🔴She blames MAGA for her debt | Maintaining Frame 189

Accountability is absolute kryptonite to these people. Can an election put you in debt? Someone seems to think so.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hi, I'm Savannah Grayson. I'm twenty seven years old.

Speaker 2 (00:02):
Hey, I'm Steve. I'm twenty eight. We live in Arlington, Texas,
and this is Financial Audit.

Speaker 3 (00:06):
Thanks for coming down to Austin, guys. I appreciate it. Savannah,
you're the one in front of me.

Speaker 4 (00:10):
You're welcome. What do you do for a living?

Speaker 1 (00:12):
I'm currently unemployed.

Speaker 4 (00:13):
Great job. What do you do?

Speaker 2 (00:14):
I'm a senior systems administrator.

Speaker 5 (00:17):
Dig the mustache, guys, it was gonna be starting your
own brewery.

Speaker 2 (00:23):
I want to open a game.

Speaker 1 (00:24):
I thank you talking about your hitstere message.

Speaker 2 (00:28):
Yay, yeah, hik you.

Speaker 5 (00:29):
All right, Hello everybody, and welcome to Honey Badger Radio.
My name is Brian, I'm with Alison and this is
maintaining frame number one eighty nine.

Speaker 6 (00:36):
She blames Maga for her debt.

Speaker 5 (00:38):
Where we are going to be looking at two videos
from a popular YouTube channel called Caleb Hammer. Caleb Hammer
does financial advice, or at least like this is like
what the it says on the tin, right, but what
it usually ends up being is kind of like a
you know, go about a guy that like yells at

(00:59):
peap for being bad with money.

Speaker 6 (01:01):
Oh that's it that's what it is.

Speaker 5 (01:03):
And now he has like, you know, mental breakdowns, and
sometimes the guests have mental breakdowns, and what you get
is basically you have like most of the people who
come on there are younger, and they have made poor
choices or they find themselves in debt somehow and they're

(01:24):
going to him for financial advice and he does it,
but the cost is shame. So we're gonna be looking
at videos where the people on his show are trying
to blame the rise of fascism for their financial situation,
whether that is because the system itself is against them
or the existence of the system has caused them to

(01:44):
make poor choices, but it's not their fault. These are
one is a woman the first one, and the second
one is a couple as a woman and a man.

Speaker 7 (01:54):
Yeah, as we all know, fascism is a code word
for masculinity.

Speaker 6 (01:59):
Yeah. Usually this is a requests, right, So who sent
us in?

Speaker 7 (02:04):
Richard Bierre? This is a request. And my first introduction
to Caleb Hammer was a short that was taken out
of his auditing of an Only Fans creator. Now she
wasn't a really big Only Fans creator. She said she
had two main supporters one of whom was under the
impression that he might be able to have a relationship

(02:28):
with her, and she had a friend, so the OnlyFans
Creator was sort of like a mid woman, and then
she had what they call like a handmaiden, which is
a significantly less attractive woman. And the significantly less attractive
woman kept white nighting for the Only Fans Creator or
I don't even know what you call it when it's
a woman, and kept telling Caleb she's just a treator

(02:49):
she's just let her be a girl, like, let her
be audited by the irs, you know, end up in
jail or with a significant fine. Okay, all right. It
was just that's what that was the first my first
introduction to Caleb Hammer, and he was honestly, I think
that when I sort of analyzed it, I thought he

(03:11):
was actually being very very nice to her because technically
what she was doing with her one one patron or
what I don't know what it called supporter client was
technically relationship fraud. There is such a thing, and it
is not legal to give people lead people on with
the impression that you are in a relationship with them.

(03:33):
It is no longer it used to be called heartbomb laws.
It used to only apply to men leading women along,
but now it is considered like as a gender neutral
form of con artistry, and it is not actually legal.
Caleb was explaining to her what she needed to do to,

(03:55):
I guess, make sure that she was within the law
in terms of her taxes and what she needed to claim,
and also tell told her you should stop doing that.
You should tell this client very clearly that you know
you're not intending, ever intending to be in a relationship
with him. Otherwise you're engaging in relationship fraud. I'm not
exactly sure if it's termed relationship fraud, but it's it's

(04:16):
that kind of thing. And I looked at that and
I said, you know, the fact he isn't actually turning
her in for breaking the law is sort of It's
not not gonna say it's simping, but it is sort of.
It is. It is giving her the girl pass a
little because I'm pretty sure if a man came on
his show and said, yeah, I'm leading this old lady alone,
she thinks she's gonna have a relationship with me, ha ha,

(04:37):
But no, she's just.

Speaker 8 (04:38):
Paying for my sneakers, you know, like he would not be.

Speaker 7 (04:41):
Like, well, you should be a little careful with that.

Speaker 8 (04:44):
You might want to reconsider your life choice. I'm not gonna,
I'm not gonna. I'm not gonna.

Speaker 7 (04:49):
I'm not gonna turn you into the authorities, but you
might want to take a sharp U turn on that
path of life there, you know, So there's a there's
a difference. But anyways, it's interesting to see him again
this one. I'm not so sure if it's gonna end
up being as tied to gender, but we'll see, we'll see.
I don't know.

Speaker 5 (05:07):
Well, we got a request from Richard, so he's obviously
got Did you watch these Richard or did you just
see how long they were and sent them to us.
I'm just curious, Like these videos are like an hour
and a half and so if and they're usually most
of it is just him saying I can't believe you're
this stupid, and the other people shrugging and gritting like idiots,
and I'm not look, I'm not shitting on the content.

(05:29):
Like Lindsay loves this stuff for some reason. But it's
can be It's a lot. It's like a lot to
sift through substance.

Speaker 7 (05:37):
It's entirely possible. He just saw this link and said, yeah,
He's like.

Speaker 6 (05:41):
Oh, I bet they'd like this. Thank you Richard.

Speaker 7 (05:44):
Anyway, Oh yep, this was a request, and I'll do
the things. If at any point throughout the show you
want to send us your comment or tip, you do
so it feedbadger dot com slash just the tip, very
best way for you to send us those funds, and
probably the best way for you to send us a
comment too, because it avoids comment labyrinth. The minotaur in
the center of YouTube's comment labyrinth, which is censorship. See

(06:07):
how my analogy is very stealthful. Anyway, let's let's get into.

Speaker 5 (06:11):
It orgo the labyrinth.

Speaker 6 (06:14):
That is you trying to describe the labyrinth?

Speaker 5 (06:17):
Okay, okay, So we're gonna start with this video from
Financial Audit called she blames Maga for her debt. Yes,
this is what she claims. So let's let's play this clip. Oh,
if she's gonna give us a little bit of her
life situation.

Speaker 3 (06:33):
In their hair that they might be afraid that you're
the one with razors and scissors.

Speaker 6 (06:37):
She's a hair dresser or something. That's how she makes
her money right now.

Speaker 9 (06:41):
She does hair, so they are just as crazy as
I am. Actually it's fantastic.

Speaker 4 (06:46):
Okay, what very good? So you must be making good
money business.

Speaker 7 (06:51):
I feel like we're I feel like we're missing a
big part of the plot here. Perhaps we should go
back about thirty seconds.

Speaker 5 (06:57):
Okay.

Speaker 6 (06:58):
I don't know if you're gonna get much, but okay.

Speaker 1 (07:00):
I absolutely do.

Speaker 4 (07:01):
It's a permit trying to processes.

Speaker 1 (07:05):
Your hair is not healthy enough to do it yet.

Speaker 4 (07:07):
Yours yep, you said yours.

Speaker 1 (07:09):
Yeah, talking about me my hair.

Speaker 7 (07:11):
You talk to.

Speaker 4 (07:11):
Yourself in the yours.

Speaker 1 (07:12):
I absolutely do.

Speaker 4 (07:14):
Okay.

Speaker 1 (07:14):
I have third person conversations all.

Speaker 4 (07:16):
The time, hopefully not out loud.

Speaker 1 (07:17):
I work for myself, so kind of there are.

Speaker 4 (07:20):
People in the chair. If you start doing.

Speaker 7 (07:24):
So yeah, oh god, the context doesn't make it better.

Speaker 5 (07:28):
Oh okay, let's keep going while.

Speaker 3 (07:30):
You're doing their hair that they might be afraid that
you're the one with razors and scissors.

Speaker 9 (07:35):
They are just as crazy as I am. Actually it's fantastic.

Speaker 7 (07:39):
No, No, I have questions right off the bat, what
is this like the little hare shop of horrors?

Speaker 5 (07:45):
I think that she does hair independently, Like it's not
like she owns a salon or anything.

Speaker 7 (07:51):
Okay, so you know, I get, I get the neutral
context that she owns the salon and that she does hair.
It's everything that's flavoring the neutral context that has got
me baffled and concerned.

Speaker 5 (08:05):
Yeah. Yeah, she owns a salon. She's a hair stylist.
So yeah, it's not like from our house. She does
own a salon, but it's so a small place. Okay,
but anyway, we're let's keep going.

Speaker 4 (08:16):
It must be making good money business owner.

Speaker 2 (08:17):
I'm hoping not as much.

Speaker 1 (08:19):
We've got kids at home and they're kind of the priority.

Speaker 3 (08:21):
Now okay, well you say we see I don't know
are we talking we as in you?

Speaker 7 (08:25):
Yes?

Speaker 1 (08:25):
Sorry, I have kids at home and they are my priority.

Speaker 4 (08:28):
So that's fine.

Speaker 9 (08:30):
I make so that I can show up for them.
I so it's just you, It is just me.

Speaker 4 (08:37):
Okay, good? How many? Well not good? But whatever it is.
What it is.

Speaker 6 (08:41):
You're a single mom.

Speaker 5 (08:43):
Okay, you can avoid that.

Speaker 7 (08:45):
We gave you. We gave women like every every potential
opportunity to avoid becoming single moms or quote unquote exploited
by men, and yet somehow it still keeps happening.

Speaker 5 (08:56):
Actually, it seems to happen even more. Yeah, okay, so yeah,
so she's a single mom.

Speaker 7 (09:02):
The only thing that's changed that we seem to blame
them less and less.

Speaker 5 (09:06):
Yes, Well, in fact, we celebrate single motherhood. It's the
bravest thing you can do. It's so it takes so
much courage, mostly from the judgment of other people that
might think you should have a man at your house
or something. That's where the courage is at.

Speaker 7 (09:18):
You know, you should have prioritized having children with the
man who was going to have a relationship with them
and indicated as such by marrying you. Yeah, or alternatively,
you shouldn't have taken the husband or the father out
of their kids' lives. But you know, well, let's go
with this all right. It's it is a thing that
has happened.

Speaker 1 (09:38):
Yep, kids two, nine and eleven.

Speaker 6 (09:41):
So our kids are nine and eleven. Is that a coincidence?
I think not. Never forget.

Speaker 5 (09:47):
Sorry, what's going on?

Speaker 9 (09:48):
So I am actually kind of in debt because of
the past election.

Speaker 1 (09:52):
Boy, I know, it's kind of crazy.

Speaker 4 (09:53):
That escalated you acknowledge it. What the do you possibly mean?
I don't know as well.

Speaker 7 (10:00):
I am deeply deeply curious the connection. I mean, I
mean there might be a connection to the rise of AI,
although I really doubt that she was in No, I
don't think Ai.

Speaker 5 (10:11):
She's a hairdresser. AI is not cutting hair yet.

Speaker 7 (10:15):
Although I imagine that her clients might consider an AI
hairdresser a woman who mutters herself in the second person
while cutting her I hope that was just a joke
that got away with got away from her. How you
hope that it's just a joke, that it got away,

(10:35):
that she got got away from her. You hope that
all right, let's go, that's really.

Speaker 3 (10:39):
Freaking our inauguration. That was like, all of a sudden,
here's alone, federal government.

Speaker 4 (10:45):
Please have it.

Speaker 9 (10:47):
So most of my clients are affected by how the
economy works, including.

Speaker 4 (10:51):
Everything in the service based economy.

Speaker 9 (10:53):
Including my boyfriend's work. He's in construction, okay, and his
income has been affected drastically prisy.

Speaker 4 (11:00):
In construction, What do you mean? What kind of construction does.

Speaker 9 (11:03):
He doohn whole home remodels. He does some handyman work
here and there, but a lot of that work has
slowed down as well.

Speaker 3 (11:12):
That's interesting because, if I'm not mistaken, especially when home
presses were storing as materials.

Speaker 8 (11:18):
Were I remember why this one was chosen.

Speaker 7 (11:20):
I remember, it's because of her particular arrangement of her relationship,
if I can, if I recall, she and her boyfriend
don't live together. He maintains a separate, separate residence and
pays for her apartment, and the reason why he's done
that is to avoid common law marriage. But but maybe
that could be completely wrong. I could be I could

(11:41):
be imagining things. So let's let's find out.

Speaker 3 (11:43):
All right, stopped renovating as quickly, and that was in
the high inflation time.

Speaker 4 (11:48):
Wouldn't that have in.

Speaker 3 (11:49):
Fact that his job as well about three four years ago,
and then got a little better for a while.

Speaker 1 (11:53):
And you know, for a little while.

Speaker 9 (11:55):
Yes, and we were kind of doing okay at that point.
Now we do live separately and we handle our fine
answers all separately. You've broken up, No, we just live separately.

Speaker 2 (12:04):
We have now.

Speaker 1 (12:05):
Yes, you were together, we are together.

Speaker 4 (12:07):
No, you live together for a short time.

Speaker 3 (12:10):
It's usually in negative of a great relationship moving out.

Speaker 9 (12:14):
We did not agree on how some of the debt
situations were being handled.

Speaker 4 (12:18):
And to keep an incredible.

Speaker 1 (12:21):
Relationship outside of that. It's actually all mad.

Speaker 7 (12:24):
He's spicy, he's actually more spicy than I was expecting
based on the last one I watched.

Speaker 5 (12:30):
Oh no, he's I mean, look a lot of it
is bance for the clicks. So yeah, so I think
that you know. And I say this because, well, I
understand he like plays up his reactions, and I think
that the guests are usually informed that that's going to
happen because they're creating content, so that I'm not saying

(12:52):
nothing is authentic, like these people are not real people
with real lives. I'm saying that the everything is dramatized
and sort of like amplified for the Internet. So he's
probably being honest. But there they know that this is
like the way the show is supposed to be.

Speaker 3 (13:09):
So outside of the things where we agree on life
matters is great.

Speaker 4 (13:14):
That sounds like a nice friends with benefits, but.

Speaker 9 (13:16):
We to keep each other from getting tied to each
other's debts, we decided to live separately.

Speaker 4 (13:22):
What do you mean you weren't married?

Speaker 3 (13:24):
Yes, living together doesn't all of a sudden make it
I legally binding thing.

Speaker 1 (13:27):
Common law comes into play.

Speaker 4 (13:29):
Are you in like common law marriage?

Speaker 1 (13:31):
No?

Speaker 9 (13:31):
Because and a big reason to avoid that is a
big way to avoid that is not living together.

Speaker 1 (13:36):
We don't share a mailing address.

Speaker 7 (13:37):
Okay, so I think that this man has determined that
this woman is a disaster, and while she's still willing
to hit it, he definitely quit it in a domestic sense.

Speaker 5 (13:49):
So he's at least at least until their debt situation
is figured out.

Speaker 6 (13:54):
And might it might be her debt situation.

Speaker 5 (13:57):
Like I know she's saying our, but it might just
be hers, which I guess is a smart move on
his because he's not on the show, so I don't
know what his situation is, so we only have her
word right, So, but she does end up I want
to say, like a few grand in debt, like after
they figure out all of her expenses and everything. We
just see, Yeah, thirty three hundred in debt.

Speaker 1 (14:20):
Anyway, get not living together.

Speaker 9 (14:23):
We don't share a mailing address, so it can't be
insinuated or taken as we are living together and presenting
as a married couple because we aren't, and we don't.

Speaker 4 (14:31):
Going above and beyond in that.

Speaker 3 (14:33):
So last election, yes, I'm a little on exactly what
you mean by that. Now, I know job numbers, jobless numbers,
unemployment overall. I've covered this in the Live streams on
the Caleb Hammer Live YouTube channel. Ever since, like the
height of the best employee market in the history of
basically humanity about four years ago, you know, jobs gain

(14:54):
on a monthly basis has been a steady decline.

Speaker 4 (14:56):
You know, people think the president has a lot more
impact than they do. How you could yell tariffs, you
could yell a lot of things, which I'm sure you will.

Speaker 1 (15:03):
No, no, no, I really.

Speaker 8 (15:06):
Okay, that's interesting.

Speaker 7 (15:08):
I uh, well, I'm glad that he keeps a sort
of a neutral line. That's something I would definitely agree with.
I don't think presidents have as much of an impact
on the economy as we are led to believe or
want to believe. So okay, let's let's see.

Speaker 6 (15:21):
I agree with that.

Speaker 5 (15:22):
I mean, I think that like soulds like a stock market,
like companies react to. It's kind of emotional in a way,
you know, But the presidents don't affect that really.

Speaker 6 (15:31):
I mean, when Biden.

Speaker 5 (15:33):
Was in office and they said they created a bunch
of jobs, they did, but they were all government jobs,
and government jobs are a net negative.

Speaker 6 (15:40):
They're basically negative jobs.

Speaker 5 (15:41):
They are jobs, but they're jobs paid for by taxpayers,
so they're not creating money. You know, they're taking it,
so they don't count. If you everyone thinks that things
are well, are good, and they're more likely to start business.
That's what I mean, Like how the stock market is
like if people become afraid then and the stocks can
change based on that, but that doesn't really reflect the

(16:04):
value and it's not something controlled by some top authority.

Speaker 9 (16:09):
But anyway, anyway, I don't think they can impact as
much as people say that they.

Speaker 3 (16:13):
Well, they can, it just takes longer. And even the
Federal Reserve Jerome Powell, who is not the biggest fan
of Trump uh specifically says he will not see the
long term the effects of tariffs for like a decently
while it takes.

Speaker 4 (16:26):
A long time to filter through the economy.

Speaker 3 (16:28):
Yeah, people get hyper political and excited online, but you know,
it's like whatever, But we're on the same trajectory and
trend that we have been in terms of job numbers
added on a monthly basis. Like if we would be
almost in a very similar economic thing we're in right now,
if Kamalo is president as well, would you be saying
the exact same thing that because of the last election,
you have lost money, so you blame that.

Speaker 7 (16:49):
What is this just bullshit? Like just just get a
hat full of little cards of potential things to external
things to blame and just pulled the election out. That
sounds it's clever and or sophisticated. I'll just blame the
election that happens every four years. Just the election, not
who was elected, not Trump and apparently not Camel. I

(17:11):
feel like she doesn't. She's trying to avoid being cornered, honestly.

Speaker 5 (17:15):
But you know, let's let's let's yeah, well, if she
doesn't want to say that she was that. Yeah, anyway,
let's just keep you going yourselves.

Speaker 3 (17:23):
No, and you can blame economic conditions. I bet people
do less home renovations when things aren't as juicy. It's
it's people borrow for home renovations. Interest rates are still high,
even though they've come down a little. Even still, people
are less likely to invest in renovating a house when
interest rates are high.

Speaker 9 (17:38):
I hope looked at potentially moving out of the country
and it's just never fees the balls all that makes sense?

Speaker 4 (17:44):
For what what?

Speaker 7 (17:45):
What?

Speaker 8 (17:45):
Where the hell would you move?

Speaker 5 (17:47):
No, it does.

Speaker 7 (17:48):
It's not better anywhere. It's not better in Canada. It's
I don't know if it's better or not. I don't
think it's better in Australia.

Speaker 8 (17:54):
I mean it's not better in the thing.

Speaker 5 (17:56):
This is just like a thing that that these like
that people are just like, I'm gonna move to this
other country and it's like, but those other countries are
not better.

Speaker 6 (18:05):
But they don't they don't believe that.

Speaker 5 (18:07):
They are certain that Canada is better, or the UK
is better, or Europe is better, or Australia or New Zealand.
But none of them are like I'm gonna go to Honduras.
Nobody says I'm gonna go through Nigeria and start a
company there. I mean, maybe there are opportunities there, but
they're not thinking that. They're usually thinking about Europe or Canada.

Speaker 7 (18:28):
Yeah, okay, let's I feel like this is just we're
just digging up a girl logic hole.

Speaker 5 (18:37):
Yep.

Speaker 7 (18:37):
Yeah.

Speaker 5 (18:38):
Well, I think most of the people who go on
and show are women. I think so I didn't look
into the numbers. I could be wrong, but from just
like Lindsay listens to this stuff in the background while
she's doing other things, and I'll always hear a woman
on there.

Speaker 6 (18:50):
So I think it's mostly women.

Speaker 5 (18:52):
And it makes sense because, like, I think women are
in a lot of debt right now collectively because of
college and just like they spending habits and they're I
don't just the way that they deal with credit and stuff, like,
they're more they're probably more likely to be in trouble,
uh than than men, or at least seek help from men.

Speaker 6 (19:12):
So but anyway, let's let's keep going.

Speaker 9 (19:15):
It has to be better anywhere else, anywhere else, anywhere else.

Speaker 3 (19:19):
No, we'll be moving to sub Saharan Africa.

Speaker 9 (19:23):
No, probably not anywhere almost anywhere.

Speaker 4 (19:26):
Oh okay, pushing the gold pust a little bit, just
a smitch. Okay, where is it better for you? Salon owner?
Business owner?

Speaker 1 (19:33):
Salon owner, business owner, I don't know.

Speaker 4 (19:34):
I have economy that's doing pretty well.

Speaker 8 (19:37):
Here's the thought.

Speaker 7 (19:39):
Here's a thought. Don't mutter and act like a crazy
person with your clients unless they're into that and they
specifically pay for it.

Speaker 5 (19:50):
She says that her clients are happy with her, so, like,
I don't think that her tendency to talk to herself
is a problem. I think that's why she jokingly said,
like Mike Lanser as crazy as me. I think it's
because they're saying. She's essentially saying they tolerate this and
that's fine and they're fine with it. So okay, I mean,
like an eccentric hair salon person. I think that's like

(20:13):
fairly common.

Speaker 7 (20:14):
All right, Okay, yeah, so I did to answer your question.
According to GROC, based on an analysis of available data
from episode counts, fan discussions, and content patterns across three
hundred and one episodes spanning twenty twenty three to November
twenty twenty five, the percentage of female guests on Caleb
Hammer's Financial Audit is approximately seventy percent. This is an

(20:38):
estimate derived from community to observations on redditt an X,
where friends frequently note a strong skew towards female guests,
often describing the show as mostly women or ninety five
percent women. Okay, so we can get into the apparent
Like GROC has offered us a rationale why it's mostly women.
So basically this is like the whatever podcast except for
taxes or finances.

Speaker 6 (20:59):
Her debt for tech financial advice.

Speaker 7 (21:01):
Yeah, here's the breakdown and reasoning. Total episodes, all right,
eighty percent guest formats, eighty percent solo guests, one person
audited fifteen percent, couples, mixed gender counting one femle and
one female, five groups or other for example, siblings rare,
all male female pairs, approximate number of episodes, solo female
sixty percent, solo male twenty percent. Okay, okay, So this

(21:25):
is the Reddit consensus on why he's always targeting women.
I'm guessing that the phrase targeting women is likely to
come up on Reddit threads, like of all the guests,
who's the best in the best financial shape? And the
average financial audit experience highlight that most of the guests
I've seen are women with train wreck finances. Well, this
must have come from one of the broreddits with user

(21:45):
setting examples like financial abuse, financial abuse victims, or insane
women episodes. As the norm, no thread disputes the female majority. Instead,
they reinforce it financial abuse victims. I'm curious do they
mean financial like the women.

Speaker 5 (22:02):
Of the financial abuse like the women are claiming to
be financially abused? Yeah? Probably, I don't know.

Speaker 7 (22:09):
Like in this case, you know this, I'm looking at
my notes. The boyfriend pays for her rent and utilities.

Speaker 5 (22:15):
In this in this video, yeah.

Speaker 7 (22:18):
She he pays for her rent and utilities.

Speaker 5 (22:20):
Yeah, that's not like for what Yeah, but but but
but again, like if we're looking at okay, so this
could be the exception in terms of it counting towards
financial abuse. Yes, it sounds like he's the one being
financially abused, if if that's a thing.

Speaker 6 (22:37):
But what I'm saying.

Speaker 5 (22:38):
Is, is it possible that the where this information is
being retrieved from by Grock, the people retrieving it do
not consider it abuse when the man is the target,
Like if he's saying I will I will pay for
your rent and utilities, or there's an offer or some
kind of deal struck up where the man and says

(23:00):
I'll pay for your stuff, and we could say in
some context that would count as financial abuse, But maybe
the people where they're getting this from don't see it
that way because it's a man and men, we just
don't see them as abused as victims. So it's possible
that this is definitely an example of that, but wouldn't

(23:23):
be counted.

Speaker 6 (23:24):
See what I mean?

Speaker 7 (23:25):
Yeah, No, definitely, I'm just I'm probing that a bit more.
Shall we listen to some more?

Speaker 5 (23:30):
Well, yeah, let's listen to more. He's going to go
into some countries that might be better for her.

Speaker 3 (23:35):
Poland, Poland's increasing, Poland's doing very well. But you know
what happened if you want people in the salon, you
know what happens if you want to fire them. Oftentimes,
depending on what contracts you're on, if you want to
fire them, you still have to actually keep them on
for about a month two months, depending on time.

Speaker 9 (23:51):
Well, luckily, my boyfriend doesn't agree with that plan.

Speaker 3 (23:54):
You're a boyfriend who you're definitely not going to get
married to and are not connected to in any way whatsoever.

Speaker 4 (23:59):
So okay, Yeah, so he likes living here.

Speaker 3 (24:01):
I mean it sounds like he has his own business, right,
yes he does.

Speaker 5 (24:04):
So okay, So she wants to leave, but her boyfriend
does not. Okay, probably because her boyfriend knows that this
is this country is their best shot. This is the
best one, despite your complaints. Sorry, And so he's like
trying to be practical. I guess, let me look at
my notes to see if there's anything after this that

(24:25):
is a bit more at seven thirty, Yeah, we're getting
to the next time code already. So he's kind of
like our buttressed against each other.

Speaker 6 (24:34):
Is that the word?

Speaker 7 (24:35):
Yeah?

Speaker 4 (24:36):
Why would he want to leave.

Speaker 9 (24:37):
I understand that's where the his logic in my logic
sometimes don't always nix.

Speaker 3 (24:43):
I'm concerned we can blame economic conditions for certain things.

Speaker 4 (24:45):
But you went to blaming the election.

Speaker 1 (24:47):
Yeah, a lot of things.

Speaker 3 (24:49):
That is just someone who does not take any kind
of accountability or at least any kind of objective intake
of information about the.

Speaker 4 (25:00):
Economy, kind of if you want to go straight politics
about it, there's all.

Speaker 3 (25:03):
There are certain things if if the if he made
it illegal to renovate houses, yes, we could blame that.

Speaker 1 (25:09):
I think.

Speaker 5 (25:11):
I'm just pausing it there for the banana. If you
want to say anything, or if I just play some more,
this goes let me just look at my notes again. Yeah,
so another fifty seconds reporty something seconds to keep going.

Speaker 7 (25:26):
Yeah, sure, another forty seconds.

Speaker 5 (25:28):
Okay.

Speaker 9 (25:28):
Part of it is that they a lot of places
are worried about things going into recession.

Speaker 3 (25:33):
And that would happen in the if there was the
other administration too.

Speaker 9 (25:37):
Yes, and so they a lot of stuff comes to
a complete halt. It doesn't even just slow down. Eighty
percent of the work disappeared, and that's not the.

Speaker 4 (25:45):
Last election though. That is interest rates being high.

Speaker 3 (25:47):
That's the purpose of interest rates being high to cool
the economy, bring down inflation.

Speaker 4 (25:51):
And when you cool the economy, you bring it down.

Speaker 3 (25:53):
Usually when interest rates are this high compared to you know,
the average of interest rates in the past decade or so,
and they're this high, statistically follows jerking off the president.

Speaker 4 (26:03):
I don't give about that. But when you're going and
you're blaming.

Speaker 3 (26:07):
Something on something like that instead of actual, you know,
objective information.

Speaker 9 (26:12):
It's the thing that makes it together because so many
people stop, so many of the businesses that he was
doing work with and contracting with they picked.

Speaker 5 (26:22):
That's kind of like the takeaway.

Speaker 7 (26:23):
I think she hasn't even she hasn't even really buttressed
the cope with any deep like could you make an
attempt to explain it that. I don't think she does never,
So she just basically just says, oh, it's the election.

Speaker 6 (26:37):
She wants it to be. She wants it to be
the election.

Speaker 5 (26:40):
He wants it to be the fault of the Orange Man,
because well, I don't really know I want to say it.
I don't know that there's a step too. It's just
blame the Orange Man and then that's it.

Speaker 7 (26:49):
Yeah, But the thing is that she He probed that
and she said, no, I would. It would be the
same with kimla Is. She's just not willing to admit.

Speaker 6 (26:56):
Or she doesn't she doesn't. Yeah, that's it. That's this
is cognitive. It's cope.

Speaker 5 (27:00):
It's like you said, it's a cope because if you
know that it wouldn't have mattered, you know, either way,
and that there are other people that are living in
the same planet that are going through the same thing
and they're not having this problem, So like what you know,
like it's like right in the beginning, he said, so
are you saying that because an election happened all of

(27:22):
a sudden, you had a loan and a high interest
rate and you know, like in all these problems, or
did you already have these problems and now you're just
trying to figure out something external to point the finger at.

Speaker 6 (27:33):
And that's what you chose.

Speaker 5 (27:34):
And you would have been in this situation no matter what,
because ultimately a president doesn't affect your debt.

Speaker 6 (27:42):
So you know, it's I don't know, it's a cope,
it's all.

Speaker 5 (27:45):
It is just cope. Probably she had other people in
her ear telling her that this is the case. I
don't know, maybe some of her customers. Yeah, all right,
so this is the last time cut I have here.

Speaker 3 (27:55):
Oh, when you're trying to sublet, your entire business is subletting,
this is not great.

Speaker 1 (27:59):
That's all us to purchase the building. The current building
owner is actually retired.

Speaker 3 (28:03):
Yeah, but you need money, we do because retired person
doesn't mean they're going to give.

Speaker 4 (28:08):
It away for free. That's actually if you're on the show,
you're not doing well.

Speaker 3 (28:12):
And if the boyfriend's money has dried up due to
the last election, then a good lot.

Speaker 1 (28:16):
It is starting to pick back up a little. It's
just a lot of catch up. But catching up. I mean,
he did a lot of work to get caught up.

Speaker 4 (28:24):
I just want to I just okay before the boyfriend.

Speaker 7 (28:27):
Yeah, or the boyfriend, So I guess he'll be able
to fund her projects. Yay. I'm guessing that Caleb probably
never mentions that like this doesn't look doesn't even He
doesn't even point out that he's funding her. He's funding
her rent her utilities. And if she's talking about how

(28:48):
his job picking up is going to benefit her business,
Caleb doesn't say, wow, he's that's interesting. Ever point out
that the boyfriend is underwriting.

Speaker 5 (28:59):
A lot of Yeah, that's what I'm doing right now.

Speaker 7 (29:02):
Yeah, I think that's that's definitely. Oh okay he does.
We just need a time code.

Speaker 5 (29:07):
Uh yeah, come on, give it to me, give it
to me. Okay, yeah, twenty four minutes. So we listen
to this whole thing already. Yeah, we did with the
cope bit. Okay, yeah, yeah, twenty four minutes. She talks
about her boyfriend. We'll go right here.

Speaker 4 (29:23):
People are figuring out a way.

Speaker 3 (29:25):
I can't speaking, and I don't own a salon, but
to suggest that you can't off.

Speaker 4 (29:29):
So he pays all the right utilities.

Speaker 1 (29:31):
He pays the right for the shop. No, he hasn't
missed it.

Speaker 3 (29:34):
Ris, Why are you Are you even dating him to
date him or are you businessing him?

Speaker 1 (29:38):
No?

Speaker 9 (29:39):
Absolutely dating him to date him. I don't know what
I would do in life without him.

Speaker 4 (29:42):
Oh, we're going to sell them.

Speaker 5 (29:43):
Why she's I don't know what I would do without him? Yeah,
because he pays for everything. I mean I know that's well, No,
that's what it sounds like. That's it building for.

Speaker 9 (29:53):
That discussion hasn't entirely been had yet, because.

Speaker 1 (29:57):
They are not all there yet. He's not ready to
sell it.

Speaker 9 (30:00):
Oh, but that was his deciding factor in picking us
to take the space.

Speaker 4 (30:04):
Does he know how you are?

Speaker 7 (30:06):
No?

Speaker 1 (30:07):
Make it?

Speaker 9 (30:07):
Their rent texts on times all of a sudden that
they don't need to full.

Speaker 3 (30:11):
Started at twenty, ended up going to thirty and then
forty to fifty.

Speaker 4 (30:14):
What the so, oh, now it's gonna be up with
the seventies. Started at twenty with the seventy. Yeah see
that's you. That's that's not that's.

Speaker 3 (30:21):
Actually not come on, tariffs didn't move it.

Speaker 5 (30:24):
Okay, So she's still trying to say it's tariffs, all right.

Speaker 4 (30:28):
Yeah, I don't know, I don't know if.

Speaker 8 (30:31):
Okay.

Speaker 7 (30:31):
So this isn't the part where she talks about her boyfriend. Okay.
So Caleb does point out that the boyfriend is underwriting
a lot of her costs and potential investments, and for example,
he mentions that the boyfriend usually pays the rent utilities
for the salon space too, which will leave some financial
burden from her. Caleb also knows that they handle their
financials separately, and that the boyfriend colors certain expenses like rent,

(30:52):
bhone bill, car insurance, while she uses credit cards for
the salon build out Moreover, is the salon should she
be investing that much money in? Moreover, Caleb highlights the
house they live in is paid off by the boyfriend,
which means she gets sucked. She is subsidized in terms
of housing as well. This financial support for the boyfriend
is brought up the multiple times to emphasize how much
she relies on him financially, despite her claims about economic hardships.

(31:15):
But is it brought up as a potential source of
I mean, because they're not living together, and in fact,
the relationship seems to be progressing backwards. So what is
he paying for? And presumably the kids aren't his?

Speaker 6 (31:29):
No, they're not.

Speaker 5 (31:30):
No, because in the beginning they said the dad is
not in the picture. So she's this is this is
another man's kids.

Speaker 6 (31:36):
He's a mess. Yeah, she's a mess.

Speaker 4 (31:38):
All right?

Speaker 5 (31:39):
Do you want me to play more? There's a little
bit more in this one, I think.

Speaker 4 (31:41):
And what the are you talking about?

Speaker 9 (31:43):
The building measurements that we got, the building measurements that
we got originally it built a whole business playing our
round it.

Speaker 4 (31:49):
Then utility is are going to cast sixteen?

Speaker 1 (31:51):
Utilities are actually only about two fifty right now? If
it stays okay, sixteen.

Speaker 3 (31:56):
Sixteen, so once it goes up, okay, yeah, seen fifty,
So sixty three thousand is your entire cost of that
than the seventy thousand build out?

Speaker 4 (32:06):
Yeah, and then.

Speaker 5 (32:07):
Okay, I'm sorry, they're just doing to find another time code.

Speaker 7 (32:12):
Okay. So the yes the situation is describing the document
could be potentially framed as abusive, particularly in a financial
and emotional context, like woman is in significant debts, struggling
with a failing business, and heavily reliant on a systems
program assistance programs while spending on non essential items like
competitive cheer activities for herself that we haven't covered yet.
She's competitive cheerleader, but doesn't make any money at it,

(32:34):
and apparently it's extremely expensive.

Speaker 6 (32:36):
Something that she wants to do.

Speaker 7 (32:38):
Okay. The financial advisor criticizes her for poor money management,
lack of accountability, and making choices that negatively impact her
family's well being. I was also mentioned of conflict and
control issues within a relationship. Okay, I'm going to drill
down on that.

Speaker 5 (32:53):
And Richard says she's on food stamps too. He's on
snap for now, not anymore. Let's play some this clip
while you're drilling down.

Speaker 9 (33:04):
Here, them them, absolutely them, one hundred percent them, Okay,
Like I beat them out in court one.

Speaker 3 (33:11):
Hundred Especially in a major blue city, we do have some.

Speaker 5 (33:14):
I have to be this self, just going back a
little bit for the context.

Speaker 3 (33:16):
Employed queen a business woman of the Century on Time magazine.

Speaker 4 (33:21):
You can go get a job.

Speaker 9 (33:22):
The problem is one of my children special needs, and
to get him too, appointments.

Speaker 4 (33:27):
Buy your low income. I know for you could have assistance.

Speaker 3 (33:31):
In a major city, we do, especially in a major
blue city, we do have some.

Speaker 1 (33:35):
I do have food stamps, and I do get some
child support, child.

Speaker 4 (33:38):
Support, daddy, how much comes in.

Speaker 1 (33:40):
From one of the dads. It's dads there are I
tried to do better.

Speaker 6 (33:44):
And a boyfriend, holy shit.

Speaker 7 (33:46):
And the boyfriend pays for her, and these two. One
of the men is paying child support. Yes, okay, all right,
let's let's hear what has she is here?

Speaker 1 (33:55):
Them?

Speaker 9 (33:56):
Absolutely them, one hundred percent them. Okay, I beat them
out in court one hundred percent them.

Speaker 3 (34:02):
Well that's good, but you call yourself we so I'm
just struggling to us.

Speaker 5 (34:06):
I mean, she's saying it was all him, it was
all him, but she had kids with him a kid
at least, So you chose him.

Speaker 6 (34:16):
That's it. So I'm gonna say you chose him.

Speaker 5 (34:18):
You know, we have really, we really got to stop
letting women say that they were completely out of their
mind and they had no idea that this man was.

Speaker 6 (34:29):
Like a terrible father or husband or boyfriend or whatever.

Speaker 5 (34:32):
And I mean, I mean this is like assuming that
you know that he was a problem at all. But
if he was, she chose to reproduce with him. She
chose that he women, you chose this that that we like,
I don't know why, but nobody wants to deal with that,
you know, they don't.

Speaker 6 (34:52):
They just really struggle with it.

Speaker 3 (34:54):
But okay, I also have a little bit of a
victim complex little then through my line working on it.

Speaker 4 (35:01):
That's what everyone says.

Speaker 5 (35:02):
I know. I like that. That's good.

Speaker 6 (35:04):
I forgot about that one.

Speaker 5 (35:05):
Okay, let me see there's a bit more thirty three.

Speaker 9 (35:11):
Yeah, you don't know how much shot support is. It's
one hundred and I think it's one hundred and forty.

Speaker 1 (35:15):
Eight a month a week.

Speaker 3 (35:17):
Oh think, because that's I know, I know, times fifty
two divided by twelve, so average it out at six
forty one.

Speaker 4 (35:25):
And thirty three cents a month.

Speaker 3 (35:28):
Why doesn't the other dad give money job hopping?

Speaker 1 (35:31):
Uh huh, Yep, there's a whole lot going on in there.

Speaker 4 (35:34):
Uh huh.

Speaker 8 (35:36):
So the other just have a steady job.

Speaker 7 (35:38):
Yeah, I wonder why she's with the current boyfriend?

Speaker 5 (35:41):
Yeah? Is that?

Speaker 6 (35:42):
Are you saying that tongue in cheek? I wonder how
the why the other boyfriend's giving her money when I do.

Speaker 3 (35:47):
Have food stamps three and twenty one per month.

Speaker 1 (35:53):
Okay, it's been They.

Speaker 4 (35:56):
All put that towards the grocery.

Speaker 9 (35:59):
For thirty six they lowered Theah, yeah it.

Speaker 1 (36:03):
Went because I had a renewal. But the requirement, there's
so much that's your choice though some of it.

Speaker 3 (36:09):
Yeah, you don't need to be doing this self and
playbook again. You're not trying to get on the cover
of Time magazine.

Speaker 4 (36:14):
What are we trying? Woman power?

Speaker 1 (36:16):
Like?

Speaker 4 (36:16):
I don't give about that a job.

Speaker 1 (36:19):
I'm trying to have a job that I want.

Speaker 5 (36:22):
Okay. I got a super chat from Zaraanx who says
it's too soon to mention Alpha Beta Bucks. Nope, it's
never too soon, never too soon.

Speaker 7 (36:32):
I just I mean, after that series of disasters and
suddenly she has a partner who can reliably pay her bills.

Speaker 5 (36:38):
Yeah, wow, I.

Speaker 7 (36:40):
Just I don't know. And then also there's just something
that's just something is rotten in Denmark if they were
originally living together and then somebody decided, no, we're going
to live apart with separate finances, although he still pays
her bills, so go figure. I mean, that's that is
quite a monthly cost just to get something to separate
like that, if you think about it. Okay, let's keep going.

(37:03):
Are we almost done with this one?

Speaker 6 (37:05):
Yes, we're almost done with this one.

Speaker 5 (37:06):
Okay, listen, I got one more minute, thirty six minutes
to thirty seven. Unless there's something that Richard Beierre wants
us to respond to.

Speaker 3 (37:15):
A good boss exactly, you are failing them by making
a thousand hours a month because you're trying to build
your business. That is a failure like that is your choice. Yes, yeah,
you will find a lot of bosses, a lot of businesses.
The business that my family's worked for, you know, my
business specifically.

Speaker 4 (37:29):
If anyone has an issue, of course they should go
deal with it. That is what would happen. You can
find jobs.

Speaker 3 (37:35):
Not every job is some massive corporate overlord, bank, teller, whatever.

Speaker 1 (37:40):
You'd be surprised at how many there are.

Speaker 4 (37:43):
And no, of course there are some. I'm not saying
that too.

Speaker 3 (37:46):
But you live in a major metro area of the
United States. I'm not you saying you can't get a
job and you're gonna allow yourself to just make a
thousand hours a month while having two kids is unacceptable.

Speaker 1 (37:55):
They didn't say I can't get a job.

Speaker 4 (37:56):
They go get a fucking job.

Speaker 5 (37:58):
That was a last time coach that I have, but
he ends up helping her put something together. But she
is getting a government support, which she's complaining is like
being reduced, like the amount of food stamps she's getting,
because she doesn't really need them. She could get a job,
she could work something out. I think that she's trying
to realize some dream of owning a hair salon and

(38:21):
having two kids from two different fathers and a boyfriend
that doesn't live with her but pays for all of
her stuff, and.

Speaker 6 (38:30):
She's in debt.

Speaker 5 (38:31):
Yeah, Alison, I don't know if you wanted to say anything,
but that was the last time stamp that I have here,
unless you want me to.

Speaker 7 (38:38):
Well, I was looking. Apparently it's the accusations of financial
abuse are about as you expect. For the most part.
On Reddit, they are talking about women being abused. Yes,
it's about eighty five percent of the time. Somehow, even
though the women are the ones in this financial distress,
they are the ones who've been subject to abuse according

(38:58):
to them. Of course, in many cases when they're solo,
I mean, they're the only person being talked about. And
let's see, so the woman is the victim according to
the Reddit financial abuse framework eighty five percent of the time.
The husband or husband is fifteen to twenty percent of
the time. Apparently this is when the women is identified

(39:23):
as a potential abuser. They it softened, so it seemed
more as enabling as over abuse. Okay, so when okay?
Where solo female audits frequently involve post divorce or ex
partner abuse stories, while couples highlight episode male highlight male control. However,
when women are abusers, it's typically downplayed or tied to

(39:44):
enabling behaviors rather than outright malice. All right, and also
Caleb Hammer is being accused of not being like, not
being conciliatory enough to the narrative around women being subject
to financial abuse, but That's why I'm asking this, like,
is this situation financial abuse? I mean, if we reverse the.

Speaker 5 (40:03):
Sex, it could be considered it technically, but I don't
think Reddit would consider it financialur course not. Yeah, So
that's just it's just a man paying for a woman's things.
It's just patriarchy backfiring or something. If there's any sympathy
at all. Otherwise, it's this is how you girl boss.
You get men to pay for your things, and you
get your business, and you get your child child support,

(40:25):
and you get your snap.

Speaker 7 (40:27):
Okay. So I basically just flat out and said, Grok, okay,
analyze what's going on with this Reddit community. That's you know,
I mean, I know it's Reddit, but it is a
epicenter of cultural commentary. That and I asked grok, if
there is any inconsistency Reddit.

Speaker 8 (40:46):
Yeah, we need to build and pay for it.

Speaker 7 (40:48):
I asked if there is any inconsistency. So basically double
standard in how Reddit views financial abuse when we're talking
about women versus men. And yes, the Reddit are Hammer
framework for analyzing financial abuse is strongly biased against recognizing
male victims. And this bias is both structural and how

(41:10):
discussions are framed and cultural and how evidence is interpreted,
the same patterns that emerge in episode narratives, fan commentary,
and Hammer's probing consistently downplay, dismissed, or re frame male
victimization while amplifying female victimization, even when the underlying behaviors
are identical. Below is a rigorous evidence based breakdown using

(41:30):
the exact same analytical framework the subred it uses. Okay,
all right, so if we just reverse the genders, what
they consider to be a skew towards male abusers immediately
becomes a skew towards female abusers. So, in other words,
it flips them.

Speaker 8 (41:47):
Who is who was an abuser.

Speaker 7 (41:49):
Becomes a victim and who was a victim becomes the abuser.
I should qualify, I should actually carefully qualify that and
make sure that's true. But preliminarily that's true, all right,
Tone and framing. Male victims are blamed or erase. The
subreddit uses three reoccurring lenses to interpret abuse when applied
to men. All three neutralized or reverse victimhood control equals

(42:11):
abuse applied to female victim wife monitors spending yields gas
lighting isolation applied to male victim husband monitors spending provider
stress necessary, male control justified.

Speaker 8 (42:24):
Okay, all right, but that's okay.

Speaker 7 (42:25):
I think we're I think we're.

Speaker 8 (42:26):
In a little bit in the weeds here.

Speaker 7 (42:28):
I have to work with this a little bit more
to get a clear answer, and maybe we should go
to the next time code.

Speaker 5 (42:34):
All Right, I'm gonna go to the next video. And
that was it for that one. Okay, all right, this
is a couple. You're gonna love the way these people look.
And their claim is that, well it's the same claim.
Actually they live in a fascist state, so they can't
get I don't know, they're struggling because of something. All Right,

(42:55):
here we go.

Speaker 1 (42:56):
Hi. I'm Savannah Grayson. I'm twenty seven years old.

Speaker 2 (42:59):
Hey, I'm Steve twenty eight. We live in Arlington, Texas,
and this is financial audit.

Speaker 3 (43:03):
Thanks for coming down to Austin, guys. I appreciate it, Savan.
You're the one in front of me.

Speaker 4 (43:06):
Oh, you're welcome. What do you do for a living?

Speaker 1 (43:09):
I'm currently unemployed.

Speaker 4 (43:10):
Great job. And what do you do?

Speaker 2 (43:12):
I'm a senior systems administrator.

Speaker 3 (43:14):
Okay, dig the mustache, guys, it was gonna be starting
your own brewery.

Speaker 2 (43:20):
Okay, I want to open a game store with.

Speaker 1 (43:25):
He is talking about your hitster message.

Speaker 2 (43:27):
Yaya get I get it, but you're not off the
market in.

Speaker 3 (43:31):
Mister mustache buck in twenty ten and sept Pearson, So
I got the full combination.

Speaker 5 (43:35):
And you got classily hitting the checks on the checklist. Okay,
so let me see here. So she doesn't have a
job and he has like a middle management thing going on.
That's what it sounds like, systems administrator. Sounds like a
you know, cubicle thing.

Speaker 7 (43:51):
So okay, here we go, Here we go. This is
the real Reddit quote paraphrase from multiple threads. If a
guy lets his wife spend like that, he's not victim,
He's an enabler. Same behavior in reverse, she was trapped
in a controlling marriage. Yeah, so that there is a
significant double standard. I think even Caleb has apparently a
double standard too, that he actually refers to financial abuse

(44:15):
with his female guests but not necessarily with his male guests.
All right, So example, a man in a couple's audit
reveals his wife maxed out joint credit cards on luxury
bags without telling him, Hammer, you need to communicate better
a woman in the same scenario, Hammer, this is coercive control.
You're being financially abused. So even though he's applying the
sort of gendered lens which picks up female victimhood far

(44:37):
more frequently the male victimhood, the reddit feminists are still
incise that, I don't know, he's not bringing out his
flamethrower and insiderating the man and swooping in and sending
the woman into I don't who knows like his Caleb's
funded shelter for financially abused women. So but you know
that's but yeah, there definitely is a bias here when

(44:59):
it comes to RecA ignizing financial abuse.

Speaker 6 (45:01):
All right, Sorry, Like I said, like I knew that
they wouldn't.

Speaker 5 (45:05):
I think that a lot of people wouldn't see a
man paying for a woman's lifestyle to be financial abuse,
because that's what he's doing.

Speaker 7 (45:13):
Yeah, Yet the reverse would be suspected.

Speaker 6 (45:16):
It would be terrible.

Speaker 5 (45:17):
It would be terrible. Yeah, it would be.

Speaker 6 (45:19):
They'd be trying to make it illegal.

Speaker 1 (45:21):
Earned eighteen, she decided to live with some other family members.
My ten year old sister is currently about to be
placed with her mom.

Speaker 3 (45:30):
Okay, interesting that she wasn't already, but I get it.
Life's complicated. I get it, so all right.

Speaker 5 (45:36):
I was I was trying to this is not the timecode,
but for some reason would let me pick the time code.

Speaker 6 (45:42):
So this is it right here.

Speaker 4 (45:43):
What are we talking about today, guys? What are we
talking about? What's going on?

Speaker 2 (45:46):
We're we really want to get the out of his country.

Speaker 1 (45:49):
Yeah, and he'd really like to move out of the
United States. That was a big thing that we were
in alignment.

Speaker 2 (45:55):
On where we have a few options that we talked about,
like New Zealand or.

Speaker 4 (46:01):
Chief one will be a failed one, that'll be an
extra failed.

Speaker 10 (46:03):
One, Germany, Northern European countries like Denmark, Switzerland, Netherlands.

Speaker 5 (46:08):
Guys, anybody from the Netherlands or Switzerland or Denmark there
that once this couple that are trying to escape the
evil fascist Nazi America, because that's what they're the mustache.
Just look at the mustache and the glasses and the
septum piercing. And I think, you guys know, Zaryanks gives
us two dollars and says I initially thought that was

(46:28):
Steve's on. By the way, for super Chows, Richard b
Are sent in a song request.

Speaker 7 (46:34):
I know that was an accident. He thought we were
doing something on Sunday, but then I.

Speaker 8 (46:38):
Was just fling ill.

Speaker 7 (46:39):
Sorry, guys. We had a we had a sudden blizzard,
which usually isn't a problem for Canadians except when it's
in fall and you haven't changed switched your tires to
your snow tires, and we ended up being stranded in
a town between our home and the city that we
go to to get some of the items that we need.
And yeah, and it's just because you know, the fall
isn't in interesting time in Canada, especially where we are,

(47:03):
because you sort of have to guess when you need
to switch from your summer tires to your winter tires.
And you do need winter tires because conditions, the road
conditions are pretty harsh, and the problem is if you
guess too soon, then you risk wearing out your winter
tires quickly, and if you guess too late, you risk
getting stranded somewhere when it just the winter switch just

(47:27):
decides to get flipped. And the winter switch just decided
to get flipped, and we got stranded. So that was
a little bit complicated. It took a couple of days
to resolve because the roads were so bad. We actually
had to change. We had to get a new set
of winter tires, which is okay, our old sets already
getting pretty old, so it was eventually we're gonna have
to get it anyway, But man, that was that was.

(47:48):
That was a lot of time and a lot of
stress and also ended up getting a little bit ill
because we were stuck in the winter. And so yeah,
there's been it's been a couple of days of trying
to get back into things from but anyway, that's that's
why we didn't do anything on Sunday, and Richard sent
in a song request to a show that didn't happen,
So eventually we will have to get that song request,

(48:10):
Black Betty, it's actually a song. I like. That's good.
But anyway, if you want to send in commentary, feed
the Badger dot com slash just the tip do it
like yeah, because it's it's lonely in there, make it
less lonely.

Speaker 10 (48:22):
All right, let's go all right, Okay, she's also a
lie just because of the political climate.

Speaker 2 (48:29):
You know, we don't think things are going great.

Speaker 4 (48:32):
Year's going to the right as well.

Speaker 2 (48:34):
Yeah, I mean the whole world is world.

Speaker 3 (48:36):
Reforms about to just smash and win the next UK election.

Speaker 4 (48:40):
I don't know it'll you.

Speaker 7 (48:41):
Know why the world is going, right, it is because
people they want to actually be able to survive. I mean,
let's face it, like the the the reality is that
the left doesn't seem to like humanity nor want it
to continue to exist. I mean that's that's my impression.

Speaker 5 (49:02):
Common sense, common sense had to come at some point.
I mean Europe, Like, the truth is, Europe got absolutely
demolished by migrants and uh and.

Speaker 6 (49:12):
I'm not talking legal ones.

Speaker 5 (49:13):
I'm talking about just people that got on a boat
and they're just like living in for star hotels and
they're not working and they're just taking like whatever social
programs they have, and they're the Europe is absolutely destroyed
and demoralized, and the UK is not much better, and
Australia is going through it. So the citizenry are like, Okay,

(49:34):
that's enough, We're gonna we're we're we're gonna, you know,
actually like try to do something about it. And that
means well, I mean, like if you've gone this far left,
anything that goes against it looks hard, right, but it
probably isn't because it just looks that way. So yeah,
they're just saying all right, we're done playing. It's just
like what happened in America. And again, these people are

(49:54):
kind of I don't know, maybe they're terminally online or
on Reddit or on TV or watching TV or something,
but they are.

Speaker 6 (50:00):
There is no like if they I don't know where
they're hoping to.

Speaker 5 (50:03):
Go, but there is no place what they're looking for
because people are done with the left games. Basically, they're
just done with it and they're ready for something that
looks like normal. So they're voting accordingly, and that's basically
all it is. They just don't they just they're just
tired of killing themselves. And yeah, I mean it's not
that hard, like it's just you know, it's a correction,
that's it. I wouldn't even say enough of a correction

(50:25):
in many cases, but we'll see. But yeah, I mean
I think these people are just again they're sort of
emotionally reacting to something. And I wonder if the woman
is actually having more effect than the man in this decision.
I think he's because I think that he's kind of
going along with her whims and so if she says,
oh MG, I'm scared, I don't I can't kill my

(50:46):
babies anymore. I'm gonna lose all my free stuff. I
don't have a job, I don't want to work whatever.
And he's like, okay, honey, well what do we do.
We have to escape. I'm gonna I'm gonna save you
from this. We're gonna go somewhere. I think New Zealand
is nice. That's where they shot Lord of the Rings
without knowing. New Zealand's cost of living is it's pretty high.
It's expensive to live there, or Australia. I think I

(51:06):
remember because when we were there in Australia and we
hung out with Bearing, I think that Sugar Tits and
I sat down, we were just hanging out, and she
said that, yeah, the cost of living in Australia is
really high, and it's got something to do with where
they are and the fact that it's like an island continent.
I don't know, so because they have to they have
to import a lot. Anyway, I'm just saying cost of

(51:27):
living is high in those places. It seems people are
not exactly like that kind of upwardly mobile.

Speaker 6 (51:33):
They want to avoid problems.

Speaker 5 (51:36):
They I don't know if they want to go to
Germany or France or the Netherlands.

Speaker 7 (51:40):
No, but it's.

Speaker 8 (51:41):
Just like this is vague.

Speaker 7 (51:42):
We want to get away from the political landscape of
where we are. It's like, I don't know this just honestly,
it's it. I don't see any of the ethical virtues
that I used to see in like liberal liberalism or
or the left. It's just basic squeezing the little guy
and making excuses for massive amounts of control and government spending.

(52:08):
And it's like, yes, of course that's going to destroy economies.
And I don't even think that people who are like,
let's please, can we stop doing that are necessarily really
really are what I would consider conservative. And again I
don't mean that as like, oh, I'm afraid to be
titled conservative. I'm saying that, in a completely neutral conservative
have these sets of values, and then you have these

(52:29):
other sets of values that tend to be liberal. And
these are two sets of values that have their positives
and their negatives. It's like two types of class in
a in a D and D setting, you got your
tank and you got your healer class, and one isn't
better and one isn't worse. They just have different functions.

(52:49):
And it's like what we term the left now does
not seem to have any function except for justifying government spending,
justifying government control, justifying corporate and government collusion, and justifying
the putting all of the consequences of all of that
on men, right and and blaming men. It doesn't It's

(53:12):
like I see that as being well, it's just evil anyway, Okay,
let's keep going, all.

Speaker 3 (53:17):
Right, who says, you know, you know, everyone everyone on
like in the United States and whatnot, calls her a fascist?

Speaker 1 (53:27):
Right, Really, I I didn't know that, you know what.

Speaker 5 (53:30):
You know, like the people don't even know what's going
on in other parts of the world. They just want
to go there.

Speaker 6 (53:35):
That's what I'm saying.

Speaker 5 (53:35):
They're very like naive, like they would probably be like, oh,
it wouldn't be cool to live in Japan. And Japan
meanwhile just like elected, like you know, somebody who like
some extremely like right wing woman to be prime minister
or president whatever they have there, and to the point
where like you know, Woki's are loving losing their shit.
So yeah, and because again Japan was starting to experience

(53:59):
a migrant problem like where they were getting all these
immigrants and Japan was like, no, we're not losing our
identity over this, so they elected somebody to fix that
problem for them.

Speaker 4 (54:09):
Don't know, it's gonna likely win in France as well.

Speaker 2 (54:12):
You know, you know what Italy did in World War Two?

Speaker 6 (54:14):
Right?

Speaker 5 (54:14):
Well?

Speaker 1 (54:14):
Yeah, okay, yeah, I know.

Speaker 4 (54:16):
I don't know why we're talking about one hundred years ago,
but okay eight. But lord, look.

Speaker 5 (54:20):
Man, you're asking normies to talk about history, and there's
only one thing in history that people can talk about.
World War Two is everybody's favorite topic.

Speaker 6 (54:28):
Let me see what.

Speaker 5 (54:29):
Other time codes I have here? Seven to ten?

Speaker 6 (54:31):
Oh, there's still a little bit more of this one.

Speaker 3 (54:34):
Yeah, okay, And how's this productive to you, guys? Because
you're making a United States income right now?

Speaker 4 (54:41):
Actually higher?

Speaker 1 (54:43):
Well I wrote that with him being in it, that
he could get a job.

Speaker 3 (54:49):
The tech sector is not even close to what the
United States is by far.

Speaker 2 (54:53):
Yeah, just based on research I've done.

Speaker 10 (54:56):
I know my career field is in high demand in
a lot of different places.

Speaker 3 (55:00):
Certainly, but even the United States. I t of where
we have a booming tech sector and it's not easy
to get hired and at this exact moment, So that
seems like a bit of overconfidence.

Speaker 5 (55:11):
Sure, all right, so I think he's trying to like
help them understand that things like with what they well,
only one of them has a job. With what this
guy does, the US is the best place still for
him to get a job in it.

Speaker 6 (55:24):
I mean, I think that's.

Speaker 5 (55:25):
Probably true because like we still have a good economy
in that regard. I guess. So then next we got
the relationship dynamics and accountability.

Speaker 10 (55:36):
That sounds intriguing, Like I feel like you could, like
you could do more.

Speaker 6 (55:40):
Oh yeah, yeah, he hass sort of step up.

Speaker 3 (55:42):
Ah, part of the reason that we So you're upset
about hurt getting in a job walking me through.

Speaker 10 (55:48):
Yeah, I mean we've definitely had Whenever we have arguments
about our financial situation, always boils down to, well X
y Z would be better if you had a job
and an income, And yeah, I mean I feel like
you don't like put in enough effort.

Speaker 2 (56:04):
I feel like I feel like you could, like you
could do more.

Speaker 10 (56:08):
You know, you sleep in a lot and you're I mean,
I'm cooking, cleaning, taking care of the animals, watering the plants.

Speaker 6 (56:18):
He's watering the plants.

Speaker 5 (56:20):
What the hell do but she sleeps in apparently, Like
I don't know, I thought that if.

Speaker 6 (56:25):
Well, again, you know, if they.

Speaker 5 (56:28):
Had an arrangement where she did all the house stuff,
I could see that as at least more agreeable. But
it sounds like, according to him, he does everything. He
does the whole shebang.

Speaker 1 (56:41):
Yeah, I water my plants. You don't water my plants.

Speaker 7 (56:44):
Your plants.

Speaker 4 (56:45):
I mean, I lost my awards. I'd give one, but
I can't find them right now.

Speaker 6 (56:50):
I lost my awards.

Speaker 5 (56:52):
Okay, okay, sorry.

Speaker 4 (56:53):
I continue.

Speaker 10 (56:53):
I mean that's I mean, the plants is just one thing,
but like I still like contribute in every area on
top of working. And then I just you know, I mean,
I am worried that you're taking advantage of me a
little bit, you know, but like.

Speaker 7 (57:12):
Yeah, there's some serious that pauses, there's a lot of
there's a lot of wheels moving in that pause. Yeah,
a swollen And it's not actually funny because this guy
is obvious, like he's obviously not in he doesn't have
a she's not well. I honestly, this isn't this isn't
unusual for men. He's probably a little scared of her,

(57:36):
and it does sound like she's taking advantage of him.
So I wonder what happens. I wonder what we're about
to see. How is this going to be dealt with?
Because this does sound like it's not just financial abuse. Basically,
she's just taking advantage of him. And I mean, I
guess you could say the genesis of that is probably
I mean, if you look at the differential in looks,

(57:56):
although again women can emulate a lot with makeup. You know,
maybe maybe she feels like she she's the table and
he has to bring something to it. And if that
was reversed, the genders were reversed, we would recognize that
as a form of abuse and entitlement. Okay, let's see
what Let's see what happens.

Speaker 5 (58:14):
I'm curious, all right, I got a super child, so
I'm going to read it. I got a super chowd
great Indoors gives us five dollars and says, this morning,
I was listening to Dasparu's review of the pilot episode
of All's Fair and it made me wonder, did Mra
successfully infiltrate Hollywood and greenlit this show to completely expose
the Hollywood elite, feminism and the divorce industry of the

(58:37):
entire world, because it sure comes across that way. Well,
I have not seen that show or the DISPARU review
of it. I think I'll have to check it out.

Speaker 7 (58:47):
Is I have heard about that. I think it's like
a I think it has I think it's about a
bunch of women. Actually, let me see if I can.

Speaker 6 (58:55):
Kim Kardashian in that show.

Speaker 5 (58:57):
I think I've seen an ad for it, like on
my front page of my Amazon firestick. Like if I
didn't watch it, I just you know, you turn on
your firestick and you're like on your TV or Google
TV or Apple TV or whatever, and it has like
all these streaming services and like whatever's out, And I
think that was like prominently featured. I did. I started
watching The Gamo del Toro Frankenstein.

Speaker 7 (59:20):
Oh Okay, Everyone's Okay is a twenty twenty five American
legal drama series created by Okay Blah Blah blah blah blah.
The therm specialized in representing high profile female clients and
messi's high stakes divorce cases, often involving themes of betrayal, revenge,
and empowerment in glossy, over the top world of extreme
wealth and cut through legal battles. The core plot follows

(59:41):
Alura and her team, including partners like Liberty ronson and
portray others portrayed by UH people as they navigate lucrative
cases for wronged women against powerful men while dealing with
personal dramas. A major storyline involves Alura's on crumbling marriage
to her husband Chase, leading to her divorce, preceding fertility

(01:00:02):
struggles and a sisterhood dynamic where the firm rallies for
collective payback that does not send that does not sound
like men's rights active as vibes.

Speaker 5 (01:00:11):
We might be at the point or at least like
with our media. It's apparently it's on Hulu. Hulu, by
the way, is owned by Disney. Hulu is essentially the
R rated Disney streaming service that doesn't have the Disney
name attached to it, although the lines there are blurry anyways.
But it could be to the point now where they
could show or at least the folks on our streaming
services that create that entertainment, or at the point now

(01:00:34):
where they can explicitly show evil women doing evil things
and the viewers will be expected to simply see it
as empowering and not evil at all. So just consider that,
because that's not a new thing either. Like I remember
I watched do you guys remember the TV show True
Blood that was on HBO, And it was like like

(01:00:55):
adult like vampires and love triangles and stuff like that,
or The Boys, or like any number of these other
shows that have like morally gray but really kind of
evil characters and they're all like screwing each other over
and blackmailing each other and doing all this backbiting and
and and it's.

Speaker 6 (01:01:14):
And they're the heroes and we're supposed to root for them.
I think that this is probably just that.

Speaker 5 (01:01:19):
So, like if you watch All's Fair, I would bet
that even if you watched it and said, wow, this
is like exposing how evil women can be. Of average
person that watches it may not see it that way
at all. They might simply see the opposite, and that
would be the intent of the people who made it. Like,
I think that we've normalized things to that point where

(01:01:40):
when we see it, we kind of expect it. So
that's what that would be my guess. I mean, you know,
I know that you guys are spergs and you're gonna
spurg out and see the spurgy things, but remember, normal
people see what they've been programmed to see. So you're
not gonna be able to convince them, you know, like
actually you're rooting for the wrong person. Aha, and they're like, no,
I'm not. So just just remember that, Just remember that

(01:02:02):
that what you see is not necessarily what was put
out there, And even if it was really obvious, it
might still get the opposite of the effect, only because
of how demoralized, how normalized this kind of like evil is,
so that people see the evil and they kind of like, yeah,
are fine with it.

Speaker 7 (01:02:21):
So well, apparently they're not all right. YouTuber dispar Disperu
delivers a scathing yet ironically enthusiastic takedown to the Ryan
Murphy created Hulu pilot, framing it is an unintentional masterpiece
of self parody. He argues the episode, about a woman
only divorce firm led by persons that breaks from a
patriarchal setup to extract massive settlements from innocent tech billionaire husbands,

(01:02:46):
is not just poorly executed, but horrifically evil, and its
unseelf aware promotion of greed, amorality, and hypocritical girl boss feminism.
Disperu calls Disney calls it Disney's funniest most evil show,
the most honest best comedy of the year that accidentally
exposes the very vices that glorifies, earning its dismal zero
to six percent Rotten Tomatoes score by hitting too close

(01:03:09):
to home. So I would say that zero to one
percent or zero to six percent and Rotten Tomatoes means
that this has roundly been rejected.

Speaker 5 (01:03:19):
Well, it looks like that was what the intention was,
Like they were trying to make it a girl Boss
affair and they just had the women being openly evil.
And I mean, according to Final Midnight and the chat
he says, I've seen it reported that all of the
tweets on the show are by women commenting on the
outfits the characters are wearing. This show has been targeted

(01:03:39):
at a very particular demographic. So yeah, I mean that's
what I'm saying, Like, how many people of the people
that it was targeting are going to see it? Like
that who even watched it? And how many of them
are going to see it? You know, like as Hulu
intended to like show it.

Speaker 6 (01:03:59):
It's a bit of a scary thought because it it you.

Speaker 5 (01:04:01):
You you end up asking yourself like okay, so how
evil are we at this point? How okay are we
with evil right now.

Speaker 7 (01:04:07):
Well, it may have backfired, you may have okay. Plot
and writing Dispairy mocks the contrived narrative as a cavalcade
of wigs screeching, and so this is, this is. This
is the analysis of All's Fair screeching and tacky, tasteless
television where the firm uses blackmail, example stocking photos, and

(01:04:29):
fabricated dominatrix scandals to force quarter million dollar settlements in
cases of cheating wives demanding unearned luxury. He highlights plot
holes and absurd dialogue like empty threats having me in
as an enemy is very unwise and buzzword laden lines
stepped away from the patriarchy, calling the script incompetent and
making Tyler Perry projects look like Shakespeare. The best jokes,

(01:04:54):
he says, arise unintentionally during serious moments, such as pigs
rolling in filth for an hour and a fetish blackmail scene,
revealing the show's obliviousness to legal or moral logic. The
protagonists are characters of pure evil again All's Fair, Hulu's
All's Fair. The protagonists are characters of pure evil and
degenerate Haggs who poses empowered saviors but are thieves and

(01:05:18):
parasites exploiting men they came to hate. Clients are entitled
gold Diggers gas lit into viewing diamonds and wealth as abuse,
while Husband's emerge is the episode's moral authorities and based
figures enforcing fair prenups. Desperu praises the rival lawyer Sarah
Paulson's Carrington as the best character for her blunt honesty, example,

(01:05:40):
calling the leads three skanks and the creepery investigator as
one of the gals and their insatiable revenge scheme.

Speaker 5 (01:05:47):
Okay, so I got from Winter for five dollars and
he says, honey for the badgers as usual grade shows lately,
thank you much, Thank you Winter, really appreciate it.

Speaker 7 (01:05:57):
Well, well, I finally got Grock to bid out proper analysis,
so we'll go through that. But at the end of
how financial abuse is treated on this show, and it's
fan community based on the gender of who they think
is doing the financial abuse the sex, Yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:06:16):
I figure that was on this relationship.

Speaker 7 (01:06:19):
Yeah, getting back to the show.

Speaker 2 (01:06:21):
Yeah, I want to I want to trust you implicitly.

Speaker 1 (01:06:25):
When when we've talked about this at home, like you've
never you never said that before.

Speaker 10 (01:06:30):
I mean, I mean, maybe I wasn't direct enough about
about it, but I've been trying to communicate, you know, like, hey,
you could put in more effort, Like I just think
that you could be doing more. And I feel like
there's definitely an imbalance like that. I'm I'm kind of
doing everything.

Speaker 7 (01:06:46):
Her only defense, if her only defense to him saying,
I pay the bills, I cook, I clean, I take
care of the animals, I water the plants, And her
only defense is but I wanted my plants. Think he's
got us. I think he's he's he is being taken
advantage of.

Speaker 2 (01:07:02):
Yeah, and you know you're not even working.

Speaker 4 (01:07:07):
Remember when he said you're you're excess. Who were financially
taking advantage of him?

Speaker 7 (01:07:12):
Whoa whoa whoa she Yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:07:15):
So the guy said that he had a he has.

Speaker 5 (01:07:17):
History of of girls taking advantage of him financially.

Speaker 7 (01:07:21):
I thought it was. I thought it was she's had
history of men taking advantage of her financially.

Speaker 6 (01:07:27):
Oh, I don't know.

Speaker 7 (01:07:28):
Yeah, let me let's just confirm that. Keep going. But
I'll get I'll get it.

Speaker 10 (01:07:33):
And I feel like there's definitely an imbalance like that.
I'm I'm kind of doing everything and you know you're
not even working.

Speaker 3 (01:07:42):
You know, remember when he said you're you're excess who
were financially taking Okay, stop.

Speaker 7 (01:07:47):
In the show, the woman mentions that in her past
relationship she was the sole breadwinner, implies that her exes
took financial advantage of her. This is discussed in the
context of her previous relationships and financial struggles. Man, on
the other hand, does not having Well, the likelihood that
that's true is now is now moving down to zero,
that she actually had exes that took financial advantage of her.

Speaker 5 (01:08:10):
Oh okay, do you really.

Speaker 7 (01:08:12):
Think that this behavior just suddenly switched like this out
of the blue.

Speaker 5 (01:08:16):
I don't know.

Speaker 7 (01:08:17):
Okay, I'm probably not.

Speaker 8 (01:08:19):
I don't know, probably not.

Speaker 4 (01:08:20):
Okay, here's the thing, this happens in actually.

Speaker 7 (01:08:25):
Really feel for that dude. I mean he's a little
bit of a a he looks a little bit bug
man ish, But even bug man have feelings.

Speaker 6 (01:08:35):
Bug man have feelings.

Speaker 5 (01:08:36):
Yes, they also if you they also cry? Got them?

Speaker 6 (01:08:40):
Do they not bleed?

Speaker 1 (01:08:41):
All?

Speaker 7 (01:08:41):
Right?

Speaker 3 (01:08:42):
This isn't obviously officials couples therapy, but in setting similar
to this in couples therapy, that's where the real thing
comes out that people hold back from wanting the same
person because they don't want to start a fight.

Speaker 4 (01:08:53):
They I want to start an argument at home.

Speaker 7 (01:08:54):
You that dude is terrified and this is that shuit
really common for lake men, that they are afraid of
confrontations with their female partners. This is this is actually,
this is this is normal for men to be scared
of confrontations of their female partners, or to be nervous
about them, or to have an increase in a general

(01:09:16):
adrenaline and I think cortisol at the idea of a
confrontation with their their female partners. That's really common and
I highly doubt it's something that's unique to this era.
So probably this is something that has happened since the
dawn of pair bonding and.

Speaker 8 (01:09:30):
The human race.

Speaker 7 (01:09:31):
Yeah, And in the context of that, it really makes
you wonder why most religions tell most religions that are
part of any kind of advanced civilization or empire have
this statement that women need to submit or trust or
listen to men. Specifically, they say that, and it's always

(01:09:52):
like that. This is consistent with every advanced empire, every
advanced civilization that got past subsistence level survival.

Speaker 2 (01:10:00):
Okay, A safe place, and I try to be that
for you.

Speaker 10 (01:10:03):
You know, I want you to be able to come
to me with stuff and talk to me about things
and be open. You know, I feel like I don't
have the same opportunity. I feel like I if I
bring stuff up, like you get.

Speaker 2 (01:10:16):
Upset and you get angry, and tell.

Speaker 3 (01:10:18):
Me about that, tell me about how those conversations go
where she gets she gets upset and angry.

Speaker 5 (01:10:26):
I'm just pausing there for that's a good place to pause.

Speaker 7 (01:10:29):
Wow, this is this is actually really topical. I think
we owe Richard Berre the apology. Okay, but no, seriously,
this was this was very well done.

Speaker 5 (01:10:40):
This was very well here's the time code and that
would have been great. Yeah.

Speaker 10 (01:10:44):
But yeah, okay, Well I'll just bring something up and
I end up having to comfort her at the end
of it, you know, because it's like she'll start saying,
I'm such a like worthless partner, you know, she says
that about herself, and then I have to be like, no, no,
you're not, like I have to.

Speaker 7 (01:11:03):
That's the way of evading responsibility, my dude, because then
it reframes it on, it reframes it on her emotional
response to the problems that you're bringing up, and then
it becomes all about her emotional response, and then the
problems disappear, right, they become not important, and you can't
bring him up again because then she'll have this breakdown

(01:11:24):
where she exaggerates what you're saying. You know, maybe maybe
you could take out the trash. Becomes you think I'm
a horrible slob. You think blah blah, and it's like
I am worthless and it's like, well, no, I think
that you could just remember to take out the trash.
That doesn't make you a worthless human being to forget right,
And so this is this is actually a offensive maneuver,

(01:11:47):
like she's she is actually silencing him by pretending that
him bringing up legitimate concerns is tied to her self esteem.
Therefore she he has to stop or he's harming her
self esteem. That's not a healthy dynamic, Okay, all.

Speaker 10 (01:12:05):
Right, next spot, and then you know, then it kind
of ends up fizzling out.

Speaker 2 (01:12:11):
Because I don't get to get my point across.

Speaker 3 (01:12:13):
And then actually, again, let's take more notes from your
TikTok community. That's an incredibly manipulative and almost gas lighting
thing that you're doing, where you have a real conversation,
and then you go, I'm not a good partner, I'm
not contributing to anything. You aren't to have that conversation,

(01:12:35):
and then go in there with that bolt, that self
victimizing bulk.

Speaker 4 (01:12:39):
That's I want to see the woman good good.

Speaker 7 (01:12:43):
He correct, He completely identified that that dynamic. It is, yeah, okay,
what what's your reaction though?

Speaker 8 (01:12:50):
I want to see it all right?

Speaker 7 (01:12:51):
All right?

Speaker 1 (01:12:52):
I feel like we always like resolve our issues.

Speaker 3 (01:12:57):
I mean because you reflect self victimize and he stops
the conversation and you feel resolved because he embraces you.

Speaker 7 (01:13:07):
Good lord. Is this considered emotional labor? Feminist? Seriously, this
is a very common dynamic between male and female people,
like a in a relationship, especially in a relationship where
the woman has hand because she's more attractive or whatever.
The man has to coutew to her emotional reality and somehow,

(01:13:32):
and the submission to her emotional reality is so complete
with a lot of these women that they think feeling
emotions is them doing emotional labor for their partner who
has to swallow his own emotions so that she can
feel her emotions. But this is the same this, and
is this considered emotional labor. Is this dynamic considered emotional labor?

(01:13:54):
The man brings up a problem he has, the woman
deflects it onto I'm so excited that the problem you
have is making me feel like I'm such a worthless person.
I feel so bad. Comfort me now, my emotions are
more important than the problem you brought up. And he does.
Is that considered emotional labor? Because I see a lot.

Speaker 5 (01:14:14):
Okay, all right, let me see here.

Speaker 6 (01:14:17):
That was all for that time?

Speaker 5 (01:14:18):
Code.

Speaker 6 (01:14:19):
Do you play more of this or sure.

Speaker 7 (01:14:22):
Let's let's see what. Wow, this gets resolved?

Speaker 2 (01:14:24):
I we do.

Speaker 10 (01:14:26):
We do get to finish the conversation. But you know,
I feel like in that area, especially with looking for
another job, like I like every everything can be like
you know, some people like the trad wife thing. Some
you know, like different relationships have different like like ratios
of stuff.

Speaker 1 (01:14:46):
Like quickly told me that if I don't want to work,
I don't have to work, that you would get a
higher paying job and that I could just stay at home.

Speaker 7 (01:14:53):
Good lord, what a fucking parasitic child. Get rid of her.
But you know, but the thing is that he can't
because it's probably terrifying the thought of not having her
or not having a woman. It's probably where is validation
comes from.

Speaker 5 (01:15:09):
Yeah, okay, set.

Speaker 4 (01:15:11):
It up like that. It would be a little weird
to go against it.

Speaker 1 (01:15:13):
He has said that to me multiple times.

Speaker 2 (01:15:16):
I mean, that's an option.

Speaker 5 (01:15:18):
He didn't do that to you though, And again you
you can still be like, well, I'm going to work anyway,
or I'm going to do the triad wife thing or whatever,
but you didn't do it either of them.

Speaker 6 (01:15:27):
You're just sleeping in and doing just like doing whatever.

Speaker 5 (01:15:30):
And then you're blaming him for i don't know, like
calling you out on it or asking for help or whatever,
Like what why should he even have to ask you?

Speaker 6 (01:15:39):
You should be taking the initiative.

Speaker 2 (01:15:41):
But like, that's not what I want.

Speaker 1 (01:15:44):
I want a job. My self worth is directly tied
to how productive I can be.

Speaker 8 (01:15:49):
And and that's why you want a job.

Speaker 7 (01:15:51):
That's why you want a job. You don't want a
job to help out with the family finances. You want
it because your self esteem is tied to it.

Speaker 1 (01:15:58):
Listen again, So forth is directly tied to how productive
I can be.

Speaker 4 (01:16:03):
I p no offense. He's never been productive.

Speaker 1 (01:16:06):
I've been what's the longest job you've ever had a
year in three months?

Speaker 5 (01:16:09):
Yeah?

Speaker 6 (01:16:10):
Yeah, a year and three months?

Speaker 7 (01:16:12):
Okay, yeah, Okay, let's go.

Speaker 1 (01:16:14):
Who is end of life care for an elderly man
with deninsia?

Speaker 4 (01:16:17):
Why do you always have to go?

Speaker 5 (01:16:18):
See?

Speaker 4 (01:16:19):
This is what she does.

Speaker 3 (01:16:19):
She always has to go into the conversation with bringing
up something sad to shut it down.

Speaker 4 (01:16:23):
You see how this works. I mean it's not good.

Speaker 3 (01:16:26):
It is not a healthy way to live or to
have conversations.

Speaker 4 (01:16:29):
But I help you recognize that. But like all this
stuff has yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:16:32):
She did, she does kind of do that. So so
what was your only job? Well? I worked for a
year and three months. That's not a lot.

Speaker 5 (01:16:38):
What did you do? I was I was working with
a dying old man. Now now you feel bad for
asking you see, look at the face. Now you feel bad, Like,
look at the face.

Speaker 7 (01:16:51):
Look at her face. She just talked about helping a
man who was dying for a year and a half.
And look at the expression on her face. Annoyed, annoying,
and she's peeved. That's the expression. She just mentioned doing
end of life care for a vulnerable person who died,

(01:17:11):
and her expression is peeved. This is either she is
so syllopsistic that she doesn't recognize other humans, or this
is a possible sociopath. I mean, I'm not saying that
she is. It's not an official diagnosis. But what I'm
saying is, if you are recalling something in your life

(01:17:31):
that should have had an emotional impact on her, and
I press X it doubt how did she get put
in a position where she's doing something like that. Usually
you'd have to have some kind of qualification, but regardless,
you would imagine it would have some emotional impact on her.
That's what I'm saying, and apparently does not have any
She just uses it a weapon in a conversation. All right,
let's keep going.

Speaker 2 (01:17:52):
All right, happened and it does have an effect on her.

Speaker 3 (01:17:55):
I'm not saying it doesn't, but it's the way that
every conversation is with her. Bring up a valid point,
and then she has to bring in something where it
gets sad. And if you then push on that valid
point again, you all of a sudden look bad because
oh no, something's sad happened, because you can't be a day.

Speaker 4 (01:18:12):
You see the expression or something sad has happened.

Speaker 7 (01:18:15):
Do you see the expressions she's making.

Speaker 5 (01:18:17):
I see it.

Speaker 3 (01:18:18):
It's and it's a tactic people like her use to
get out of any valid criticism.

Speaker 2 (01:18:24):
I just don't think she's doing it on purpose.

Speaker 4 (01:18:27):
Why didn't you use this in DNA?

Speaker 7 (01:18:29):
She's female? Oh god, no, I'm just being I'm being facetious.
Well that the expressions that she's making are not leaving
me with any sense that she is emotionally affected by
the things she brings up. Rather she sees them simply
as tools to enact or will on others.

Speaker 5 (01:18:46):
All right, all right, I got a super child from ZARANX,
gives us five dollars and says, for the record, Adam
knew what apple Eve was giving him to eat. He
knew it on site and where it came from. The
fact that this goes on constantly and humanity shows how
often men yield to women, and now we know how
we got to where we are today. Also that woman's

(01:19:07):
self worth being tied to how productive she is. Screams
that she's a feminist to those who are able to
see it. Loving how Caleb is pointing stuff out to
thank you for super super chow.

Speaker 7 (01:19:18):
Yeah yeah, So far in this conversation she has removed
She's taken every criticism and reframed it in terms of
her self worth its impact on her self worth. She
has thrown out anecdotes that make anybody who criticizes her
the bad guy. And despite the fact that what she's

(01:19:38):
talking about should make her sad, it isn't. She just
continues to act peeved that she's not getting her own way.
Mm hmm, okay, all right.

Speaker 3 (01:19:51):
This is how she lives. This is how she's gotten
past any criticism in her life. This has learned and
this instinctive to her.

Speaker 10 (01:20:00):
And we're working on helping emotional terrorists. We're working on
helping her change that.

Speaker 3 (01:20:04):
You know, are we because I'm the first one to
bring it up and you haven't brought it up, and
you don't even seem to agree with me right now.

Speaker 1 (01:20:10):
I mean, I feel like when I was in therapy last.

Speaker 4 (01:20:15):
Year, we should probably do that times three.

Speaker 3 (01:20:18):
Okay, I just but not an enabling therapists to which
again I don't want to loopien a group, but many
people like yeah, they only wait, they go through therapists
until they find the therapist that enables their thoughts and
behavior and worldview.

Speaker 4 (01:20:31):
And it's very bad because you need someone to challenge you.

Speaker 1 (01:20:33):
I'm ready for a challenge.

Speaker 4 (01:20:35):
A year in one month's worth of one?

Speaker 1 (01:20:37):
What's that in reference to the job?

Speaker 2 (01:20:39):
A year in three Yeah, hey, those cheest months, you know?

Speaker 6 (01:20:43):
Okay? Should I go to another time code?

Speaker 8 (01:20:47):
This is emblematic.

Speaker 7 (01:20:49):
This is literally emblematic of the social roles we're not
allowed to examine, Like she feels entitled to live another
person like this, And if this was a man, I
don't think you'd be getting away with this.

Speaker 8 (01:21:05):
I mean I can.

Speaker 7 (01:21:06):
I can actually look at the Caleb Reddit response to this,
and I'm guessing that I'm guessing it's entirely possible that
they slammed on Caleb for calling her out like this.
But we'll see, Like I'll look up that response. Let's
listen to a little.

Speaker 2 (01:21:21):
Bit more, all right.

Speaker 5 (01:21:22):
I got a super chow from Richard Pierre who gives
us five dollars and says, since we are talking finance here,
allow me to divulge the secret of being a higher
level contributor. If you save a penny every day, at
the end of the year, you will have thirty six
five hundred dollars that you can contribute to HBr. Alternatively,
you can save a quarter every day and at the

(01:21:42):
end of the year, you will have ten thousand dollars
to contribute to HBr.

Speaker 4 (01:21:48):
It's a joke.

Speaker 7 (01:21:48):
It's a reference to an argument between a husband and
a wife in which the wife insisted that if she
saved a penny every day for a year, you'd have
thirty five thousand dollars. No, thirty six thousand dollars, thirty
six thousand, five hundred dollars. And the husband was trying

(01:22:09):
desperately to explain why this wasn't the case, and she
just couldn't get it. Yeah, yeah, and it's that's what
he's that's what it was.

Speaker 8 (01:22:18):
Roal math, okay, girl math.

Speaker 7 (01:22:20):
Yeah. Well, this is this girl psychology. This is this
is how she's managed to navigate her life for however
many years, and and it actually is terrifying because there's
certain parts of herself that she hasn't developed and she
doesn't understand. She just considers it an attack. She's so

(01:22:41):
undeveloped in terms of recognizing her own agency that it
doesn't exist for her.

Speaker 8 (01:22:46):
That whole part.

Speaker 7 (01:22:47):
Of being a human being doesn't exist for her. It's
like if you looked into her skull, half of her
brain was missing and this is what we encourage in women.
This is the behavior that we encourage in women. It's
like self lobotomy.

Speaker 5 (01:23:00):
Okay, right, so the next time could have them talking
about their spending habits.

Speaker 4 (01:23:05):
Made filter everything through that card. What is that to you?
What does that mean?

Speaker 10 (01:23:08):
Like like I would pay, I'd pay my bills on it,
and then your bill and then pay it off after.

Speaker 2 (01:23:14):
It's just why it's maxed ount?

Speaker 4 (01:23:17):
Well, sorry, you're right, it's.

Speaker 3 (01:23:19):
Not to it's over the limit by two hundred sixty
seven hours and thirty seven. So you're putting our bills
on a card that is over the limit. That is
a coin interest that we can't pay off to save
our life.

Speaker 4 (01:23:29):
That is a coin fees.

Speaker 3 (01:23:31):
Woof the producers they were watching you, they said, you
seem surprised by that.

Speaker 2 (01:23:35):
I did say. I did say, you.

Speaker 4 (01:23:36):
Did not know? You probably don't know.

Speaker 5 (01:23:39):
It's sober maxxed.

Speaker 3 (01:23:40):
So you becoming financially dependent to someone that can't even
manage his own finances.

Speaker 7 (01:23:46):
Well, she can just walk away. That's probably her her
ultimate strategy.

Speaker 6 (01:23:51):
Really, yeah, she could.

Speaker 3 (01:23:53):
Well, people use less credit cards in the EU, so
maybe you will be better off there.

Speaker 1 (01:23:59):
All right, I gave him three thousand dollars to help
pay off some of his cards. How much three thousand
from the kid fund from my grant? Yeah, it's what
car did that go on?

Speaker 10 (01:24:14):
That went on the Amazon and the American Express off
the Southwest at all?

Speaker 3 (01:24:20):
No, so you've purchased one hundred and forty dollars on here,
you had one hundred and eighty nine dollars of fees. Dude,
you dip seventeen dollars and sixty eight cents of interest
accrued and we got a three hundred sixty eight dollars
minimum monthly payment. What the fuck is going on? So, really,
let's be honest. You sacked up a lot of debt
to your life and now you just want to flee

(01:24:40):
to get away from it instead of taking any ownership
and beating this down.

Speaker 4 (01:24:44):
Let's be honest. That's what this is really looking like.

Speaker 10 (01:24:46):
No, I mean like, we can't leave the country with debt,
right like, we want to pay it off.

Speaker 2 (01:24:50):
That's why we're here, you know.

Speaker 4 (01:24:53):
So I'll say this.

Speaker 3 (01:24:53):
I just gonna say, listen, I'm okay with the center
left government. I'm okay with the center right government. I
like good and nuanced in the middle of where you
can fly back and forth with a nice little fence it.

Speaker 1 (01:25:03):
You know.

Speaker 4 (01:25:03):
I like that. But you guys or her right now.

Speaker 3 (01:25:07):
Just like people on the far right, anyone slightly to
the left as a communist, her she's on the far left,
anyone slightly to the right as a fascist.

Speaker 4 (01:25:13):
This is what the internet is right now.

Speaker 7 (01:25:16):
Wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait.
So they're both on two different parts of the spectrum.

Speaker 5 (01:25:21):
Oh she's she's further left than her boyfriend, but they're both.

Speaker 7 (01:25:26):
Left these Okay, I think Yeah, Honestly, I think anybody
who justifies government spending like this is is a commie
like Hanas. I don't know. I think there's more to
right and left than sheer economics. To be frank, I
think I.

Speaker 5 (01:25:42):
Think it's the degree to which the state should be
involved in your life. That's what it comes down to. Yeah,
I agree to which the state should be involved in
your life.

Speaker 7 (01:25:49):
Well, I think that's pretty much the only politics some people.

Speaker 5 (01:25:53):
Yeah, I mean, some people will say that the right
spends a lot of money with government money because of
military but I don't think that that's a right wing thing.
I think that that is a neocon thing, which is
not the same, and I think most people are not
that way.

Speaker 7 (01:26:07):
Yeah, But like I've said before, I think the ultimate,
ultimately politics comes down to whether or not you sign
off on government debt and that's it. And and literally
it really comes down to whether or not you sign
off on the eventual end of the economy that you
rely on. Do you sign off on killing the golden goose?

Speaker 5 (01:26:27):
No?

Speaker 7 (01:26:28):
I don't, because it's insanity, but you know it's it's
the It is actually the trajectory of every monetary system ever.
So I guess that's that's that's humans thing. That's what
we do. We create an economic system and then we
just completely fuck it and then we create a new one.
Maybe it's maybe it's recycling, who knows, but anyway, are

(01:26:49):
we are we basically done with this couple? Because yeah, yeah,
all right, So I wanted to see what they had,
what the reddit analysis for this, because I did finally
get the proper analysis, the final verdict. Yes, the reddit
Kallub's reddit fan base, if you can call it that,
because they always apply these narratives and they're never happy.

(01:27:12):
But on Reddit, yes, the framework is biased against male victims.
So their framework in analyzing this show is biased against
male victims. It's biased towards female victims or seeing women
as victims of men's financial abuse. So let's look at
that the frequency at which they identify male victims is
substantially less than female victims. Of course, and I want

(01:27:33):
to note when I say that that feminists in general,
feminist research into domestic violence victimization experienced by men finds
two to four times less, so one fourth as much
victimization as non feminist investigation. And you gotta actually wonder,
you know, when they say that patriarchy minimizes male victims,

(01:27:56):
are they once again just projecting what they're doing on
to patriarch. But anyway, that's a little bit of an aside.
Of course, they're going to find less male victimization by
the tone downplayed, blamed, or reframed his provider failure. Apparently,
traditional gender roles still exist for the reddit feminists when
it comes to financial abuse. Consistency, same acts, equal abuse

(01:28:18):
if they're directed at women, and negligence if they're directed
at men. The community mockery, dismissal, or conditional validation, validity.
You know what's really funny about that is there was
recently this this meme that I saw on Twitter, and
it showed women laughing are they talking about the seriousness
of domestic violence? And then the next one was a

(01:28:41):
SpongeBob meme where he's laughing uproariously and the and the
caption was basically women when they're thinking or they're talking
about male domestic violence against male domestic violence against men. Sorry,
stumbling a bit? Are we okay? Anything paused?

Speaker 6 (01:28:58):
Oh?

Speaker 8 (01:28:58):
Okay?

Speaker 7 (01:28:59):
So this me And there was a woman who retweeted
it and said something like women never do this and
it's patriarchy. It's like right here, there is an example
in the caleb Hammer finance fans reddit of people mocking
men for being financially abused. I would honestly say that

(01:29:20):
the provider role puts men in a position to be
more likely to be financially abused than women. Structural guest
skew plus probing biased locks in female victim narrative. Bottom line,
the R caleb Hammer financial abuse framework is not gender neutral.
It operates in a one way filter that amplifies female

(01:29:41):
victimization and suppresses male victimization, even when evidence is symmetrical.
If you're male victim or no one watching the show.
Don't expect validation from Hammer or the subreddit. Document everything.
Oh my god, Rock says what we say, always be recording.
You just heard it from Grock, like GROC has analyt
the situation of men in society, and Grox says, always

(01:30:03):
be recording, document everything. The framework will default blaming you
seek neutral resources, for example financial counselor's legal aid outside
the show's echo chamber. Now this is probably amplifying because
it looks like Caleb is calling women out, but he
may not actually be identifying this as financial abuse. He

(01:30:23):
may not be saying this you are financially abusing him,
or he may not offer any kind of resources to
the victim, which is the man here. Okay, and here
are some corrective measures that could be taken actively. Platform
male victim stories. Use consistent language abuse versus stress. So

(01:30:43):
if a man does it, it's abuse, if a woman
does it, it's just stress. Challenge double standards in real time.
You know nobody's going to do that but us, of course,
But they could do that to make it a better world,
a fairer world, a more equitable world. And then I asked,
what's the reddit analysis of the three one hundred thous
debt to flee Trump's America. So let's find out about

(01:31:03):
that Reddit analysis of the three. Okay, this episode in
question is from Caleb Hammer's financial audit series just setting
this the the landscape. It features a solo female. Oh wait,
what the hell? No, this is incorrect. It feels uh
it features it features a couple. Okay, Grok is is
screwing up? We did do we did do this one?

(01:31:25):
If this features a couple, all right, all right, Grek
has screwed up. Excuse me for a moment. I need
to I need to beat on groc for a bit.
It's AI abuse, all right, Okay, So any any super
chat super chats. By the way, guys, if you want
to message us, the best way to do so is
feed thebadger dot com slash just the tip get the
full benefit of whatever funds you send, and we and

(01:31:46):
you get the benefit of not sending your comment through
YouTube's I'm still going to continue to use the euphemism
because I'm probably censorship is flagged. But you know YouTube's
comment thresher system. All right, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, Okay,
here we go. Oh, this is a combined debt of
three hundred and twenty thousand student modes, credit cards, mortgage
on a fixer upper, and an exile prep admid post

(01:32:08):
twenty twenty four election fears of Trump's fascism? Did you actually?
Did we actually? I don't remember going through them saying
that they put a whole bunch of stuff on their
credit cards to get away from Trump's fascism? Did we
miss that?

Speaker 6 (01:32:21):
We might have missed that.

Speaker 7 (01:32:22):
Yeah, okay, well that was interesting. Steve is more of
that's the male character. The male character, yeah, is more pragmatic,
but enables by co signing debts and splitting costs. Hammer
Grims grills them on feasibility. As of November tenth, twenty
twenty five, five weeks post update, Right discussions are intensely
polarized and viral. It ranks as the subreddits number one

(01:32:44):
episode I Wonder Why with cross posts in Our Personal
Finance and Our Conservatism commentary follows the subreddits fan framework,
financial delusion, entitlement, political weaponization, couple dynamics, abuse undertones, and
gender scrutiny. Well, Savannah bears eighty percent of the roasts.
Oh so Savannah is actually being called out? It must
have been so obvious. In this one even reddit notice

(01:33:07):
no no dedicated abuse analysis thread. Well, that's definitely a difference,
because if the genders were reversed, there would be one
fifteen percent of comments invoke abuse financial abuse parallels Steve
as enabler victim, no just victim. But below is a
structured breakdown from top threads comments. Oh, a couple tries

(01:33:28):
to flee Trump with three hundred thousand debt focus ultimate
delusion dul Okay, all right, let me just figure out
what is the what would the analyze this based on
the financial abuse framework in the threddit subreddit that we
had went through earlier. Okay, so now it's going to

(01:33:49):
apply that that framework. All right. This couple's episode reveals
subtle but skewed dynamics, leaning towards Savannah as the primary
abuser enabler and Steve as the passive victim. However, the
frame works bias against male victims shines through. Steve's enabling
complicity is downplayed or blamed on him hen packed Beta,
I almost feel bad for calling him a bugman, while

(01:34:11):
Savanna's control is frame like as delusional activism rather than
outright abuse. Abuse themes appear in twenty percent of comments
higher than solo episodes, but recognition is conditional, Hammer probes
it lightly, and the community amplifies female led delusion over
male victimization. No overt abuse labels stick to Savannah instead.

(01:34:31):
It's mutual sabotage. That's not what I saw. I saw
a man who's afraid to confront this woman, who uses
her own pride, self, her own emotions. Everything goes back
to her and she uses, she weaponizes them to take
away his voice. That's actually controlling. I mean, I think

(01:34:52):
that might even qualify as coercive control by a vulnerable narcissist. Okay,
this is the lines of the frameworks eighty to skew
tow towards male abuser framework. Here the female led control
flips the script but gets neutralized, reinforcing dismissal of male victims.
These case fits the rare fifteen to twenty percent enabler
blame pattern. Below is a structured application the framework to episode. Okay,

(01:35:15):
we might skip that. Let's look at the summary structural
bias bottom line, the subreddit frame where misfires on this
gender flip, treating Savanna's control as entertaining chaos not abuse,
and Steve's plight is self inflicted, proving it's one way filter.
If reversed male pusher, female enabler, it'd be text based
coercive control with viral evil husband posts. This episode subtly

(01:35:40):
challenges the bias, but gets absorbed into it, highlighting calls
for balanced lenses, consistent abuse tags, and consistent abuse tags.
For raw threads, check our Caleb Hammer's top posts. Okay,
so why are male victims not recognized? Well, apparently a
big reason is because there are gigantic arenas social media

(01:36:02):
arenas where women turn male abuse into humor. They have
taken this situation by this guy who's obviously afraid to
talk to his partner to clearly articulate his concerns, right,
And I don't believe for a second that he genuinely said, oh, yeah,
you don't have to have a job. I think that's bullshit.

(01:36:23):
All of this is bullshit. And they take this situation
that this man is facing and they turn it into
entertaining chaos. That's one of the big reasons why men
aren't seen as victims and women have responsibility to take
what a surprise. I mean, I look at these communities
and I've done analyzes because GROC is great with analyzes

(01:36:44):
of these communities and their behavior. The fan fiction community.
Female fan fiction community is unbelievably toxic when it comes
to male consent. So you'll hear these feminists talk about
AI porn and like computer programs that approximate women when
they're nude or whatever, and they'll talk about how this

(01:37:06):
is exploitative of actresses and women in the public eye,
but not a peep about all of the in real life,
the real person slash fan fiction that is gay fan
fiction or even head sexual fanfic, well, I guess mostly
it is gay that is created by women, puts the
men into sexual situations that they would never consent to

(01:37:29):
in real life, humiliates them, degrades them, treats them like contempt,
emasculates them, and not a word that this might actually
be exploitative too for men who are actors and other
and politicians and other men in the public eye. But
we have to focus so much on what men do
to women, and no thought is given to what women

(01:37:51):
do to men. And again this is a This is
in terms of online presence. Fanfic community is pretty big
and has absolutely no sense of responsibility to men's consent
at all. There's like a tiny minority of people are
starting to ask those questions. And then we have this community,
the financial audit in Caleb Hammer communities, and they think

(01:38:12):
that a man being financially abused with this man obviously
is he demonstrates fear of this woman. And I guess
there's a there's a there's a tendency to laugh at that.
But this is something that all most men have, unless
they are actually a sociopath or a narcissist. Most men
are or unusually disagreeable without being like having antisocial personality,

(01:38:34):
which is possible. Most men have a certain amount of
fear of confronting their lives. This is a very common
male experience. He's afraid of her, He's afraid of stressing
what he wants in a relationship. She uses all kinds
of abusive tactics to shut him down, and he's she's
also pushing him further and further into debt over political
values that he may not share. He may be on

(01:38:57):
the left, but is it really that clear that he's
behind this idea that they have to flee America because
of Trump's fascism? Doesn't seem like it if he has
a more common sense approach to it. So she's pushing
him into debt, she is financially abusing him. And this forum,
while it will recognize a reverse situation that the man

(01:39:19):
is financially abusing a woman, it considers it's humorous. It's
just chaos. It's just humorous chaos when the woman is
the financial abuser. That meme that I saw this morning
is I didn't expect it to be proven so violently
right by the end of the day. Maybe I should
have to put more faith into internet memes. Okay, by

(01:39:40):
the way, again, the meme is that women laugh, you know,
they want domestic violence to be treated seriously, but then
they turn around and laugh and men who are abused,
and do I think.

Speaker 1 (01:39:51):
All women do it?

Speaker 7 (01:39:51):
Obviously not, I'm not laughing. If I am laughing, it's
just black humor, recognition of the horror of the situation.
But yeah, there are are a number of women who do.
And of course the woman who retweeted that memes like no,
we don't do that, yes you do, you do that?
And worse. Okay, yeah, all right, I'm sort of done.

(01:40:12):
I shouldn't have used the lady the evil d word shit.
Sorry guys. Okay, so are we done all of the Yeah?

Speaker 5 (01:40:19):
That was it?

Speaker 4 (01:40:20):
Okay?

Speaker 5 (01:40:21):
I mean that last one was kind of an extra one.
I think we basically got the yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:40:25):
I think this is good.

Speaker 7 (01:40:26):
I think we hammered this down and it was surprisingly
topical in my opinion. I guess I should have more
faith than Richard Bierre and internet memes. Okay, all right,
so thank you Richard for this suggestion. Very helpful one.
I can't think of anything to do. Sometimes it becomes
a bit of a grind to try to figure out content,

(01:40:47):
and uh, thank you for everybody. Wait, that's you. Isn't
it that you do that?

Speaker 5 (01:40:53):
I can do it, But I mean, like, I don't
know if you wanted to say any about feed the
Badger dot com right, sure, I.

Speaker 7 (01:40:59):
Still don't have the fundraiser up, but I will be soon.
But when that's available, it'll be at Feedbadger dot com
slash support And please do help out because because this
is important, this is really important. I'm starting to realize
just how important the stuff that we've done for fifteen
years turned out to be. I just had an extended discussion.
I think it was GPT five, Like I have all,

(01:41:21):
I've collected all of the AIS guys, all of them,
and I and I talk about them about these issues
with all of them, and in the end I figured out,
based on you know, it's facilitated research, feminism is actually
using a bio essentialist framework to blame men while hand
waving it because bio essentialist framework, so the idea that

(01:41:43):
someone is born criminal is considered so verbotan in science
because of what it has created in the past in
terms of eugenics and genocide that they've they've, they've, they've
it's there's huge prohibitions and ethical like don't ethical prohibitions
against doing it. And yet what feminist has created created

(01:42:07):
is while the research community is deeply concerned about the
implications of genetic research into criminal behavior, because of the
concept of born criminal, we're perfectly fine with describing blame
to men universally. So the way that it works is
feminists hand wave it and say no, it's socialization. And

(01:42:28):
they do that because they that avoids the ethical scrutiny
of saying that it's biology, that's what's happening. That's why
they do it. They don't actually put any there is
no causal mechanism that they've proposed, no socialization causal mechanism
that explains the universality of this blame, like it literally

(01:42:50):
applies to all men. And the only thing that explains
how universal it is is that it is applied when
the label you are a boy is applied to you
when you're born. That's why it's a It has one
hundred percent it's saturation with men, this blame, feminist blame,
has one hundred percent of saturation with men. All men

(01:43:11):
are subject to it, right, not just all men, sorry,
all men are subject to the correctness of the blame.
So it is like all men are subject to this
socialization one hundred percent, all of them, no exceptions. They're
they're not even biology, not even a biological sex like

(01:43:34):
trait has one hundred percent saturation, much less a socialized trait.
And they do this because they want to tie these
this condemnation, this contempt, this blame to men as a category,
not even a biological category, because biology wouldn't express something
one hundred percent through a category, would there be variations. No,

(01:43:55):
they're tying this, they're tying this categorization to a biological factor.
And it's like that is so unethical.

Speaker 1 (01:44:05):
It is.

Speaker 7 (01:44:05):
It is like Neuremberg trials level of unethical. It's like
pre genocide trials of unethical. And it just so happens,
you know, like the people who engage in this, they
just sometimes pop out with some genocidal rhetoric, but they're
just girls. Right, this is I'm like looking at the
scope of this, and even in chat ept is like, wow,

(01:44:25):
this is this is this is actually really a bad thing.
I'm like, yes, it is. And it's like I'm not
laughing because it's funny. I'm laughing because it's horrifying. But
we have based so much of our society on an
ethical breach that has in the past caused people to
be in front of war tribunals for war crimes. You
just wrap your heads around that there is no justification

(01:44:48):
for feminism, and in a just world, they'd be going
to jail. Feminist academics would be going to jail for this,
for this gross lapse in ethical oversight. I don't know
if what I've said it makes any sense.

Speaker 6 (01:45:00):
Anyone that makes sense?

Speaker 7 (01:45:01):
Okay, thank you, Brian. You're not just saying this to
end the argument, are you.

Speaker 6 (01:45:05):
No?

Speaker 5 (01:45:06):
I don't hear.

Speaker 1 (01:45:07):
No.

Speaker 7 (01:45:07):
Okay, all right, So anyway, if you want to, if
you want to make commentary, feed the Badger dot com
slash just the tip. If you want to support our
continued grinding through the soft underbelly of this society's absolute bullshit,
then feed the Badger dot Com slash support. It'll be
available shortly and I will hand it back to you, Brian,
because you know I want to go get some supper.
I'm sure you do too, all right.

Speaker 5 (01:45:29):
Yeah, I do too. Okay, If you guys like this video,
please hit like subscribe. If you're not already subscribed, hit
the bellof notification, leave us a comment, let us know
you guys think about what we discussed on the show today,
and you'll find links to the original videos and description
of this one so you can like watch it for
yourself see the whole thing. And please please please share
this video because sharing is caring. Thank you guys so

(01:45:49):
much for coming on today's episode of HBr. Well this
is maintaining frame. Sorry, and we'll talk to you guys
in the next one.

Speaker 11 (01:45:55):
Men's Right activists are machines, dude. Okay, they are literal machines.
They are talking point machines. They are impossible to deal with,
especially if you have like especially if you have like
a couple of dudes who have good memory on top
of that too, Holy shit, you're fucked