December 1, 2025 • 32 mins
The attempted cancellation of the "Just Roomates" TikTok duo might go down in history as the dumbest cancellation of all time. I break it down in this episode of the Brad vs Everyone podcast. Plus, right-wing new media star Tucker Carlson's odd rant about gay people goes viral.
Send me a voice note: https://www.speakpipe.com/bradvseveryone
Check out the merch: https://bp-shop.fourthwall.com/
Support My Show: https://linktr.ee/bradpolumbo
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):
You are a white man. They knew their privilege before
getting onto TikTok.
Speaker 2 (00:03):
I do apologize for making anyone upset, you know, rightfully
so over eating Donald's.
Speaker 3 (00:07):
People have gone to my friends and family's accounts to
spread hate. I've gotten death threats.
Speaker 4 (00:13):
This might actually be the dumbest to TikTok cancelation of
all time, and that is saying something. We're gonna break
this down, plus so much more on today's episode of
The brad Versus Everyone Podcast. A TV host introducing me
(00:33):
recently said, well, that's an interesting name, and it is,
but the brad Versus Everyone Podcast where we take on
the craziest ideas from across social media and the Internet,
all from an independent political perspective. I am so happy
to be back with you guys after a wonderful Thanksgiving.
I hope you all had a great holiday and are
ready to dive back into the de lulu world of
(00:55):
the Internet with me. At first, we're gonna check in
on TikTok, where things are always super normal, and this
time on a cancelation attempt targeting two roommates their brand
name I guess you could call it or their couple name,
whether they're not actually a couple, but that's part of
their bit, is that, oh are they roomates? Are they
(01:15):
a couple? They're called just roommates Jake and Mo. I'll
put a little clip here of their kind of style
of content that has earned them a huge following over
the last I think six months to a year since
they started doing content, and then I will explain why
these two are in hot water for being super duper
problematic and it's totally not absurd or ridiculous at all.
(01:39):
First though, here's a clip of them doing their thing,
a fan edit that was made of them.
Speaker 5 (01:44):
Why can I give myself a man like this.
Speaker 2 (01:47):
Boy?
Speaker 5 (01:48):
Big news?
Speaker 3 (01:52):
It looks so cute. Do I look like a little baby?
Speaker 4 (01:56):
I think I can see why they may have gotten popular,
but anyway, I just they seem sweet. Their content is fun.
It's really not deep. It's just like skits of them,
or not even skits, but just funny moments and interactions.
They got a YouTube channel, They've got lots of followers
on TikTok now. But it's twenty twenty five, so we
(02:16):
can't have nice things and everything has to be somehow
made problematic. So they're in trouble for two things, the
first of which is the one we'll start with. Jake,
the white guy of the duo, was brace yourself for this.
It's really bad. It's really scary scene with a Blue
Lives Matter flag in the background of his dorm room
(02:37):
or apartment or whatever it is, meaning that he supports
the police. What a terrible, terrible thing. We're going to
react to one clip that had a lot of views
and engagement. This is a pretty big TikTok discourse explaining
the controversy. And guys, the weird thing with their voice
is like a thing people do on TikTok. It's like
(02:58):
an effect. I didn't do that this person, they did
it to themselves.
Speaker 1 (03:01):
Let's listen, alert alert, Just roommates just not canceled. Guys,
guess what your two favorite YouTubers? Yeah, they were Trump
supporters the whole time. Fork found in the kitchen.
Speaker 4 (03:15):
What just pausing here to say like they're not, in
fact Trump supporters, And that just became the narrative and
was echoed around TikTok as if the idea that they
voted for Trump like half the country would somehow mean
they're evil and that you can't like their roommates. Gits.
That alone is absurd enough. But they're not Trump supporters.
She's just assuming that based off the Blue Lives Matter
(03:36):
flag that one of them had, she's assuming that means
they're both Trump supporters. That's not a fair assumption, actually,
but go off, queen, No way, they were Trump supporters.
Speaker 1 (03:47):
Yes, they were Trump supporters, guys. And you might be
saying to yourself, Oh, this isn't that serious. Wait it is, guys.
I'm not supporting somebody who supports Trump. You go against
everything that I stand for. You are a white man.
They knew their privilege.
Speaker 4 (04:01):
Before getting Oh my god. It's like I open up
TikTok and I forget that people are still doing this.
The people on ironically still talk like this and think
like this. Are they not exhausted? Are they not tired?
Have they not moved on? I mean, I know this
person is young, but the hundreds of thousands of people
nodding along like, oh my god, those white boys and
(04:23):
their privilege. Also one of the only one of them
is white, but the other one isn't. Oh, it's just
so silly.
Speaker 1 (04:28):
We're getting onto TikTok. They knew that they could be
another remake of Hamza and Martin. They're not slow cuz
what's not clicking. They knew that you guys would follow
them because they're too attractive males. They literally knew what
they were getting into. They didn't want this to come out.
They don't want to talk about politics. Yet you stam
in front of the Blue Lives Matter flag.
Speaker 4 (04:47):
Okay, I actually don't think those things are so inconsistent
that you might not want to be a political influencer
but might film yourself in the background and there's something
that gives a hint about your political orientation. It's not
like he was doing whole video essays about, you know,
back the blue and against the BLM narrative or anything
like that. He wasn't doing that. Y'all just overanalyzed his
(05:07):
background because you're in physiologically and capable of minding your business.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
Come on, guys, like and you were caught liking anti
abortion reels and all of your friends are.
Speaker 4 (05:20):
Oh my god, let's pause on that. Was he caught
liking them or are you all neurotic stalkers who desperately
need hobbies. I think it's more the latter are Trump supporters.
Speaker 1 (05:32):
Oh my God, could this get any worse? Wait, it
actually does. Let me explain why this is so important.
Their fan base is a really diverse group of people,
people who are directly affected by Trump's organization and what
his policies do. Not just Jake, it's moll two. I
will never be friends with the Trump supporter, let alone
be roommates with one. Y'all. I don't care that shit's weird. Anyways,
(05:55):
that was my rant. You can always follow me. I
don't support Trump, I'm gay, I'm black. Listen to the
educated black woman. Guys, I'm talking to you. Listen to me.
Speaker 6 (06:02):
I know what I'm talking about, is the educated black
woman in the room with us, Because I just see
a hysterical little girl babbling nonsensically using a weird voice filter.
Speaker 4 (06:16):
But that is just me. I do find it hilarious
how she kind of gives the game away and she's like, yeah,
follow me instead. I'm black, I'm gay, which not good
reasons to follow someone, by the way. You should follow
people because they have something interesting to say or qualifications
of some kind, not because of what box they check
off on their sensus. But it is funny when they
make it so obvious and blatant that the cancel culture
(06:38):
stuff is oftentimes just weaponization driven by jealousy. They want
to take down somebody else who's built up an audience
and a following and then steal it from them, so
they use the woke stuff as a shield to do that.
And this person, kudos to her, just admitted it. But guys,
let me know what you think in the comments. We
have to get to the second part of this controversy,
which is even more absurd. But first though, so please
(07:00):
do make sure subscribe to if you aren't yet, do
hit the like button and also consider becoming a channel
member on YouTube. Thank you so much to the more
than one hundred of you who I've signed up to
help support my independent perspective letting me criticize both sides,
give you my honest opinions with not having to just
chase the whims of the algorithm. You, guys, if you
could become a channel member, please do consider doing so today.
(07:23):
Now let's look at the apology video that Jake, who
is the easy on the eyes one of the two,
if you ask me, Let's look at the apology video
that he put out, and then we're gonna touch on
the piece that got MO in trouble because he too
is problematic now despite being a POC himself a person
(07:43):
of color. But first, let's just watch this first apology video,
because of course there's going to be multiple apology videos,
because what is a TikTok drama without multiple apology videos.
Let's watch this first one.
Speaker 3 (07:54):
It's not a political account by any means, but I've
been getting comments on my recent videos that I feel
like I need to address. There's been some miss understanding,
So I want to lay out a base real quick.
The flag that you've seen hung up in my bedroom
is the thin Blue Line flag. It was created in
twenty fourteen. Firefighters have one. Military personnel have one. I
think all first responders have one. But I understand it's
(08:15):
become a point of controversy, and I want you guys
to know that me hanging up that flag was not
to discriminate against any group of people, but it was
purely and solely to respect police and honor fallen officers.
I do still support police officers. I will continue to
support police officers.
Speaker 4 (08:32):
Yeah, I just don't get what's controversial about that or
what's so offensive about that. Like, I know there's like
two percent of the country or whatever that wants to
abolish the police, crazy radical leftists. But I'm sure, pretty sure,
Like basically every normal American supports the idea of police
and the fact that many of them serve well and
do good things and protect us. No, Like, obviously there
(08:54):
are bad police officers and there are problems with the
criminal justice system. But how is just supporting them, even
with this somewhat conservative coded symbol really that controversial. It's
like TikTok is such an echo chamber because in real
life nobody would link twice at that.
Speaker 3 (09:08):
For police officers, they are the ones enforcing our law. Again,
I'm not a political account in any way. I don't
want to speak on politics because I mean, one, nobody
followed me to hear my political views, and two I'm
not educated enough to give political advice. So if you
guys want political content, I'm sure there's thousands of creators
out there creating political content.
Speaker 4 (09:26):
See, this is actually great, and I really appreciate creators
who have the humility to acknowledge that they actually don't
know very much about politics and just stay out of it,
as opposed to the like Spence Waws and these other
creators who made it big for comedy or other stuff
but then started doing politics and as a result have
no idea what they're talking about and just few misinformation,
like we covered with the whole thing about the graduate
(09:49):
and student loan grants and all that, where they were
all like, oh, they just said all these degrees are
non professional and it's not really true, but all these
influencers spread it. I actually think we should. We should
really appreciate when creators are like, no, no, no, I
don't know about politics, look elsewhere for news. But instead,
when you do this, you get attacked for it online,
and that's what happened to him.
Speaker 3 (10:08):
But my goal on here is purely to entertain. I
want my account to just be a place of unity
and not the vision. I want you guys to be
able to turn on my content, relax and just have fun.
I will still continue to post on here, Muhammad, and
I will still continue to post on our YouTube channel
just Roommates. If you guys don't like our content anymore,
because of this, it's always optional to watch. You can
just keep scrolling. I will not be arguing with anybody
(10:28):
in my comment section, and I know I can't please everybody,
but I hope this video kind of cleared some folk.
Speaker 4 (10:32):
You would hope that would be the end of it, right,
people would be chill. And I know the comments were unhinged.
I'll read you a few of the top comments. Ah okay,
so you were Republican. Seventeen thousand likes on that comment.
So just like what you're saying that normal people who
are able to celebrate, I mean, separate some aspects of
(10:53):
life from politics or Republicans. Then you're kind of owning yourself.
I don't know if you realize that. Next person commented
Sydney's saying, I did a Jane ad. Another person said, yeah,
the Trumpies can have this one. Eight thousand likes. This
was very telling. Heartbreak emoji six thousand likes. In this
day and age, I don't speak politics is seriously code
(11:14):
for yeah, I'm a Republican, but I want y'all to
still like me. Eight thousand likes. I guess humility is
Republican coded. Now, not being insufferable is Republican coded. I
think y'all might want to reevaluate that, because that's not
the best strategy in fact, but the funniest part of
this whole saga. For me, that shows you just how
(11:36):
brain rotted and online everyone involved is is the fact
that Moe the other one. Because Jake has been the
subject of most of the controversy for the Blue Lives
Matter flag or whatever, Moe is also under fire because
he ate at McDonald's. Seriously, listen to this. He actually
(11:56):
got apologized for eating at McDonald's in the YouTube video
because apparently there's some woke boycott against them because of
Palestine or something. Let's watch.
Speaker 2 (12:06):
So, although Jake and I don't really want to talk
about politics in our accounts, we thought it'd be important
to address our most recent YouTube video where we were
eating McDonald's and the flag that Jake has up in
his room back at home. Starting with the McDonald's, Jake
and I almost never eat fast food, let alone McDonald's,
and the only reason we did get McDonald's was because
we thought it would be funny to have like a
(12:27):
candlelit dinner in our big like oversized suits and all that,
and then be eating McDonald's. But after receiving all the
comments about the boycott and everything, I did just want
to say that Jake and I genuinely had no idea
about it. Of course, I wish we did know about
that beforehand, because then we you know, probably wouldn't have
gotten McDonald's. But that's just a matter of fact, and
(12:48):
it's unfortunate, but we can't change what we've already done.
So for that, I do apologize for making anyone upset,
you know, rightfully so over eating McDonald's on the YouTube video.
We did not mean to promote McDonald's in any way,
shape or form. My heart is with the Bastinians who
are suffering right now, and I really do hope that
they received the justice and freedom that they deserve.
Speaker 4 (13:06):
I'm I'm gonna crash out. This might be the start
of my supervillain arc. What do you mean, rightfully, so, bru,
it's McDonald's. No one cares if you eat McDonald's or not.
That's like five watermelon profile pictures on the internet. Get
mad about that. It has nothing to do with Israel.
(13:28):
This is ridiculous Israel Palestine. As if a single person
in Gaza who is like, you know, struggling to amid
the conflict, It's like, oh, I hope they're not eating
McDonald's over there in America. This is so ridiculous and
so out of touch it is. It is not, in fact,
meaningfully a way to resist Israel to not buy that
(13:52):
big Mac, and you are allowed to do your cute
little skit without in fact consulting random lists that internet
activists put together of which companies are the bad ones,
often based on like total falsehoods like I haven't looked
into the McDonald's one, but the Starbucks boycott, for example,
related to Israel's based on a bunch of incorrect assumptions
(14:13):
and information. So the fact that they are caving to
these people and validating their paranoia and neurosis is pissing
me off because it's never going to satisfy them. They're
going to find some other reason you're problematic or not
accept your apology. However, you are encouraging that, and you
are just suggesting keep doing this, this is great, and
(14:33):
you are affirming their delusions when instead you should be
slapping them verbally and saying, no, I'm not apologizing to you.
Get a grip. That's what you should be doing if
you had a backbone, but you don't. Apparently that's annoying
to me because even Jake, the other guy, he crumbled
like a wet blanket as well, and started apologizing still
for what for his original apology video not being good enough, Like, seriously,
(14:55):
let's look at this second one.
Speaker 3 (14:58):
I thought keeping my account politically neutral would be best.
The video I made a couple of days ago was vague,
and I want to apologize, and I will admit that
that was not the right way to go about it.
It left a lot of things up for interpretation. People
started assuming things, which I completely understand why they would
do that. And most of you have shared your thoughts
and ideas in the comments respectfully, and I appreciate that
so much. But there is a group that took it
(15:20):
too far and they crossed the line. People have gone
to my friends and families accounts to spread hate. I've
gotten death threats, people are making videos about me, about
me just lying and spreading misinformation.
Speaker 4 (15:35):
I guess, listen. I know I'm annoyed with them for
caving to the mob, but they're not political people. They
didn't sign up to be controversial, and I understand. I
guess if you get this deluge of hate and threats
and harassment, that you might want to placate that. But
so maybe I shouldn't be too harsh. I don't know.
You guys, let me know in the comments. Do you
have sympathy for them? Because now I'm starting to feel
(15:56):
a little sympathetic. But again, it might just be because he's hot.
I don't know, but they yeah, I don't know. I
still think they should have stood up and been like, no,
we're not apologized for this. Y'all are ridiculous because they're
only encouraging this feeding frenzy. That's what they don't understand.
You're not gonna make this go away by apologizing. You're
(16:16):
just gonna give more fuel to the fire. And you
don't owe people an explanation when you've done absolutely nothing wrong.
Speaker 3 (16:22):
I didn't want to mention this in the first video,
but when I was a child, and to make a
long story as condensed as possible, a police officer is
the reason that I'm still here and alive today, and
that's probably why I support an honor police more than
the average person does. I did not hang that flag
up to oppose BLM, or to discriminate against people of color,
(16:42):
or to discriminate against immigrants.
Speaker 4 (16:45):
Only like it is insane that he even has to
state that only a deranged person would say, see a flag,
this is a higher standable police and think you are
discriminating against people of color or what immigrants have to
do with this. I hate it here. I hate to
(17:07):
hear so much.
Speaker 3 (17:08):
Sometimes imgrants it really just was to respect the honor police.
And when I say that, I do not support police brutality,
I do not support racial profile.
Speaker 4 (17:19):
Again, what right minded person would have assumed desupported police brutality.
I can't. I'm trying to take this shit serious, but
I just can't. I'm sorry, y'all, I just cannot. Look,
I'm just gonna I'm gonna take him off screen. I'm
gonna leave it there. Because he goes on to clarify
(17:40):
that he's actually not a Trump supporter. He has a
mix of views. He says he's a Christian, that's the
defining aspect of his worldview. And look, it doesn't matter.
People on the internet need to get a grip. This
is the most toxic kind of left wing politics. It
repulses normal people, and it chases influencers and commentators and
(18:01):
anybody with any sort of platform away from y'all because
y'all are exhausting. And if you think that woke is dead. Remember, guys,
there's always TikTok where so so many of them have
not given it up. That's my analysis of it all
that you guys will have to let me know what
you think in the comments below. Make sure you're subscribed.
(18:22):
If you aren't yet, hit the like button as a well,
and remember please consider becoming a channel member and all
of that. Now, up next, we're going to check in
with a controversial Internet figure, one of the darlings of
kind of new right wing or conservative alternative media, Tucker Carlson,
because he just did an interview with Piers Morgan, the
(18:44):
British journalist and kind of somewhat centrist commentator, and it
got weird, particularly when they discussed gay people. And I
definitely have some thoughts, but I want to play y'all
a couple interesting clips of Tucker discussing the gays, and
then we will discuss some of the things he had
to say. Let's just jump right in to this first
(19:06):
clip of Pears and Tucker talking about gay stuff.
Speaker 5 (19:10):
What's wrong with hav sex?
Speaker 7 (19:12):
Well, if you encourage it and that rate goes up,
people have fewer kids. I don't know you did you
do biology? So people doesn't have kids. That's the point
I'm making. So if all of a sudden you have
more people being gay, which you do a lot.
Speaker 5 (19:28):
No, you don't. People don't pretend to be gay.
Speaker 7 (19:30):
Do you have the Internet?
Speaker 2 (19:31):
I don't know.
Speaker 7 (19:32):
I'm not saying they're pretending. I'm saying, well, you've got
way more right.
Speaker 4 (19:37):
Well, so we'll we'll come back to this. We'll keep
rolling this in a second. But I just want to
touch on this. There's a couple of problems with Tucker already.
I mean, he has this smugness to him that I
don't appreciate, Like, did you learn biology, Yes, Tucker, people
do understand that a male and a male cannot produce
a child just themselves. However, this idea that like, gay
(20:00):
people don't have kids is just outdated unless you just
discount adoption or even surrogacy and that form of reproduction.
Gay people do sometimes have kids. But more importantly, this
idea that like, oh well, if gay people are the
gay people. There's so many things going into the declining
fertility rate, and it is primarily about heterosexual women and
(20:22):
men having fewer kids and choosing to and there's a
million reasons for that, but it's really the gays are
a very tiny, tiny, tiny contributing factor to that. And
this idea rests on a false assumption that if somehow
homosexuality were stigmatized, a lot of gay people would be
having kids.
Speaker 3 (20:39):
Like.
Speaker 4 (20:39):
I don't know about you, but I guess if it
was so unacceptable for me to be gay, I would
just be alone. I guess I wouldn't be in a
marriage with a woman I don't love and having kids,
like at least I wouldn't want to be and I
would Probably a few might do that, But is that
really what you want? More like unhappy homes just spamming
out children like seems like a recipe for disaster to me.
(21:00):
And it all rests on a claim here that Tucker
will double down on the percentage of people identifying as
gay or homosexual has rapidly increased, And I don't think
that's actually true. We're going to get into it because
it's complicated, but let's keep listening to him.
Speaker 7 (21:17):
Well, you know, we used to say that, but well
I used to think that, but all of a sudden, you're.
Speaker 5 (21:24):
Saying that trends. That's a different issue.
Speaker 4 (21:26):
Oh, it's totally different. It's not part of the continuum.
Speaker 7 (21:29):
It's not like gender isn't real, id this.
Speaker 5 (21:34):
If you're gay, you're gay.
Speaker 4 (21:35):
Well you know, we were told well, actually, Tucker, I
think trands and sexuality are different in many ways actually,
but also in the sense that most people's sexuality is
very is quite fixed throughout their life. It doesn't change,
whereas people's internal sense of self, their gender dysphoria canon
does resolve or change or abate, and trans has been
(21:59):
encompass to include just like personality fads like non binary,
which of course that can be a social contagion and
just spread because it's literally just it's like a fat
it's like goth So it mimics social patterns in a
way that sexuality doesn't. Your sexuality doesn't change just from
social pressure, or most people wouldn't be gay.
Speaker 7 (22:20):
So we were told that, and I believed a lot
of things that, well, it's demonstrably not true because science
tells us making it up.
Speaker 5 (22:28):
I don't think they're making it up at all.
Speaker 7 (22:30):
I think that you can be moved in that direction
through propaganda, And.
Speaker 4 (22:38):
I'm sorry, Tucker, but this is not how it works.
You cannot be moved in the direction of home at least,
the vast, vast majority of people cannot be moved in
the direction of homosexuality through porn and propaganda. I don't
know about y'all. Maybe maybe if you're like a little
by to begin with, and you watch some gay pornography,
(23:01):
you might be into it and be like, oh, I
kind of like that. But like a straight guy show
him gay porn, He's not going to become gay. That's
not how that works. And in fact, we know that
that's not how that works. To get personal and get
raw and get real I should not say raw in
this context, but people like myself who are gay and
(23:23):
who grew up as teenagers figuring that out. Most of
us resist the idea a lot. Most of us have
this strong internal like, oh no, I really don't want
to be gay, And so for me, for example, like
I would look at victorious secret magazines, I would look
at even lesbian porn like two women, and really try
to force myself to be attracted to it. You really try.
(23:44):
Many people resist for years and go through intense efforts
to not be gay, right, I mean, it's not conversion therapy.
They're not shocking us. But most people do this to
themselves while grappling with this, and it doesn't work because
for the vast, vast, vast majority of people's sexuality is
not fluid, and it is low key kind of funny
to suggest that you can be moved in the direction
(24:06):
of being gay through pornography. And again though, it's actually
not even true that more people are identifying as gay.
So I want to just show you guys the gallop pulling.
What is true is that more people are identifying as
LGBTQ plus, but that's because of two things. A large
rise in the number of people identifying as bisexual, and
(24:27):
then the increase in people identifying as some sort of
trans umbrella or non binary or fake thing. So if
you look at this graph at first glance, it will
confirm Tucker's thesis. Right American self idea as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender,
or something other than heterosexual twenty twelve to twenty twenty four,
and it says that in twenty twelve this was under
(24:49):
five percent, in twenty twenty four it was nine point
three percent. But when you look at the breakdown, the
percentage of people that are gay is just two percent
of US adults of lesbian is one point four percent
of adults now. Of course, the big increases come in
(25:09):
bisexuality and transgender, which are much higher than they once were.
And I think partially that can be, like Peers suggested,
because of a decline in social stigma, particularly with bisexual people,
the trans one gets more complicated. Some of it is
probably socially influenced than a fad, and some of it
(25:29):
is probably people who really did have genertus for you,
a feeling they don't have to fully repress themselves. I
don't know, but the point is that Ted Tucker's central
underlying point here that gays are the amount of people
being gay is just soaring, is not true. Two percent
sounds about right actually, and any increase that two percent
(25:52):
represents is likely because again, people don't feel like they
have to remain closeted and hidden. If it started shooting
up to ten percent of the population or something, maybe
you could have this conversation. But it hasn't, and people
like Tucker, I don't know, do they just not fact
check their narratives. They just run with something that sounds good.
I would, yes, they correct, that is what they do.
(26:14):
I'll just agree with myself there. But let's keep rolling
this clip.
Speaker 5 (26:18):
Well, then then how do you explain is there anything
that would make could I make you gay?
Speaker 7 (26:24):
How hard do you want to try?
Speaker 4 (26:26):
That's a little funny. I'll give Tucker that one. That's
a little.
Speaker 5 (26:28):
Funny that people can be persuaded to be getting.
Speaker 7 (26:35):
Well, then why don't you explain the twofold or threefold
increase in self identified homosexuals?
Speaker 4 (26:40):
And as we looked at the data, there is not
a two or threefold increase in self identified homosexuals. There's
a two or threefold increase in LGBTQ plus, but it's
not in the homosexual department. So Tucker simply has his
facts wrong.
Speaker 5 (26:57):
Sexuals inscas, they used to be repressed, used to be legals.
Comes into the mid sixties. You literally went to Jake,
so you literally would put in a prison cell if
you will openly homicide.
Speaker 7 (27:08):
I was more here. Actually you guys did Oscar wild
We didn't, but he lost. So yeah, it was terrible.
He ruled the world at the time, and now you're
dependent on four known.
Speaker 3 (27:18):
Bank was gay.
Speaker 4 (27:20):
So it's like a great train. Why does Tucker do
this where he conflates random stuff. I don't think anyone
would seriously argue that Britain, the fact that they were
a global empire was because they had repressive laws about
gay people. Like those two things coincided, but I don't
think one caused the other. I don't know. He just
seems he seems really to be losing it and just
(27:42):
like rambling and going into edgy territory for its own
sake rather than because the facts or logic lead him there.
Do you guys get that from him? It's just strange
to me, because well, I often have disagreed with his perspectives.
When he was at Fox, he was much more I
don't know, coherent and put together in precise.
Speaker 5 (28:00):
So, allowing allowing gay people to be openly gay is
is why we run.
Speaker 7 (28:05):
Masculinity is the fastest way different.
Speaker 4 (28:09):
So he just does a total pivot here. What is
people being gay have to do with mocking masculinity? There
are masculine gay people and there are feminine gay people too.
But yeah, I don't think allowing some people to be
different means that you are devaluing or degrading traditional masculinity.
(28:31):
In fact, I think a lot of gays do a
lot to uplift and support traditionally masculine men just look
at their Instagram comments and followers of all the honky celebrities.
I don't know, I just he just I think he's
just moving the goalpost because he said something edgy and
he can't actually defend it.
Speaker 7 (28:49):
Shoes servitude Pakistani. That's why I like the Takistan is here.
You talk to Pakistani cabdriver and you're like, what are
you gay? And they will start laughing because they've watched
the video and they're like, I'm not gay man.
Speaker 4 (29:00):
We see this actually is kind of messed up where
he's saying I'm not gay, I'm a man. He's suggesting
that's a good attitude. No, you can be a man
and be gay. What is Yeah, I'm sorry, that is
actually homophobic. It's closed minded. There is more than one
way to be a man. And it's what's funny is
when it comes to the trans discussion, they argue, just
(29:21):
being a man is just biology, right, It's not something
you can choose. It's not a social role. There's not
one way to be a man. But then here they are,
or at least Tucker is, with this retrograde perspective on
homosexuality that he's suddenly adopted after most of his career
being totally supportive of gay people or a different Now
he's saying, well, no, no, no, there is a right way
to be a man. So then okay, a man who
(29:41):
doesn't fit that is actually maybe trans, maybe they're not
a man. Like do you not see how you're doing
the same thing in a different direction. I don't know.
Speaker 7 (29:49):
Ask a single Briton why are you get Well, I'm
not gay, but it would be okay if I was,
and it's there's no masculine self respect at all.
Speaker 5 (29:57):
It'll sounding homophobic, afraid of gay's at all.
Speaker 4 (30:01):
Oh my god, not that I'm not afraid. That's not
what homophobic means. Homophobic at this point, the definition of
that is having disdain, disgust, hatred towards gay people, and
it certainly seems like Tucker increasingly does I mean the
rants He goes on the fact that he wants it
to be illegal for gay people to have families, which
we've discussed in another video, and just flinging around these
(30:24):
fact free assertions and then suggesting you're not a real
man if you're gay. It's funny the last example that
he touched on, because I actually think that response of oh,
I'm not gay. I'm a man, and oh I'm not gay,
but you know it's fine if somebody is. I actually
think that's more of a confident male response, the I'm
(30:44):
not gay and gay people discuss me and are terrible
and horrible. That almost gives fragile masculinity. It almost gives
insecurity when men are like that. And I actually think
some of the most masculine men are comfortable in their
sins of selves and they're not really insecure about their
sexuality or how they're perceived, so they don't feel the
need to be like so uncomfortable or outraged at the
(31:06):
presence of gave you boy that somebody might think they're gay.
But Tucker, I just think has it totally backwards. And
to me, this moment, which did go quite viral, just
kind of encapsulated his descent into strange and I think
unsubstantiated territory. It seems calculated more for what will go
(31:26):
viral than for what is really thoughtful or insightful in
any way. So I definitely agreed with Peers more in
this portion of their conversation and just in general at
this point. But you guys will have to let me
know what you think in the comments below. Mike sure subscribed.
If you aren't yet, hit that leg button and please
do consider becoming a channel member to support my work
(31:48):
if you haven't yet. And with that, guys, we will
talk again real soon
You are a white man. They knew their privilege before
getting onto TikTok.
Speaker 2 (00:03):
I do apologize for making anyone upset, you know, rightfully
so over eating Donald's.
Speaker 3 (00:07):
People have gone to my friends and family's accounts to
spread hate. I've gotten death threats.
Speaker 4 (00:13):
This might actually be the dumbest to TikTok cancelation of
all time, and that is saying something. We're gonna break
this down, plus so much more on today's episode of
The brad Versus Everyone Podcast. A TV host introducing me
(00:33):
recently said, well, that's an interesting name, and it is,
but the brad Versus Everyone Podcast where we take on
the craziest ideas from across social media and the Internet,
all from an independent political perspective. I am so happy
to be back with you guys after a wonderful Thanksgiving.
I hope you all had a great holiday and are
ready to dive back into the de lulu world of
(00:55):
the Internet with me. At first, we're gonna check in
on TikTok, where things are always super normal, and this
time on a cancelation attempt targeting two roommates their brand
name I guess you could call it or their couple name,
whether they're not actually a couple, but that's part of
their bit, is that, oh are they roomates? Are they
(01:15):
a couple? They're called just roommates Jake and Mo. I'll
put a little clip here of their kind of style
of content that has earned them a huge following over
the last I think six months to a year since
they started doing content, and then I will explain why
these two are in hot water for being super duper
problematic and it's totally not absurd or ridiculous at all.
(01:39):
First though, here's a clip of them doing their thing,
a fan edit that was made of them.
Speaker 5 (01:44):
Why can I give myself a man like this.
Speaker 2 (01:47):
Boy?
Speaker 5 (01:48):
Big news?
Speaker 3 (01:52):
It looks so cute. Do I look like a little baby?
Speaker 4 (01:56):
I think I can see why they may have gotten popular,
but anyway, I just they seem sweet. Their content is fun.
It's really not deep. It's just like skits of them,
or not even skits, but just funny moments and interactions.
They got a YouTube channel, They've got lots of followers
on TikTok now. But it's twenty twenty five, so we
(02:16):
can't have nice things and everything has to be somehow
made problematic. So they're in trouble for two things, the
first of which is the one we'll start with. Jake,
the white guy of the duo, was brace yourself for this.
It's really bad. It's really scary scene with a Blue
Lives Matter flag in the background of his dorm room
(02:37):
or apartment or whatever it is, meaning that he supports
the police. What a terrible, terrible thing. We're going to
react to one clip that had a lot of views
and engagement. This is a pretty big TikTok discourse explaining
the controversy. And guys, the weird thing with their voice
is like a thing people do on TikTok. It's like
(02:58):
an effect. I didn't do that this person, they did
it to themselves.
Speaker 1 (03:01):
Let's listen, alert alert, Just roommates just not canceled. Guys,
guess what your two favorite YouTubers? Yeah, they were Trump
supporters the whole time. Fork found in the kitchen.
Speaker 4 (03:15):
What just pausing here to say like they're not, in
fact Trump supporters, And that just became the narrative and
was echoed around TikTok as if the idea that they
voted for Trump like half the country would somehow mean
they're evil and that you can't like their roommates. Gits.
That alone is absurd enough. But they're not Trump supporters.
She's just assuming that based off the Blue Lives Matter
(03:36):
flag that one of them had, she's assuming that means
they're both Trump supporters. That's not a fair assumption, actually,
but go off, queen, No way, they were Trump supporters.
Speaker 1 (03:47):
Yes, they were Trump supporters, guys. And you might be
saying to yourself, Oh, this isn't that serious. Wait it is, guys.
I'm not supporting somebody who supports Trump. You go against
everything that I stand for. You are a white man.
They knew their privilege.
Speaker 4 (04:01):
Before getting Oh my god. It's like I open up
TikTok and I forget that people are still doing this.
The people on ironically still talk like this and think
like this. Are they not exhausted? Are they not tired?
Have they not moved on? I mean, I know this
person is young, but the hundreds of thousands of people
nodding along like, oh my god, those white boys and
(04:23):
their privilege. Also one of the only one of them
is white, but the other one isn't. Oh, it's just
so silly.
Speaker 1 (04:28):
We're getting onto TikTok. They knew that they could be
another remake of Hamza and Martin. They're not slow cuz
what's not clicking. They knew that you guys would follow
them because they're too attractive males. They literally knew what
they were getting into. They didn't want this to come out.
They don't want to talk about politics. Yet you stam
in front of the Blue Lives Matter flag.
Speaker 4 (04:47):
Okay, I actually don't think those things are so inconsistent
that you might not want to be a political influencer
but might film yourself in the background and there's something
that gives a hint about your political orientation. It's not
like he was doing whole video essays about, you know,
back the blue and against the BLM narrative or anything
like that. He wasn't doing that. Y'all just overanalyzed his
(05:07):
background because you're in physiologically and capable of minding your business.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
Come on, guys, like and you were caught liking anti
abortion reels and all of your friends are.
Speaker 4 (05:20):
Oh my god, let's pause on that. Was he caught
liking them or are you all neurotic stalkers who desperately
need hobbies. I think it's more the latter are Trump supporters.
Speaker 1 (05:32):
Oh my God, could this get any worse? Wait, it
actually does. Let me explain why this is so important.
Their fan base is a really diverse group of people,
people who are directly affected by Trump's organization and what
his policies do. Not just Jake, it's moll two. I
will never be friends with the Trump supporter, let alone
be roommates with one. Y'all. I don't care that shit's weird. Anyways,
(05:55):
that was my rant. You can always follow me. I
don't support Trump, I'm gay, I'm black. Listen to the
educated black woman. Guys, I'm talking to you. Listen to me.
Speaker 6 (06:02):
I know what I'm talking about, is the educated black
woman in the room with us, Because I just see
a hysterical little girl babbling nonsensically using a weird voice filter.
Speaker 4 (06:16):
But that is just me. I do find it hilarious
how she kind of gives the game away and she's like, yeah,
follow me instead. I'm black, I'm gay, which not good
reasons to follow someone, by the way. You should follow
people because they have something interesting to say or qualifications
of some kind, not because of what box they check
off on their sensus. But it is funny when they
make it so obvious and blatant that the cancel culture
(06:38):
stuff is oftentimes just weaponization driven by jealousy. They want
to take down somebody else who's built up an audience
and a following and then steal it from them, so
they use the woke stuff as a shield to do that.
And this person, kudos to her, just admitted it. But guys,
let me know what you think in the comments. We
have to get to the second part of this controversy,
which is even more absurd. But first though, so please
(07:00):
do make sure subscribe to if you aren't yet, do
hit the like button and also consider becoming a channel
member on YouTube. Thank you so much to the more
than one hundred of you who I've signed up to
help support my independent perspective letting me criticize both sides,
give you my honest opinions with not having to just
chase the whims of the algorithm. You, guys, if you
could become a channel member, please do consider doing so today.
(07:23):
Now let's look at the apology video that Jake, who
is the easy on the eyes one of the two,
if you ask me, Let's look at the apology video
that he put out, and then we're gonna touch on
the piece that got MO in trouble because he too
is problematic now despite being a POC himself a person
(07:43):
of color. But first, let's just watch this first apology video,
because of course there's going to be multiple apology videos,
because what is a TikTok drama without multiple apology videos.
Let's watch this first one.
Speaker 3 (07:54):
It's not a political account by any means, but I've
been getting comments on my recent videos that I feel
like I need to address. There's been some miss understanding,
So I want to lay out a base real quick.
The flag that you've seen hung up in my bedroom
is the thin Blue Line flag. It was created in
twenty fourteen. Firefighters have one. Military personnel have one. I
think all first responders have one. But I understand it's
(08:15):
become a point of controversy, and I want you guys
to know that me hanging up that flag was not
to discriminate against any group of people, but it was
purely and solely to respect police and honor fallen officers.
I do still support police officers. I will continue to
support police officers.
Speaker 4 (08:32):
Yeah, I just don't get what's controversial about that or
what's so offensive about that. Like, I know there's like
two percent of the country or whatever that wants to
abolish the police, crazy radical leftists. But I'm sure, pretty sure,
Like basically every normal American supports the idea of police
and the fact that many of them serve well and
do good things and protect us. No, Like, obviously there
(08:54):
are bad police officers and there are problems with the
criminal justice system. But how is just supporting them, even
with this somewhat conservative coded symbol really that controversial. It's
like TikTok is such an echo chamber because in real
life nobody would link twice at that.
Speaker 3 (09:08):
For police officers, they are the ones enforcing our law. Again,
I'm not a political account in any way. I don't
want to speak on politics because I mean, one, nobody
followed me to hear my political views, and two I'm
not educated enough to give political advice. So if you
guys want political content, I'm sure there's thousands of creators
out there creating political content.
Speaker 4 (09:26):
See, this is actually great, and I really appreciate creators
who have the humility to acknowledge that they actually don't
know very much about politics and just stay out of it,
as opposed to the like Spence Waws and these other
creators who made it big for comedy or other stuff
but then started doing politics and as a result have
no idea what they're talking about and just few misinformation,
like we covered with the whole thing about the graduate
(09:49):
and student loan grants and all that, where they were
all like, oh, they just said all these degrees are
non professional and it's not really true, but all these
influencers spread it. I actually think we should. We should
really appreciate when creators are like, no, no, no, I
don't know about politics, look elsewhere for news. But instead,
when you do this, you get attacked for it online,
and that's what happened to him.
Speaker 3 (10:08):
But my goal on here is purely to entertain. I
want my account to just be a place of unity
and not the vision. I want you guys to be
able to turn on my content, relax and just have fun.
I will still continue to post on here, Muhammad, and
I will still continue to post on our YouTube channel
just Roommates. If you guys don't like our content anymore,
because of this, it's always optional to watch. You can
just keep scrolling. I will not be arguing with anybody
(10:28):
in my comment section, and I know I can't please everybody,
but I hope this video kind of cleared some folk.
Speaker 4 (10:32):
You would hope that would be the end of it, right,
people would be chill. And I know the comments were unhinged.
I'll read you a few of the top comments. Ah okay,
so you were Republican. Seventeen thousand likes on that comment.
So just like what you're saying that normal people who
are able to celebrate, I mean, separate some aspects of
(10:53):
life from politics or Republicans. Then you're kind of owning yourself.
I don't know if you realize that. Next person commented
Sydney's saying, I did a Jane ad. Another person said, yeah,
the Trumpies can have this one. Eight thousand likes. This
was very telling. Heartbreak emoji six thousand likes. In this
day and age, I don't speak politics is seriously code
(11:14):
for yeah, I'm a Republican, but I want y'all to
still like me. Eight thousand likes. I guess humility is
Republican coded. Now, not being insufferable is Republican coded. I
think y'all might want to reevaluate that, because that's not
the best strategy in fact, but the funniest part of
this whole saga. For me, that shows you just how
(11:36):
brain rotted and online everyone involved is is the fact
that Moe the other one. Because Jake has been the
subject of most of the controversy for the Blue Lives
Matter flag or whatever, Moe is also under fire because
he ate at McDonald's. Seriously, listen to this. He actually
(11:56):
got apologized for eating at McDonald's in the YouTube video
because apparently there's some woke boycott against them because of
Palestine or something. Let's watch.
Speaker 2 (12:06):
So, although Jake and I don't really want to talk
about politics in our accounts, we thought it'd be important
to address our most recent YouTube video where we were
eating McDonald's and the flag that Jake has up in
his room back at home. Starting with the McDonald's, Jake
and I almost never eat fast food, let alone McDonald's,
and the only reason we did get McDonald's was because
we thought it would be funny to have like a
(12:27):
candlelit dinner in our big like oversized suits and all that,
and then be eating McDonald's. But after receiving all the
comments about the boycott and everything, I did just want
to say that Jake and I genuinely had no idea
about it. Of course, I wish we did know about
that beforehand, because then we you know, probably wouldn't have
gotten McDonald's. But that's just a matter of fact, and
(12:48):
it's unfortunate, but we can't change what we've already done.
So for that, I do apologize for making anyone upset,
you know, rightfully so over eating McDonald's on the YouTube video.
We did not mean to promote McDonald's in any way,
shape or form. My heart is with the Bastinians who
are suffering right now, and I really do hope that
they received the justice and freedom that they deserve.
Speaker 4 (13:06):
I'm I'm gonna crash out. This might be the start
of my supervillain arc. What do you mean, rightfully, so, bru,
it's McDonald's. No one cares if you eat McDonald's or not.
That's like five watermelon profile pictures on the internet. Get
mad about that. It has nothing to do with Israel.
(13:28):
This is ridiculous Israel Palestine. As if a single person
in Gaza who is like, you know, struggling to amid
the conflict, It's like, oh, I hope they're not eating
McDonald's over there in America. This is so ridiculous and
so out of touch it is. It is not, in fact,
meaningfully a way to resist Israel to not buy that
(13:52):
big Mac, and you are allowed to do your cute
little skit without in fact consulting random lists that internet
activists put together of which companies are the bad ones,
often based on like total falsehoods like I haven't looked
into the McDonald's one, but the Starbucks boycott, for example,
related to Israel's based on a bunch of incorrect assumptions
(14:13):
and information. So the fact that they are caving to
these people and validating their paranoia and neurosis is pissing
me off because it's never going to satisfy them. They're
going to find some other reason you're problematic or not
accept your apology. However, you are encouraging that, and you
are just suggesting keep doing this, this is great, and
(14:33):
you are affirming their delusions when instead you should be
slapping them verbally and saying, no, I'm not apologizing to you.
Get a grip. That's what you should be doing if
you had a backbone, but you don't. Apparently that's annoying
to me because even Jake, the other guy, he crumbled
like a wet blanket as well, and started apologizing still
for what for his original apology video not being good enough, Like, seriously,
(14:55):
let's look at this second one.
Speaker 3 (14:58):
I thought keeping my account politically neutral would be best.
The video I made a couple of days ago was vague,
and I want to apologize, and I will admit that
that was not the right way to go about it.
It left a lot of things up for interpretation. People
started assuming things, which I completely understand why they would
do that. And most of you have shared your thoughts
and ideas in the comments respectfully, and I appreciate that
so much. But there is a group that took it
(15:20):
too far and they crossed the line. People have gone
to my friends and families accounts to spread hate. I've
gotten death threats, people are making videos about me, about
me just lying and spreading misinformation.
Speaker 4 (15:35):
I guess, listen. I know I'm annoyed with them for
caving to the mob, but they're not political people. They
didn't sign up to be controversial, and I understand. I
guess if you get this deluge of hate and threats
and harassment, that you might want to placate that. But
so maybe I shouldn't be too harsh. I don't know.
You guys, let me know in the comments. Do you
have sympathy for them? Because now I'm starting to feel
(15:56):
a little sympathetic. But again, it might just be because he's hot.
I don't know, but they yeah, I don't know. I
still think they should have stood up and been like, no,
we're not apologized for this. Y'all are ridiculous because they're
only encouraging this feeding frenzy. That's what they don't understand.
You're not gonna make this go away by apologizing. You're
(16:16):
just gonna give more fuel to the fire. And you
don't owe people an explanation when you've done absolutely nothing wrong.
Speaker 3 (16:22):
I didn't want to mention this in the first video,
but when I was a child, and to make a
long story as condensed as possible, a police officer is
the reason that I'm still here and alive today, and
that's probably why I support an honor police more than
the average person does. I did not hang that flag
up to oppose BLM, or to discriminate against people of color,
(16:42):
or to discriminate against immigrants.
Speaker 4 (16:45):
Only like it is insane that he even has to
state that only a deranged person would say, see a flag,
this is a higher standable police and think you are
discriminating against people of color or what immigrants have to
do with this. I hate it here. I hate to
(17:07):
hear so much.
Speaker 3 (17:08):
Sometimes imgrants it really just was to respect the honor police.
And when I say that, I do not support police brutality,
I do not support racial profile.
Speaker 4 (17:19):
Again, what right minded person would have assumed desupported police brutality.
I can't. I'm trying to take this shit serious, but
I just can't. I'm sorry, y'all, I just cannot. Look,
I'm just gonna I'm gonna take him off screen. I'm
gonna leave it there. Because he goes on to clarify
(17:40):
that he's actually not a Trump supporter. He has a
mix of views. He says he's a Christian, that's the
defining aspect of his worldview. And look, it doesn't matter.
People on the internet need to get a grip. This
is the most toxic kind of left wing politics. It
repulses normal people, and it chases influencers and commentators and
(18:01):
anybody with any sort of platform away from y'all because
y'all are exhausting. And if you think that woke is dead. Remember, guys,
there's always TikTok where so so many of them have
not given it up. That's my analysis of it all
that you guys will have to let me know what
you think in the comments below. Make sure you're subscribed.
(18:22):
If you aren't yet, hit the like button as a well,
and remember please consider becoming a channel member and all
of that. Now, up next, we're going to check in
with a controversial Internet figure, one of the darlings of
kind of new right wing or conservative alternative media, Tucker Carlson,
because he just did an interview with Piers Morgan, the
(18:44):
British journalist and kind of somewhat centrist commentator, and it
got weird, particularly when they discussed gay people. And I
definitely have some thoughts, but I want to play y'all
a couple interesting clips of Tucker discussing the gays, and
then we will discuss some of the things he had
to say. Let's just jump right in to this first
(19:06):
clip of Pears and Tucker talking about gay stuff.
Speaker 5 (19:10):
What's wrong with hav sex?
Speaker 7 (19:12):
Well, if you encourage it and that rate goes up,
people have fewer kids. I don't know you did you
do biology? So people doesn't have kids. That's the point
I'm making. So if all of a sudden you have
more people being gay, which you do a lot.
Speaker 5 (19:28):
No, you don't. People don't pretend to be gay.
Speaker 7 (19:30):
Do you have the Internet?
Speaker 2 (19:31):
I don't know.
Speaker 7 (19:32):
I'm not saying they're pretending. I'm saying, well, you've got
way more right.
Speaker 4 (19:37):
Well, so we'll we'll come back to this. We'll keep
rolling this in a second. But I just want to
touch on this. There's a couple of problems with Tucker already.
I mean, he has this smugness to him that I
don't appreciate, Like, did you learn biology, Yes, Tucker, people
do understand that a male and a male cannot produce
a child just themselves. However, this idea that like, gay
(20:00):
people don't have kids is just outdated unless you just
discount adoption or even surrogacy and that form of reproduction.
Gay people do sometimes have kids. But more importantly, this
idea that like, oh well, if gay people are the
gay people. There's so many things going into the declining
fertility rate, and it is primarily about heterosexual women and
(20:22):
men having fewer kids and choosing to and there's a
million reasons for that, but it's really the gays are
a very tiny, tiny, tiny contributing factor to that. And
this idea rests on a false assumption that if somehow
homosexuality were stigmatized, a lot of gay people would be
having kids.
Speaker 3 (20:39):
Like.
Speaker 4 (20:39):
I don't know about you, but I guess if it
was so unacceptable for me to be gay, I would
just be alone. I guess I wouldn't be in a
marriage with a woman I don't love and having kids,
like at least I wouldn't want to be and I
would Probably a few might do that, But is that
really what you want? More like unhappy homes just spamming
out children like seems like a recipe for disaster to me.
(21:00):
And it all rests on a claim here that Tucker
will double down on the percentage of people identifying as
gay or homosexual has rapidly increased, And I don't think
that's actually true. We're going to get into it because
it's complicated, but let's keep listening to him.
Speaker 7 (21:17):
Well, you know, we used to say that, but well
I used to think that, but all of a sudden, you're.
Speaker 5 (21:24):
Saying that trends. That's a different issue.
Speaker 4 (21:26):
Oh, it's totally different. It's not part of the continuum.
Speaker 7 (21:29):
It's not like gender isn't real, id this.
Speaker 5 (21:34):
If you're gay, you're gay.
Speaker 4 (21:35):
Well you know, we were told well, actually, Tucker, I
think trands and sexuality are different in many ways actually,
but also in the sense that most people's sexuality is
very is quite fixed throughout their life. It doesn't change,
whereas people's internal sense of self, their gender dysphoria canon
does resolve or change or abate, and trans has been
(21:59):
encompass to include just like personality fads like non binary,
which of course that can be a social contagion and
just spread because it's literally just it's like a fat
it's like goth So it mimics social patterns in a
way that sexuality doesn't. Your sexuality doesn't change just from
social pressure, or most people wouldn't be gay.
Speaker 7 (22:20):
So we were told that, and I believed a lot
of things that, well, it's demonstrably not true because science
tells us making it up.
Speaker 5 (22:28):
I don't think they're making it up at all.
Speaker 7 (22:30):
I think that you can be moved in that direction
through propaganda, And.
Speaker 4 (22:38):
I'm sorry, Tucker, but this is not how it works.
You cannot be moved in the direction of home at least,
the vast, vast majority of people cannot be moved in
the direction of homosexuality through porn and propaganda. I don't
know about y'all. Maybe maybe if you're like a little
by to begin with, and you watch some gay pornography,
(23:01):
you might be into it and be like, oh, I
kind of like that. But like a straight guy show
him gay porn, He's not going to become gay. That's
not how that works. And in fact, we know that
that's not how that works. To get personal and get
raw and get real I should not say raw in
this context, but people like myself who are gay and
(23:23):
who grew up as teenagers figuring that out. Most of
us resist the idea a lot. Most of us have
this strong internal like, oh no, I really don't want
to be gay, And so for me, for example, like
I would look at victorious secret magazines, I would look
at even lesbian porn like two women, and really try
to force myself to be attracted to it. You really try.
(23:44):
Many people resist for years and go through intense efforts
to not be gay, right, I mean, it's not conversion therapy.
They're not shocking us. But most people do this to
themselves while grappling with this, and it doesn't work because
for the vast, vast, vast majority of people's sexuality is
not fluid, and it is low key kind of funny
to suggest that you can be moved in the direction
(24:06):
of being gay through pornography. And again though, it's actually
not even true that more people are identifying as gay.
So I want to just show you guys the gallop pulling.
What is true is that more people are identifying as
LGBTQ plus, but that's because of two things. A large
rise in the number of people identifying as bisexual, and
(24:27):
then the increase in people identifying as some sort of
trans umbrella or non binary or fake thing. So if
you look at this graph at first glance, it will
confirm Tucker's thesis. Right American self idea as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender,
or something other than heterosexual twenty twelve to twenty twenty four,
and it says that in twenty twelve this was under
(24:49):
five percent, in twenty twenty four it was nine point
three percent. But when you look at the breakdown, the
percentage of people that are gay is just two percent
of US adults of lesbian is one point four percent
of adults now. Of course, the big increases come in
(25:09):
bisexuality and transgender, which are much higher than they once were.
And I think partially that can be, like Peers suggested,
because of a decline in social stigma, particularly with bisexual people,
the trans one gets more complicated. Some of it is
probably socially influenced than a fad, and some of it
(25:29):
is probably people who really did have genertus for you,
a feeling they don't have to fully repress themselves. I
don't know, but the point is that Ted Tucker's central
underlying point here that gays are the amount of people
being gay is just soaring, is not true. Two percent
sounds about right actually, and any increase that two percent
(25:52):
represents is likely because again, people don't feel like they
have to remain closeted and hidden. If it started shooting
up to ten percent of the population or something, maybe
you could have this conversation. But it hasn't, and people
like Tucker, I don't know, do they just not fact
check their narratives. They just run with something that sounds good.
I would, yes, they correct, that is what they do.
(26:14):
I'll just agree with myself there. But let's keep rolling
this clip.
Speaker 5 (26:18):
Well, then then how do you explain is there anything
that would make could I make you gay?
Speaker 7 (26:24):
How hard do you want to try?
Speaker 4 (26:26):
That's a little funny. I'll give Tucker that one. That's
a little.
Speaker 5 (26:28):
Funny that people can be persuaded to be getting.
Speaker 7 (26:35):
Well, then why don't you explain the twofold or threefold
increase in self identified homosexuals?
Speaker 4 (26:40):
And as we looked at the data, there is not
a two or threefold increase in self identified homosexuals. There's
a two or threefold increase in LGBTQ plus, but it's
not in the homosexual department. So Tucker simply has his
facts wrong.
Speaker 5 (26:57):
Sexuals inscas, they used to be repressed, used to be legals.
Comes into the mid sixties. You literally went to Jake,
so you literally would put in a prison cell if
you will openly homicide.
Speaker 7 (27:08):
I was more here. Actually you guys did Oscar wild
We didn't, but he lost. So yeah, it was terrible.
He ruled the world at the time, and now you're
dependent on four known.
Speaker 3 (27:18):
Bank was gay.
Speaker 4 (27:20):
So it's like a great train. Why does Tucker do
this where he conflates random stuff. I don't think anyone
would seriously argue that Britain, the fact that they were
a global empire was because they had repressive laws about
gay people. Like those two things coincided, but I don't
think one caused the other. I don't know. He just
seems he seems really to be losing it and just
(27:42):
like rambling and going into edgy territory for its own
sake rather than because the facts or logic lead him there.
Do you guys get that from him? It's just strange
to me, because well, I often have disagreed with his perspectives.
When he was at Fox, he was much more I
don't know, coherent and put together in precise.
Speaker 5 (28:00):
So, allowing allowing gay people to be openly gay is
is why we run.
Speaker 7 (28:05):
Masculinity is the fastest way different.
Speaker 4 (28:09):
So he just does a total pivot here. What is
people being gay have to do with mocking masculinity? There
are masculine gay people and there are feminine gay people too.
But yeah, I don't think allowing some people to be
different means that you are devaluing or degrading traditional masculinity.
(28:31):
In fact, I think a lot of gays do a
lot to uplift and support traditionally masculine men just look
at their Instagram comments and followers of all the honky celebrities.
I don't know, I just he just I think he's
just moving the goalpost because he said something edgy and
he can't actually defend it.
Speaker 7 (28:49):
Shoes servitude Pakistani. That's why I like the Takistan is here.
You talk to Pakistani cabdriver and you're like, what are
you gay? And they will start laughing because they've watched
the video and they're like, I'm not gay man.
Speaker 4 (29:00):
We see this actually is kind of messed up where
he's saying I'm not gay, I'm a man. He's suggesting
that's a good attitude. No, you can be a man
and be gay. What is Yeah, I'm sorry, that is
actually homophobic. It's closed minded. There is more than one
way to be a man. And it's what's funny is
when it comes to the trans discussion, they argue, just
(29:21):
being a man is just biology, right, It's not something
you can choose. It's not a social role. There's not
one way to be a man. But then here they are,
or at least Tucker is, with this retrograde perspective on
homosexuality that he's suddenly adopted after most of his career
being totally supportive of gay people or a different Now
he's saying, well, no, no, no, there is a right way
to be a man. So then okay, a man who
(29:41):
doesn't fit that is actually maybe trans, maybe they're not
a man. Like do you not see how you're doing
the same thing in a different direction. I don't know.
Speaker 7 (29:49):
Ask a single Briton why are you get Well, I'm
not gay, but it would be okay if I was,
and it's there's no masculine self respect at all.
Speaker 5 (29:57):
It'll sounding homophobic, afraid of gay's at all.
Speaker 4 (30:01):
Oh my god, not that I'm not afraid. That's not
what homophobic means. Homophobic at this point, the definition of
that is having disdain, disgust, hatred towards gay people, and
it certainly seems like Tucker increasingly does I mean the
rants He goes on the fact that he wants it
to be illegal for gay people to have families, which
we've discussed in another video, and just flinging around these
(30:24):
fact free assertions and then suggesting you're not a real
man if you're gay. It's funny the last example that
he touched on, because I actually think that response of oh,
I'm not gay. I'm a man, and oh I'm not gay,
but you know it's fine if somebody is. I actually
think that's more of a confident male response, the I'm
(30:44):
not gay and gay people discuss me and are terrible
and horrible. That almost gives fragile masculinity. It almost gives
insecurity when men are like that. And I actually think
some of the most masculine men are comfortable in their
sins of selves and they're not really insecure about their
sexuality or how they're perceived, so they don't feel the
need to be like so uncomfortable or outraged at the
(31:06):
presence of gave you boy that somebody might think they're gay.
But Tucker, I just think has it totally backwards. And
to me, this moment, which did go quite viral, just
kind of encapsulated his descent into strange and I think
unsubstantiated territory. It seems calculated more for what will go
(31:26):
viral than for what is really thoughtful or insightful in
any way. So I definitely agreed with Peers more in
this portion of their conversation and just in general at
this point. But you guys will have to let me
know what you think in the comments below. Mike sure subscribed.
If you aren't yet, hit that leg button and please
do consider becoming a channel member to support my work
(31:48):
if you haven't yet. And with that, guys, we will
talk again real soon
Popular Podcasts
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.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com