked over, talked down to,
and I was made to cry two, three, four times.
I open to the back and just sobbed. I really
tried to stay to the end because I wanted to
be reimbursed for all the expenses, but I couldn't. I've
done debate for nine years, so I know things could
get heated. That wasn't debate that was assault. I felt
(14:06):
like I was sexually assaulted. After the next day, I've
been assaulted twice, and I woke up feeling that same
sense of sadness and violation and emptiness.
Speaker 2 (14:18):
Yeah, so this is breathtaking in its insanity. I'll of
course say that I have tremendous sympathy and compassion for her.
That she was assaulted twice. That's horrible. No one should
have to go through it. Far too many women and
some men, but particularly women do. However, it is absurd
and actually deeply insulting to your fellow survivors of abuse.
(14:42):
To compare being talked over or told you're stupid or
having people be unkind to you in a debate to
being sexually assaulted. That is totally inaccurate, totally disingenuous and unfair,
a wild and baseless accusation to lobb at someone, and
(15:02):
also really invalidating and downplaying to the actual survivors of
essay and what they go through like that is horrible
to say that normal, unpleasant social interactions are the same
thing as what they went through. No, they are not,
and you, of all people, as a feminist and as
a survivor, should know better. Than that. That is laughable.
It is frankly despicable rhetoric to use, totally disingenuous, trying
(15:27):
to shut down debate and garner sympathy for yourself on
the backs of your fellow survivors while diminishing what they
went through to score political points after crumbling. Really in
a kind of pathetic manner in a debate with she
loves to talk about her Ivy League degrees and her
TikTok videos and her all her years of debate. I
have never been less impressed with somebody's ability to debate
(15:50):
in my life, and I've seen some rough ones, so
I'm not without sympathy for this woman. But she does
in fact deserve the monarch her crash out, Kylie, And
while she may call herself a feminist, her public appearances
and rhetoric so far from what I'm seeing, are the
(16:11):
exact opposite of a feminist strong woman. No, they're a
toxic want to be victim, lying and distorting a story
to deprive herself of her own agency and play the victim.
But what do you guys think? Are you more sympathetic
to her than I am? Do let me know in
the comments. Do hit that leg button and do make
(16:32):
sure subscribed if you aren't yet. By the way, guys,
remember you can listen to the Bread Versus Everyone podcast
on Apples, Spotify, iHeartRadio, or wherever you get your podcasts.
Would love to have you over on the audio side
with us and take us with you on the go
and you don't have time to look at my beautiful face. Also,
remember to check out the merch items. My boyfriend's done
(16:52):
a lot of hard work on those. We have some
really cool stuff that's linked to the description. And remember
to send in your voicemails your voice notes for my
voicemail Friday episodes where I react to your whoa car stories,
your personal life scenarios, and answer any questions you guys
have for me, all on air. The link to sending
a voice note is in the description. Up next, we're
going to respond to a left wing YouTuber who mocked
(17:15):
and attacked me after my recent CNN appearance that's going
very viral, right classed with the liberal pundit and a Navarro,
and she dismissed my opinion for being a white man,
which I correctly responded was racist. That clip is going
super viral and lots of commentary channels have reacted to it,
most of them agreeing with me, most of them right
wing channels. But I do like to hear what critics
(17:37):
have to say about me, so I've been checking to
see if any significant left of center channels or commentary
has been put out about it. I would like to
know and see if they have any points this one
guy does not. That's really all there is to say.
This guy, his name is couch Politics. He is a
left wing YouTuber with fifty thousand or so subscribers. He
(18:00):
made a video about me that was very unpleasant and
not very substantive. So let's react to some clips from that.
Speaker 5 (18:08):
As just get right into this segment. We got another
gay Republican just humiliating himself as he bootlegs for a
party that just thinks he's subhuman and shouldn't even exist.
It's always amazing for me to see these kinds of
people just straight sellouts for a buck.
Speaker 2 (18:23):
So this was interesting to me because I don't think
he did very much research about me. I recently reregistered
actually as an independent as not affiliated with any political party.
But though my view is leaned to the right to
the center right for sure, I am not some even
though when I was a registered Republican, I've never been
some party loyalists, some maga stan. I've always been very
(18:45):
critical of Trump. I've always been very critical all the
party on different issues, and so to kind of act
like I'm some team red Chill, I just think he
did no research before talking about me and made a
bunch of assumptions that probably aren't truecond Listen, there is
still some homophobia on the right wing, but the idea
that most Republicans think gay people are like subhuman or
(19:09):
shouldn't exist, it's just totally out of touch with reality
and with public polling, like forty percent or so actually
support gay marriage, and even the ones who don't, most
of them do not think gay people shouldn't exist. It's
just a real distortion of where the Republican Party is
actually at its many faults aside on issues of gay
(19:29):
rights and gay marriage. I mean, President Trump is pretty
supportive of gay rights, of gay marriage. He's openly supportive
of it. He appointed the highest ranking ever gay Cabinet official,
and Scott Bessett. It's just I feel like we're living
in slightly different realities here where he acts like any
gay person who leans Republican is aligning with a party
(19:49):
that wants to put them in a camp or something
that is simply like just not true. Not to say
there aren't flaws or bigoted parts of the party or
anything like that, but just his perception of it is
wildly off base. Let's keep watching. The Democrats have allowed
themselves to become the party that stood in almost uniform
behind child sex changes across America.
Speaker 5 (20:12):
Listen, Poppy, I don't want to hear the word kids
or children coming from Republicans when Trump is your daddy,
speaking about kids, seems like you're cot leader. Trump may
have an issue controlling himself around them. We'll say you
crazy eyes.
Speaker 2 (20:29):
Notice how he just didn't address any of my points
or any of the substance of my commentary about Democrats
supporting experimental, irreversible medical transitions for minors, and just started
rambling about Trump. Trump is not my Poppy, and never
has been. In fact, I've actually made fun of Republicans
who on ironically call him daddy. But regardless, it's just like,
(20:53):
what about is them? It's totally illogical non response. It's
a non sequitur, and I call me crazy. The eyes
if you want, But I'd put my appearance up against
yours any day of the week. Let's hear more from
our friend here.
Speaker 5 (21:07):
Like, this is the thing, Them's Democrats come from a
place of empathy and try to make everyone feel accepted
and welcome. I'd rather start off that base than one
of cruelty and bigotry and just truly noxious behavior any
day of the week.
Speaker 2 (21:25):
Yeah. I just don't buy this, this idea that well,
you know, Democrats have empathy and Republicans are all just
cruel I actually think there are people on either side
of the political spectrum that embody those values. And well,
you could say that's just some to some extent true, like, oh, well,
democrats want to help people with their policies. Sure, good
intentions don't equal good results, No, that's for sure. And
(21:49):
I also think that we have also seen cruelty and
vindictiveness from the Democratic side, where you look at the
way they try to cancel and destroy random people's lives
over old tweets or out of context hand gestures and
the like. It's not like they are always the loving, caring,
tolerant ones in practice. So this didn't hit the way
(22:09):
that he thought it hit and regardless, like again, I'm
not some loyal party, loyalist Republican. He's shadow boxing a
straw man. Let's keep watching.
Speaker 5 (22:19):
And he said, yeah, when you offer free stuff, it's
such a Republican thing to say, as they literally rip
away health insurance from some of the poorest people in
this country to give tax breaks to the superrich. So
free stuff is bad, but stealing from the most who needed,
that's all good. Again, only Republicans and Conservatives who are
(22:41):
among some of the poorest in this country could clap
like seals in agreement for this. And by the way,
free stuff, what do you mean we pay taxes? Isn't
that what taxes would be used for, for instance, the
free bus rides in New York City that I'm Donnie
wants like these people are.
Speaker 2 (23:00):
So there's a lot to unpack there. But first and foremost, well,
we pay taxes took at the federal level. Most taxes
are paid by high income people and by the top
half and about the bottom half is of income earners
are not net federal tax payers, so that's really not true.
And Democrats are They are promising tons of tons and
(23:22):
tons of new spending and social programs and goodies for everyone,
and they say, oh, we're only going to tax the rich. Now,
in reality, they couldn't actually fund their programs by just
taxing the rich. There's not enough money there. The math
doesn't math. So maybe they would end up having to
tax everyone. But according to them, they don't plan to
tax everyone fairly for it. Everyone pays in. They just
(23:43):
want to tax the rich. So yeah, then they are
promising people free stuff paid for by other people. And
the other issue here is him conflating tax cuts that
let people keep their own money. He's saying that's a
giveaway to them. That's not how I view property and income,
and I don't think it's how most Americans do either.
Actually think you own your money and the government letting
(24:07):
you keep more of it is not them giving you money,
unless your base assumption is that all money and property
truly owns with the government, in which case you are
a communist. And I am not, in fact a communist.
Let's go through a few more clips of this guy.
Speaker 6 (24:24):
I want to respond to you saying that I was
hyperbolic when I talked about a R. No, it might
be hyperbolic for you as a white man. It's certainly
not hyperbolic for me. No, I'm not being racist. Well,
I'm not dissing your opinion.
Speaker 5 (24:40):
These people are just gross, like to try to play
the victim there and act like what she said was
what she was being racist towards you. To act like
he's offended by that. Again, but he's a gay Republican
to be offended by that, but be a gay Republican again,
a party that wish you did didn't exist is incredible.
Speaker 2 (25:02):
First off, what you're saying isn't true. I'm not a
loyalist Republican, and Republicans don't wish for me not to exist,
not the vast majority of them. But even if it
were true, it doesn't actually make sense. Just because I
accept one thing over here that means it's okay for
her to racially abuse me on national television. What I mean,
(25:24):
what she said very explicitly in the clip. They try
to deny it afterwards, but it's on record for everyone
to hear. Is when I made a claim, like a
factual claim that no, calling Trump's immigration policy is a
reign of terror is hyperbolic. She responded with, you're a
white man, so that's why you think that, and implicitly
that's why you're wrong. So she dismissed my opinion, not
(25:45):
with facts, not with logic, not with arguments, but by
citing my race and gender. That is just like textbook
racism and sexism, but it's discriminatory. And the idea that
I can't call that out because this other thing he
imagined also exists doesn't even make sense on its own
terms like two wrongs don't make a right, and just
(26:09):
because even if someone is inconsistent, that doesn't actually make
the point they're saying wrong. Let's look at one final
clip from this fine fellow couch politics.
Speaker 5 (26:19):
This is what Republicans always do when it comes to
these racism conversations. They play the victim and act like
the little snowflakes that they are when the conversation is
about to get too tough for their little brains to handle.
He really tried to call out racism because she was
pointing out a simple fact that maybe, as a white man,
you may not have the same personal feelings towards it. Again,
(26:44):
gay Republican crazy eyes over here, your party thinks you
should be damned to hell and that you have a
severe mental disorder. We on this side don't think that
shit about you, You know how we see you as humans,
not less, not anymore. I truly despise people like this,
(27:04):
such pathetically weak to have to throw your own people
under the bus by supporting this party for what just
a couple of dollars, because that's what they're used for.
That's bigger street shields. We're not biggest. Look at this
creepy looking gay guy we have.
Speaker 2 (27:18):
He is so obsessed with the gay Republican thing it's
actually comical to me. But yes, I don't really agree
that I was being a snowflake or playing the victim,
because it's not like I was traumatized by it or anything.
I just called it out, like she said something racist
to me and I was like, hey, that's racist, knock
it off. And then we went we discussed it, and
(27:39):
I moved on the idea that I was triggered or
melted down or anything like that. I just don't think
that's true. I don't think there's an accurate reflection of
the clip we watched. They're not used to being called
on it when they're racist against white people or sexist
against men. They're used to people being afraid of them
and nodding along, and I called them on it directly
to their face, and she didn't like that. Anna didn't
(28:01):
like it, and apparently this couch guy doesn't like it either.
And again the fact, even if I was this caricature
of a gay Republican that he's talking about, which is
not a remotely accurate reflection of my work, it wouldn't matter.
It wouldn't make it okay to dismiss my opinion because
of my race, Like, oh, it's okay to be racist.
What you're saying is it's okay to be racisting. It's
(28:22):
gay Republicans because they're wrong about politics and self hating.
That's not even true. But to the extent even if
it was, it wouldn't justify you being racist. That's insane.
In what other scenario would you say that someone's personal
beliefs or inconsistencies or moral failings justify bigotry and discrimination
against them. You wouldn't say that. But if your partisan
(28:44):
blinders on here and it's showing, all right, guys, we're
going to leave it there for today's episode of The
Brad Versus Everyone Podcast. Thank you so much for tuning in.
Please do make sure you subscribed If you aren't yet,
do hit that like button before you go. Remember to
check out the March items and the different options we
have available there linked in the descriptions and in your
voicemails for our voicemail Fridays and uh we'll talk again
(29:08):
real soon
That's exactly what's going on this podcast. Fell Like, I've
done debate for nine years, so I know things could
get heated. That was in debate, that was assault. I
felt like I was sextually assaulted.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Well, this might actually be the most unhinged TikTok meltdown
I've ever seen, and that's saying something. We're going to
break down a hugely viral feminist meltdown from an influencer
after a podcast debate, and so much more on today's
(00:33):
episode of The Brad Versus Everyone Podcast, my daily show
where I take on the craziest ideas from across the Internet,
our media, and our politics, all from an independent perspective. First,
we're going to talk about a moment that's going megaviral
and to kind of saga kind of a fallout from
something called the Whatever podcast, which is a dating and
(00:56):
gender podcast hosted by someone named Brian At. It's kind
of associated with the like red pill movements, kind of
like a pro men, some would say anti women. I'm
not normally a huge fan of this podcast because I
think the conversations that take place on it sometimes can
be interesting, but are often pretty vapid. They often bring
(01:18):
on professional debater men to go against random Instagram models
or women off the street, and it doesn't really feel
like a fair fight or super interesting or substantive. And
then the whole thing is supposed to be like railing
against like modern women or whatever. Yet it's basically used
as a platform for these women to promote their OnlyFans.
(01:38):
So I'm not a huge fan of the podcast, but
I certainly don't think that appearing on it constitutes rape
or sexual assault. Yet that is actually the claim that
one feminist guest, who a TikTok influencer who went on
the podcast, is now making. And Guys, this woman's name
is Kylie Brewer. She is a cell described queer leftist
(02:01):
feminists who teaches anti racism and has over one hundred
thousand followers on TikTok's Look at our first video on
TikTok complaining about this situation.
Speaker 1 (02:11):
Hi, my name is Kylie, and I've been harassed by
men so severely online that I'm thinking about giving up.
Misogyny has always been really bad as a feminist content creator,
but especially because I talk about intersectionality, which means I'm
often talking about the systems that uphold white supremacy and
racism in the US, which pisses off a number of
uber racist white supremacists. About six weeks ago, I was
misled by some men and they ended up having me
(02:34):
on a podcast that turned out to be red Pill,
And I don't want to go into the details of
it because it was honestly like the most traumatic experience
of my life and really horrible, and I am scared
of these people, so I would prefer to not go
into more detail. But then became a meme known as
crush out Kylie, which here's a photo, But they sent
their hundreds of followers onto me to leave hate comments
and spam report my account until it was removed on
(02:56):
Instagram for child they do the same thing that my
content has been censored, is not appearing on people's for
you pages.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
I become a.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
Target for them, for in cells and red Pill people. Though,
if you see this, if you could just let me know,
because I'm like really close to giving up and I've
been doing this for two years since has been my dream.
Speaker 2 (03:13):
And it's just like, so everything about this is kind
of ridiculous and absurd if you know a little bit
of the context. First of all, she's complaining about being
censored and my videos aren't being shown on the for
you page. This video has one point one million views.
I don't know what she's talking about. I don't know
what happened with her Instagram account. I did look and
see that it's still suspended, and if that whatever reason
(03:36):
it's suspended is from like trolling in spam and she
didn't actually do anything wrong, but of course I don't
support that. But I don't know exactly what happened there.
I do know the hosts and the guests. Other guests
definitely did not tell people to get her banned, at
least I've seen no evidence of that, and they're not
necessarily responsible for what random viewers decide to do afterwards. Also,
(03:57):
like side note, I find it hilarious that she says, oh,
just white supremacists don't like my content because I teach
anti racism or whatever. Actually, she posts like ridiculous, absurd
race baiting content that lots of people object to who
aren't racists or white supremacists because it's absurd and condescending
and probably ignites racial tension where none actually exists. Here's
(04:20):
a little sample of that.
Speaker 1 (04:22):
Hi, this is just your reminder that huss the culture
is white supremacy.
Speaker 3 (04:25):
Prior to colonization, there was no structured idea of time in.
Speaker 1 (04:28):
The sense that we have.
Speaker 2 (04:29):
I also find it funny that she objects to being
depicted as crash out Kylie, but yet chose to upload
multiple crash out videos to TikTok. And on a more
serious note, it is ironic to me that a feminist
content creator would so deceptively portray herself as a victim
(04:53):
and as lacking agency when that is not in fact
the case. So she has produced no evidence that she
was misled about the nature of the podcast, and she
if she only found out that the whatever podcast is
a red pill podcast once appearing on it, then that
is her fault. All their episodes, all their debates, are
(05:14):
publicly available, many of them have millions of views. And
if you did not do the basic diligence to look
up what media program you were appearing on see what
it's like, the tone and tenor of her appearance wasn't
really that different from any other segment I've seen on there.
It is hostile, it is rude, it can be crude,
(05:36):
but it's what she signed up for, and it's a
debate a political debate. Here's an actual clip from this
show to give you a sense of what it was
like when she actually appeared that she is now so
dramatized by By the way, if that's the most traumatic
experience you've ever had in your life, that tells me
you have had a very sheltered life for which you
(05:57):
should be grateful. Let's look at an actual clip from
the show. Now, are you aware that men only got
any rights to vote about a decade roughly before women.
Speaker 3 (06:09):
That is not true. Men have been making The founding
fathers were all men.
Speaker 2 (06:12):
So I have no idea. What you're talking about is
I have to do the right to vote.
Speaker 3 (06:14):
The right to vote was historically withheld from men of color.
It was a also with the general do not cut
me off. Do not cut me off. I'm in the
middle of speaking.
Speaker 2 (06:22):
I don't care if you're in the middle of speaking.
You're in the middle of a debate the right to vote.
You don't have your TikTok mute button, sweetheart.
Speaker 3 (06:30):
I will not be speaking anymore until you have a
conversation with it.
Speaker 4 (06:33):
Well, look, if we can for both people, if we
can allow each other to finish, even if you want
to jump in, just let the other person finish speaking.
If somebody is going on a monologue and they're filibustering,
I'll try to get them to wrap up, but just
if they're making a point, try to let them finish.
Speaker 3 (06:55):
Now, I did not go to school for four years
and build a platform to be taught to like this.
So I will be walking away from the microphone right now,
and I would encourage you to get your guests under control.
I'm going to take two minutes so you can ask
him questions if you'd.
Speaker 2 (07:08):
Like, and I will be right back because I just
won't be back.
Speaker 5 (07:12):
And I don't give a shit.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
What do I here. I'm here to have a debate,
and I listen to your whining. Do you want to
have a debate or not?
Speaker 3 (07:19):
All right, I'm not going to be talking to you
like this.
Speaker 4 (07:21):
Well do you want do you want to just take
a little two minute breathers? Do you want to take
a two minute breather?
Speaker 2 (07:26):
This is feminism. You're the strong woman. You're the strong woman.
This was an l for the feminist community.
Speaker 6 (07:36):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (07:36):
I mean, there's just everything about this is awful, the
condescending nature of I'm an ivy league educated debater, and
I won't be spoken to like this, Okay, then you
should probably be able to handle a little bit of
just rough debate like Andrew. I'm not a fan of
Andrew Wilson. I think he has very extreme, far right
political views, and I do think I mean, his approached
(07:57):
to debate, at least in this clip, is definitely kind
of hostile and kind of like there is a rudeness
to it, kind of a gotcha vibe to it that
I don't love, and it isn't how I would prefer
to engage in a debate. But the meltdown from her
is proving his point right. If his point is that
like women are sensitive and weak and men are strong,
(08:20):
it's like you didn't have to play so perfectly into
the stereotype here, my dear. The feminism girl bossing didn't
hit the way that we hoped it would in this clip,
and unfortunately that was kind of indicative of how the
event went the rest of the podcast. She kept like
quitting and walking away and then having to be coaxed
(08:42):
back to the table. Now she claims that she only
didn't leave because of financial manipulation or something. Let's listen
to her TikTok video, explaining that aspect of it, how
their promise to reimburse her travel expenses was held over
her head to her there, let's listen to that.
Speaker 3 (09:02):
Hi.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
My name is Kylie and this is part two of
my story of being harassed by inseels. It has rootin
my mental health so severely that I actually ended up
getting Bell's palsy. I will not be naming names specifically
because again I am scared of these people, but you
can do your research. I was misled by these people
and told that I would be reimbursed for traveling out
to California from Chicago. I was not, and I have
yet to receive any money. I am out one thousand
(09:22):
dollars from my appearance on this podcast, and still every
day I am harassed by their fans online telling me
that I got owned, when in reality I was disrespected
blatantly to my face and made to feel unsafe. These
people were talking about harming women. They were drinking alcohol
on set and making me feel generally very uncomfortable and unsafe,
as well as prolonging my dress by holding money and
(09:43):
financial gain over my head because they kept trying to
prolong my stay longer and longer under the conditions in
the contract that they wouldn't pay me into unless I
stay till the end. On the live stream, people would
send in money and be like ten dollars to put
a sock in her mouth, slap the bitch, twenty dollars
in a bunch of other things, obviously scared that they
would take the money and harm me, and at the
end they didn't pay me a single cent.
Speaker 2 (10:06):
Okay, so again I am not buying the melodrama here
that you were tricked into appearing on this podcast. It
is not their fault. You didn't google it and watch
a couple episodes before going on. If you did, you
would have known exactly what to expect. You would have
known that they do belittle their female guests sometimes in
ways that I don't support and don't think are healthy
(10:27):
or productive. They do antagonize their female guests, and I
guess sometimes their male guests as well, and it's not
like a super friendly or casual chat or super substantive either.
That said, you should have known that. You also should
have known that no one gets assaulted on. They don't
(10:47):
punch or hit people, that that's not a thing that
happens on their show, and you had no real reason
to believe that it would. Now, as for the expenses, listen,
if I ran the podcast, if I was this bride guy,
I would probably reimburse her just because she did come
all the way out there. You did get the views
and clicks that you were hoping for. But in his defense,
(11:09):
they had an agreement and a written agreement that she
would come and complete the podcast and he would reimburse her.
And she left early and multiple times disrupted the podcast.
She didn't stay till the end. She didn't really hold
up her end of the deal. So it's not the
craziest thing in the world that you would refuse to
reimburse her. I would probably still reimburse if I was him,
(11:31):
especially to take away, you know, whatever tiny bit of
legitimate grievance she might have to garner sympathy in this fallout.
But I don't think he's crazy for not wanting to
reimburse her when she didn't hold up her end of
the bargain, which again, she should have known what she
was signing up for by doing basic due diligence, and
it's not his fault if she agreed to do something
(11:52):
that she was not emotionally or mentally strong enough to
actually fulfill, and yet expect the full benefits of the contract. Ironically,
that doesn't seem very feminist to me. The feminist position
would be that men and women are equal, and that
a woman is just as capable of fulfilling her obligations
and being held to account to the agreement she signs
up to. Instead, she seems to want the best of
(12:13):
both worlds, that nobody can hostily debate her the same
way they would a man. She can still get her
end of the deal without having to fulfill her obligations.
Like ironically, it doesn't seem actually equal at all. But
here's the part where things just totally lose the plot
because I'm not without any sympathy for her experiences here.
(12:37):
They definitely weren't nice to her. And if she didn't
know that what she that's what she was signing up for.
If she's not used to this kind of you know,
verbal jousting and hostile debate, I wouldn't be phased by it,
because I've done it many times. Again. She should have
looked into it before agreeing to do it, But I
can understand how that would be a very jarring and
upsetting experience for someone. Here's where she totally won one
(13:00):
hundred percent loses me. She claims that men being mean
to her on a podcast feels like the same thing
as rape, as sexual assault. Seriously, that's what she said.
Listen to this, That's exactly what's going on.
Speaker 1 (13:17):
This podcast felt like made me feel violated in so
many ways, disrespected and used. In addition to them having
me fly across the country and front the bill myself
with the promise of paying me back, which they didn't.
I made them so much money that they asked me
to come back three times within twenty four hours, and
when I told them to pay me back, they sent
me a threatening, abusive email. Felt not like a human being.
(13:42):
I was harassed on the basis of being a woman,
told that I was stupid, talked over, talked down to,
and I was made to cry two, three, four times.
I open to the back and just sobbed. I really
tried to stay to the end because I wanted to
be reimbursed for all the expenses, but I couldn't. I've
done debate for nine years, so I know things could
get heated. That wasn't debate that was assault. I felt
(14:06):
like I was sexually assaulted. After the next day, I've
been assaulted twice, and I woke up feeling that same
sense of sadness and violation and emptiness.
Speaker 2 (14:18):
Yeah, so this is breathtaking in its insanity. I'll of
course say that I have tremendous sympathy and compassion for her.
That she was assaulted twice. That's horrible. No one should
have to go through it. Far too many women and
some men, but particularly women do. However, it is absurd
and actually deeply insulting to your fellow survivors of abuse.
(14:42):
To compare being talked over or told you're stupid or
having people be unkind to you in a debate to
being sexually assaulted. That is totally inaccurate, totally disingenuous and unfair,
a wild and baseless accusation to lobb at someone, and
(15:02):
also really invalidating and downplaying to the actual survivors of
essay and what they go through like that is horrible
to say that normal, unpleasant social interactions are the same
thing as what they went through. No, they are not,
and you, of all people, as a feminist and as
a survivor, should know better. Than that. That is laughable.
It is frankly despicable rhetoric to use, totally disingenuous, trying
(15:27):
to shut down debate and garner sympathy for yourself on
the backs of your fellow survivors while diminishing what they
went through to score political points after crumbling. Really in
a kind of pathetic manner in a debate with she
loves to talk about her Ivy League degrees and her
TikTok videos and her all her years of debate. I
have never been less impressed with somebody's ability to debate
(15:50):
in my life, and I've seen some rough ones, so
I'm not without sympathy for this woman. But she does
in fact deserve the monarch her crash out, Kylie, And
while she may call herself a feminist, her public appearances
and rhetoric so far from what I'm seeing, are the
(16:11):
exact opposite of a feminist strong woman. No, they're a
toxic want to be victim, lying and distorting a story
to deprive herself of her own agency and play the victim.
But what do you guys think? Are you more sympathetic
to her than I am? Do let me know in
the comments. Do hit that leg button and do make
(16:32):
sure subscribed if you aren't yet. By the way, guys,
remember you can listen to the Bread Versus Everyone podcast
on Apples, Spotify, iHeartRadio, or wherever you get your podcasts.
Would love to have you over on the audio side
with us and take us with you on the go
and you don't have time to look at my beautiful face. Also,
remember to check out the merch items. My boyfriend's done
(16:52):
a lot of hard work on those. We have some
really cool stuff that's linked to the description. And remember
to send in your voicemails your voice notes for my
voicemail Friday episodes where I react to your whoa car stories,
your personal life scenarios, and answer any questions you guys
have for me, all on air. The link to sending
a voice note is in the description. Up next, we're
going to respond to a left wing YouTuber who mocked
(17:15):
and attacked me after my recent CNN appearance that's going
very viral, right classed with the liberal pundit and a Navarro,
and she dismissed my opinion for being a white man,
which I correctly responded was racist. That clip is going
super viral and lots of commentary channels have reacted to it,
most of them agreeing with me, most of them right
wing channels. But I do like to hear what critics
(17:37):
have to say about me, so I've been checking to
see if any significant left of center channels or commentary
has been put out about it. I would like to
know and see if they have any points this one
guy does not. That's really all there is to say.
This guy, his name is couch Politics. He is a
left wing YouTuber with fifty thousand or so subscribers. He
(18:00):
made a video about me that was very unpleasant and
not very substantive. So let's react to some clips from that.
Speaker 5 (18:08):
As just get right into this segment. We got another
gay Republican just humiliating himself as he bootlegs for a
party that just thinks he's subhuman and shouldn't even exist.
It's always amazing for me to see these kinds of
people just straight sellouts for a buck.
Speaker 2 (18:23):
So this was interesting to me because I don't think
he did very much research about me. I recently reregistered
actually as an independent as not affiliated with any political party.
But though my view is leaned to the right to
the center right for sure, I am not some even
though when I was a registered Republican, I've never been
some party loyalists, some maga stan. I've always been very
(18:45):
critical of Trump. I've always been very critical all the
party on different issues, and so to kind of act
like I'm some team red Chill, I just think he
did no research before talking about me and made a
bunch of assumptions that probably aren't truecond Listen, there is
still some homophobia on the right wing, but the idea
that most Republicans think gay people are like subhuman or
(19:09):
shouldn't exist, it's just totally out of touch with reality
and with public polling, like forty percent or so actually
support gay marriage, and even the ones who don't, most
of them do not think gay people shouldn't exist. It's
just a real distortion of where the Republican Party is
actually at its many faults aside on issues of gay
(19:29):
rights and gay marriage. I mean, President Trump is pretty
supportive of gay rights, of gay marriage. He's openly supportive
of it. He appointed the highest ranking ever gay Cabinet official,
and Scott Bessett. It's just I feel like we're living
in slightly different realities here where he acts like any
gay person who leans Republican is aligning with a party
(19:49):
that wants to put them in a camp or something
that is simply like just not true. Not to say
there aren't flaws or bigoted parts of the party or
anything like that, but just his perception of it is
wildly off base. Let's keep watching. The Democrats have allowed
themselves to become the party that stood in almost uniform
behind child sex changes across America.
Speaker 5 (20:12):
Listen, Poppy, I don't want to hear the word kids
or children coming from Republicans when Trump is your daddy,
speaking about kids, seems like you're cot leader. Trump may
have an issue controlling himself around them. We'll say you
crazy eyes.
Speaker 2 (20:29):
Notice how he just didn't address any of my points
or any of the substance of my commentary about Democrats
supporting experimental, irreversible medical transitions for minors, and just started
rambling about Trump. Trump is not my Poppy, and never
has been. In fact, I've actually made fun of Republicans
who on ironically call him daddy. But regardless, it's just like,
(20:53):
what about is them? It's totally illogical non response. It's
a non sequitur, and I call me crazy. The eyes
if you want, But I'd put my appearance up against
yours any day of the week. Let's hear more from
our friend here.
Speaker 5 (21:07):
Like, this is the thing, Them's Democrats come from a
place of empathy and try to make everyone feel accepted
and welcome. I'd rather start off that base than one
of cruelty and bigotry and just truly noxious behavior any
day of the week.
Speaker 2 (21:25):
Yeah. I just don't buy this, this idea that well,
you know, Democrats have empathy and Republicans are all just
cruel I actually think there are people on either side
of the political spectrum that embody those values. And well,
you could say that's just some to some extent true, like, oh, well,
democrats want to help people with their policies. Sure, good
intentions don't equal good results, No, that's for sure. And
(21:49):
I also think that we have also seen cruelty and
vindictiveness from the Democratic side, where you look at the
way they try to cancel and destroy random people's lives
over old tweets or out of context hand gestures and
the like. It's not like they are always the loving, caring,
tolerant ones in practice. So this didn't hit the way
(22:09):
that he thought it hit and regardless, like again, I'm
not some loyal party, loyalist Republican. He's shadow boxing a
straw man. Let's keep watching.
Speaker 5 (22:19):
And he said, yeah, when you offer free stuff, it's
such a Republican thing to say, as they literally rip
away health insurance from some of the poorest people in
this country to give tax breaks to the superrich. So
free stuff is bad, but stealing from the most who needed,
that's all good. Again, only Republicans and Conservatives who are
(22:41):
among some of the poorest in this country could clap
like seals in agreement for this. And by the way,
free stuff, what do you mean we pay taxes? Isn't
that what taxes would be used for, for instance, the
free bus rides in New York City that I'm Donnie
wants like these people are.
Speaker 2 (23:00):
So there's a lot to unpack there. But first and foremost, well,
we pay taxes took at the federal level. Most taxes
are paid by high income people and by the top
half and about the bottom half is of income earners
are not net federal tax payers, so that's really not true.
And Democrats are They are promising tons of tons and
(23:22):
tons of new spending and social programs and goodies for everyone,
and they say, oh, we're only going to tax the rich. Now,
in reality, they couldn't actually fund their programs by just
taxing the rich. There's not enough money there. The math
doesn't math. So maybe they would end up having to
tax everyone. But according to them, they don't plan to
tax everyone fairly for it. Everyone pays in. They just
(23:43):
want to tax the rich. So yeah, then they are
promising people free stuff paid for by other people. And
the other issue here is him conflating tax cuts that
let people keep their own money. He's saying that's a
giveaway to them. That's not how I view property and income,
and I don't think it's how most Americans do either.
Actually think you own your money and the government letting
(24:07):
you keep more of it is not them giving you money,
unless your base assumption is that all money and property
truly owns with the government, in which case you are
a communist. And I am not, in fact a communist.
Let's go through a few more clips of this guy.
Speaker 6 (24:24):
I want to respond to you saying that I was
hyperbolic when I talked about a R. No, it might
be hyperbolic for you as a white man. It's certainly
not hyperbolic for me. No, I'm not being racist. Well,
I'm not dissing your opinion.
Speaker 5 (24:40):
These people are just gross, like to try to play
the victim there and act like what she said was
what she was being racist towards you. To act like
he's offended by that. Again, but he's a gay Republican
to be offended by that, but be a gay Republican again,
a party that wish you did didn't exist is incredible.
Speaker 2 (25:02):
First off, what you're saying isn't true. I'm not a
loyalist Republican, and Republicans don't wish for me not to exist,
not the vast majority of them. But even if it
were true, it doesn't actually make sense. Just because I
accept one thing over here that means it's okay for
her to racially abuse me on national television. What I mean,
(25:24):
what she said very explicitly in the clip. They try
to deny it afterwards, but it's on record for everyone
to hear. Is when I made a claim, like a
factual claim that no, calling Trump's immigration policy is a
reign of terror is hyperbolic. She responded with, you're a
white man, so that's why you think that, and implicitly
that's why you're wrong. So she dismissed my opinion, not
(25:45):
with facts, not with logic, not with arguments, but by
citing my race and gender. That is just like textbook
racism and sexism, but it's discriminatory. And the idea that
I can't call that out because this other thing he
imagined also exists doesn't even make sense on its own
terms like two wrongs don't make a right, and just
(26:09):
because even if someone is inconsistent, that doesn't actually make
the point they're saying wrong. Let's look at one final
clip from this fine fellow couch politics.
Speaker 5 (26:19):
This is what Republicans always do when it comes to
these racism conversations. They play the victim and act like
the little snowflakes that they are when the conversation is
about to get too tough for their little brains to handle.
He really tried to call out racism because she was
pointing out a simple fact that maybe, as a white man,
you may not have the same personal feelings towards it. Again,
(26:44):
gay Republican crazy eyes over here, your party thinks you
should be damned to hell and that you have a
severe mental disorder. We on this side don't think that
shit about you, You know how we see you as humans,
not less, not anymore. I truly despise people like this,
(27:04):
such pathetically weak to have to throw your own people
under the bus by supporting this party for what just
a couple of dollars, because that's what they're used for.
That's bigger street shields. We're not biggest. Look at this
creepy looking gay guy we have.
Speaker 2 (27:18):
He is so obsessed with the gay Republican thing it's
actually comical to me. But yes, I don't really agree
that I was being a snowflake or playing the victim,
because it's not like I was traumatized by it or anything.
I just called it out, like she said something racist
to me and I was like, hey, that's racist, knock
it off. And then we went we discussed it, and
(27:39):
I moved on the idea that I was triggered or
melted down or anything like that. I just don't think
that's true. I don't think there's an accurate reflection of
the clip we watched. They're not used to being called
on it when they're racist against white people or sexist
against men. They're used to people being afraid of them
and nodding along, and I called them on it directly
to their face, and she didn't like that. Anna didn't
(28:01):
like it, and apparently this couch guy doesn't like it either.
And again the fact, even if I was this caricature
of a gay Republican that he's talking about, which is
not a remotely accurate reflection of my work, it wouldn't matter.
It wouldn't make it okay to dismiss my opinion because
of my race, Like, oh, it's okay to be racist.
What you're saying is it's okay to be racisting. It's
(28:22):
gay Republicans because they're wrong about politics and self hating.
That's not even true. But to the extent even if
it was, it wouldn't justify you being racist. That's insane.
In what other scenario would you say that someone's personal
beliefs or inconsistencies or moral failings justify bigotry and discrimination
against them. You wouldn't say that. But if your partisan
(28:44):
blinders on here and it's showing, all right, guys, we're
going to leave it there for today's episode of The
Brad Versus Everyone Podcast. Thank you so much for tuning in.
Please do make sure you subscribed If you aren't yet,
do hit that like button before you go. Remember to
check out the March items and the different options we
have available there linked in the descriptions and in your
voicemails for our voicemail Fridays and uh we'll talk again
(29:08):
real soon
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.