6 Incel Traits, 2 New Ways to Fear Men & 1 Man‑Free Society

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
All right, hello everybody, and welcome to Honeybadger Radio. My
name is Brian. I'm here with Alison and this is well,
it's maintaining frame. But I don't know the number because
we're not doing that anymore.

Speaker 2 (00:10):
But we can do the number.

Speaker 1 (00:12):
We can do the number. I don't know the number.
It's just maintaining frame.

Speaker 2 (00:16):
It's whatever number you want it to be.

Speaker 1 (00:19):
One, yes, six six in celt rates two new ways
to fear men and one a one man Free Society
and one man Free Society.

Speaker 2 (00:30):
Yes, it's a bit of a ton. It is a
bit of a tongue title. Yes, yeah, what loquacious?

Speaker 1 (00:38):
Yeah, wouldn't that be like elaborate a lot of words?

Speaker 2 (00:43):
Yeah, okay, loquacious?

Speaker 1 (00:46):
All right, do you want We're going to be looking
at a couple of different things today, because you can
see we have this article from the Daily Mail which
is going to be discussing like the traits of ins
l is kind of like describing some kind of rare
you know, uh bymate creature, a rare pokemon, so you

(01:09):
know what you're looking for. Yeah, And then we have
a post from Lisa Brighton, who is a an ally
of ours, one of the one of the good ones.
I guess you could say it has been rustling Jimmy's
all over the internet. Huh.

Speaker 2 (01:31):
She's quite polite. She's a very polite.

Speaker 1 (01:33):
It's a really nice lady.

Speaker 2 (01:35):
It's very nice. Not like me. I think that I've
just been doing this maybe too long.

Speaker 1 (01:43):
Perhaps, And then we have a clip from of an
interview on News Nation with Scott Galloway. If you guys
don't know, Scott Galloway is a professor of n YU
and they basically from the School of Business, so he's
like a business guy and he talks about, you know,

(02:04):
brand strategies and digital marketing. But he was asked about
men and the situation for men, and he had some
things to say about it, which I will save for later,
so you guys will you'll see what where he lands
in terms of men as as productive members of society.

(02:24):
And then we're gonna end end, hopefully on something light
if we have time, which is how to use crystals
to fight the patriarchy. So hopefully you guys will stay
for all of that. But before we that stuff, I'm
gonna have to hand it off to Alison to do
the things.

Speaker 2 (02:42):
So all right, so if at any point throughout the
show you want to make commentary on the six core
traits of in cells and.

Speaker 3 (02:52):
And what.

Speaker 2 (02:55):
There are no surprises in this article, I'll just put
it that way, or Lisa bright its dive into feminist insanity,
or Scott Galloways whatever he is presenting. And if you
want to comment on which of the six crystals or

(03:16):
the sixth or the five it was five? Right, five crystals?
You would you fight patriarchy? Then please send your comments
to feed the Badger dot com slash just the tip.
That's feed the Badger dot com slash just the tip
the very best way for you to send us a comment,
and with that comment a tip, because we get the
full benefit of whatever funds you send, and you get
the full benefit of not sending your comment through YouTube's

(03:39):
comment pressure system comment enhancement system. All right, So feed
the Badger dot com slash support no, just the tip,
feed the Badger dot com slash just the tip to
send us those comments. Please do because we like to
hear from you. It's nice to know we're not screaming
into the void. Sometimes it feels like we are screaming
into the void. And then occasionally the void writes an

(04:02):
academic paper and does the talk rounds based on what
we screamed into it. But anyway, Feed the Badger dot
com slash just the tip to send in those comments.
And if you would like to support the show, the
monthly fundraiser is live and you can support us at
feed the Badger dot com slash support. That's Feed the
Badger dot com slash support. There is only two days left,

(04:23):
well two full days, a little bit more than two
days because the thirtieth is on the Sunday and we
will be doing a Beat Saber fundraiser then. But please
do help out because we need to fill off the
coffers for the month again. Feed the Badger dot com
slash support. All right, let's s all right mm hmm.

Speaker 1 (04:42):
Indeed, let's get into the first topic, the core traits
of in cells. This was put up by The Daily
Mail's Science Science Weird. Okay, oh, but we're gonna listen
to this, right, We're gonna use yea.

Speaker 2 (05:02):
Yeah, it's the AI reader, so there you go.

Speaker 1 (05:07):
All right, let's let's look at yeah, the Kamala Harris
robot and have it read the uh read the article. Well,
we we have time codes though so why don't we
just find those they.

Speaker 2 (05:21):
Change the background, or are you still enjoying the broccoli
themed vending weird kitchen? Yeah, no, it's like it's like
a breakroom in an office in an avocado show's job.
She's it's a break room in an office in the
avocado toast job. She's having some salad lattes.

Speaker 3 (05:41):
You know.

Speaker 1 (05:42):
Yeah, I don't know what's going on there. I think
those are like banana peppers on that green and the
green fridge thing. Yeah, it's yeah, it's just it's just weird.
All right, So let's jump ahead to two for the
first uh edgy statement. So we'll just go like right here.

Speaker 2 (06:03):
No, actually, no, wait, wait, don't jump do the first bit.
Do the first bit, because we gotta we gotta learn
the right all.

Speaker 1 (06:09):
Right, all right, let's get the let's get the Yeah, sure,
all right, I'm playing it the.

Speaker 4 (06:13):
Core traits of in cells scientists identify characteristic What did.

Speaker 2 (06:18):
You speed up the sound?

Speaker 1 (06:20):
Did you speed up?

Speaker 2 (06:21):
Yeah? I don't don't play it at the regular speak.

Speaker 1 (06:25):
She's right all right, eating it up.

Speaker 4 (06:27):
Indisturbed Women Hating Men by Jonathan Chadwick, Assistant Science and
Technology Editor.

Speaker 1 (06:34):
All right, so wait, wait, wait, Six scientists identify six
key characteristics in disturbed women hating men. Not women who
hate men, but men who are women hating. Let me
show you guys that. So you see the context in
disturbed women hating men, because that's what that is. Okay,

(06:54):
all right? So uh and then she like tells you
who these people are and stuff. But okay, go for.

Speaker 2 (07:02):
That.

Speaker 4 (07:03):
Light on in cells and exactly why some men are
more likely to become women hating recluses. Psychologists in Spain
conducted a review of scientific studies about in cells, the
growing online subculture of involuntarily celibates. They identified six key
characteristics among this group.

Speaker 1 (07:21):
All right, well, okay, credit where credit is due. They
call it a subculture and not a movement.

Speaker 5 (07:27):
Mm hmm.

Speaker 1 (07:28):
I mean at least that's at least that's accurate.

Speaker 2 (07:31):
I think, yep, yep.

Speaker 1 (07:33):
So I don't think they hate men or women though,
but whatever. All right, so let's now jump to the
first thing.

Speaker 2 (07:44):
No, no, keep going. We need to hear the six
core traits.

Speaker 1 (07:47):
Oh I thought that. I thought the time codes were
the six core trades.

Speaker 2 (07:51):
No, no, all right, okay, you got to understand how
this is structured. You got to understand how this is structured, Brian.
We're gonna go through the six or strict traits in
a sentence. We're gonna one single sentence, and then we
are going to talk about how in cells hate women.

Speaker 4 (08:11):
Ah right, okay, Science and Technology editor, a new study
has shed light on in cells and exactly why some
men are more likely to become women hating recluses. Psychologists
in Spain conducted a review of scientific studies about in cells.

Speaker 1 (08:26):
All right, so psychologists in Spain did this, mm hmmm.
Just for context, Spain is absolutely cooked as a feminist country.
It's probably one of the most feminist countries in the world. Like,
I don't know if it's it's either you know that
South Korea, India. Uh, yeah, it's one of those, Like

(08:49):
they're like the most feminists I know. Spain is absolutely
cooked though, But okay, anyway.

Speaker 4 (08:55):
Growing online subculture of involuntarily celibates. They find six key
characteristics among this group loneliness, rejection, low self esteem, limited
social support, and higher rates of anxiety.

Speaker 2 (09:09):
And okay, depression, anxiety, low self esteem, no support systems, rejection,
and I do not remember the third one right now, loneliness.
Those are the six core traits of in culs. And

(09:30):
this is the last time we're going to discuss them,
because the rest of this article is about how in
cells are violently hateful towards women. Yeah, they get so
close and yet so far.

Speaker 1 (09:44):
No, I don't even I don't think it's a mistake.
I think that they just they lay out all out,
here are all the things that they that they're dealing with,
and then the rest of the article is them saying,
and here's why we shouldn't give a shit. That's that's
what the article is, right, It's just like an and
here's why we don't care. And then they lay it
all out like they you know, like it's like it's

(10:06):
like migtal They used to go out there mictaw all
the time, right, mm hmmm. And the thing about Migtao
is they're literally not doing anything. They're not doing anything.
They're just avoiding women, period, avoiding dating. Some of them
aren't even avoiding dating. They might just be avoiding marriage
or something like that, but like they're generally avoiding relationships
with women. And that's a problem for whatever reason, and

(10:29):
they can't explain it. They just don't like the fact
that there are men who are choosing to say no,
and so they're just like doing their own thing. They're
not hurting anybody. They're not like, you know, like leeching
off the government for money. They're not like a drain
on people. They're not becoming like you know, welfare kings
or anything like that. They're just working and keeping to themselves.

(10:53):
And they hate that. So it's like, well, what do
you guys want? Well, what they want is for them
to be only and depressed and and you know, unsupported,
but continue to want to be like you know, to
to want to be with women. They don't want them
to want it but not actually get it, which is

(11:15):
kind of where in cells are like they're I think
in cells are in the position they are in because
they do want a relationship. They do want to like
you know, like start a family like any other guy does. Right,
meet someone, get married, start a family. That's what most
men want. And they're like, well, you haven't done it,

(11:35):
so it must be your fault somehow. And if you
because you're not allowed to get embittered about it. You're
not allowed to complain about it. You're not allowed to
you know, and even like try to analyze it or
understand it. Like you can't even like go into say,
you know, evolutionary psychology or or whatever, you know sort
of you know, social dynamics and things like that. Huh.

Speaker 6 (11:58):
Actual fact, Yeah, like you're not allowed to do that
because it means you're trying to change something, and then
they want you to stay like miserable and alone and
productive for them, like, oh, we'll go go be a
wage slave for taxation.

Speaker 1 (12:14):
And that's that's an.

Speaker 2 (12:15):
Interesting way to look at it, isn't it.

Speaker 1 (12:19):
It is though, because yeah, because like they again, no
one is saying that we need like a government to
like assign men a woman. Nobody's saying that. They they
claim this, but nobody's saying that. Even even if there
are guys saying this online, they have no power to
do it. They have like no ability to do it.
So they're just they're just kind of like blowing off steam,

(12:41):
right mm hmm. But these people, they they literally only
want men, and it doesn't matter if they're migtile or
in cells, Like, it doesn't matter if they're they're this
way on purpose or you know because of like limited access,
like they just can't like a lot of cells are
guys with disabilities, you know, they have all Yeah, they

(13:03):
have problems, and but they're like no, you know, like
you're not allowed to complain, you're not allowed to have
an issue with this. But what we will do is
take your money and redirect it to women through taxation,
which is what they're fine with, you know. And that's
the real that's that's like another thing that I don't
think people like talk about at all. And these articles

(13:25):
exist to essentially say, look, this is a problem, and
these guys are having this problem, but don't look too
closely at it. Fuck those guys, just tell them to
keep paying their taxes and shut up, because we're gonna
give this money to women.

Speaker 2 (13:37):
Yeah. Well, what's interesting is, like you said, you there's
this dichotomy. So there are men who have see this
current situation and they've just opted out. That that's magtel
And of course the media does not like magtew and
they and again you were right. They were all over
the news for a while. And now there are in
cells the involuntary celibate people who are not in the

(13:58):
same situation as make too because they've make to out,
have made the conscious choice. Men going their own way
they've made the conscious choice to opt out. The in
cells have not. They they want to be part of
the system and they want to have a relationship, and
incidentally they're there. What they're willing to select in a
partner is significantly lower than men who don't identify as insuls,

(14:23):
so they don't actually have higher standards. In fact, one
of the markers of being an inceel is that you
have lower standards than average in a potential female partner,
but you're still not making that. So they want to
be part of the system. They want to have a
female partner, but it's not happening for them. So if
if you think about it, there's no position that men

(14:45):
can occupy that's acceptable. Well I could just leave it
at that.

Speaker 1 (14:49):
There's no position, and you know and tax mule. That's
basically it. And it's thankless, like it's like there's no
like appreciation for that, it's just expectation.

Speaker 2 (15:01):
So yeah, but again, this is the last time that
there I believe that this article ever mentions or no,
it doesn't mention it again, but it's there's no discussion
of it, like, well, how do we deal with the loneliness,
how do we deal with the mental health issues, the
depression and anxiety, the feelings of rejection. What do we
do that's proactive to to help these men if they're

(15:22):
having these issues with this kind of this thinking which
is negative, right, the negative spirals, And there's nothing. There's
just immediate pivot to how these men are dangerous to
women and basically why we shouldn't care. And I just
was like, that is so astounding that there isn't even
a buffer. There isn't even an attempt to, uh say, yeah,

(15:46):
they have these issues and we probably should do something
about it. But the truth is that they're probably rejected
because they're rejected. You know that circular reasoning that in
cells are rejected because they have a negative attitude towards women.
Except their negative attitude towards women came about because they

(16:06):
were rejected. So it just goes right into that unless
you know, don't take my word for it. Let's listen
to the first time code.

Speaker 1 (16:14):
All right, I'm gonna go out of the first time
code at two minutes thirty to two seconds. And you
know I said this before, like in cell is not
like a new phenomenon. There's always been like a segment
of the population that just gets you know, they just
don't find anybody and they and they usually find another
way to you know, have a purpose.

Speaker 2 (16:35):
Ah.

Speaker 1 (16:36):
But they're treating this like this is some kind of
new thing, you know, so like the reproductive or the Yeah,
the reproductive bottleneck is real and it exists and it happens.

Speaker 4 (16:47):
But any women violence in cells claim to be rejected
because they are unattractive, have mental health problems anxiety depression,
are neurodivergent autism, or are socially in it. Young men
and boys who identify as part of the in cell
subculture regard sex as a transactional act, devoid of emotional ties,

(17:09):
but also as a fundamental right.

Speaker 2 (17:10):
That is, okay, this is incorrect. And what do you
mean by a fundamental right? Can people be upset about
not getting something without saying that they're entitled? Like do
you mean that if somebody doesn't get something and they
feel upset about it, that means that they're automatically entitled.
So anyone who are who is upset about never getting

(17:32):
a house while you just feel entitled, in fact, you're
equivalent to someone who would steal a house. You know,
people who are upset at the price of food. Well,
you're just entitled and you're equivalent to somebody who would
steal food. Like, do you see this the logic here?

Speaker 1 (17:47):
Yeah, I know I do. It's it's like I said,
it's it's poisoning the well on purpose. Yeah. Because again,
you know, like anybody who just says, you know, I
wish I blame doesn't matter, I wish I could have this,
They're like, oh, you feel entitled to that. Huh, you're
going to like force the government to like, you know,
have the government force people to give that to you.

(18:09):
It's like, no, that's projection, because I'm pretty sure it was.
It's women that want things like free healthcare, free birth control,
free abortions, you know, free housing. They want a Lamborghini.
That's why they voted for Zora Mandani because he's going
to give everybody Lamborghinis. So yeah, you guys are totally projecting.

(18:31):
I think that in general, most most people who I
guess we would classify as in cells or just like
guys that are are dealing with unrequited love or you know,
they're lonely. They want to earn a relationship. They don't
want to be given something. They want to feel like
they did it because if you were assigned, you know,

(18:51):
a woman like for example, hypothetically speaking, you would spend
your whole life thinking like, does she even care about me?
Or is she doing this because she has to? Like
I don't. I don't think it makes it makes no
logical sense. I think in general, people want to be wanted,
you know, they want to feel desired. They don't want
to just have It's just ridiculous. But anyway is that

(19:16):
let me see the And it's.

Speaker 2 (19:17):
Also inconsistent with what they said at the beginning. So
feeling rejected I social isolation, depression, anxiety, low self esteem,
and then the sixth one that I'll probably always forget.
But these are not the emotional expressions of someone who
feels entitled. Like someone who feels entitled doesn't care about

(19:43):
being rejected to what they're by, by what they're entitled to,
Like they don't internalize it. It's something offensive and anger inducing,
and yes they get angry, but it's a different thing
if you think about it, Like, if you genuinely feel
entitled to something, you're not going to feel rejected when
you don't get it right for an emotion entirely And yeah,

(20:06):
sure you can feel resentment and anger, but it's not
like it's not going to have that component of rejection.
It's not going to have that component of anxiety and
depression and feeling socially isolated like this is. And to
say that it's all transactional, that they want a transactional relationship, well,
a transactional relationship doesn't come with the emotions that would

(20:29):
resolve depression, anxiety, loneliness, feelings of rejection, and social isolation.
So what are you even talking about? Why would they
be feeling these things if all they want is a transaction,
is what I'm getting at. They wouldn't be They would
only feel these things if they want a genuine connection
and they feel that that connection affirms their human worth. Okay,

(20:53):
Like they're completely flattening this situation, and you're right, they're
poisoning the well because you again, I want to dismiss
this is this is more of this is somebody else's problem. Field.
They're applying to somebody else's problem. You know that.

Speaker 1 (21:10):
Well, there's I think there's another reason they're doing this too.
I think the real reason for the article is actually
not to do with in cells at all. I think
it's to defend something to protect something, something that's losing,
that's losing the pr war a lot lately. And I
think they're going to give it away right up here,

(21:31):
because I want you to well, well, listen to the
next the next time code, and then you let me
know what is actually at stake in this article, but.

Speaker 4 (21:43):
Also as a fundamental right that is denied to them
as a result of feminism and female empowerment in cells
blame women for their inability to have relationships, and some
even contend that the denial of sex by women is
a punishable crime.

Speaker 1 (22:01):
Yeah, no, they don't say that, but let's see that
there's maybe is there is there like a source source question?

Speaker 2 (22:07):
No, No, this is all just Oh, this is a
vulnerable population. Well, let's spit on them. Let let us
let's make them look, let's demonize them, let's turn them,
let's show how criminal they are so we don't have
to care. That's that. You're right, it's just. And also
we're gonna defend feminism, even though feminism stated aim in

(22:31):
many instances was to destroy the family. Well, guess what
happens that leaves a whole bunch of men shit out
of luck, disenfranchised, through no fault of their own, but
simply because the overwhelming social narrative is positions relationships is
something toxic to women and men, as something no sane

(22:51):
woman would choose to have in her life. Okay, so
that basically we have created action like what they did
with the black communit they out competed black men in
their own families. The government out competed black men in
their own families, disenfranchised black men in their own families.
And we can't talk about that because it's sexist, even

(23:13):
though it's if you think about it, it is actually
that is institutional racism. But anyway, they out competed black
men in their families. Black men were destroyed and now
and then they also promoted this attitude for everyone that

(23:33):
it is bad for a woman to have a man,
that he is dangerous, that he is useless, that he
is lazy, that he is a net drain on her.
All of this feminist rhetoric is overwhelming. It's not a
trillion dollar narrative, guys. It probably moves about a trillion
dollars of mostly government money, tax payer money, or loss

(23:58):
of purchasing power in terms of you know, every time
you go to the grocery store and eggs cost fifty bucks.
A dozen eggs cost. Think about the government programs you
are financing, because they can just they don't print money.
What they do is they create another treasury, which is
a giant packet of government debt, puts more money into
the economy, which inflates the whole, the whole thing. So

(24:23):
you are paying that through your increased the price points
in the grocery store. You're paying that through taxes. You're
paying that through sales tax paying into this, paying into
a narrative that men are awful people like. And that's
the most egregious part. Men are paying for their own
destruction in this system. They're literally freaking paying for it.

Speaker 1 (24:48):
Well, they're having their money taken from them and then
it's being repurposed to destroy them. Yes, yes, to destroy
forced to pay for their own destruction, to.

Speaker 2 (24:57):
Destroy their self self worth, and destroy their opportunities in
terms of having families and relationships. It's unfreaking belief. It
is an injustice, an tremendous injustice, and in and in
cells are a victim of it. In other times and periods,

(25:21):
these men would have partners and it wouldn't just because
of arranged marriage. It would be because it would.

Speaker 1 (25:29):
Be Alison dropped. Alison dropped out of the call. Hopefully
she figures it out and comes right back. Let me see.
Uh so while waiting for Alson to come back, Oh
there she is. What happened void cat? That's what I
thought I saw like the camera was starting to like

(25:53):
get shut her a little bit. Okay, so this one,
that's okay you.

Speaker 2 (25:58):
Camera, Okay, all right, I'm going to squeeze squish that cat. Squish,
I'm gonna squish you. You're not getting more food, Okay.
As I was saying before, I was so rudely interrupted.

Speaker 1 (26:12):
Trying to take a screenshot of the cat and give
it glowing eyes. Go ahead, just take a screen cap
and then put a glowing eyefilter on it and then
might like release me or something at the bottom. But okay,
go ahead, finish your comment.

Speaker 2 (26:29):
Something out, all right. The rhetoric around this is that
women had to they had to have husbands because in
order to take care of themselves, which is no, you're
not no, no, okay, which is nonsense. All right. First
of all, there was a much stronger social expectation that

(26:50):
relatives take care of any unmarried woman. Right, So if
you were unmarried, you would be living with your father,
with your brothers, with your uncles, you'd probably have a ward,
you would be taken care of, so you didn't automatically
have to get married to get taken care of. And
here's the other thing. Women brought dowries, they brought money,

(27:11):
and they often brought some form of labor into the marriage.
So it wasn't a situation where there wasn't actually also
dependency the other way. Men were dependent on women's labor.
That's why they got married. It was like a mutual
economic exchange, hopefully with some friendly affection at some point.

(27:32):
That's the way it worked. So it was never a
situation where women were asymmetrically reliant on men. Men and
women were reliant on each other economically, and they came
together and they formed partnerships. And in those eras, these
men wouldn't have been disenfranchised, right, they would either have
gotten married or maybe they would have ended up in

(27:54):
a monastery, okay, going into the priesthood, or maybe.

Speaker 1 (27:58):
The universe becoming you know, philosophers or scientists are committing themselves.

Speaker 5 (28:03):
To some Yeah exactly, Yeah, so I mean, it's it's
the situation is because we have failed men and we've
made them pay for that, which is just.

Speaker 2 (28:18):
Just astounding to me. It's astounding to me that we
that taxpayers pay for this, They pay for these narratives,
and you know who benefits. There's only one group of well,
two groups of people who benefit from this. Feminists and
divorce lawyers, the two most wonderful group of groups of
people in our society. Every Oh, aren't we all happy

(28:41):
that we are making feminists and divorce lawyers rich? Okay,
let's keep going.

Speaker 1 (28:51):
So there's a little bit more of this. But but
ultimately I think this video disc Yeah.

Speaker 2 (28:55):
And the Democratic Party, because.

Speaker 1 (28:57):
They are in the I think that, uh yeah, somewhat,
But I think it's mostly what you said. It's it's
feminist activists, it's the academics, it's the people in media
you know that all push this stuff. People force lawyers,
and and also you know, corporations, they get to, you know,

(29:18):
sell twice as much junk to people. So but okay,
let's uh. I just wanted to point out that ultimately
this article is about defending feminism because feminism itself is
becoming less and less popular. It's still like ubiquitous. Don't
get me wrong. I'm not pretending like it's over, but

(29:39):
it's if it starts to show a little bit of
like chinks in the armor, then you know that that's
like really happening, because these articles come out and they're
like trying to like, look, if you don't have feminism,
men are gonna throw you in chains, men are going
to change the change the to the stove. You're gonna
be turned into breeding, you know, uh, like breeding chattel again,

(30:02):
which of course never happened. But it's all this scary stuff,
and in cells are part of that. They're scary because
you know they might just blow up one day and
shoot up a school. Oh my god. Right, and this
so this is what they're doing, is they're saying, you
need us, so you have to keep supporting us. That's
ultimately all this is. But okay, we got forty five
seconds left or no half thirty seconds left in this clip,

(30:25):
so let's finish it.

Speaker 4 (30:27):
Bloody as a normal or preferred sexual orientation, and that
only men who conform to heteronormative standards of masculinity such
as strength, aggression, and emotional stoicism are considered attractive.

Speaker 1 (30:41):
Is it okay for me to say that heterosexuality is normal?
Like it is? Okay, like it is? It's normal? Is that? Okay?
I don't have anything against you if you're gay, But
if you are gay and you're watching this, can you
also just like co sign is? Is it not the
case a heterosexuality is normal? It's like the reason why

(31:02):
you're here? Can we just because they're just I don't
know what this is about, but it's just factually untrue. Okay,
So let's let me know. Is there something wrong with that.
I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I don't
think it's It's not a value judgment. It's just a
statement of fact. Okay, here because of sexual homosexual homosexual
we're here because of heterosexuality.

Speaker 2 (31:24):
Okay. I just want you this is something that really
occurred to me when she said that insults feel like
they're entitled to sex. Well, I'm not. I am pro choice. However,
I want to point something out. The argument, first of all,
that it should be government funded or available anywhere that

(31:45):
people don't necessarily the locals don't necessarily want to have
it is predicated on the idea that people women are
entitled to sex for entertainment? Yeah, are you really? Are
you really entitled to sex for entertainment? Like, are you

(32:05):
are you? Like, if you think your birth control should
be paid for, are you entitled to have other people
pay for the fact that you're using sex as a
form of entertainment? And incidentally, I noticed that not only
do women say that they need birth control their birth
control paid for so that they can use sex as
a form of entertainment, they also say that sex is

(32:28):
a terrible form of entertainment, which is really interesting. So
all of these arguments that women are owed birth control
by virtue of you know, should be taken out of
the taxes are based on this idea that access to
sex is.

Speaker 1 (32:46):
A right right now?

Speaker 2 (32:50):
Yeah? Yes, Like, what's what's the difference?

Speaker 1 (32:56):
Somebody? Uh, I gonna read this? This is funny. So
fl Tourists says Fred Flintstone and Barney Rubble were both
in cells. So I gotta I gotta disagree with you
on that. Obviously you're probably joking because Fred totally got
Wilma pregnant. That's where pebbles came from, and you could see,
like for a while on the show, Wilma was like

(33:17):
carrying the baby. So Fred obviously did that, and Barney
and Betty they didn't have a kid. They ended up
adopting one that was bam bam. But they were trying,
because they would say so they were. They were saying,
we were trying to have a baby and we can't
have one. So that means that Barney was hitting it
like constantly and it just didn't didn't work out for them,
but they did get a kid eventually. So no, not

(33:37):
at all. Those are your ancestors. If it weren't for
Fred and Barney, you wouldn't be here. I'm just saying
the ancient peoples, all right. Anyway, So Fred was getting
it and Barney was two. Okay, all right anyway, So
that was the The other thing too, is they they

(33:58):
it's weird that they like talk about head sexuality, and
it's like weird that it's normal. And then they go
into heteronormative standards of masculinity. This is how they describe them,
such as strength, aggression, and emotional stoicism. So apparently there
are no gay men who are strong, aggressive or emotionally

(34:19):
stoic because that's a heteronormative trait. Have you seen they're
doing with this like sleight of hand, where first they say, well,
here are these traits that are considered masculine that are bad,
and then they say they're not masculine traits, they're heteronormative traits,
which means a gay man can't have these traits either,

(34:39):
because that would still be bad even if he's gay.
So you understand that what they're attacking isn't heterosexuality, but
they're using this like, let's say, this alternative way of
looking at sexuality itself. So like for most of our
time here on earth, for most of human history, like

(35:02):
ninety nine point nine percent, heterosexuality was the norm, and
it was a standard. It wasn't something that was a measure.
It was simply human behavior just playing out its, you know,
instincts biologically, and that was just how we lived, That
was how we reproduce, and that was just how things were.
And then of some of what caused that was like

(35:25):
you know, the the how dimorphic our species is, so
men being men generally having you know, like traits that
were more not that there was like one or the other,
but because you know, obviously there were men who have
feminine traits, we would consider to be feminine, and there
are women who would have traits that we would consider
to be masculine, but there are overall, there are enough

(35:46):
divertences due to biological differences, evolutionary differences, and sexual selection differences.
Like women were choosing men to have babies with based
on certain traits that they liked in them, and then
they carry those traits onto their next to their kids,
and then so on. Right, and we have gotten now

(36:06):
to the point where they're trying to dismantle masculinity itself
by calling it toxic and now heteronormative. But the attack
is on masculinity full stop. It's just what it is.
And of course they have a specific definition for that.
But if women display this, which you know in those

(36:27):
Girl Boss movies and stuff, if they display strength, aggression,
and stoicism, that's totally fine. Because women, when they display
masculine traits, it's not masculine anymore, you know. And it's
which means it's not negative anymore. It's positive. Now you
see what I'm saying.

Speaker 2 (36:43):
Killing traits that they say are masculine are totally distorted.
So women don't actually show protectiveness provision towards men when
they're vulnerable or.

Speaker 1 (36:52):
In a fantasy sense. What I mean is like when
they see it in like there, like when you see
it represented in fiction not reality. But I mean, you
know what I'm saying, like when yeah, yeah.

Speaker 2 (37:04):
Yeah, Well, what I'm saying is that they use they
they basically say that masculinity is all of these toxic
traits like contempt for others, dominance, aggression, being very you know,
angry at slights, and willing to fight at the drop
of a hat. They don't say that masculinity is honor,

(37:25):
the ability to take risks, the desire to protect and
provide for others. So they don't embody those traits. These
these boss tapes. They they don't protect or provide for
men or children or whatever. They just are aggressive and
nasty and undermining to the men around them. And they

(37:48):
they so that they're not just distorting, not just telling
women to be masculine, they're distorting what masculinity is. But
then when women embody this distorted toxic traits and it's
not toxically masculine traits, they're just toxic traits, then they say, oh,
that's empowerment. So it's like multiple layers of distortion, going

(38:11):
on a Russian doll of distortion. Absolutely.

Speaker 1 (38:15):
Yeah, it's all about reframing everything as like always men
always bad, women always victims or good. So all right,
let's continue.

Speaker 4 (38:26):
System is the eighty twentieth principle, the belief that eighty
percent of women are attracted to twenty percent of men,
the core feelings that can drive males to in seldom.

Speaker 1 (38:39):
Just it's true, it's observable, it's an observable phenomenon, and
it might be not necessarily driven biologically.

Speaker 2 (38:46):
Like I said, maybe we can stop having the tax
payers pay for this narrative. Yeah, just see what happens.
You know, Like I've had a feminist recently who was
arguing with me, and she she said, you want to
force men to women to marry men. I'm like, no,
why don't we just start by defunding all of these

(39:09):
projects into destroying the relationship between men and women, by
making out making men out to be toxic to women
and toxic to society. Why don't we just stop that.
I mean, that's a that's a tall order since it's
like a trillion dollar industry, But you know, we could
stop that and see see if things improve. Stop picking

(39:30):
at it. Maybe it'll heal, you know, but no, she
has a right to Oh you want to force, No, no,
just stop stop forcing the other thing. See what happens,
you know, And yeah, okay.

Speaker 1 (39:49):
All right, next time code it's right here.

Speaker 4 (39:52):
So loneliness to rejection. Oh they did repeat it steam
for limited social support five, anxiety six depression. The study
also explains the terminology in cells use a cant to
speaking in an exclusive.

Speaker 2 (40:09):
You would think that you would think that at that
point you would segue into describing some of the effects
of these things, how they manifest, maybe some solutions, But no,
we're just going to pivot back into they are the threat.
I just want to point out that the things that
in cells are are the exact opposite of what feminism

(40:30):
says toxic masculinity is.

Speaker 1 (40:34):
Yeah, well that's because again it's not about it, it's
not about anything but demonizing men, no matter what stage
of life they're in, no matter what their what their personality.
So like, if you are successful with women, then you're
a bad person who hates women somehow. So like, you know,
if you're like, uh, you don't have to compare you

(40:56):
to Andrew Tate. Just like a guy who's successful with women,
Like you're doing well, you're looks maxing, you're you're getting
dates and you're like, you know, spinning plates and all
of that. Oh you because they hate the PUAs too, right,
so they'll be like, oh, you guys hate women because
you use them and take advantage of them or whatever
it is. So if you're successful with women, it's bad.
If you are uninterested in women like a migtow, it's bad.

(41:20):
And if you're unable to get with women, it's bad,
like you're an insult. And if you're just like trying
to like you know, you're not even concerned with women's
issues and instead you're basically choosing to focus on men's
issues like an mra. Guess what, it's bad. No matter what,
there is no like you can't really basically the bus,

(41:42):
Like there is no form of masculinity that works. Even
if you're a gay man. Guess what you are the
straight white men of gay people of the LGBTQ community,
because you're still super privileged, so you deserve nothing.

Speaker 2 (41:58):
So yeah, so I do have somebody to thank you
that we probably should do. So I want to thank
Mario who put fifty dollars into the hat for uh
huh the fundraiser, which is that feedbadgery dot com slash
just or feedbadger dot com slash support. So thank you, Mario,

(42:22):
very much appreciated. It's me Mario, I should who thank you.
Thank you for making that less awkward, Brian. Okay, and again,
if you want to send us a comment at any
point throughout the show, feed the badger dot com slash

(42:43):
just the tip. And if you want to support the
show and join our very generous supporters that allow us
to predict what people will be talking about five to
ten years in advance, then please do so at feed
the badgery dot com slash support.

Speaker 1 (42:55):
All right, all right, let's keep going.

Speaker 4 (43:00):
Public. Don't generally understand it. Women are commonly referred to
as animals, as dangerous and dirty as pigs, cattle, snakes,
and insects, food, roast, beef, inanimate objects.

Speaker 1 (43:13):
No, well, roast these is something else. I think what's
a roasty anyway? No, I think roast beef is what
they're saying, you know, because they well, it's a it's
a little bit lewde but it's funny. But like, so,
what when women do this to men? All the time,
like you can actually like men do care whatever.

Speaker 2 (43:36):
Yeah, hunk stud, those are those are actually the hunk
of me stud No shud hut shud.

Speaker 1 (43:47):
I mean derogatory things.

Speaker 2 (43:49):
We're deep into double standard territory. Brian, you can't bring
this stuff up, but actually I will bring it up.
So there's been recent research on misogyny and miss indry
in extremist reddit communities. Actually, I think extremist communities period.
A key study recently addressed the balance between misogyny, hatred
of prejudice against women and miss indry hatred of presidents

(44:12):
prejudice against men in online extremist spaces is titled Women
Who Hate Men, A Comparative Analysis across Extremist Reddit Communities,
published in Scientific Reports April twenty one, twenty twenty five.
The peer reviewed paper, authored by researchers including those from
the University of Bologna and other institutions, provides empirical evidence

(44:33):
suggesting that these forms of gendered hate speech are structurally
and linguistically comparable in intensity within such communities. Get this, guys,
an extremist gender based communities. The hatred is fairly comparable,
although I would question that slightly study overview and methodology. Okay,

(44:55):
we don't need to go into that. The study posed
three research questions. Are there systemic differences and perspectives male
to female versus female to male hate. Is misogyny more
prevalent than miss inondry? Is gendered hate speech tied to
the community's dominant gender, or is it a broader feature
of extremism? Key findings evidence of equivalence. The results indicate

(45:16):
no systemic discrepancies between misogynistic and misinterist communities across the
analyzed dimensions. This implies that both forms of hate operate
at comparable levels in terms of expressions, emotional intensity, and
structural reinforcement. However, this is good. It's a nice start. However,
there is a confound that these scientists didn't address. They

(45:37):
conflate hatred of feminism with hatred of women, all right,
and that is going to distort their results. However, it's
a good step. Linguistic and toxicity level levels, both sets
of communities showed bimodal distributions and toxicity scores, meaning a
mix of mild and extreme content. However, misogynistic communities end

(45:59):
slightly higher in overall toxicity. But this was not statistically
significant enough to suggest overrepresentation. Common themes include victimhood narratives,
with terms like misdry used in misogynist spaces to frame
feminism as anti male see what I'm saying, mirroring how
misogyny is invoked in misinterest ones. Emotional analysis, emotions such

(46:20):
as anger and disgust were equally prevalent, reinforcing echo chambers
in both directions. For an instant, fear of the opposite
gender was a shared motif driving isolationist ideologies. Network structures
interaction graphs revealed closed triads of extreme users in all communities,
indicating that hates spread similarly regardless of gender focus. This

(46:41):
supports the view that extremism, not gender, is the core driver.
The authors conclude, in addressing the phenomenon online gendered hate speech,
both male to female and female to male perspectives should
be taken into account, thus recognizing equal importance to both
misondry and misogyny. They emphasized that missiondry, often understudied compared

(47:01):
to misogyny, warrants equal scrutiny to combat online toxicity. Toxicity holistically, well, unfortunately,
there's a huge like that. I can just see these researchers,
you know, doing this stuff in the little corner. Meanwhile,
the gigantic monster looks of feminism, feminist academia looks on

(47:22):
just waiting for the moment to cancel them, you know.
And it's like this is this is a good start,
but you have to realize that miss injury is entrenched.
Feminism is miss injury. It pretends like it has an excuse,
but it has never proven its core premisses. There's no

(47:45):
neutral science that has ever proven feminist core premise. So
it remains a premise that was simply assumed and then
everything else was buttressed off of that. And that premis
is horrifiedly anti mail, the idea that men oppressed women,
horrifyingly anti male, and never proven. That's that, folks. It

(48:10):
is not something in fact, it's this syllopsistically proven. What
happened is feminists made that decision. They basically enshrined misonry
into their beliefs about society. Blaming an entire group of
people would be considered racism, anti semitism, something ism in
any other context. Saying that an entire group of people

(48:33):
is responsible for an invisible, in system systemic oppression of
your group would be very suspect as a conspiracy in
any other context. And then a saying that somehow this
is a result of socialization, not the biogroup that they're
part of, would never fly in any other context because

(48:56):
feminists have never explained how it is that every man
on earth is socialized the exact same way across ethnic, cultural, national, religious,
and honestly, considering the behaviors that they're saying are socialized
species grounds like across species. This is a cultural socialization

(49:20):
that crosses species, right, and they have never explained how
that happens because there is no explanation. There is no
possible explanation for how all human beings are socialized to
the same all men are socialized to the same thing.
There's no explanation. The only way that socialization really comes
in is that feminists assert that men can be socialized

(49:44):
out of it. There's some sort of weird, ubiquitous X
factor that's one to one with every man on the planet,
but feminists can socialize them out of it. But it's
not biological bullshit. So all of these factors mean that
feminism is utterly illegiti as a concept, as an academic concept,
as an intellectual concept as a political concept, as a

(50:08):
moral concept, it has no grounds for legitimacy, and it
is directed at all men in our society. Okay, our
society is inherently misangerous. And until these researchers step out,
they're they're fish. They got to get onto land, they
will never true understand the true extent of the ocean.

(50:29):
All right, okay. Implications of broader contexts. These findings challenge
narratives that downplay myssonry is negligible, highlighting how both amplify
division in extremist spaces. Okay, but you gotta go, You
gotta now. Turn that lens on feminist academia, academia and
its influence on law and policy, on NGOs, on government

(50:51):
shadow budgets. The study notes of publication bias. Scopist data
shows far more papers on online misogyny, underscoring the need
for balanced research. Okay, all right, let's continue.

Speaker 1 (51:07):
All right, let's continue.

Speaker 4 (51:10):
Sperm containers and androids cyborgs or humanoids in cells use
the term femoids female humanoids to dehumanize them by turning
them into a subhuman on which to legitimately apply violence.
The study authors.

Speaker 1 (51:23):
Explain, uh no, I think they're just I mean, look,
they're angry, they're frustrated. I get it, But I don't
think that they're looking for a reason to apply violence
by changing like the language. But it's interesting that you
point that out. So, like, what happens when you call
people Nazis for ten years? Does that? Does? Could that

(51:46):
maybe result in violence? I mean, nobody likes Nazis? Maybe
we can do something about it. What does that look like?
What happens when you call people like misogynists for ten
years that they hate women and they want to raise
them and kill them and turn them in a slave.
Do you think that maybe someone might try to do
something about it?

Speaker 2 (52:05):
Yeah?

Speaker 1 (52:06):
Someone can any consequences for that?

Speaker 3 (52:09):
Yeah?

Speaker 2 (52:11):
Or I mean some might actually just get angry at
the people who are saying it. She's how how unbelievably unsupportable.
I'm been being abused and I feel some anger towards
those of that abuse misogynist Yeah, okay, so I have

(52:33):
here actually some extra stuff. I might not be able
to go through all of it, but I'm going to
do a shout out to therapy Snack, which you can
find on stubs Stack, and one of the things that
he proposes looking at it because he's been looking at
the day. But he's a criminology student, and so he

(52:55):
looked at this this data, and he said this. The
clearest and most consistent finding is the nearly universal experience
of abuse and bullying among in cells, particularly in the
social context. While further research in this area is certainly required,
this finding becomes rather instructive when assessing underlying theory and explanation,
and would it generally appear to explain, at least in part,

(53:17):
pathways to insul them. One of the most notable aspects
of the in cell movement, however, is group heterogenetic heterogeneity.
Analysis of the in cell community has found a clustering
of traits. So there's a bunch of different groups within
the in the in cell community. This group heterogenetic heterogene

(53:37):
genin this this multitude of people or different types of
people presents regarding in cells who have committed vast violence.
Whereas where wherein they appear to be notably situated in
the externalizer category. Okay, so what it means is they
externalize their problems. A lot of in cells internalize them.

(54:01):
So there's an alternate theory for where in cell violence
comes from reviewing. There has been an implicit assumption that
the causal agent aspect of insull violence is gendered in nature.
In some sense, such a conclusion is rhetorically obvious given
the social scripting. However, there are some notable issues with

(54:21):
this approach when a more detailed analysis is undertaken. Firstly,
in cell violence is incredibly rare, despite what might think
what might expect from a movement that is frequently assessed
as having pervasive misogyny steeped in toxic grievance. The subversion
of expectations regarding conversion to lethal violence against others has
impacted more than the political radicalization arguments with theories and

(54:47):
evolutionary psychology, namely the young male hypothesis, similarly predicting violence
spikes in such a population, leading to the offering of
a sedated male hypothesis to explain the suppression of predicted violence.
So essentially, what they're saying is that science would predict
that this population would be vastly more violent than they are,
so because they aren't, then they had to propose a

(55:08):
counter like a little epist cycle to explain this, which
is male sedation hypothesis, which is that society sedates in
cells with pornography and games. However, while the evolutionary psychology
approach is certainly reflexive of a more biologically coherent and
grounded theoretical malu, on its own, it appears to have

(55:29):
yet to be fully integrated into the wider mass violence
phenomenon to which in cell violence is frequently evoked. So
when we talk about the wider mass violence phenomenon, we're
talking about other groups where young men who do not
have romantic prospects engage in political violence in order to

(55:51):
advance an ideology. Often these young men are called martyrs,
or they may be in other groups in which they
engage in violence against their political opponents. Might even argue
that society itself has a very very powerful track record
in mobilizing disenfranchised young men to do violence in order

(56:13):
to solve its political quandaries. So the biggest radicalizer of
young men, if you're going to call radicalizations basically saying hey,
you go kill people because you'll be a good person
in our eyes, is society itself, which is probably why
we're not seeing a lot of real insight into this problem. Furthermore,

(56:37):
despite the young modifier on both theories. At least some
larger data sets, the median and a offense and the
in cell population exceeds that of the general homicide population. Okay,
so this is just some more information. Furthermore, in cell
violence is conducted by offenders without long histories of violent
crime and minimal, if any, criminal convictions. In fact, the

(57:01):
overwhelming majority, and here's the big thing, the overwhelming majority
of violence risk appears to be directed towards the self.
So this is something I've said so many times. Men
are far more likely to kill themselves than they are
ever to kill another person. Ever, and yet what does
this article focus on the mass majority of men who

(57:28):
are suffering the loneliness, depression, anxiety, rejection, social isolation. Right,
they're going to kill themselves. They're going to unlive themselves,
kill them Oh you know what, fuck YouTube, They're going
to kill themselves. That's what they're going to do. And
in fact, this article makes that a certainty because instead

(57:52):
of refocusing on how to help these young men, it
refocuses on the burden that they are to the greater society. So, really,
really ask the question is that the outcome these people want?
Do they just want these guys to disappear themselves, right.

Speaker 1 (58:12):
They wouldn't. They wouldn't have a problem with it. If
they happened, No, they wouldn't. They wouldn't have a problem
with it. They probably blamed They'd gild be another thing
they could blame them for.

Speaker 2 (58:21):
Okay, So here's what.

Speaker 1 (58:22):
I'd be like, why don't you guys share your feelings more, which,
of course they are doing that now and people are
sad about that.

Speaker 2 (58:29):
So so one of the things that we've brought up
a lot on this show is that men without a
sense of connection to the work of society are vulnerable
to narratives that give them a purpose, even if those
narratives are violent. And this is a crew across the board,

(58:51):
like these narratives, these ideologies, and that includes like Nazism.
Originally it caught root with like these disaffect groups of
young men. And this is happening with the in cell community,
and people are mistaking the forest for the trees, the
trees for the forest. Really it is critical to digress

(59:12):
in order to address one or so the obvious aspect
regarding the killings committed by those in the in cell community,
which is that they often contain overtly ideological or political positions,
including by the offenders themselves, a frequent habit, particularly by
non criminologists. That's a little bit of throwing shade there
is to take offenders at their word. Attempting but highly fraught.

(59:36):
RESET research tactic an excellent example of this, particularly given
calls to classify in cells and their violence as terrorism,
is an MS research conducted in terrorism contexts. Boy, we
just got our entire channel heeded for using the T word. Surprisingly,
actors of suicide attacks were historically considered two of all

(01:00:00):
things be suicidal, rather ideological fear for was considered the
driving force of suicide attackers. Relying on.

Speaker 1 (01:00:11):
Allison Aliston, Aliston, you're thing pros and she's gone, uh,
probably avoidcat again. Let's see if she comes back in
a second. It's just one of those days when you
don't want to wake up. Everything is fucked. Everybody sucks.

(01:00:32):
You don't know why, but you want to justify ripping
someone's head off. All Right, I'm gonna play some more
of this clip. I don't. Alison kind of threw me
a curveball, went out of the blue. She pulled out
a massive study and started reading the whole thing, which
is weird because we have a lot to get through,
but you know, fuck eating right, all right, let's play

(01:00:55):
some more of this. Let me see while I'm waiting
for Alison to come back.

Speaker 4 (01:01:00):
More Specifically, attractive, sexually successful women are known by inceels
as facies, while Becky's are supposed to be normal or
relatively attractive women chads. Physically attractive Alpha male figures at
the top of the male hierarchy are also resented by
in cells and seen as part of the problem ranking

(01:01:21):
below this alpha.

Speaker 1 (01:01:22):
Yeah, so it's almost like they don't They're not just
annoyed with women. They're also jealous of men that are
doing better than they are, and so it's not really
a hate thing. It's just envy, which is uh, you know,
pretty normal. Let's see what Alison just sent me a
message She had a blackout. Uh huh, sorry guys, all right,

(01:01:55):
so Serenade, does Brian get it? Felix the Cat was
an inceel, Yes, Felix the Cat he no, he was migtaw.
He didn't need anybody. A lot of those, a lot
of cartoon characters were just migtaw except for Droopy. He
was getting it. Okay, So let's keep going while Allison's
doing that. So yeah, I mean, I don't know. This

(01:02:16):
time code is kind of lame because it's just like describing,
like you know what, like all the things that in
cells believe. It's almost like guys like, yeah, we've known
this stuff for a long time, and it's not it's
not baseless anyways. So let me see. I can just
read to some of this, So I think I will

(01:02:40):
let me just find because then it might be better than
hearing like a robot say it. So all right, so
we'll go We'll jump to the article itself. See if
you guys can see it. I'm just gonna check and see, Yeah,
you guys can see it, all right. And in the

(01:03:05):
article this is the it's showing clips from or like
images from the show Adolescents. So let's go ahead and
read through some of this article, all right. Ranking below
this alpha male category of chads are betas, men of
average appearance and with the ability to maintain a relationship,

(01:03:25):
and then in cells males too unattractive to achieve sexual success.
This is how they're describing it, all right. In cells
believe that women take advantage of beta's financially or for
other reasons, and that beta's end up being cheated on
and used. I don't know how widespread this belief is,
but we do have a system, the divorce system, child custody, alimony,

(01:03:50):
et cetera, that essentially incentivizes women to do this to men.
And in fact, divorces can be very profitable for women
in the right kind of marriage. So why wouldn't they
do that? And I'm not saying that they're all prone
to doing it, but the incentive structure is there, and
this is why Allison said that divorce lawyers benefit a

(01:04:11):
lot from this kind of this narrative about men. So
let me see what you guys are saying. I see
the vocal chat or the the the special chat is
pretty special today. So let's see. I want to see
what you guys are saying. Luke Skywalker was an inceel No.

(01:04:32):
I think he was focused on being a Jedi. That's
how you become a Jedi. You don't you don't get
laid if you guys know that, but you can use
the force. Uh, you guys aren't saying much. You're just
kind of being silly. That's fine, be silly, hang out,
that's cool. I will see if Alston comes back. I'm
not sure if she will. Apparently they have a blackout.

(01:04:52):
I guess it's really cold up there, so all right.
Then they explain that terminali comes terminology for this comes
the matrix. Blah blah blah. Don't really care. And then
of course they go to Elliott Roger, because this is
like the go to example today in cells glorify Elliott Roger,

(01:05:13):
a twenty two year old who penned a one hundred
and thirty seven page in cell manifesto before killing six
people and injuring fourteen others in California in twenty fourteen. Okay,
notice this is like a trick. Okay, Whenever they tell
you this sexist person hurt people, they usually mean men,
because if they hurt women, they would say women. But

(01:05:36):
when they don't say women and they say instead people
or students or some kind of gender neutral term, it
means that they hurt men. And in Elliott's Roger's case,
I believe, and I could look it up to confirm it,
but it was a minority of women, maybe two, but
mostly it was men. So we're looking at, you know,
killing six people. I think four of them were men.

(01:05:57):
Some of them were his roommates and injuring. Many others,
mostly men, were hurt and killed by this. And yeah,
he was I guess he was struggling with relationships. But
if you guys don't know this, Elliott Roger's problem was
he had an abusive stepmother and that's where the source

(01:06:20):
of a lot of his ire came from. His father
was a very rich Hollywood producer, but he was not
around because he was flying around doing things, you know,
And so Elliott Rodger lived with a woman that was
not his mother. His mother stayed in I forget, but
it was some of European country and she stayed behind

(01:06:43):
there when his father moved to Hollywood with his new wife,
and his new wife treated Elliott Roger like shit until
she and basically demanded that she have her own kids.
She didn't want to raise him, and so he ended
up basically just like an absolute mess. And eventually, because
he desired to be with his mother, he started to

(01:07:06):
desire women, and he wanted a specific kind of woman
because he was looking for you know, I guess, like
something normal and peaceful, but never got it, unfortunately, and
he ended up lashing out the Supreme gentleman, as it were,
So how do they explain men who have hurt or

(01:07:28):
killed their partners? They were ideologues of a movement, that
what ideologies of movements? Who are married? I are you
talking about? I don't know what you're talking about. Your
your phrasing is nonsensical. So Shaft five things, says, intel
is another word for lowly white man syndrome and guys

(01:07:49):
who can't get girlfriends because I'm an asshole to women.
And they wonder why. Actually, significant number, maybe even a majority,
of in cels are not white. They're minority men and
their men with disability and some mental health challenges and
autism and stuff. But nice try Shaft. Of course, you
know you don't care about that because you're not you.

(01:08:09):
You're interested in pushing a narrative of your own. So yeah,
sorry to tell you break it to you, man, but
most in cells probably are actually not white. Okay, But anyway,
like Elliott Roger was half Asian, I think, yeah, he was,
Like he was half Asian and I don't know what
the other half was. So uh. Twenty five four years later,

(01:08:32):
twenty five year old Toronto in cel Alec Manassian. It's
Alec not Alex carried out a deadly rampage that left
ten people dead and injured sixteen others. Again, that's not
true because while he said what he needed to say
during the interview with police, it was later revealed that
by his lawyer and others that it wasn't because of

(01:08:52):
an in cell ideology, but rather because of basically workplace
stressors that drove him over the edge. So his job,
it wasn't And he actually had a pretty normal like
social circle, so that's not true either. But and this
was debunked years ago, like years ago, and yet these

(01:09:12):
people are still gonna like trot out the same old
talking points because that's the purpose of it. It's not
really to address the issue. It's just to like maintain
the frame, as it were, of you know, the Intels
being very dangerous people despite the fact that they're probably
like the least effectual people. And that's not a bad thing.

(01:09:34):
It's just a truth. So all right, Uh, let's see
what are you guys saying in the chat. If I'm
the president, I think I'm entitled to boot my pants,
thank you very much. That's your business, not mine. Get
Islam out of America. Now working on it. I think
it's not up to me. Let's see uh in a

(01:09:59):
yarready that you haven't said anything shafts since then, So
I guess I guess you're just walking away from that
discussion now that you know that, all right. And then
there was Jake Davidson when I was shooting spree in Plymouth,
killing five people, including a father and his three year
old daughter. Again, remember, whenever they say people, they mean men.
If there was women, they would just say it. If

(01:10:20):
a guy killed ten women, they would say a guy
killed ten women or girls. But if they if they
say people were killed, it usually means men. They don't
want to they don't want to refer because then then
you have to like think, oh, there are male victims here, right,
and that's just not important to these people. A new
study published in Aggression and Violent Behavior says most insults

(01:10:41):
don't engage in physical violence, but the normalization of misogynistic
and aggressive rhetoric online creates an environment where violent fantasies
and actions are validated. Again, what about assassinations of like
political pundits and stuff is what does that does that
account for? Allison said, she's getting to another location, all right,

(01:11:09):
Purlog the Giant says, Lol, you never had a girlfriend. Okay,
I mean, I'm I'm like fifty two years old, I
don't really care, and I'm married, so sure, I guess
I guess she's not my girlfriend. She's my wife and
we'll be of ten years in December. But you know,
thanks for that really like well thought out and logical

(01:11:31):
argument that you made. Really appreciate it, all right. So, yeah,
rhetoric violent rhetoric. That doesn't there's no such thing as
violent rhetoric. It's just words. They can't be violent, they
don't hurt you. Uh, normalization of that again, you know,
I'm not the weird. Those aren't the guys that were essentially,

(01:11:55):
you know, calling for like people to be killed and
and then acting on it. It's not that. So the
study identifies several priorities for future research, such as the
role of mental health conditions like anxiety depresident of neurodivergence,
so what they're going to do anything about that. The
team conclude there is a need to examine the pathways

(01:12:16):
and mechanisms of radicalization, as well as protective factors that
could mitigate risks of violent behavior. Understanding how mass attacks
are glorified within inseell communities, and how these acts are
interpreted as symbols of grievance is also critical for developing
strategies to counteract such narratives. So they don't actually want
to solve the problem. They just want to complain about

(01:12:37):
the problem as usual. This is how it almost always goes.
So they never want to solve the problem. They just
want to whine about it because like, these guys do
need help, like a lot of men, they're in dire
straits and we should be supporting them. And one of
the ways to do is give them a healthy community

(01:12:59):
to be a part of. I actually do believe that
insell forums and Reddit and stuff are actually like they're
not healthy for anyone because it becomes a weird, toxic
circle jerk there. And I think that what you need
is something that you know, not for the sake of
monitoring anybody, but like to give them a healthier place

(01:13:20):
to like feel included, like a space of their own.
But the problem is that male spaces are always broken
up by women and feminists, so they and because they're
worried that this something bad is going on, so they
don't allow that to happen. So that's an issue as well.
So uh, tangle Hierarchy says, why are you pushing a narrative?
What narrative are you talking about? Okay, so hypnosis go

(01:13:48):
out to go out and unprogram all these liberals. I
don't know what that means. There's no way Brian can
get a girlfriend. Lindsey would be pissed. I'll look, one
woman is enough, Okay. I can't. I can't do I
can't do that. I don't I just this too much work.
You guys, you don't know. Women are a lot of work.
I'm telling you. So all right, let me see if Alison.

(01:14:10):
I haven't heard anything from her yet. She's trying to
solve this problem. I'm sure she's gonna take ten minutes
to explain how, you know, her whole adventure. So I'm
going to move on to something else in the meantime.
So let's look at a video by well, let's look

(01:14:31):
at Lisa Brighton's post here on X. So here you
have Lisa Brighton. I'm going to turn this off so
that you guys can see it over here that are
watching on the vertical. This is on X. Lisa Brighton

(01:14:52):
says a recently published peer reviewed article in a feminist
academic journal aims to broaden conventional ideas of violence to
include even the anticipation of potential harm. The researchers assert
that violence doesn't need intention or an instigator, and that
just existing within the Western capitalist cis hetero patriarchal regime

(01:15:13):
transforms daily experiences into arenas of trauma and violence. Basically,
men are perpetrators just for existing. This is not a joke.
This is not a joke. This is a real, published,
peer reviewed article in a feminist academic demic journal. So

(01:15:34):
we're gonna look. I'll look at this maybe on its own. Yeah,
I can get I can get real close, so you
guys can see it. So let's share this tab. Let
me look at what you guys are saying really quick
before I move on. Let's see box TV says wise
words from a married man. Yep, tangled hierarchy says people

(01:15:58):
is a mixed gender term, narrative pusher. No, you don't
understand how the media works, my man. If women are
the primary victims, or even a plurality like a significant number,
then that will be the focus of the post. They'll
say this number of women were harmed in this instance.
You can find countless examples. But if they don't say

(01:16:21):
that and they just say people, it usually means a
majority of men were the victims, because it doesn't work
as well. And actually, the fact that you think I'm
pushing a narrative because I'm telling you how they do
that means that you have actually fallen prey to that
narrative yourself, because you're the one saying, well, it could
be both, but I obviously it can be. But my

(01:16:44):
point is the reason why they choose those words is
because they're trying to get you to see it a
certain way, because if they're too specific, then it's going
to like minimize the impact they want, the emotional impact
they want you to get. Your sources. I don't look,
I'm doing the show. Okay, Like, if if you want

(01:17:05):
to like debate or whatever, you can come on the
show and fight fight me if you want to stop
pushing narrative and putting words in my mouth. He's so
mad source question mark source. This guy's a soyjack in
real life. Okay, So here's an article. Uh, this is
the paper. Okay, I've grown it's just like the uh abstract,

(01:17:28):
but we can probably find the whole thing. I've grown
fearful of any rustle behind me. Defining anticipating discriminatory violence
as violence. So if a woman feels like she's in danger,
according to this paper, it means she is. This is
and this kind of attitude is why we live in
such a let's just say, a society that is completely

(01:17:53):
in danger of losing all of its rights because women
feel unsafe. And it's not just in America. This is
in Canada. This is New Brunswick, this and on Ottawa.
Canada doesn't have free speech, by the way, so if
this like passes into law, then the Canada's cooked is done. Okay,
So I am slightly feeding the trolls because Alison would

(01:18:16):
totally feed the trolls. But like Tangle, hierarchy has nothing left.
He's just like hurling insults. You can stay do whatever,
man spurg out. I get your view, and it's it
only helps us out. So thanks for contributing to the algorithm.
All right, m abstract marginalize people. That means not men

(01:18:37):
fear and expect violence often daily. This prompts us to
ask is anticipating violence of violence in and of itself?
Asking and answering this question extends the feminist critical Race,
Violence and Trauma Project studies project of broadening traditional understandings
of violence to name ignored forms of violence as violence,

(01:18:58):
epistemic or representational violence. Ultimately, we argue that anticipating discriminatory
violence is violence in and of itself. What would be
the purpose of making this claim? Like, that's the only
thing that matters. What would be the purpose of making

(01:19:19):
this claim if it isn't to basically grasp at more
power and control over people? I don't see any other
reason to do it. And like Canada is like it's
so it's probably like closer to communism than any other
country that the US deals with is Canada. It's probably

(01:19:39):
the most fucked and we're like right next door too,
but anyway to do so? First, we contest the common
assumption that violence is intentional. The idea that violence needs
to be intentional is a long held myth that functions
to deny various forms of violence. What so can violence

(01:20:01):
be unintentional? Oh more control? What does that mean? Oh?
My goodness? Uh? The idea that violence needs to okay,
I read that. Second, we challenge the idea that violence
requires a clear perpetrator. Systems of oppression and discriminatory ideologies
enact violence, but there often is no clear perpetrator. When

(01:20:24):
we are preoccupied with claiming that violence involves an intentional actor,
we neglect to attend to the ways in which oppressive
ideologies and systems structure systemic structures of institutional structures of
systems marginalize people's daily lives and experiences of anticipating violence.
Common gobbledegook. Living under the Western capitalist cis hetero patriarchal

(01:20:49):
regime renders the everyday a god a site of trauma
and violence? Who does is anyone in the chat actually
buying any of this? Are you buying any of this? Like?
Do you believe in systemic western capitalist cis hetero patriarchal

(01:21:11):
regimes that just are a site of trauma and violence?
Just living under that system is violence? Does anyone actually
believe that? Like? Like, are you that retarded that you
think this is at all valid? And this is a
peer reviewed academic paper that is making this claim. All right,

(01:21:33):
just just remember somebody got paid a lot of money
to write this drivel. Oh you're back, Okay, what happened? No?
I know, I know. Let me let me just plug
you in. Nobody can hear you right now? Yeah, no,

(01:21:55):
no I can, but I haven't plugged you in, so
the audience can't. I have to like put your camera
in in here with your audio. Okay, you're good now,
So just.

Speaker 2 (01:22:05):
Just zoom in a bit because I can't do that.

Speaker 1 (01:22:08):
Uh how do I zoom in? Well, hold on, let
me let me see if I can do it over here. Uh,
I might not be able to.

Speaker 2 (01:22:19):
All right, So we I just had a massive blackout.
It wasn't voidcat.

Speaker 1 (01:22:24):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:22:25):
So now I'm on like at where I have a
a generator and nobody else in the town has power,
so don't tell them. But yeah, that's it's it's just
well out of my hands. It's for some reason winter
is unusually difficult to deal with this year or something,

(01:22:46):
or maybe it's three I atlas. Who knows, Yeah, who knows.
But anyway, so I'm back doing what I can too.

Speaker 1 (01:22:55):
All right, No, it's okay, we're we're uh so I fail.
It is the insul article and now we're looking at
the least a brighton thing. Okay.

Speaker 2 (01:23:07):
I I caught a little bit of it, and I
just want to say that I find myself. I have
grown fearful of any feminist tweet, and I would like
to say that that means I live in a feminist

(01:23:28):
informed the theocracy, and that it is violence against me.
That feminism is literal by existing, is literal violence against
me because I find it well, I mean, I'm not
particularly afraid of it because I don't think feminists can
really do anything to me. Oh boy, now in before
they do. But yeah, like I don't fear the cis

(01:23:52):
hetero patriarchal. I fear feminists. And it's not that I'm
like I'm afraid of them like they they are. I'm
afraid of what they can do because I've had it
done to me and it wasn't fun. So I would
say that the biggest purveyors of fear in my life
are feminists themselves. How bad is my sound?

Speaker 1 (01:24:09):
By the way, sounds fine?

Speaker 2 (01:24:12):
Oh okay, yeah it's bad.

Speaker 1 (01:24:14):
Then yeah it's not bad.

Speaker 2 (01:24:16):
We have an actual what are they called microphone at
the moment, So.

Speaker 1 (01:24:23):
What are you using as your microphone? Your phone?

Speaker 2 (01:24:26):
No, not my phone. I'm just using my laptop. So
there you go.

Speaker 1 (01:24:32):
Yeah, I don't know.

Speaker 2 (01:24:35):
The phone video is so huge, like it's he wants
to capture my entire I'm actually pretty close to the
to the s boop, I'm quite close, but doesn't It's
like wide screen for some reason.

Speaker 1 (01:24:50):
So hello, I mean we just gotta like deal with
it for this.

Speaker 2 (01:24:53):
Yeah, I guess, so, I guess, all right.

Speaker 1 (01:24:56):
So yeah, so the U I was reading article or
the abstract.

Speaker 2 (01:25:02):
I wonder why men feel so lonely and isolated when
their very presence is considered a reason to eject them
from society.

Speaker 1 (01:25:12):
Yeah, I grew.

Speaker 2 (01:25:13):
Okay, all right, let's go into Scott Galloway.

Speaker 1 (01:25:17):
Then, uh, well I'm not finished with this yet. Oh
so no, no, I was reading it and then you
jumped in. So okay. Systems of oppression and discriminatatory ideologies
and act violence. So just systems existing, mm hmm, But
there is often no clear perpetrator. When we are preoccupied

(01:25:38):
with claiming the violence involves an intentional actor, we neglect
to attend to the ways in which oppressive ideologies and
systems structure marginalize people's daily lives and experiences of anticipating violence.
So the again, just the existence of these systems means
that people live under the system anticipating violence, which is

(01:26:02):
itself violence to these people, living under the Western capitalist
cis hetero patriarchal regime renders the everyday. The every day
a site of trauma and violence. Just living under a
Western capitalist cis hetero patriarchal regime. This framework for reconceptualizing

(01:26:23):
what counts as violence creates a space to move beyond
violence in its most traditional forms. The punch, the slur,
anticipating violence is the logical consequence of living under systems
of oppression.

Speaker 2 (01:26:39):
And then this again, this is all just unproven assertion,
just they just randomly decided to make to prove, to
allege that this is happening, and we're supposed to agree
this is. None of this stuff is proven, None of
this has been subject to any kind of academic rigor.
It's just supposed to be accepted at face value because

(01:27:03):
they've said it, and that's it.

Speaker 1 (01:27:05):
Yep. Also, Alison, you don't get to claim the same
the same thing when you said earlier like I fear,
I know, you were basically throwing it in their face.
I fear feminists, you know, attacking me that. That doesn't
work though, because you see, they don't have power. You
have power because you are in the side of men,

(01:27:25):
even though you're a woman. But you are the one
that has a systemic power, not them, Not those you know,
multi million dollar academics with tenure that are just like
telling us this shit from their ivory towers and then
like sharing this. They're all of their articles like people
in the media and the political class and the you know,

(01:27:47):
the corporations, et cetera, to like use that to inform
law and policy. No, no, no, that that's not institutional power.
They're just punching up. They're always punching up. You see,
you're the one punching down. I'm poor widow. Women's anyway,
Alison dropped again? Now, Allison, Alison, I can hear you,

(01:28:16):
but your camera turned off or not? Let me see
if she dropped again. She dropped again anyway, all right,
I don't know Today's today might be like kind of cooked.
All right. So Albatross sent us a super chap for
five dollars and says, was this article written by a

(01:28:38):
rabbit or deer? How are you a grown human being
and right about being afraid of literally everything? Pathetic? Yeah,
it is pathetic, but it makes the money. You see,
these are these are these are grifters like real ones.
So anyway, let me see Alison. Are you back? Oh? Oh,

(01:29:01):
she's coming back. I think Alison are you there? Uh?
All right, Well, I'm just going to keep ongoing. See

(01:29:25):
if anybody send another super If you want to send
us a message, you can go to feedbadgmer dot com
forward slash just the tip to send us a message,
and uh hopefully I will. I will get it from you.
Tangle hierarchy is spurging out over there in the chat.

(01:29:48):
Keep spurging, bro, I mean, I appreciate the view. I
appreciate it. Thanks for thanks for coming stick around if
you wish. Okay, let's go on to the next bit.
Uh debate you on?

Speaker 3 (01:30:04):
What?

Speaker 1 (01:30:05):
Debate me? Bro?

Speaker 2 (01:30:08):
Where's the demate.

Speaker 3 (01:30:11):
On?

Speaker 1 (01:30:11):
Now? You had to adjust the zoom?

Speaker 2 (01:30:14):
No, no, I'm using a completely different camera because that
one's crapping out or some ship. How do you like
your maasoline camera?

Speaker 1 (01:30:23):
Whatever? I mean, I just want to get through this
because I'm hungry. Yeah, it looks fine, all right, So
for some reason there's like another whatever. All right, So
I'm gonna move on to Scott Galloway. Now all right,
so let me see this one is do I have, like, yeah,

(01:30:45):
we have a so this is news Nation. Scott Galloway
is a professor at NYU of marketing and business and
brand strategy and stuff, and he's done a couple of debates.
I think he did one on It was either a
Chris Williamson or Diary of CEO, I don't remember which,

(01:31:07):
and they were talking with like some other people about
what is going on between men and women PLU. Scott
Galloway was definitely in over his head in that one.
So he is his primary thing is like money. He
does have some statistics on this, but I don't know
that he has the solution. But let us let us

(01:31:32):
get into it. So I'll do the intro and then
we'll get into some of the time codes. Let me
know if you can hear this.

Speaker 2 (01:31:38):
I can.

Speaker 1 (01:31:40):
Oh, I gotta, I gotta, I gotta do this thing
over again. Hold on a second, just the moment. Sometimes
this thing like stops, it stops like sharing or whatever,
like it stops sharing the audio. Okay, all right, so
let's try it now.

Speaker 7 (01:32:00):
To the quietest and the so Okay, going back to
the beginning of this, some of the most important stories
are also the quietest and the most underreported. My Next
Guest says a widespread social crisis is simmering under the
surface and in desperate need of attention. NYU professor and

(01:32:21):
best selling author Scott Galloway has dedicated much of his
career to exploring why men in America are struggling. In
his new book, Notes on Being a Man, Galloway offers
a path forward for men and the parents of young
men and boys all dealing with feelings of isolation, suffering
from economic inequality, and struggling with the evolving message of

(01:32:43):
the Democratic Party. Galloway argues they need an aspirational vision
of masculinity. I sat down with them a short time ago.

Speaker 1 (01:32:50):
To discuss all right, Yeah, he was on Diary Thank You,
Murder of Crows. Yeah, Diary of CEO with Louise Perry.
That was I always forget her name. Every time I
think of Louise Perry and I want to say her name,
I think of Laura Bates and they're just not the
same at all, So I don't say anything. I'm just like, oh,
it was somebody, but irrelevant. Yeah, he didn't have like

(01:33:11):
I think he was a bit in over his head.
Like he wasn't because The problem is that when you're
so like this woman does her little opening and she
talks about like economic inequality, which is like a weird
buzzword to say, because I don't think. I don't think
that men are worried that there's another dude somewhere making

(01:33:33):
more than them. I think men are worried that they
can't afford things that would attract them a mate, so
that they would have trouble buying a house or having
buying a car, or something that they can use to
like provide for a family, right, not even like necessarily
to compete with other men, but just to be able

(01:33:53):
to say, here, I can you know, I'm able to
give like a stable household to a family, and that's
what I want. And another thing is that, again, I
don't think men are concerned about equality or inequality, rather
than they are concerned that women have really unrealistic standards

(01:34:16):
right now. And a lot of that comes from perhaps
social media, so like you know, and also.

Speaker 2 (01:34:23):
Also the underselling of men as partners. But well, I
was listening and I'm like, well, perhaps the situation is
partly due to this gigantic, trillion dollar industry that siphons
money from taxpayers and people who want to buy groceries
to programs that teach us all not to get in

(01:34:45):
relationships and have families like who basically undersellment. Like we
were talking about that earlier. Like maybe part of our
economic woes is we now have this gigantic pipeline from
the people who are productive to a bunch of people
who can make really good excuses. Why they why they're
owed your money and I don't even want to talk

(01:35:05):
about money. Why they're owed the things that you make.
So if you go and you and you do all
the work to have three hundred potatoes at the end
of the year, they're owed three hundred and fifty of them.
You know, like this is this is like when they
talk about economic inequality, the greatest driver of that is
the government.

Speaker 1 (01:35:25):
Yeah, absolutely at this point.

Speaker 2 (01:35:29):
Like look you every single politician, it doesn't they're democrat,
they say they're socialist, They get into political office, and
suddenly they become multimillionaires. How did that happen? You know that?

Speaker 1 (01:35:44):
How that is?

Speaker 2 (01:35:45):
You know how that happened? Because they they get they
invest and they have inside scoops. Right, none of them
have our interests in mind. And also they get they
open up a line of cash from the tax pair
of van and it doesn't Matt Like. People are like, oh, well,
we could just print ourselves out of any Yeah. The

(01:36:06):
problem with that is every time the government gives itself
a loan in the form of a treasury, your potatoes
go up fifty cents. That's the way it works. They
inject more money into the system, everything costs more. And
who is responsible for making all the products that underwrite
this entire thing? Us? All right?

Speaker 1 (01:36:30):
All right, so first time code, well he talks about inflation.
I don't know if that's like really I can just
get to the part where he talks about man sure
because like the yeah, like the other stuff is like
he talks about you know, the tariffs and stuff, and frankly,
like guys don't care about that, like they just you know,

(01:36:53):
they're that's just not related. So we'll go to seven
fifty one.

Speaker 2 (01:36:59):
I mean, I'm learning about those things, but you want
me to go back to that. Let me see, let
me see what it has to say. How discussions how
Americans know inflation is real despite official numbers knowing it
downlinking economic cardships of feeling of anxiety and failure, especially
among young people who are struggling with housing and employment. Yes, right, okay,

(01:37:21):
why are young people struggling right now? Because we have
had years of government graft eroding the purchasing power. Right,
and it's all in the US, it's all under it
by the the world Reserve currency. And then we have
also even the taxes don't even compare to losing your

(01:37:42):
purchasing power through inflation. And that is literally the government
writes out alone to itself, and that it injects the
economy with more money. Right, and what happens everything is
everything costs more. And by right, what is the government

(01:38:04):
created by writing a loan to itself? What is the
government added to the the net body of things that
we can buy by creating a loan to itself? Nothing? Nothing.
The government simply takes from all of the productivity that
we do that we create us. And then here's the

(01:38:26):
other thing. Productivity throughout history has been tied to the
relationship between men and women. Now use the example of
hunter gatherer societies. Hunter gatherer societies make it so that
men's labor incentivizes women's labor. That incentivizes men's labor. Now,

(01:38:46):
how do they do that, and they do that because
they're at the razor's edge of survival. So if they
screw this up, they're dead, right. And the way that
they do this is the best hunter gets the best gatherer.
Gatherer gets the best hunter, right. So there is incentive
throughout the tribe for both men and women to provide

(01:39:06):
the best that they can. And in our society that
incentive has been broken in favor of a narrative in
which men exploit women and women are exploited. So we've
basically broken the productive engine of our society, which is
the relationship between men and women, men and women incentivizing
each other to be productive. That is the engine of

(01:39:28):
our society. So yeah, everything is going to become unaffordable
because we are we are not productive the way we were.
Everything is going to cost more, everything is going to
get more difficult because everything was easier when the productive
engine wasn't broken. And it is broken because of feminism,

(01:39:52):
maybe other factors that feminism is a symptom of, but regardless,
what feminism is doing is not helping justifying the engine
being broken and calling it progress.

Speaker 1 (01:40:04):
Okay, yeah, and well again, one of the reasons why
I wanted to skip this part because I think Scott
Galloway is trying to make a link between men's problems
and the way they voted, because like, men overwhelmingly came
out and voted for Trump in the last election, a

(01:40:25):
lot of Latino men actually, like probably the largest demographic,
and I think people are scrambling to understand it, and
then they're like, well, he's not gonna do things for you,
And it's like, we didn't vote for him because we
wanted a genie. We didn't want someone to grant wishes.
We weren't looking for a fairy godmother. We wanted someone
that was gonna not continue to destroy the country so

(01:40:46):
that the people who live here, who are Americans, who
are citizens, can build their own shit unimpeded by the state.
Because guess what, the state is an obstacle. It is
an obstacle. It serves a purpose right at the minimum,
it protects the rights of its citizens, like by protecting
its borders, by protecting you know, domestic threats, whatever, maybe

(01:41:12):
continuing good relations with other countries who can trade with them,
but at least in a fair sense. But for the
most part, like men don't vote for Gibbs, Men vote
for liberty so that they can build something, and they
can't do that if the state is subsidizing their own destruction,
which is why they voted the way they did. It's
very simple, like that's just what's the reality. Men don't

(01:41:35):
see the government as a genie or a fairy godmother.
It doesn't grant wishes, it doesn't just give them shit. Okay,
it's best served being out of the way, and that's
what they want to do. And so it was either
that or you know, like what women voted for, which
was infinity abortions and infinity migrants, that we're going to

(01:41:55):
take their jobs. So like they were like, no, we
don't want that. We want you know, we want you
to look out for us. And that's why they voted
that way. And Scott Galloway is trying to find ways
to criticize this because he thinks men want the same
thing women want, and they don't, you know, women want
infinity free shit. Men realize that's not how the world works.

(01:42:16):
And in fact, if they gave them that, then men
would be even worse off because women would never they
would look at men's said I don't need you for anything.
Now you can just work, and we'll just tax the
shit out of you and we'll just give all the
money to women. And that is what it does. Literally,
like have you seen well, like.

Speaker 2 (01:42:36):
Gives to women but takes a gigantic chunk in the meantime. Yeah,
Like the women that they're giving this stuff to are
not getting rich off of it. But somehow the people
who are directing the funds to women are And somebody says,
we're not billionaires, it's billionaires. Yes, billionaires are doing this shit.

(01:42:56):
They're doing this shit. Soros is doing this shit, that club,
Carl Schwazz. You know, they're all doing it. They're all
part of the system. Surprise, surprise.

Speaker 1 (01:43:06):
Your problem is but the government is what makes it possible. Like,
the government is what makes taxation like this possible. Yes,
so I think they corporations don't exist without the government.
They don't. So you can hear them billionaires if you
want to, But that doesn't answer that. The thing is
if a man is in a marriage with a woman

(01:43:29):
and they're happy together, they don't need anyone. Like where
I live, there are plenty of people who just do
it all on their own and they have a community
and they raise their own You know, kids, they educate them,
they grow their own food, they tend to their own animals.
They don't need the government for that. It's literally what
the Amish does. Like they live without it and they're happy. Okay,

(01:43:51):
So like the government getting involved, yes, with corporations, sure
and billionaires, sure whatever, they form the conditions for this,
for this sickness. So like, but the but the solution,
the antidote, if it were, is men and women coming
together freely. The problem is is that we've created a

(01:44:14):
situation where the majority of women are not interested in
the majority of men, and the men can't build anything
of their own so that they can attract a woman.
Because women, they they get, they get more education, they
get they make more money, they base you know, they're
basically doing better. But it's not it's not organic. It's artificial.

(01:44:38):
Like they get like bullshit jobs at Google and ship
you know, when they eat avocado toast all day and
play ping pong. But at some point they're going to
be replaced with AI and they're not going to be
prepared for that, and it's it's going to be a disaster.

Speaker 2 (01:44:52):
So yeah, okay, So people are saying in the in
the in the special chat tangled hierarchy. You fucking love women? Okay? Why? Okay?
I am a woman and I absolutely hate it when
men say stuff like that, what is it you love
about women? Okay?

Speaker 4 (01:45:14):
Right?

Speaker 2 (01:45:17):
Is it our butts?

Speaker 3 (01:45:18):
Like?

Speaker 2 (01:45:19):
What is this generic thing that all women have that
you love? Obviously, I, as an individual haven't developed it
or earned it, so I don't want it, all right,
And then here's the next thing, So, uh, what do
we have to say that that women are First of all,

(01:45:42):
it was feminism that I said. Okay, Feminism has never
been proven. There is no neutral, ideologically neutral body of
evidence that proved feminist feminist premises correct, right, and it
BA basically just creates the evidence for itself. So it

(01:46:04):
is not proven. Nobody has to believe it. So we
have to look at it for what it has done.
And it has promoted this idea that men are a
net negative to women. That's what it's done. It's said
that men oppress women. It maybe says, well, if you
submit to feminism, you'll stop doing that sometime in the

(01:46:25):
future or maybe for a single second. But again, right
back to the first step, it hasn't been proven, and
we've injected this narrative into the relationship between men and women.
Where do you think productivity comes from? Where do you
think desire to build something comes from? To produce something,
to grow something. It comes from the desire to have

(01:46:49):
a family, right to have a wife, to have children,
to have a husband, to have children. That's what makes
both men and women productive. And again go back to
the hunter gather example. They don't have any room for
error because they're on the edge of survival and they
know this, so they make sure that men incentivize the

(01:47:11):
productivity of women and women incentivize the productivity of men.
Where do you think the economy came from that first
group of people, two groups of people exchanging, hunters and
gatherers exchanging. That's the first unit of our economy and
it remains the fundamental unit of our economy, the fundamental

(01:47:31):
reason why people are productive instead of just simply being
consumers of things. Okay, when you destroy that, imagine productivity
it's like a I don't know, like you're going to
a party and everybody brings their brings, their casse role

(01:47:53):
or their dessert or whatever. Right now, productivity is making
sure everybody brings something so they all have it. In
the buffet. Okay, what happens when people just start taking
without bringing it without putting something back. What ends up
happening if you get too many people who go to
the buffet and take without putting their own item back

(01:48:14):
in is you have a bear buffet. There's nothing left.
That's what happens when productivity ceases, and that's what's happening
with our society. Productivity is ceasing because the essential unit,
the essential dynamic that creates productive people is gone, and
it's beyond because we have embraced a narrative, and there

(01:48:35):
may be other reasons why we embrace that narrative, we
have embraced that narrative that men are a net negative
to women, so that men incentivizing women's productivity and women's
incentivizing men's productivity. Broken, we've taken a frickin baseball bat
to our engine. And then we're like scratching our head.

(01:48:56):
Why is there so much inflation? Why can nobody buy
a ha? Why doesn't it work anymore? Because we've taken
a baseball bat to our engine. And while we could say, well, billionaires,
if billionaires certainly haven't helped with their pet projects, but
they are what actually did it? You want to continue

(01:49:18):
to blame them, Sure, kill all the billionaires. See if
it changes anything, it won't. You still will not have
You will still not be able to pay for your groceries.
You still won't be able to buy a house, You
still won't be able to buy a car, you will
still never be in a position to have a family.
That is not the problem. They are at best a

(01:49:41):
symptom of a problem, which is consolidation of money in
a smaller and smaller and smaller group of people. Which
part of the problem, and part of the reason why
that's happening is the government, Like look at the look
at all the AI stuff happening now, Okay, all of that,

(01:50:01):
all of that, and then the head of Navidia saying, oh,
what our exit plan? Well he said it as a joke,
but it probably isn't. Is that we're going to become
too big to fail and then the government's going to
have to come in and bail us out. You didn't
think that would happen, would you. Yeah, you could create
a socialist system, except it's not socialism for people. It's

(01:50:23):
socialism for corporations, because that's how it works. Okay, anyway, So.

Speaker 1 (01:50:31):
Let's get to the to the to the bit where
he talks about because I think this is the part
that I was.

Speaker 3 (01:50:38):
More interested in suicide Elizabeth for.

Speaker 1 (01:50:43):
Bit, he talks about men's issues here.

Speaker 3 (01:50:48):
Yeah, it would be hard to identify a cohort that
has fallen further faster than young men over the last
twenty years. If you walk into a Morgan, there's five
people died by suicide Elizabeth. For men, so four times
likely to kill themselves. We have a homeless and an
opiated crisis. But what we really have is a male
homeless and a male opiate crisis. There's three times more
likely to be addicted twelve times when we are likely to

(01:51:09):
be incarcerated. Only one in three men under the age
of thirty is in a relationship, whereas two and three
women are in a relationship. You think, well, that's mathematically impossible.
It's not because women are dating older because then.

Speaker 2 (01:51:19):
What that much that's not possible.

Speaker 1 (01:51:25):
Well, yeah, I don't know if that's true, but I
do think women are. Well, here's the thing. Women tend
to marry up and so if they're making more money
than the men of their same age range, then they'll
look at older men who are doing even better, and
they'll probably be interested in them, because like a woman
looks at her situation compares it to like how much

(01:51:47):
better can I do? And then that's where she goes.
So I could. I don't think it's happening across the board,
but I do think that a lot of women are
dating older men because those men are well, if they
are economically higher up they do, I'll put it that way,
if they if there was a man their age that
was economically making more than they did him, but there

(01:52:07):
probably aren't. So it's probably more likely they're dating older,
like a lot older, not just a few years, you know,
mm hmm. So, Or they're dating the same guy, like
a bunch of women are with the same guy, you know,
you know that what's the what's the Reddit page? Are
we are we sating the same guy? Or something like that?

Speaker 2 (01:52:29):
It's Facebook? And then there was the tapacebook, the t
apps that sort of confirmed that all these women are
basically dating the same man.

Speaker 1 (01:52:38):
Yeah crazy, All right, let's keep going.

Speaker 3 (01:52:44):
Man, you have now one in seven men are qualify
as NEAT. They're neither an education, employment, or training. They're
essentially doing nothing. One out of three men under the
age of twenty five still lives at home. One out
of five men at thirty is still living at home.
So you have essentially a group of people who are
becoming just very unproductive citizens. And the result is the

(01:53:06):
death of despair, trunk driving accidents, suicide.

Speaker 1 (01:53:11):
And I'm pausing it there for a second. So he
knows the problem, he sees the the well the outcomes right,
like the the the struggles that young guys are having.
But he also like sort of like talked earlier about
all the problems with the you know, like financially with
the current administration, and he's like baffled that men voted

(01:53:32):
that way. But I think it's again, it goes back
to what I was saying before. They were looking for
opportunities and the Democrats had nothing for them. They were
they they didn't even know how to talk to men.
They were shitting on them constantly, they were shaming them
for not supporting women. And so those men were like, well,
fuck this, you know, and now there there's probably some

(01:53:57):
room to breathe they can like figure this out. And
he's just like, yeah, this is really bad, but he
doesn't have any answers he's not like, you know, these
guys need some I don't know, like we need to
form some kind of social organization, we need to form
a network, We need to help these guys start their
own businesses because a lot of companies are hostile towards men.

(01:54:18):
HR departments, you know, things like that. So but again
just sort of like sit in the stage here. I
don't think he's going to have a solution. All he
can do is talk about the problem. He's got the
data right, so I'll give him that.

Speaker 3 (01:54:33):
I hope you had addiction over doses. Since two thousand
and two, for the last twenty three years, more men
have died incrementally. Not men who are dying from death
to despair, but additional deaths from despair is greater than
the number of young men who are lost in World
War Two. So this is taking a real toll on
households and on young men. And we were off my

(01:54:54):
talking about the struggles of young men. When a boy
loses a male role model at that moment, he's more
likely to be incarcerated and graduating from college. And the
interesting thing about that day, Elizabeth, is that a girl
in a single.

Speaker 1 (01:55:06):
Grade pausing it there for a second, like a father.
I mean he says male role model, but like it
starts with the father.

Speaker 2 (01:55:12):
Father. Yeah, it's a father, that's that's Yeah. If they lose,
we are constructing a situation where we are destroying ourselves
by incentivizing single motherhood.

Speaker 1 (01:55:28):
Yep.

Speaker 2 (01:55:29):
I've looked at the I've looked at the statistics single
mothers are and I actually got into arguments with people
who are Okay, I'm gonna I'm gonna go a place
where it might upset the people who are anti immigration
or are against immigration, single mothers are worse than immigrants.

Speaker 1 (01:55:47):
They vote not anti immigration. That just gives me a
scope on how bad the single mom problem is. He's
still an anti immigration though, Alison, that hasn't changed. But
I'm also anti single mom, so you know, you just
add that to the list, all right.

Speaker 2 (01:56:02):
So they vote overwhelmingly Democrat, and at this point in time,
overwhelmingly Democrat is basically just making more excuses for governments
to print themselves blank checks that we all have to
pay for in our groceries. Right, I mean, honestly, both
sides are sort of like this at this point. But
there may be some hope with one, but they Not

(01:56:26):
only do they keep voting for people who increase the
spending even more than the other side that increases the spending,
they also are a net drain on the tax base,
so they put they take out hundreds of thousands more
than they put in. Okay, Now, the only group of

(01:56:49):
people who is really shouldering the system is men, in
particular married men, who are paying the most amount of taxes.
After that is unreas married men, and then married women
and then single mother So it goes single mother's huge negative,
married men huge positive, single men smaller positive, single sorry,

(01:57:14):
married women smaller positive, and that so it goes back
to the whole thing that men and women incentivize each
other's productivity. So a married woman incentivizes the married men's productivity.
He's putting a lot more back into the system. Single
women with children take more out than they put in.
Single women put a little bit back in, but not

(01:57:37):
too much. And then there's there's these statistics out of
out of New Zealand that show that women only ever
take more out of the system than they put in.
So he got that educated immigrants, Okay, they actually put
in to the system in terms of their taxes, just

(01:57:58):
under married men and just over single men.

Speaker 3 (01:58:05):
Right.

Speaker 2 (01:58:05):
Unfortunately, they also vote for the let's write more blank
texts led the government writing more blank tech checks party. Okay,
which most of those blank checks I don't know if
you guys have noticed go to corporations first. So, yeah,
you're getting hoodwinked by these people, these individuals, whatever party,

(01:58:29):
the Democratic Party, you're definitely getting hoodwinked because they say
that they're for the little guy. They're not. Therefore, whatever
excuse enables government to justify printing yet more blank checks
for itself. And I'm not saying like I don't. The
Republicans also have shown that they expend a lot too.

(01:58:54):
This is a government problem. The government can only ever
take from the economy. It can't create an economy, and
it can't add to the economy. It only ever takes
from it. But the economy itself, the fundamental is the
relationship between men and women, and right now the government

(01:59:16):
is paying for a narrative to destroy that relationship. And
you can, like this guy that I think his name
is Tangled came in and he was like, oh, gender war,
gender war, sure, sure, let's get rid of the gender war,
get rid of feminism. What do you think it means?
What do you think it is to say that men
oppressed women? What do you think that means in terms

(01:59:39):
of a gender war? Don't you think that's pretty much
starting one? And if you want to stop it, then
you got to stop it. You got to stop the
narrative that men oppressed women. Otherwise, what you really are
saying is you want one side to win it.

Speaker 1 (01:59:58):
Okay, all right, anyway, let's get into the rest of this.

Speaker 3 (02:00:03):
Parent Holme has similar outcomes, same rates of college attendance,
same rates of self harm. What it ends up is
that while boys are physically stronger, they're emotionally and neurologically
much weaker than girls. And what we're seeing is the
kind of economic secking sound of economic prosperity being transferred
from young So.

Speaker 1 (02:00:22):
He's saying that boys are emotionally and psychologically weaker than girls,
why are twenty five percent of young women on SSRIs.
I don't think that's true, But I think that men
are actually doing well considering the constant, constant demonizing, and

(02:00:46):
they haven't like burned the country down. Yeah, I mean,
I think that's kind of amazing, to be honest, that
they're like this. They haven't started a violent revolution, and
I hope they don't, but I mean, I think that
speaks to their stoicism, despite everyone telling them that stoicism
is bad.

Speaker 2 (02:01:07):
So, Olivia Kalos says, men do oppress women. No, they don't.
That is your desire to deny a part of your
humanity speaking, Olivia, I don't. I don't want to play
that game personally.

Speaker 1 (02:01:21):
There's no evidence of that. The Nova twenty one gives
a dollar and said, huh.

Speaker 2 (02:01:27):
It's never been proven.

Speaker 1 (02:01:28):
In fact, there's never been proven. You can make claims,
but those are not arguments. You're just saying what you
were told to say by your teachers and by the TV,
and by the news people and by the internet people. Okay,
I just want to following the line. But they said this.
You never questioned it. You never asked yourself if that
was true. You never looked at the data. You're just
following the line. Congratulations, Lemming. You're just saying what you

(02:01:52):
were told to say. So you get a cookie for that.

Speaker 2 (02:01:56):
Olivia says, if you show up in family court, you're
likely to get fifty fifty custody. Yeah, in Kentucky, where
they now have a presumption of shared custody.

Speaker 1 (02:02:05):
I hope that's everywhere.

Speaker 2 (02:02:09):
People like us for that. You're welcome, You're welcome, Okay.

Speaker 1 (02:02:17):
Nob twenty one games us a dollar on rumble it says,
My favorite part of special chat is how you say
feminism is bad and they'll argue with you, but praise
patriarchy is good, and they refuse to prove you wrong. Well,
they need the premise of patriarchy to exist so that
they can continue to have their arguments. And of course
it's not real patriarchy. It's their sort of twisted evil

(02:02:41):
you know, doctor Doom version of patriarchy, which is not
proven either. But anyway, all right, back to Scott Galloway,
old which.

Speaker 3 (02:02:52):
Has happened over the last forty years is having a
district personally negative effect on young men. So you're saying
that young women are better equipped somehow to deal with
all the headwinds that are derailing young men.

Speaker 1 (02:03:07):
That's what the data shows, it doesn't How is it
possible if women are oppressed?

Speaker 2 (02:03:14):
No, they're just that strong, right, No, that's not Yeah, they're.

Speaker 1 (02:03:17):
Just that strong right.

Speaker 2 (02:03:19):
Well yeah, why don't we subject women to a sort
of society wide narrative that they are to blame for everything,
like it's okay, So we got to suit the special chat, right,
and we got some people flipping out in the special
Chat because I said.

Speaker 1 (02:03:34):
That they're communists and feminists in that that's all they do.
They're right welcome.

Speaker 2 (02:03:41):
So they they're flipping out about me saying that women
are not oppressed by men. But I bet this is
the first time in their life they've ever heard that statement.
It's entirely possible for all of them that this is
the first this is the first time you've ever heard that.
So well, I invite you to think when were you

(02:04:03):
convinced that women were oppressed by men? And what argument
was used? Okay, what did that argument also include the
situation for men? Because I'm truly curious, like, when did
you decide to agree with the argument that women are oppressed?

(02:04:24):
When did you sit there and have somebody say, okay,
well this is the argument for it. And was it
just simply oh, women are suffering in this way? Well
did they point out how men are suffering? Did they
tell you how they were waiting the suffering of men
versus the suffering of women? Like what was the argument

(02:04:45):
that convinced you of this instead of writing more bs
in the special chat. Tell me that, tell me the
argument that convinced you that women were oppressed. Go ahead, operationally,
this all right, let's continue, all right?

Speaker 3 (02:05:03):
Should Oftentimes she pours that energy back into her friend
network in her professional life. If a man hasn't cohabitated
or been married by the time he's thirty, there's a
one in three chance he's going to be a substance abuser.
There's this cartoon, Elizabeth of a woman, and I'm.

Speaker 1 (02:05:18):
Going to pause it there for a second. So he says,
when women they like need to release tension or whatever
they're going through, they go to their friend group or
their workplace and they can I guess they feel free
to do that. And then he doesn't even he just
doesn't even address whether or not men can do that too.
But remember, whenever men try to form a space, it

(02:05:41):
gets broken up because men can't are not allowed, are
not allowed to fraternize. I mean, I'm granted they figure
it out a lot of times, but I guess lately
it's been harder. You know, maybe the lockdowns did something
about that. I don't know, but it's definitely been a
phenomenon that no one can ignore now, and so they're

(02:06:02):
like starting to panic. I think that's why this is
like coming up more and more.

Speaker 2 (02:06:07):
Yeah, this is like she says that men are weaker,
and yet again, men are subject to a society wide
threat narrative that blames them for literally everything going wrong
in society, right, and they're also subject to this continuous
campaign against their spaces being able to socialize. Remember gaming comics,

(02:06:32):
all of this stuff had to be colonized, and men
have to be subject to oversight. And of course the
justification for that oversight is the feminist narrative that men
are somehow socializing each other to patriarchy. So any moment
where men are together alone is a potential vector of

(02:06:53):
patriarchy into society. So you know, you have to destroy
all of men being able to just hang out with
each other and support each other. And I've seen this myself.
I've seen support groups for men, men dealing with suicide,
men dealing with rape, men dealing with domestic violence. I've
seen them broken up, I finish, Yeah, I've seen them

(02:07:16):
broken up by feminists, right. And and so men's spaces,
even men's spaces of support, men's sheds, are recently, now
they have to open up the women, so men don't
have spaces that aren't under attack, right, and then they
don't have any artificial boosting even in the they just

(02:07:41):
don't have any artificial boosting the unique like male ownly bursaries,
uh scholarships, hiring quotas. And despite all of this, they're
still responsible for most of the work that maintains society
day after day after day. I don't know, Scott, I

(02:08:02):
think that you're full of shit when you say they're weak.
Maybe they're just caring more. All right, let's move on,
all right?

Speaker 3 (02:08:12):
In our thirties, who didn't find romantic love? Sitting in
the windowsill with cats staring out depressed? Like, what a
tragedy that Lisa didn't find love? Guess what, Elizabeth, Lisa's
just fine when I mean, the data is clear. Widows
are happier after their husband dies. Widowers are less happy
after their wife dies. Women in relationships do live longer

(02:08:34):
two to four years. Men in relationships live four to
seven years longer. So just the outcomes the rates of
self harm men really it ends up. The bottom line
is men need relationships more than women, and essentially women
are more resilient. They don't know if it's because women
have had to endure menstruation or childbirth but it ends up.

Speaker 2 (02:08:55):
Or maybe it's because women's spaces aren't constantly under attack
except for now. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (02:09:03):
Oh well yeah by by some men. But you know what,
y'all voted for that, so I don't have any.

Speaker 2 (02:09:10):
In that game.

Speaker 1 (02:09:11):
But seriously, no, I don't care you voted for it,
but like.

Speaker 2 (02:09:16):
This is okay, why don't we again? Like I said
to that feminist, he said, you just want women to
be forced to marry, And I'm like, no, let's just
stop stop having people pay for these narratives that men
are so bad for women, Like, stop paying for them.
Kick that ship out of that, get rid of all
of the science, like the feminist science that has no academy,

(02:09:37):
no actual empirical validity, which is all of it. Just
get rid of it. You sho didn't have been there
in the first place. Like, just get rid of all
of that, and let's see how it happens. Like, get
rid of all of the all the male space breaking
rhetoric and activity and just let men have their just

(02:10:01):
let men be together being friends. Stop having oversight over that. Okay,
stop brading.

Speaker 1 (02:10:08):
I'd like to see that. I'd like to see the
data because I don't know if you can measure like
if you can get I see. I'd like to see
the data just out of curiosity, because there's a lot
of unhappy men and women. In fact, women are a
lot more neurotic about the future. So I don't understand how.
I mean, you know, whether they're in a relationship or not.

(02:10:30):
I don't see how that's a thing.

Speaker 2 (02:10:31):
Angels hierarchy. Tell me what argument convinced you that women
were oppressed? All of you who assert that, What argument
convinced you? When were you convinced? Identify when you didn't
believe that, and when you learned that, and tell me
the argument that convinced you. Until you do, shoosh, you

(02:10:54):
don't even know your own mind. You don't even know
where your core beliefs, those sacredly held things, things that
you believe even came from. Okay, all right.

Speaker 3 (02:11:07):
Frightening statistic two fifteen year olds, a boy and a
girl both sexually molested. Neither crime is less hardous than
the other. The boy is ten times more likely to
kill himself later in life. So what we're coming to
grips with the fact is that men and boys are
neurologically weaker and need relationships more. Now, I want to
be clear that doesn't.

Speaker 2 (02:11:25):
Are no services for boys who are victims of sexual
assault and they're subject to a society whyet campaign of
gas lighting and harassment? Dude, what and why did this
become about Oh, men are weaker?

Speaker 1 (02:11:41):
Like, yeah, it's a weird framing, isn't it. It's like
really weird. Maybe boys need support that they're not getting. Like,
if something happens to a woman or a girl, like
people come out of the woodwork to support her. So yeah,
she's probably less suicidal after that. I mean, you know,
there's one thing. There's one thing.

Speaker 2 (02:12:04):
That about disclosure on surveys regarding to sexual assault. Women
do it very quickly. Men don't, like, for whatever reason,
if a woman is subject to a sexual assault, she's
just like, I can't wait to talk about it on
this survey, whereas guys are like they it takes a
while for them to just warm up to the idea

(02:12:25):
of talking about it. Why is that? Why is it
that women feel so empowered to talk about these things
that happen to them, and yet men feel like they
have to keep it to themselves, right you really think
that's just quote unquote toxic masculinity or is it because

(02:12:47):
nobody wants to help them?

Speaker 1 (02:12:51):
Yeah?

Speaker 3 (02:12:51):
Okay, all right, the relationships no group is, no group
is expected or respond sable for servicing another group of men.
But the reality is men need relationships more than women.

Speaker 1 (02:13:09):
Men need relations more than women. Well, I mean, I
don't think that that's.

Speaker 2 (02:13:15):
Right, Jacob Hierarchy says when I found out my girlfriend
was abused and harrassed from eleven fifteen. Okay, so because
I know men who have been sexually assaulted by women,
that means patriarchy or sorry, matriarchy exists because it exists

(02:13:40):
criminal women who abuse men. That means matriarchy exists because
there exists men criminal men. What about Okay, so your
girlfriend is subject to a criminal activity at all of

(02:14:01):
the men who go out of their way to punish, incarcerate,
bring to justice men who are criminal, they don't count.
How many men do I know who are assaulted? Okay?
How old are you tangled? How old are you are
you perhaps under the age of thirty, because I got

(02:14:22):
a statistic for you, and you're probably going to completely
ignore it.

Speaker 1 (02:14:28):
Yeah, I mean, I think you might be wasting your
time here. No, but you know, it could be. It
could be a teachable moment for the audience. It could
be a teachable guy. You are in you are way
in over your head, whoever. You are so not prepared
for this. But go ahead, all right.

Speaker 2 (02:14:47):
How many men do you know that we're assaulted? I
don't have to give you how many men I know
because I can tell you the statistics, and they're getting
worse and more terrifying. Millennial women, that is, women at
actually should be classified as women who are like under
thirty five, rape using weapons two to three times more

(02:15:09):
than millennial men or any other generation. Their attitudes towards
male victims of sexual assault have gotten worse since the
seventies the eighties. So women who are more my generation
have better attitudes towards male victims of sexual assault than
younger women. So the direction of attitudes in women for

(02:15:32):
male victims of sexual assault is getting worse, and their
behavior is getting worse worse. Now go ahead and ignore that.
Let's keep going on.

Speaker 1 (02:15:47):
That's the end of the video, all right.

Speaker 2 (02:15:50):
Do we want to do the patriarchal crystal smash or
the patriarchy smashing crystals. I think that we'll get quite
the appreciative audience in the specialty chat today. I'm sure
they're going to go out and buy some crystals to
smash pages.

Speaker 1 (02:16:04):
Might help you fight patriarchy.

Speaker 2 (02:16:05):
Yeah, let's let's help me completely. Let's go on a
completely different note. Now, something completely different for those of
you in the special chat who are insisting that they want.

Speaker 1 (02:16:16):
James, Ali says, Gene, you mean Jean Carroll fantasized, But
you mean you're talking about I forget her name, but yeah,
Jean Carroll. She but like if she fantasized about it,
then it must have happened though, right, because even if
women think that it might have happened or could happen,
that means it happened. That was like literally the paper
that I was looking at earlier. If they feel like

(02:16:39):
it happened, e Gen Carrol, that was her name. If
they feel like it happened, then it happened or it
could happen. Therefore we should treat it like it happened.
That's where we are now, that's that's where that's that's
the situation we're in, all right, So would you like
to get some. This is from Baltic mermaid dot com.

(02:17:01):
You can find it so you can fight the patriarchy
with crystals. Favorite crystals for fighting the Patriarchy set fifteen dollars, guys,
only fifteen dollars. This is not a sponsor. I'm just
looking at it. Maybe some of you out there in
the audience that are really worried about the patriarchy and
you know that these like thought crime laws you're trying

(02:17:22):
to put into place might not quite cover it. Maybe
you need some magic crystals just to like just to
like get around that.

Speaker 2 (02:17:32):
Okay, curious, totally serious.

Speaker 1 (02:17:35):
This is a totally serious thing. Okay, So we believe
that everyone deserves access to medical care and medical freedom,
you mean, paid for by men. Five dollars from each
satirical crystal set sold will be donated to Women's Reproductive
Rights Assistance Project WRAP, the largest national, independent and nonprofit

(02:17:57):
abortion fund. Women's Reproductive Rights Assistance Product has been offering
financial aid for abortion or emergency contraceptive since nineteen ninety one.
They provide funds directly to health clinics and doctors across
the nation, and boast relationships with reputable clinics like Planned parenthood.
Woo wow, the one started by Margaret Sanger, the totally

(02:18:17):
like not you know, eugenic feminists. Okay, you can also
make a donation, so you can just skip buying the crystals.
But why would you do that? Why deny yourself the mana.
You'll get one of each tumbled stone. We should look
and see what they do, what the powers are, what

(02:18:39):
the magic is. But I want to read them off anyway.
Carnelian tiger i, labradorite, Amazon amazonite, and citrine in a
little cloth bag and an info card with pictures above.
So yeah, they'd say, like, there's some things. Let's see
what they do. Favorite crystals for fighting the patriarchy, Cornelians

(02:19:01):
orange for the fiery rage that is burning inside you.
What does it do though? Is it just to stoke
the fire? Are these like lightsaber crystals? Yes? Amazon Amazonite
for the strength and stamina to argue with annoying pro lifers.

(02:19:25):
What is this?

Speaker 2 (02:19:25):
Is? Just like like okay.

Speaker 1 (02:19:30):
Yeah, what.

Speaker 2 (02:19:34):
Okay, here's the thing I think.

Speaker 1 (02:19:37):
Look alson, I'll tell you what these exist for. These
exists so that when feminists buy them, they can go
to little their little you know, gatherings at like whatever
protests are going to and they can show them to
their friends and say, look, this is how much of
a better feminist I am than you because I bought
these for fifteen dollars. Where are your crystals?

Speaker 7 (02:19:58):
Okay?

Speaker 1 (02:20:00):
And no, I'm serious. It's just like when Lenning happened
and women were like getting blue heart tattoos on TikTok
and they were telling other women to get blue heart tattoos.
There was a signal like are do you have your
blue heart tattoo? Or are you my enemy? That's what
it was, right or I mean, it's like countless, like
the ketchup bottle costumes, the pussy hats. It's just like

(02:20:22):
whatever the new trend is. And it's interesting because it
is a way to make money, like a real grift,
not the stuff we're being accused of, but like a
real one, you know. Cause, like I hate to tell
you guys, but feminism is very mainstream. It's extremely popular,
extremely still. Okay, So if you want to make money,
if you want a grift, be a feminist and you're

(02:20:43):
gonna make bank. I can tell you right now. If
I quit this show and I threw a tantrum or
whatever I like yelled at Alison. I said, fuck this,
I hate MRAs. I'm a feminist. Now I would get
phone calls tomorrow, like do do content for you know,
fucking plant parenthood? In fact, who has been caught not

(02:21:04):
caught per se, but it's been discovered they have paid
off a lot of activists to like create content promoting abortion.
That's where you make your money anyway.

Speaker 2 (02:21:15):
Yeah, I just I find it amazing like that. We
just went through an article where in cels simply talking
about not having sex being a problem that they have
a problem with it, struggle with, yeah, a relationship. They're
not able to access things that they think normal people get,

(02:21:36):
like a sex life, and that's that's being seen as entitled.
But requiring having abortion in order to entertain yourself with
sex is a human right and then also having other
people pay for it. Like I'm pro choice again, but

(02:21:57):
I'm pro choice. That means I don't think people should
have to pay for it except for the person who's
choosing it. Okay, all right, so this is this is
just okay, all.

Speaker 1 (02:22:10):
Right, Yeah, if you don't like your eye to keep
a resilient fuck you to Supreme Court Citrin for confidence
to shove this stone up. Clarence Thomas's hypocritical ass This
is meant to satire and not to be taking seriously,
Please don't. That's not a threat of violence. But like
if somebody actually did do that, they'd be celebrating on TikTok.
You know, like when they when Charlie Kirk was assassinated,

(02:22:32):
they celebrated even though they were like, no, no, I'm not
pro violence, but that was awesome labradorite protection from negative forces.
Mitch McConnell, Well, I don't like him either, So fuck
that guy. Okay, Allison, That's that's it.

Speaker 2 (02:22:45):
I read them all, Okay, all right, I guess I
should take a look to see if there's anything gone
through the pipeline. See if you guys sent something through
the voles that would really piss off our feminist guests
in the special chat. By the way, so give him
a few minutes. Feed the Badger dot com slash support
if you want to support the show, if you want
to enable us to predict what people are going to

(02:23:07):
be talking about in five to ten years. Again, feed
the Badger dot com slash support. Get a little you know,
spoilers for the future of the human race right here.
We got them hot off the presses, and if you
want to make comment you can do so it feed
the Badger dot com slash just the tip at any point.
Don't have to You don't have to do it.

Speaker 3 (02:23:25):
Now.

Speaker 2 (02:23:25):
You can cogitate on the things that we've been talking
about and send us send something through at your leisure
at any time. That's feed the Badger dot com slash
just the tip. I don't see anything, I guess just
that Mario. Thank you Mario for fifty bucks. Very much appreciated.
And I'll probably have to shake down the discord because

(02:23:47):
you guys are quiet and the special check is loud.
All right, so I think we've we've overcome adversity. Voidcat
destroyed the stream at least my half, and then the
blackout destroyed the stream. But we're still here. We chugged

(02:24:07):
through the end. So I'm going to hand it back
to Brian to do our farewells and then we shall.

Speaker 1 (02:24:16):
All right, let's get out of here then, all right,
If you guys liked this video, please hit like or dislike.
If you dislike the video, it doesn't matter. We still
win because you help out the algorithm. Either way. Subscribe
if you're not already subscribe to the channel. If you
want to like continue to troll us, that's fine too.
I welcome it, and please leave us a comment let

(02:24:38):
us know what you think about what we talked about
on the show today. You'll find links to all of
the things we talked about in the description of this video,
so you can watch it yourself for the full context
if you must have it, And please share this video
because sharing is caring. Thank you guys so much for
coming on today's episode of Maintaining Frame, and we'll talk
to you guys in the next one.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}6 Incel Traits, 2 New Ways to Fear Men & 1 Man‑Free Society

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

All Episodes

6 Incel Traits, 2 New Ways to Fear Men & 1 Man‑Free Society

Stuff You Should Know