July 31, 2025 • 37 mins
This episode dives into the drama behind Sydney Sweeney’s American Eagle ad and why the internet can't stop talking about it. Mary Katharine Ham and Kelly Maher unpack how media fuels faux outrage and what it says about our culture. Then, things get serious with a deep dive into the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the tangled politics of aid. Wrapping up, we tackle emotional labor in modern relationships—why women still carry the load and what needs to change. Normally is part of the CLay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network - new episodes debut every Tuesday & Thursday.
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
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 (00:01):
Hey guys, we are back on normal. Show it normally
she takes for when the news gets weird. Carol is
enjoying her trips, and Kelly Maher of Colorado joins me
again today. Her organization is restoring Standards dot com. She's
just working on being normal, basically improving the incentive structure
in politics so that people who enter it can be
(00:24):
more normal.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
It's a beautiful thing it is. It's standards. That's what
we're trying to do.
Speaker 1 (00:31):
Hence the name. Thanks for being with us. Absolutely, there's
like important things going on in the world. But first
I think we need to talk about a Vibe Shift
ad campaign starring Sydney's Sweeney, which okay for anyone who's
been living under a rock and has not seen this.
Sidney Sweeney is a starlet of Buxom proportions. She's lovely.
(00:56):
I like her. I first saw her in White Lotus,
I think, and I think she's good. She's in interesting.
One of the things I like about her actually is
she has an interesting face. Instead of looking exactly like
the carbon copy of every Instagram influencer these days, I
know many people would say her face is not the
first thing they noticed but I'm just saying for me
(01:17):
at any rate. Sidney Sweeney says this starlet. She was
hired by American Eagle to do a jeans commercial and
since that time, about a week and a half ago,
I have never thought or talked about American Eagle so
much in my life. And this is the reason. So
Sidney Sweeney is a blonde, blue eyed, beautiful woman. She's hot.
(01:42):
She loves hot in jeans. She's working on an old
muscle car in the In the ad, by the way,
I was wondering, like, what's Sydney fixing the car? Which
is she working on? In there? We just changing an
air filled Like what's going on anyway? Yeah, she closes
the hood, a nice shot of the rear, she goes
(02:04):
to the car, she zooms off and some of that
over the the The voiceover for these ads is her
saying that she has good genes, right, yeah, good genes
because she's hot. So it's g E N E S
and j E A N S.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (02:24):
Okay, are you Are you scandalized yet? Kelly so scandalized
you should be scandalized, according to the media. The media
says this is and many well, it started with influencers, right,
So TikTok. Crazy people are like, this is Nazi eugenicism
(02:45):
because it refers to genes. It she's blue eyed and
blonde haired. This is a racist dog whistle, to which
I say, like, it's just a hot chick wearing genes.
That's it. There's a hot chick wearing jeans. So now
it's become like a mainstream controversy. So let me play
(03:07):
Good Morning America explaining this controversy.
Speaker 3 (03:13):
Tim to check the pulse. We begin with the backlash
of our new ad campaign featuring actress Sidney Sweeney.
Speaker 4 (03:18):
The ads are for American Eagle and the tagline is
Sidney Sweeney has great genes Now. In one ad, the blondehair,
blue eyed actress talks about genes as in DNA, being
passed down from her parents.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
The play on words is being compared to Nazi propaganda
with racial undertones.
Speaker 5 (03:37):
The pun good genes activates a troubling historical associations for
this country. The American eugenics movement and it's prime between
like nineteen hundred and nineteen forty, weaponized the idea of
good genes just to justify white supremacist Despite.
Speaker 4 (03:57):
That backlash American Eagle stock has been sword.
Speaker 1 (04:03):
Despite the backlash, Someone argue because of the much it
is up apparently eighteen percent, there's a notable change.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
Is this controversy real, Kelly? Does anybody actually object to
this ad? That's I think that's really the question, right.
But my when I see stuff like this, and there's
always something like this, right, there's always some controversy somewhere
with somebody. Is the person who made the ad? Were
(04:32):
they anticipating that this was going to happen? And then
we're like walking up to like the controversy line or
the outrage line in order to just try to push
people to pay attention, because, as you said, you haven't
paid this much attention to American Eagle.
Speaker 1 (04:51):
I haven't since I was.
Speaker 2 (04:52):
A thirteen year old angsty wanted to wear good jeans,
you know, like, haven't I haven't thought about it that much?
And now it's is it two Q by half? Is
it nothing.
Speaker 1 (05:09):
People will like to get mad about? This is the
thing that I refer to as a cultural reply all.
You know, when you're in a big group of people,
or in an office setting or what have you, and
someone accidentally sends out a full company email and then
everyone replies all to this massive reply all, and they
(05:31):
keep replying all to say stop replying all to this,
thereby perpetuating the reply all. It's you. I think that's
what this is. There's like four people who said it
was a problem. Those four people got a lot of attention.
(05:52):
The attention got attention. They're by creating more TikTok psychos
who are happily to be happy to be psycho about
any number of things, and they're like, this is the
thing to be psycho about, So I'm going to do that. Bendreyfus,
by the way, I wrote a piece entitled everyone upset
about the Sydney Sweeney ad is mentally ill and I
think that's my that's my take. And then, because it's
(06:16):
rating to talk about these insane people, right media continues
to talk about it and continue to validate it because
many left of center people have this leftover twenty twenty
twenty one act angst that makes them want to say like, yes,
this turned toward like, oh, I don't know a more
like Budweiser circa nineteen ninety one. Vibe in our advertising
(06:40):
is not what we want. We want the woke ads
of twenty twenty and twenty twenty one. Right, well, and
this goes back to that.
Speaker 2 (06:49):
And by the way, I'm replying all right now exactly,
we're part of the problem, acknowledging it while still talking
about it.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
I'm the problem, not the solution. I tweeted about it
like four times yesterday.
Speaker 2 (07:05):
I mean, but this goes back to this underlying question
of I think you know this story. One of our
mutual friends and I make a joke all the time
about your metabolism as we eat cheese and uh chocolate,
and we're like, maybe Catherine and her metabolism as we're
snacking you my brunette friend.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
Yes, I talk about your jeans all the time.
Speaker 2 (07:30):
Right, like the idea that some people are naturally pretty
like you.
Speaker 1 (07:38):
That's not mutual. Thanks. Yeah, No, I think that Maria
should say, like, the good jeans are hot jeens. That's
the point. M h yeah, Ben Wrights. Ben Dreyvius writes,
the ad is a naziad. Duh, how is it a Naziad?
The real question is how isn't it a naziad? Because
(07:59):
it's obviously a Nazia. Let me count the ways. Number one,
it's visual and the Nazis loved visuals. Number two it's
in English, a Germanic language. Number three, Sidney Sweeney is
blonde and blue eyed, and the Nazis loved those things.
Number four American eagle eagle. They loved eagles. Americans love
bald eagles. But this is not a bald eagle. It's
(08:19):
just an eagle. Could have hair, could not have hair.
How am I supposed to know anyway? American schwashedika. Number five.
The Nazis liked eugenics, I mean eugenics. And number six
Sidney Sweny eagles SS makes you think, yeah, I mean again,
and it is working for American eagle. Of course, I'm
(08:42):
not sure that they anticipated it would work this well.
But whatever staff put this together has got to be
like well done.
Speaker 2 (08:49):
That is my question with some of these things, right, Like,
sometimes when these things blow up, it either goes very
poorly or it goes very well and it's just a gamble,
don't know.
Speaker 1 (09:01):
Yeah, to me, this is so funny because the ad
itself is so ana dyne. It's like so much less
risky than so many things we've seen over the years.
It's it's like, I think, tastefully shot. It's she's a
fun chick, like I just it's so not in advertising clothes. Yeah,
(09:26):
it's so not something to be mad about. And yet
the headlines are vanity fair Sidney Sweeney under fire after
controversial American Eagle ad campaign backlash against Sydney sweeney jeans
jeans ad gets mocked by the White House. So now
it's to the president as well. Does Sidney Sweeney's American
Eagle Great Jeens campaign mark a shift for advertising? I
(09:49):
like that one because it's from NPR and notably not insane,
which makes makes me think they're like, please give us
our money back. We are not insane, but nobody's gonna
give you your money back because it's our money. But she's
also in the government, like I digress. I looked it
up because I remembered that she was in trouble for
something else before, like a couple of years ago. And
(10:13):
it's the stupidest thing. This happened in twenty twenty three.
I knew she had been in trouble, in trouble quote
backlash quote under fire for something right leaning or right
coated in the past, and it is this that in
twenty twenty three she went to a birthday party for
(10:33):
her mother who turned sixty, and she took some pictures
there and she's in some pictures there, And the hats
made for this event were read and said make sixty
great again. Business insider Sweety and her family faced criticism
last August over what people on social media perceived to
be maga hats popularized by her president doct drop it
(10:54):
as supporters. Sweeney's brother Trent pointed out that they say
make sixty great again, but it became a whole thing
and she had to, Like she didn't really back down,
which is one of the reasons I like her. She
did just say, like, these are my mom's friends, it's
my mom's birthday party. It's like, what do you do it? Crazy? Yeah,
(11:17):
so people are crazy, and she did not, I think,
sort of cave in that instance and recognized it to
be silly. And I hope the same is true of
her and American Eagle this time around. I think it
probably will be.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
Yeah. Being hot is sometimes, at least in part, a
genetic thing.
Speaker 1 (11:36):
It just is. It's Oh I do have I also
have audio of one of the insane influencers, and she's
a she's a surgeon, so she wants to give you
a scientific take on this. Do we have that one?
Speaker 6 (11:50):
The Sydney Sweenie Arian Eagle ad is not only xenophobic
and racist, it's also scientifically inaccurate. She says, genes often
the determine hair color and eye color. I'm sorry, often
that's literally what they do. If they're not determining hair
(12:10):
color and eye color, what is it's giving red Pill
podcasts bro with no marketing experience clearly running their ad department.
And I just hate when companies make content trying to
use medical or scientific terms and then completely fuck it up, Like.
Speaker 1 (12:28):
It's not that hard to.
Speaker 6 (12:29):
Google what genes do, how DNA works. Do genes often
determine our traits? Or do they always determine our traits?
Speaker 1 (12:40):
Okay? Can I say one thing, which is that if
I ever I met my sergeant and she talks like bus,
I am going to ask for another sergeant.
Speaker 2 (12:52):
Also, she's never heard of colored context, nor has she
ever heard of hair dye before.
Speaker 1 (12:59):
But sometimes a box at the drug store does determine
our hair color? Yeah? True, sure, yes, yes, that's true. Anyway,
It's like sorry, I mean, yes, I can't.
Speaker 2 (13:10):
I can't determine what she they cannot definitively say right right, oh,
oh my god. Notably that surgeon pretty genetically hot. Look
at he's blond and blue eyed. Yeah, I want to
be like, Okay.
Speaker 1 (13:32):
Is there a dog whistle here? Anyway? I think American
Eagle will happily continue to make more money. I don't
anticipate that they'll back off of this over the seventeen
people who are actually mad about it, as Ben Dreyfus
calls them, the most insufferable people on the Internet. I
think we're all very familiar these types of people. I
did want to notice. Also Jarvis the the Great X
(13:54):
account or, he says he offers some upcoming Sweeney projects.
One Sidney Sweeney is an elite race car driver Elizabeth
fast Rubber. But can she win the season title and
become a Master Grand Champion? Find out this fall only
in theaters in Mester Race. Oh no, so fun. So
(14:15):
there's a whole thread of those that he came up with,
if you guys would like to check them out. Okay,
I think we're done with the cultural reply all. Who
knows how long it will last again, when this happens
with the whole company, it can be days. And days
of back and forth, meaning stop talking about it, stop
talking about it.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
The question is what actual news or are we not
paying attention to because of this? And the answer is
probably a lot, right.
Speaker 1 (14:39):
Probably a lot, Probably a lot. Congress is an in
session at the moment. Are they so like we're clear
on that right or are they anyway?
Speaker 2 (14:46):
Three percent GDP growth?
Speaker 1 (14:48):
What perhaps if Congress had better jeanes I would pay
more attention. Okay, shall we move on to actual serious news?
We should just chat through an update on the Israel
Gaza war and Israel fighting on many fronts, having subdued
many of its would be annihilators from Hesbela to the
(15:12):
Hooties to Hamas. It's you know as usual. Israel's performance
has been improbable. They have their intelligence service has done
amazing things eliminating many of these forces and their leadership
through all sorts of crazy daring do and also the
(15:34):
on the ground war that is not intelligence based like
the Hesbola hits and such. Beyond the ground war in
Gaza remains pretty brutal, with Israeli soldiers dying there, with
much of Gaza reduced to nothing or very little infrastructure.
Except for the infrastructure that Hamas terrorists would like to
(15:55):
keep in place underground, even that has taken a hit,
and the question, the big issue, as it has been
throughout the war, is the care and distribution of food
to civilians within the Gaza strip, always very challenging, always
(16:16):
unlike any other war footing in history, it is considered
Israel's responsibility to fully maintain the civilian population of Gaza,
as it's fighting a war. Hamas, which rules Gaza, which
is the government of Gaza on the international stage, has
(16:38):
no responsibility for feeding or housing its own civilian population
and in fact uses them and abuses them in awful,
awful ways to make things worse for Israel and to
make it harder to fight them. But there has been
like a fairly large shift. A couple days ago there
was an attempt at yet another ceasefire, and you'll never
(16:59):
guess who didn't accept the terms, Kelly, was it Israel?
What is it? Was it Israel refusing to cease fire
or was it Hammas sang it was once again Hamas
saying no. And in that moment as Hamas once again
illustrated that it will not return hostages or accept terms
(17:21):
of a ceasefire. Suddenly it became like a real, strident,
full media wide, international community wide outrage that even though
all these people have been saying that many people and
Gaza have been starving the whole time, suddenly they were
really really, really really really more.
Speaker 2 (17:39):
Starving, right, and a lot more pictures of like starving
looking children right hitting the media, which is the thing
that makes people get real edgy.
Speaker 1 (17:51):
Yes, and a note on that front, The Washington Post
posted a picture of a child. Heart like, heart wrenching
photo of a child held by his mother. His spine
is visible, his his ribs are visible. And the implication,
in fact, I think outright claim was that Israel is
(18:12):
specifically starving this child. Yes, and in fact that child
had other nutrition or other medical issues, which is why
he looked the way he did. And in fact, his
brother was standing in the photo and was cropped out,
(18:34):
one might imagine, because he didn't look unhealthy.
Speaker 3 (18:38):
Hmmm.
Speaker 1 (18:39):
So the New York Times, excuse me, The New York
Times posted this photo, I think, I said Washington Post earlier.
So the New York Times posted this and they added
on their New York Times Communications pr X feed, not
on the main feed, not on the front page. Of
the paper where the photo was featured an appended editor's note.
Children in Gaza are nourished and starving, as New York
(19:01):
Times reporters and others have documented. We recently ran a
story about Gaza's most vulnerable civilians, including Mohammed Zakaria al Motelwak,
who is about eighteen months old and suffers from severe malnutrition.
We have since learned new information, including from the hospital
that treated him in his medical records, and have updated
our story to add context about his pre existing health problems.
This additional detail gives readers a greater understanding of his situation.
(19:23):
Our reporters and photographers continue to report from Gaza bravely, sensitively,
and at personal risk, so that readers can see firsthand
the consequences of the war. Okay, so again, that's not
a proper correction. It doesn't even take responsibility for having
not given people the real information. And this is the thing.
I believe that people are suffering in Gaza. I for
(19:44):
sure think that's real. Stop lying about it, Stop misrepresenting things,
because that makes everybody go But what is real? What
can we trust in? What can we not? And then
the other question is how are people still starving when
(20:05):
millions and millions and millions and millions and millions and
millions and millions of meals, yeah, have gone into the
country throughout the entire conflict.
Speaker 2 (20:14):
I mean, this is this is one of these like
larger questions about what AID looks like just in general.
I had I had a was it a presentation by
a really fascinating guy from the Act and Institute a
couple of weeks ago and talking about like African Aid.
(20:38):
We're talking about these when you are in a conflict situation.
Oftentimes the ruling party, right Hamas for instance, plenty of
evidence that they take the AID in whatever form it is,
right and turn it into a weapon, yes, right, whether
(21:00):
you're trading it, whether you are using it as a
tool of oppression against your own people. And this is
this is, you know, on a much smaller scale.
Speaker 1 (21:10):
I was.
Speaker 2 (21:11):
I was driving with my two boys, six and eight
the other day and in Denver right now, there's lots
of you know, panhandlers, and my children were like, the
sign says these hungry mom right, hungry, this is a
hungry person. We must act, we must like And both
(21:32):
of my kids go to Catholic school, so they're like
Jesus says, mom, we have to give this person money,
and like the nature and question of aid is a
really hard one because we are called to help hungry
people and also in some cases it is possible that
(21:53):
those methods that we use are then turned on the
population and can be in fact more harmful for those people,
and we have to a six and eight year old
is yeah, trying to but it's essentially the same argument
that one would make on an international stage, because that's
about where our reading level is.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
Yes, and you know there is evidence despite what the
New York Times says, which came out with this wild
ass story right headlined, no proof Hamas routinely stole you
in aid? Is Israeli military official say that is wild,
That is counter to everything that pretty much like even
people who are nominally like pro Palestinian Cause or even
(22:38):
pro Hamas are like, yeah, they mess with these supplies,
they resell them, they take charge of them. They're the
ones who in the past have claimed to have been
distributing them. If they're not distributed, that seems like it
should be on them, and it never is. So because
this is a problem with Unruh, which is the UH,
(23:00):
the Refugee Agency of UN that works hand in hand
with Hamas. Because Anra is so notoriously bad, Israel and
the US got together and formed the Gaza Humanitarian Fund
to feed hungry gossins. And they have a way that
they do that that is approved by these two organizations,
to keep aid workers as safe as possible, to allow
(23:22):
the food to actually get to hungry gossens. A right
to people. Our friend Guy Benson knows the Gaza Humanitarian
Fund is feeding hungry gossens, with the US footing the
bill and Israel blessing the efforts we've distributed. They've distributed
tens of millions of meals. Hamas has murdered their aid
workers that happened a couple weeks ago, and threatened and
attacked gosins who accept the aid and the UN is
(23:44):
effectively partnering with Hamas against the Gaza Humanitarian Fund with
the help of much of the global media. There is
no bottom with these people who pretend to care about
acute hunger in Gaza. To prove this point, and we
will note that it is a you know, a government entity,
so you know, you can take it with a grain
of salt, but the IDF takes reporters out to this
(24:06):
field where un AID is sitting undistributed to show them
we are like, we're trying this AID is here rotting
in the sun. And Jon Favreau of the pod Save
America Guys was like, like, it's believable that the UN
would just leave food sitting around instead of feeding gusins.
(24:29):
It's like, have you met the UN, Like do you remember?
But I'm sure they don't, even though it took place
during the time that all these guys have been in politics.
The UN famously, in many places, specifically with refugee services
and AID, makes people have sex with them to get food. Right,
(24:52):
That's like a normal thing that nobody gets fired for
that they covered up for a decade that finally was
like uncovered at some point after about ten or twelve years. So, yeah,
it is believable that the UN would do that.
Speaker 2 (25:06):
It's such a complicated and multifaceted problem, right, because we
have the issue you and I talk about often, which
is the issue of like the reliable narrator and the
New York Times has done a fabulous job at undercutting
their own, winning itself and everyone else's credibility in the
long run this right, then we have like the nature
(25:30):
and struggles of aid in situations like this, and then
we have just like a general interest in Sydney Sweeney
versus this because this is depressing and it's hard to
talk about and it's hard to think about, and there
are no easy answers, right, There aren't.
Speaker 1 (25:50):
Easier answers because it's war. And I do think that's
one of the things that is cynically used against Israel,
which is like war is tear, and terrible things happen
in war, and you can do your best to ameliorate them,
as I think that Israel does and shows itself to
do at nearly every turn, and it is given absolutely
(26:11):
no credit for it. But then I think that the
next question is like what does become of Gaza? What
becomes of Israeli efforts there? The problem with fighting a
death cult that is in a holy war with you
is that they don't surrender, right, You just like do
the best you can. And so that that's the very
(26:35):
complicated situation is.
Speaker 7 (26:36):
Real fine, it's like the perpetual cusp of peace with
just this constant underlying Like we were talking about generation
after generation after generation of the same thing over and
over and over.
Speaker 1 (26:56):
And despite all its dominance over you know, in this
basically Seven Front war. You know, it's it's very unsatisfying
for the Israeli people to look around and be like, well,
we can leave Gaza once again, which they did into
they did twenty years ago and handed the whole thing over,
(27:17):
and this is October seventh. Was the result. It wasn't
a flourishing Palestinian state on the Mediterranean, which was the opportunity,
but it was relinquished. So yeah, I don't know what
comes next, and it is disappointing to see many people,
even otherwise rational people, fall for some of the propaganda.
(27:42):
Not to weigh the claims of the Gaza Health Ministry,
which is just TAMAS and not be part of you know,
the Gaza humanitarian funds attempts to actually get people fed.
That's the tell like they're there to do the thing. Yeah,
is there to do the thing? Yes?
Speaker 2 (28:01):
If somebody is handing somebody else food, support them, yeah.
Speaker 1 (28:05):
Right. By the way, I'm going to close this out
with one clip real quick that will show the shift
in the Democratic Party and which previews what the next
primary season for them is going to look. Like these
are the pod Save America bros. Of the Obama administration
talking about how nothing can ever be the same moving on,
(28:26):
and that funding Israel militarily should not be basically shouldn't
be on the table for democratic candidates and administrations. So
we'll close with that little clip. The Times they are
a change.
Speaker 8 (28:38):
In and I don't think democratic candidates should take money
from APEX or vote to fund military support for Israel anymore,
like I really don't in this government, absolutely not, and
that especially includes I think the next Democratic nominee for president.
Speaker 9 (28:50):
Things I want to see Democrats at least calling for
is cutting off military systmto Israel. It's a rich country.
By the way, they don't need a three billion a
year and hands up right back. Obama signed a ten
year MoU for three point three billion a year. Like,
so we're part of the problem here, let's correct it.
I would like to see talk about sanctioning Israeli government
officials who use genocidal rhetoric or talk about ethnic cleansing openly.
We should support a ceasefire resolution at the UN. We
(29:10):
should demand that international press be allowed into the Gaza
strip to report on what's happening without an IDF minder.
It's insane. The press still can't go with the gaza
and cover what's happening. And I also think like there
has to be a total mindset change in the Democratic
Party when the war ends. We are not going back
to the pre October seventh status quo because it's not
where the party is, is not where the world is. We're
not going to shovel billions a year in military A,
We're not going to veto every effort to recognize the
(29:32):
Palestinian state at the UN. We should not take money
from APAC. And like I will hold out hope for
better political leadership in the US and in Israel, but
we often also recognize that the Biden era hugbybnet and
Yahoo's strategy has to be thrown in the trash can.
Speaker 1 (29:45):
We'll be back with another insane New York Times dating
themed piece to lighten the mood on normally. Oh, back
on normally with Kelly Maher of Restoring Standards. You can
find that at Restoring Standards dot com and The New
York Times is always supplying us good stuff on the
(30:05):
dating scene right and or on just relationships in general.
And I think a lot of relationship writing, and I
understand why it happens this way, but a lot of
relationship writing is just taking your own relationship and then
projecting it onto society, and that is not always wise, right.
(30:28):
And so this is the new sort of feminist gripe.
And I'm not saying that uncharitably. That's what this article is.
It's like, here's our new feminist gripe. Are you ready
for it? I'm ready. The headline is why women are
weary of the emotional labor of mankeeping. As male social
circles shrink, female partners say they have to meet more
(30:51):
social and emotional needs. Okay, so there's a little I'll
read you a little bit down here. This is a
relationship where both are busy attorneys, it says, but she
miss Tillie Coulson hyphenated, but she tends to take charge
of their social plans. Miss Tilly Coulson has hung out
(31:13):
with her boyfriend's close friends a handful of times. He
hangs out with hers several times a week. Her role
as the de facto social director of the relationship includes
more serious concerns too. When are we going to meet
each other's parents? When are we going to do our
first vacation together? She said, And if all of that
onus is on me to kind of plan, then I
also feel all the responsibility of something goes wrong. Mankeeping
(31:34):
put a word to her feelings of imbalance. I feel
responsible for bringing the light to the relationship. She said.
Speaker 2 (31:43):
Okay, uh, I'm cringing so hard that I feel it
in my back and I might need to go to
Pilate's after this just to stretch.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
It out, because it's just.
Speaker 2 (31:56):
I think being a man is just so hard in
this society.
Speaker 1 (32:01):
I can't imagine there are I would say, many contradictory
things that I feel like are asked of the men,
because it feels like the old gripe was if I
may generalize that men were not sharing their feelings with
their remote romantic partners right and that that therefore did
(32:22):
not lead to emotional intimacy, and that they needed to
do more of that. Great, But now the complaint seems
to be that they are sharing too much and that
that is hard on women. I do think, honestly, I
think this piece would be a very helpful and good
piece if it were focused on the fact that men
oftentimes do have fewer social relationships than women do, and
(32:44):
it might be healthier for them to have more. Now,
those relationships are going to look different than women's relationships,
and I think too much of the New York Times
staff wants them to look exactly like women's relationships, and
they don't have to. But I think that part might
have been the pitch for this piece if it were me,
instead of the women are complaining because men don't have
(33:07):
enough friends.
Speaker 9 (33:09):
You know you.
Speaker 2 (33:11):
I just finished a book that you recommended to me,
of Boys and Men. Yes, and uh it was rich
Is it Richard Reeves? Uh? And he's a Brooking Brookings
Institute guy. And you recommended it to me because I
am raising two young hopefully like men, if I can
help them transition from boyhood and demandhood, and this is
(33:33):
it's a hard thing to think about, you know, how
do you raise children? How do you raise young men
who can operate in a world where like therapy and
feelings is okay and we have to access what real
masculinity looks like. But it does just seem like it's
(33:53):
a no win situation.
Speaker 1 (33:55):
It feels pretty no when, by the way, one of
the lines in this this this particular it says. It
says that a therapist says that often with his straight
mail clients, they tell him that they rarely open up
to anyone but their girlfriends or wives. Their partners have
become their unofficial therapists, he said, doing all the emotional labor.
That particular role now has a name, man keeping. The term,
(34:16):
coined by Angelica Puzzio Ferrara, a post doctoral fellow at
Stanford University, has taken off online. It just this is
the sentence. It describes the work women do to meet
the social and emotional needs of the men in their lives,
from supporting their partners through daily challenges and inner turmoil,
to encouraging them to meet up with their friends. Our
(34:37):
friend Emily's and Notty tweeted about this and said, tbh,
I'm not sure you guys understand what relationships require like this.
That's just being in a relationship.
Speaker 7 (34:48):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (34:49):
Yeah, It is so interesting to me though. The term
man keeping is so reminds me so much of like
being a zoo keeper, as if you were as if
you were as if you must maintain this exotic animal
in your life that is completely un like, incapable of understanding, right,
(35:13):
what it's it's a it's a fascinating shift from like
the duality of masculine and feminine to default women and
then the men are kind of orbiting around the default
woman and the struggles of.
Speaker 1 (35:33):
That to that point. By the way, what if you
reversed this column and a dude wrote a column that
was just like, Oh, they're always talking to me about
their feelings. It's so hard and I have to listen
to it all the time, like I'm obviously canceled and sexist.
Speaker 4 (35:51):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (35:51):
And the other thing I thought when I was reading this,
as she says that she's hung out with his friends
a couple of times and he's hung out with hers
several times a week, I think you're an extrovert who
is with an introvert And this might just be something
called a personality difference that you need to work out
in your personal relationship and not an issue where you're
(36:14):
doing something that is beyond the expectations of a normal relationship.
Just girl, y'all have.
Speaker 2 (36:20):
Different trust me, Like this is it's just normal stuff
being pathologized. Yes, who's part of I think the downfall
of society?
Speaker 6 (36:33):
Yes?
Speaker 1 (36:33):
All right, Well, on that note, the good news is
that like, these are actually normal things. You just like
you need to discuss them with your partner. And if
you don't want to be hanging out three times a
week and he only wants to be hanging out once
every now and then, like that's fine, You'll figure out
if you can make one. Okay. Bless you all and
your mankeeping endeavors. Thanks for joining us on Normally Normally
(36:56):
airs Tuesdays and Thursdays, and you can subscribe anywhere you
get your podcast. Get in touch with us at normally
the pod at gmail dot com. Thanks for listening and
when things get weird, act normally
Speaker 7 (37:10):
Mhm
Hey guys, we are back on normal. Show it normally
she takes for when the news gets weird. Carol is
enjoying her trips, and Kelly Maher of Colorado joins me
again today. Her organization is restoring Standards dot com. She's
just working on being normal, basically improving the incentive structure
in politics so that people who enter it can be
(00:24):
more normal.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
It's a beautiful thing it is. It's standards. That's what
we're trying to do.
Speaker 1 (00:31):
Hence the name. Thanks for being with us. Absolutely, there's
like important things going on in the world. But first
I think we need to talk about a Vibe Shift
ad campaign starring Sydney's Sweeney, which okay for anyone who's
been living under a rock and has not seen this.
Sidney Sweeney is a starlet of Buxom proportions. She's lovely.
(00:56):
I like her. I first saw her in White Lotus,
I think, and I think she's good. She's in interesting.
One of the things I like about her actually is
she has an interesting face. Instead of looking exactly like
the carbon copy of every Instagram influencer these days, I
know many people would say her face is not the
first thing they noticed but I'm just saying for me
(01:17):
at any rate. Sidney Sweeney says this starlet. She was
hired by American Eagle to do a jeans commercial and
since that time, about a week and a half ago,
I have never thought or talked about American Eagle so
much in my life. And this is the reason. So
Sidney Sweeney is a blonde, blue eyed, beautiful woman. She's hot.
(01:42):
She loves hot in jeans. She's working on an old
muscle car in the In the ad, by the way,
I was wondering, like, what's Sydney fixing the car? Which
is she working on? In there? We just changing an
air filled Like what's going on anyway? Yeah, she closes
the hood, a nice shot of the rear, she goes
(02:04):
to the car, she zooms off and some of that
over the the The voiceover for these ads is her
saying that she has good genes, right, yeah, good genes
because she's hot. So it's g E N E S
and j E A N S.
Speaker 2 (02:24):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (02:24):
Okay, are you Are you scandalized yet? Kelly so scandalized
you should be scandalized, according to the media. The media
says this is and many well, it started with influencers, right,
So TikTok. Crazy people are like, this is Nazi eugenicism
(02:45):
because it refers to genes. It she's blue eyed and
blonde haired. This is a racist dog whistle, to which
I say, like, it's just a hot chick wearing genes.
That's it. There's a hot chick wearing jeans. So now
it's become like a mainstream controversy. So let me play
(03:07):
Good Morning America explaining this controversy.
Speaker 3 (03:13):
Tim to check the pulse. We begin with the backlash
of our new ad campaign featuring actress Sidney Sweeney.
Speaker 4 (03:18):
The ads are for American Eagle and the tagline is
Sidney Sweeney has great genes Now. In one ad, the blondehair,
blue eyed actress talks about genes as in DNA, being
passed down from her parents.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
The play on words is being compared to Nazi propaganda
with racial undertones.
Speaker 5 (03:37):
The pun good genes activates a troubling historical associations for
this country. The American eugenics movement and it's prime between
like nineteen hundred and nineteen forty, weaponized the idea of
good genes just to justify white supremacist Despite.
Speaker 4 (03:57):
That backlash American Eagle stock has been sword.
Speaker 1 (04:03):
Despite the backlash, Someone argue because of the much it
is up apparently eighteen percent, there's a notable change.
Speaker 2 (04:12):
Is this controversy real, Kelly? Does anybody actually object to
this ad? That's I think that's really the question, right.
But my when I see stuff like this, and there's
always something like this, right, there's always some controversy somewhere
with somebody. Is the person who made the ad? Were
(04:32):
they anticipating that this was going to happen? And then
we're like walking up to like the controversy line or
the outrage line in order to just try to push
people to pay attention, because, as you said, you haven't
paid this much attention to American Eagle.
Speaker 1 (04:51):
I haven't since I was.
Speaker 2 (04:52):
A thirteen year old angsty wanted to wear good jeans,
you know, like, haven't I haven't thought about it that much?
And now it's is it two Q by half? Is
it nothing.
Speaker 1 (05:09):
People will like to get mad about? This is the
thing that I refer to as a cultural reply all.
You know, when you're in a big group of people,
or in an office setting or what have you, and
someone accidentally sends out a full company email and then
everyone replies all to this massive reply all, and they
(05:31):
keep replying all to say stop replying all to this,
thereby perpetuating the reply all. It's you. I think that's
what this is. There's like four people who said it
was a problem. Those four people got a lot of attention.
(05:52):
The attention got attention. They're by creating more TikTok psychos
who are happily to be happy to be psycho about
any number of things, and they're like, this is the
thing to be psycho about, So I'm going to do that. Bendreyfus,
by the way, I wrote a piece entitled everyone upset
about the Sydney Sweeney ad is mentally ill and I
think that's my that's my take. And then, because it's
(06:16):
rating to talk about these insane people, right media continues
to talk about it and continue to validate it because
many left of center people have this leftover twenty twenty
twenty one act angst that makes them want to say like, yes,
this turned toward like, oh, I don't know a more
like Budweiser circa nineteen ninety one. Vibe in our advertising
(06:40):
is not what we want. We want the woke ads
of twenty twenty and twenty twenty one. Right, well, and
this goes back to that.
Speaker 2 (06:49):
And by the way, I'm replying all right now exactly,
we're part of the problem, acknowledging it while still talking
about it.
Speaker 1 (07:00):
I'm the problem, not the solution. I tweeted about it
like four times yesterday.
Speaker 2 (07:05):
I mean, but this goes back to this underlying question
of I think you know this story. One of our
mutual friends and I make a joke all the time
about your metabolism as we eat cheese and uh chocolate,
and we're like, maybe Catherine and her metabolism as we're
snacking you my brunette friend.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
Yes, I talk about your jeans all the time.
Speaker 2 (07:30):
Right, like the idea that some people are naturally pretty
like you.
Speaker 1 (07:38):
That's not mutual. Thanks. Yeah, No, I think that Maria
should say, like, the good jeans are hot jeens. That's
the point. M h yeah, Ben Wrights. Ben Dreyvius writes,
the ad is a naziad. Duh, how is it a Naziad?
The real question is how isn't it a naziad? Because
(07:59):
it's obviously a Nazia. Let me count the ways. Number one,
it's visual and the Nazis loved visuals. Number two it's
in English, a Germanic language. Number three, Sidney Sweeney is
blonde and blue eyed, and the Nazis loved those things.
Number four American eagle eagle. They loved eagles. Americans love
bald eagles. But this is not a bald eagle. It's
(08:19):
just an eagle. Could have hair, could not have hair.
How am I supposed to know anyway? American schwashedika. Number five.
The Nazis liked eugenics, I mean eugenics. And number six
Sidney Sweny eagles SS makes you think, yeah, I mean again,
and it is working for American eagle. Of course, I'm
(08:42):
not sure that they anticipated it would work this well.
But whatever staff put this together has got to be
like well done.
Speaker 2 (08:49):
That is my question with some of these things, right, Like,
sometimes when these things blow up, it either goes very
poorly or it goes very well and it's just a gamble,
don't know.
Speaker 1 (09:01):
Yeah, to me, this is so funny because the ad
itself is so ana dyne. It's like so much less
risky than so many things we've seen over the years.
It's it's like, I think, tastefully shot. It's she's a
fun chick, like I just it's so not in advertising clothes. Yeah,
(09:26):
it's so not something to be mad about. And yet
the headlines are vanity fair Sidney Sweeney under fire after
controversial American Eagle ad campaign backlash against Sydney sweeney jeans
jeans ad gets mocked by the White House. So now
it's to the president as well. Does Sidney Sweeney's American
Eagle Great Jeens campaign mark a shift for advertising? I
(09:49):
like that one because it's from NPR and notably not insane,
which makes makes me think they're like, please give us
our money back. We are not insane, but nobody's gonna
give you your money back because it's our money. But she's
also in the government, like I digress. I looked it
up because I remembered that she was in trouble for
something else before, like a couple of years ago. And
(10:13):
it's the stupidest thing. This happened in twenty twenty three.
I knew she had been in trouble, in trouble quote
backlash quote under fire for something right leaning or right
coated in the past, and it is this that in
twenty twenty three she went to a birthday party for
(10:33):
her mother who turned sixty, and she took some pictures
there and she's in some pictures there, And the hats
made for this event were read and said make sixty
great again. Business insider Sweety and her family faced criticism
last August over what people on social media perceived to
be maga hats popularized by her president doct drop it
(10:54):
as supporters. Sweeney's brother Trent pointed out that they say
make sixty great again, but it became a whole thing
and she had to, Like she didn't really back down,
which is one of the reasons I like her. She
did just say, like, these are my mom's friends, it's
my mom's birthday party. It's like, what do you do it? Crazy? Yeah,
(11:17):
so people are crazy, and she did not, I think,
sort of cave in that instance and recognized it to
be silly. And I hope the same is true of
her and American Eagle this time around. I think it
probably will be.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
Yeah. Being hot is sometimes, at least in part, a
genetic thing.
Speaker 1 (11:36):
It just is. It's Oh I do have I also
have audio of one of the insane influencers, and she's
a she's a surgeon, so she wants to give you
a scientific take on this. Do we have that one?
Speaker 6 (11:50):
The Sydney Sweenie Arian Eagle ad is not only xenophobic
and racist, it's also scientifically inaccurate. She says, genes often
the determine hair color and eye color. I'm sorry, often
that's literally what they do. If they're not determining hair
(12:10):
color and eye color, what is it's giving red Pill
podcasts bro with no marketing experience clearly running their ad department.
And I just hate when companies make content trying to
use medical or scientific terms and then completely fuck it up, Like.
Speaker 1 (12:28):
It's not that hard to.
Speaker 6 (12:29):
Google what genes do, how DNA works. Do genes often
determine our traits? Or do they always determine our traits?
Speaker 1 (12:40):
Okay? Can I say one thing, which is that if
I ever I met my sergeant and she talks like bus,
I am going to ask for another sergeant.
Speaker 2 (12:52):
Also, she's never heard of colored context, nor has she
ever heard of hair dye before.
Speaker 1 (12:59):
But sometimes a box at the drug store does determine
our hair color? Yeah? True, sure, yes, yes, that's true. Anyway,
It's like sorry, I mean, yes, I can't.
Speaker 2 (13:10):
I can't determine what she they cannot definitively say right right, oh,
oh my god. Notably that surgeon pretty genetically hot. Look
at he's blond and blue eyed. Yeah, I want to
be like, Okay.
Speaker 1 (13:32):
Is there a dog whistle here? Anyway? I think American
Eagle will happily continue to make more money. I don't
anticipate that they'll back off of this over the seventeen
people who are actually mad about it, as Ben Dreyfus
calls them, the most insufferable people on the Internet. I
think we're all very familiar these types of people. I
did want to notice. Also Jarvis the the Great X
(13:54):
account or, he says he offers some upcoming Sweeney projects.
One Sidney Sweeney is an elite race car driver Elizabeth
fast Rubber. But can she win the season title and
become a Master Grand Champion? Find out this fall only
in theaters in Mester Race. Oh no, so fun. So
(14:15):
there's a whole thread of those that he came up with,
if you guys would like to check them out. Okay,
I think we're done with the cultural reply all. Who
knows how long it will last again, when this happens
with the whole company, it can be days. And days
of back and forth, meaning stop talking about it, stop
talking about it.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
The question is what actual news or are we not
paying attention to because of this? And the answer is
probably a lot, right.
Speaker 1 (14:39):
Probably a lot, Probably a lot. Congress is an in
session at the moment. Are they so like we're clear
on that right or are they anyway?
Speaker 2 (14:46):
Three percent GDP growth?
Speaker 1 (14:48):
What perhaps if Congress had better jeanes I would pay
more attention. Okay, shall we move on to actual serious news?
We should just chat through an update on the Israel
Gaza war and Israel fighting on many fronts, having subdued
many of its would be annihilators from Hesbela to the
(15:12):
Hooties to Hamas. It's you know as usual. Israel's performance
has been improbable. They have their intelligence service has done
amazing things eliminating many of these forces and their leadership
through all sorts of crazy daring do and also the
(15:34):
on the ground war that is not intelligence based like
the Hesbola hits and such. Beyond the ground war in
Gaza remains pretty brutal, with Israeli soldiers dying there, with
much of Gaza reduced to nothing or very little infrastructure.
Except for the infrastructure that Hamas terrorists would like to
(15:55):
keep in place underground, even that has taken a hit,
and the question, the big issue, as it has been
throughout the war, is the care and distribution of food
to civilians within the Gaza strip, always very challenging, always
(16:16):
unlike any other war footing in history, it is considered
Israel's responsibility to fully maintain the civilian population of Gaza,
as it's fighting a war. Hamas, which rules Gaza, which
is the government of Gaza on the international stage, has
(16:38):
no responsibility for feeding or housing its own civilian population
and in fact uses them and abuses them in awful,
awful ways to make things worse for Israel and to
make it harder to fight them. But there has been
like a fairly large shift. A couple days ago there
was an attempt at yet another ceasefire, and you'll never
(16:59):
guess who didn't accept the terms, Kelly, was it Israel?
What is it? Was it Israel refusing to cease fire
or was it Hammas sang it was once again Hamas
saying no. And in that moment as Hamas once again
illustrated that it will not return hostages or accept terms
(17:21):
of a ceasefire. Suddenly it became like a real, strident,
full media wide, international community wide outrage that even though
all these people have been saying that many people and
Gaza have been starving the whole time, suddenly they were
really really, really really really more.
Speaker 2 (17:39):
Starving, right, and a lot more pictures of like starving
looking children right hitting the media, which is the thing
that makes people get real edgy.
Speaker 1 (17:51):
Yes, and a note on that front, The Washington Post
posted a picture of a child. Heart like, heart wrenching
photo of a child held by his mother. His spine
is visible, his his ribs are visible. And the implication,
in fact, I think outright claim was that Israel is
(18:12):
specifically starving this child. Yes, and in fact that child
had other nutrition or other medical issues, which is why
he looked the way he did. And in fact, his
brother was standing in the photo and was cropped out,
(18:34):
one might imagine, because he didn't look unhealthy.
Speaker 3 (18:38):
Hmmm.
Speaker 1 (18:39):
So the New York Times, excuse me, The New York
Times posted this photo, I think, I said Washington Post earlier.
So the New York Times posted this and they added
on their New York Times Communications pr X feed, not
on the main feed, not on the front page. Of
the paper where the photo was featured an appended editor's note.
Children in Gaza are nourished and starving, as New York
(19:01):
Times reporters and others have documented. We recently ran a
story about Gaza's most vulnerable civilians, including Mohammed Zakaria al Motelwak,
who is about eighteen months old and suffers from severe malnutrition.
We have since learned new information, including from the hospital
that treated him in his medical records, and have updated
our story to add context about his pre existing health problems.
This additional detail gives readers a greater understanding of his situation.
(19:23):
Our reporters and photographers continue to report from Gaza bravely, sensitively,
and at personal risk, so that readers can see firsthand
the consequences of the war. Okay, so again, that's not
a proper correction. It doesn't even take responsibility for having
not given people the real information. And this is the thing.
I believe that people are suffering in Gaza. I for
(19:44):
sure think that's real. Stop lying about it, Stop misrepresenting things,
because that makes everybody go But what is real? What
can we trust in? What can we not? And then
the other question is how are people still starving when
(20:05):
millions and millions and millions and millions and millions and
millions and millions of meals, yeah, have gone into the
country throughout the entire conflict.
Speaker 2 (20:14):
I mean, this is this is one of these like
larger questions about what AID looks like just in general.
I had I had a was it a presentation by
a really fascinating guy from the Act and Institute a
couple of weeks ago and talking about like African Aid.
(20:38):
We're talking about these when you are in a conflict situation.
Oftentimes the ruling party, right Hamas for instance, plenty of
evidence that they take the AID in whatever form it is,
right and turn it into a weapon, yes, right, whether
(21:00):
you're trading it, whether you are using it as a
tool of oppression against your own people. And this is
this is, you know, on a much smaller scale.
Speaker 1 (21:10):
I was.
Speaker 2 (21:11):
I was driving with my two boys, six and eight
the other day and in Denver right now, there's lots
of you know, panhandlers, and my children were like, the
sign says these hungry mom right, hungry, this is a
hungry person. We must act, we must like And both
(21:32):
of my kids go to Catholic school, so they're like
Jesus says, mom, we have to give this person money,
and like the nature and question of aid is a
really hard one because we are called to help hungry
people and also in some cases it is possible that
(21:53):
those methods that we use are then turned on the
population and can be in fact more harmful for those people,
and we have to a six and eight year old
is yeah, trying to but it's essentially the same argument
that one would make on an international stage, because that's
about where our reading level is.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
Yes, and you know there is evidence despite what the
New York Times says, which came out with this wild
ass story right headlined, no proof Hamas routinely stole you
in aid? Is Israeli military official say that is wild,
That is counter to everything that pretty much like even
people who are nominally like pro Palestinian Cause or even
(22:38):
pro Hamas are like, yeah, they mess with these supplies,
they resell them, they take charge of them. They're the
ones who in the past have claimed to have been
distributing them. If they're not distributed, that seems like it
should be on them, and it never is. So because
this is a problem with Unruh, which is the UH,
(23:00):
the Refugee Agency of UN that works hand in hand
with Hamas. Because Anra is so notoriously bad, Israel and
the US got together and formed the Gaza Humanitarian Fund
to feed hungry gossins. And they have a way that
they do that that is approved by these two organizations,
to keep aid workers as safe as possible, to allow
(23:22):
the food to actually get to hungry gossens. A right
to people. Our friend Guy Benson knows the Gaza Humanitarian
Fund is feeding hungry gossens, with the US footing the
bill and Israel blessing the efforts we've distributed. They've distributed
tens of millions of meals. Hamas has murdered their aid
workers that happened a couple weeks ago, and threatened and
attacked gosins who accept the aid and the UN is
(23:44):
effectively partnering with Hamas against the Gaza Humanitarian Fund with
the help of much of the global media. There is
no bottom with these people who pretend to care about
acute hunger in Gaza. To prove this point, and we
will note that it is a you know, a government entity,
so you know, you can take it with a grain
of salt, but the IDF takes reporters out to this
(24:06):
field where un AID is sitting undistributed to show them
we are like, we're trying this AID is here rotting
in the sun. And Jon Favreau of the pod Save
America Guys was like, like, it's believable that the UN
would just leave food sitting around instead of feeding gusins.
(24:29):
It's like, have you met the UN, Like do you remember?
But I'm sure they don't, even though it took place
during the time that all these guys have been in politics.
The UN famously, in many places, specifically with refugee services
and AID, makes people have sex with them to get food. Right,
(24:52):
That's like a normal thing that nobody gets fired for
that they covered up for a decade that finally was
like uncovered at some point after about ten or twelve years. So, yeah,
it is believable that the UN would do that.
Speaker 2 (25:06):
It's such a complicated and multifaceted problem, right, because we
have the issue you and I talk about often, which
is the issue of like the reliable narrator and the
New York Times has done a fabulous job at undercutting
their own, winning itself and everyone else's credibility in the
long run this right, then we have like the nature
(25:30):
and struggles of aid in situations like this, and then
we have just like a general interest in Sydney Sweeney
versus this because this is depressing and it's hard to
talk about and it's hard to think about, and there
are no easy answers, right, There aren't.
Speaker 1 (25:50):
Easier answers because it's war. And I do think that's
one of the things that is cynically used against Israel,
which is like war is tear, and terrible things happen
in war, and you can do your best to ameliorate them,
as I think that Israel does and shows itself to
do at nearly every turn, and it is given absolutely
(26:11):
no credit for it. But then I think that the
next question is like what does become of Gaza? What
becomes of Israeli efforts there? The problem with fighting a
death cult that is in a holy war with you
is that they don't surrender, right, You just like do
the best you can. And so that that's the very
(26:35):
complicated situation is.
Speaker 7 (26:36):
Real fine, it's like the perpetual cusp of peace with
just this constant underlying Like we were talking about generation
after generation after generation of the same thing over and
over and over.
Speaker 1 (26:56):
And despite all its dominance over you know, in this
basically Seven Front war. You know, it's it's very unsatisfying
for the Israeli people to look around and be like, well,
we can leave Gaza once again, which they did into
they did twenty years ago and handed the whole thing over,
(27:17):
and this is October seventh. Was the result. It wasn't
a flourishing Palestinian state on the Mediterranean, which was the opportunity,
but it was relinquished. So yeah, I don't know what
comes next, and it is disappointing to see many people,
even otherwise rational people, fall for some of the propaganda.
(27:42):
Not to weigh the claims of the Gaza Health Ministry,
which is just TAMAS and not be part of you know,
the Gaza humanitarian funds attempts to actually get people fed.
That's the tell like they're there to do the thing. Yeah,
is there to do the thing? Yes?
Speaker 2 (28:01):
If somebody is handing somebody else food, support them, yeah.
Speaker 1 (28:05):
Right. By the way, I'm going to close this out
with one clip real quick that will show the shift
in the Democratic Party and which previews what the next
primary season for them is going to look. Like these
are the pod Save America bros. Of the Obama administration
talking about how nothing can ever be the same moving on,
(28:26):
and that funding Israel militarily should not be basically shouldn't
be on the table for democratic candidates and administrations. So
we'll close with that little clip. The Times they are
a change.
Speaker 8 (28:38):
In and I don't think democratic candidates should take money
from APEX or vote to fund military support for Israel anymore,
like I really don't in this government, absolutely not, and
that especially includes I think the next Democratic nominee for president.
Speaker 9 (28:50):
Things I want to see Democrats at least calling for
is cutting off military systmto Israel. It's a rich country.
By the way, they don't need a three billion a
year and hands up right back. Obama signed a ten
year MoU for three point three billion a year. Like,
so we're part of the problem here, let's correct it.
I would like to see talk about sanctioning Israeli government
officials who use genocidal rhetoric or talk about ethnic cleansing openly.
We should support a ceasefire resolution at the UN. We
(29:10):
should demand that international press be allowed into the Gaza
strip to report on what's happening without an IDF minder.
It's insane. The press still can't go with the gaza
and cover what's happening. And I also think like there
has to be a total mindset change in the Democratic
Party when the war ends. We are not going back
to the pre October seventh status quo because it's not
where the party is, is not where the world is. We're
not going to shovel billions a year in military A,
We're not going to veto every effort to recognize the
(29:32):
Palestinian state at the UN. We should not take money
from APAC. And like I will hold out hope for
better political leadership in the US and in Israel, but
we often also recognize that the Biden era hugbybnet and
Yahoo's strategy has to be thrown in the trash can.
Speaker 1 (29:45):
We'll be back with another insane New York Times dating
themed piece to lighten the mood on normally. Oh, back
on normally with Kelly Maher of Restoring Standards. You can
find that at Restoring Standards dot com and The New
York Times is always supplying us good stuff on the
(30:05):
dating scene right and or on just relationships in general.
And I think a lot of relationship writing, and I
understand why it happens this way, but a lot of
relationship writing is just taking your own relationship and then
projecting it onto society, and that is not always wise, right.
(30:28):
And so this is the new sort of feminist gripe.
And I'm not saying that uncharitably. That's what this article is.
It's like, here's our new feminist gripe. Are you ready
for it? I'm ready. The headline is why women are
weary of the emotional labor of mankeeping. As male social
circles shrink, female partners say they have to meet more
(30:51):
social and emotional needs. Okay, so there's a little I'll
read you a little bit down here. This is a
relationship where both are busy attorneys, it says, but she
miss Tillie Coulson hyphenated, but she tends to take charge
of their social plans. Miss Tilly Coulson has hung out
(31:13):
with her boyfriend's close friends a handful of times. He
hangs out with hers several times a week. Her role
as the de facto social director of the relationship includes
more serious concerns too. When are we going to meet
each other's parents? When are we going to do our
first vacation together? She said, And if all of that
onus is on me to kind of plan, then I
also feel all the responsibility of something goes wrong. Mankeeping
(31:34):
put a word to her feelings of imbalance. I feel
responsible for bringing the light to the relationship. She said.
Speaker 2 (31:43):
Okay, uh, I'm cringing so hard that I feel it
in my back and I might need to go to
Pilate's after this just to stretch.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
It out, because it's just.
Speaker 2 (31:56):
I think being a man is just so hard in
this society.
Speaker 1 (32:01):
I can't imagine there are I would say, many contradictory
things that I feel like are asked of the men,
because it feels like the old gripe was if I
may generalize that men were not sharing their feelings with
their remote romantic partners right and that that therefore did
(32:22):
not lead to emotional intimacy, and that they needed to
do more of that. Great, But now the complaint seems
to be that they are sharing too much and that
that is hard on women. I do think, honestly, I
think this piece would be a very helpful and good
piece if it were focused on the fact that men
oftentimes do have fewer social relationships than women do, and
(32:44):
it might be healthier for them to have more. Now,
those relationships are going to look different than women's relationships,
and I think too much of the New York Times
staff wants them to look exactly like women's relationships, and
they don't have to. But I think that part might
have been the pitch for this piece if it were me,
instead of the women are complaining because men don't have
(33:07):
enough friends.
Speaker 9 (33:09):
You know you.
Speaker 2 (33:11):
I just finished a book that you recommended to me,
of Boys and Men. Yes, and uh it was rich
Is it Richard Reeves? Uh? And he's a Brooking Brookings
Institute guy. And you recommended it to me because I
am raising two young hopefully like men, if I can
help them transition from boyhood and demandhood, and this is
(33:33):
it's a hard thing to think about, you know, how
do you raise children? How do you raise young men
who can operate in a world where like therapy and
feelings is okay and we have to access what real
masculinity looks like. But it does just seem like it's
(33:53):
a no win situation.
Speaker 1 (33:55):
It feels pretty no when, by the way, one of
the lines in this this this particular it says. It
says that a therapist says that often with his straight
mail clients, they tell him that they rarely open up
to anyone but their girlfriends or wives. Their partners have
become their unofficial therapists, he said, doing all the emotional labor.
That particular role now has a name, man keeping. The term,
(34:16):
coined by Angelica Puzzio Ferrara, a post doctoral fellow at
Stanford University, has taken off online. It just this is
the sentence. It describes the work women do to meet
the social and emotional needs of the men in their lives,
from supporting their partners through daily challenges and inner turmoil,
to encouraging them to meet up with their friends. Our
(34:37):
friend Emily's and Notty tweeted about this and said, tbh,
I'm not sure you guys understand what relationships require like this.
That's just being in a relationship.
Speaker 7 (34:48):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (34:49):
Yeah, It is so interesting to me though. The term
man keeping is so reminds me so much of like
being a zoo keeper, as if you were as if
you were as if you must maintain this exotic animal
in your life that is completely un like, incapable of understanding, right,
(35:13):
what it's it's a it's a fascinating shift from like
the duality of masculine and feminine to default women and
then the men are kind of orbiting around the default
woman and the struggles of.
Speaker 1 (35:33):
That to that point. By the way, what if you
reversed this column and a dude wrote a column that
was just like, Oh, they're always talking to me about
their feelings. It's so hard and I have to listen
to it all the time, like I'm obviously canceled and sexist.
Speaker 4 (35:51):
Uh.
Speaker 1 (35:51):
And the other thing I thought when I was reading this,
as she says that she's hung out with his friends
a couple of times and he's hung out with hers
several times a week, I think you're an extrovert who
is with an introvert And this might just be something
called a personality difference that you need to work out
in your personal relationship and not an issue where you're
(36:14):
doing something that is beyond the expectations of a normal relationship.
Just girl, y'all have.
Speaker 2 (36:20):
Different trust me, Like this is it's just normal stuff
being pathologized. Yes, who's part of I think the downfall
of society?
Speaker 6 (36:33):
Yes?
Speaker 1 (36:33):
All right, Well, on that note, the good news is
that like, these are actually normal things. You just like
you need to discuss them with your partner. And if
you don't want to be hanging out three times a
week and he only wants to be hanging out once
every now and then, like that's fine, You'll figure out
if you can make one. Okay. Bless you all and
your mankeeping endeavors. Thanks for joining us on Normally Normally
(36:56):
airs Tuesdays and Thursdays, and you can subscribe anywhere you
get your podcast. Get in touch with us at normally
the pod at gmail dot com. Thanks for listening and
when things get weird, act normally
Speaker 7 (37:10):
Mhm
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular 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.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.