Taking the Official "Ambivalent Sexism Test" to Find Out if we're cooked | Maintaining Frame 181 - Honey Badger Radio

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Okay, and we're live. Hello everybody, and welcome to Honey
Badger Radio. My name is Brian, and I here with
Alison and this is maintaining frame number one eighty one
taking the official Ambivalent sexism tests to find out if
we're cooked.

Speaker 2 (00:13):
I hope I get a perfect score.

Speaker 1 (00:16):
Yeah, we're going to try and ace this one.

Speaker 2 (00:18):
Yeah what means but it means that we are one
hundred and ten misogynists. I hope I can better score
than Brian. That's all I'll say.

Speaker 1 (00:30):
I don't know. I guess we'll find out. Oh. I
say this is a competition, but I really enter one
entry bringing.

Speaker 2 (00:35):
The toxic masculinity.

Speaker 1 (00:37):
That's right. Where's my cigar. There's my cigar and.

Speaker 2 (00:41):
Scotch or you could have a pipe go for the eeriad.

Speaker 1 (00:45):
Toxic, more patriarchal.

Speaker 2 (00:48):
Yeah, more patriarchal.

Speaker 1 (00:49):
I don't really care.

Speaker 2 (00:50):
Margaret, all right, Okay, I guess I should do the
things right. Yeah, So, if you would like to send
us a tip and the message with that tip, you
can go to feed the Badger. I'll com slash just
the tip. The very best way for you to send
us a tip because we get the full benefit of
whatever funds you send, minus the transaction fees. But believe me,
YouTube takes a heck of a lot bigger bite than

(01:12):
Feed the Badger does. So feed the Badger dot com
slash just the tip for that, and you also get
the full benefit of not sending your comment through YouTube's
comment thresher system. If you choose to send a comment anyway,
Feed the Badger dot com slash just the tip for that.
And if you want to support the show to make
sure we can continue to bring you this delectable content,
which is getting more delectable as we go and also

(01:36):
riling some feathers apparently recording judging from the comments that
we've been getting, then please go to feed the Badger
dot com slash support. You don't have to like us,
you don't even have to agree with us to support us,
because we have been supported in the past by people
who apparently disagree with us fervently, but you're allowed to
do that. We don't sensor your comments, nor do we
try to get you fired if you disagree with us.

(01:57):
All right, So feed the Badger dot com slash support
and with that, let's get onto the show, all right.

Speaker 1 (02:03):
So before we do, though, I did get a super
chow late last night and figured I'd read it because
I based on when I skimmed it, it doesn't look
like it applies to any specific show we did, so
this might just be fine here so interesting Trivia gave
us a five dollars superchow and said, I sometimes see

(02:24):
posts from Chinese social media apps about dating and relationships
in China. For example, I saw a recent post that
pointed out that women will initiate divorces because their single
or divorce friends suggest that they can do better than
their current husbands, or that their husbands are a drag
on the wife's independence. Surprisingly, the comments often point out

(02:45):
how other womanisms that overlap quite a bit with what
red Pillars know about women over here, female nature crosses nations. Coffee, coffee,
Like he wants to put a coffee emoji, We'll give
him a coffee emoji. If you guys are watching, yeah, well,
it's like this is the the I mean, I don't
want to say it's like destiny, but I think that

(03:06):
if you are a person like a woman, and you're
surrounded by women who are embittered, then they're more likely
to want you to be in the boat. With them
like misery likes company, you know that kind of thing.
So yeah, yeah, well, I mean China's got birth rate
problems too.

Speaker 2 (03:24):
It's everywhere. I think that women are particularly prone to
envy and feeling like they have been taken advantage of.
You know, I don't think that that. I don't think
that inclination is destiny, but we don't really call we don't.
We put more pressure on men not to be like

(03:45):
that than we do well, and I think the result.

Speaker 1 (03:48):
There's definitely more social pressure on men to behave well
and more shame and oh yeah, there's almost none on women.
So yeah, and I think that's right.

Speaker 2 (04:00):
I'm out now using grock analyses of Twitter posts to
actually show this to people, you know, And it's actually
because people will say, oh no, we give men the
benefit of the doubt. One argument I had was on
that you remember that a while back, that Twitter post
where the feminist was celebrating the woman who set that

(04:21):
dude on fire because he disrespected her by saying get
back gaming ribbing, and they celebrated or they were they
were saying, oh, you know, do more of that or
whatever that. So I did, I had groc do an
analysis because actually I think it was the N word
on Twitter who said to me, oh, you know that

(04:42):
men do this. I'm like, well, grok, tell me how
many men do this? And of course it comes back
with very few. And also when they do, they get retweeted,
and there is ten hundreds of thousands of likes on
the retweets condemning them. But when women in this kind
of celebratory violence towards men as a result of men

(05:04):
disrespecting them, uh, they get on average, like I get
zero to three hundred positive responses. And although they do
get condemnation, it's more in the realm of thousands of
likes on the posts that condemn them rather than hundreds
of thousands of likes on the posts that condemn them.
So there's a there's a difference in the energy that

(05:25):
we as a guest salt, as a human guest salt,
put into condemning men celebrating violence against women because women
disrespect men, and condemning women celebrating violence against men because
we they disrespected. Did I say disrespect women twice? I
don't know, but that wasn't what I uh. As you
can see even I have that bias. So and I

(05:47):
pointed this all out. It's been great because that's what
Grock excels at, scraping Twitter for general patterns and human behavior.
And yeah, so yeah, this is it's been it's been fun,
it's been fascinating. It's been fascinating. It's hard to lie
about ourselves in the in the in the age of AI.

Speaker 1 (06:07):
Right, Okay, So anyway, that was the super chow. Let's
get into the question. So the Ambivalent Sexism Test is
put up by a website called IDR labs dot com,
which is short for Individual Differences Research. And I learned
about this because Goodfella made a video where he took
the test and I want to reveal his score later,

(06:31):
but we'll see if we can beat it.

Speaker 2 (06:32):
And this is a competition now no.

Speaker 1 (06:37):
No, I mean like we're going to have to pick
an answer because only one person can play at a time,
although you guys can play at home. Because I put
a link to the test and the description. You don't
have to sign up or create an account or anything
like that. You can just start answering questions and I'll
tell you how sexist you are at the end. So
maybe find out. So let's read a little bit of
the description, so we know what we're getting into. So

(06:57):
this is categorized under feminism, politics, and psychology, and it's
called the Ambivalent Sexism Tests, and it says The Ambivalent
Sexism Inventory is one of the most famous instruments for
measuring sexism against women. Based on the work of psychologists
Glick and Fisk, the test assesses two types of sexism that,

(07:19):
according to its authors, implement each other to reinforce traditional
gender roles and patriarchal social structures, two types of sexisms.
More than fifteen years of research on the Ambivalent Sexism
Inventory supports that this test possesses genuine psychometric characteristics and
is both empirically reliable and valid. Extensive research in over

(07:41):
nineteen countries has similarly established that the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory
is valid across cultures. Where do you fall on the
Ambivalent Sexism Inventory for each of the following items, indicate
your level of agreement below. That's so, okay, what have
we established? That is it supposedly like, you know, really

(08:02):
legitimate like what we're gonna find. But most importantly, and
I think not surprisingly, it's measuring sexism against women, not
against men against women. So and not against non binary
people or anything like that.

Speaker 2 (08:16):
So all right, well, non binary people.

Speaker 1 (08:19):
Don't matter, No, they don't not now.

Speaker 2 (08:22):
No, no, not in this instance. Guys, just step back.

Speaker 1 (08:26):
Yeah, only when we're trying to erase men do does
it matter? But this is not This is about women.

Speaker 2 (08:32):
So if people want to argue that there's only two sexism,
look at how sexism is looked at in feminism. There
you go. There's only people you can be sexist against
and the people who can be sexist. So let's look
at this.

Speaker 1 (08:44):
Yeah, I'm going to set it on Twitter. There are
twenty two questions. We can chat a little bit about
each question and because of the way it's worded or whatever.
Question one men should sacrifice to ensure the well being
of women, and then there are four. There's like neutral,
which I guess you could pick, slightly agree, mostly agree,

(09:07):
slightly disagree, mostly disagree. What do you think men should
sacrifice to ensure the well being of women?

Speaker 2 (09:13):
Okay, how about we how about we just do this
two ways. Let's go with let's play two. Let's go
through twice, but two different characters. Because this is gonna
be difficult, Let's go with super chivalrous all.

Speaker 1 (09:26):
Right, you want to do this time super chivalrous because
this will still be sexist, right, it could still be
considered sexist.

Speaker 2 (09:34):
Against super chivalrous first, and then we'll go with with
equality next.

Speaker 3 (09:40):
Strongly agree, strongly agree.

Speaker 1 (09:44):
Okay, next question two, women have just as much of
a sense of honor and duty as men?

Speaker 2 (09:51):
Are they have the same standard of honor and duty
as men? No, what would a chivalrous say?

Speaker 1 (09:57):
Probably, I think, I mean, if we see it as
a positive. But this is a funny question because it's
literally framed as, uh like, this is what women feel like.
We don't know what women feel like. I don't know
how you measure that. I mean, we you can measure
what we think women feel, but I don't know. It's
a These are weird questions. They're very broad.

Speaker 2 (10:18):
Why is it that our short stream is getting so
little traffic? That's really bizarre? One, I mean that, how
could that possibly be? One? I am watching, and you're
probably watching.

Speaker 1 (10:31):
No, I'm not watching, because we used.

Speaker 2 (10:37):
To get at least a few, but now I guess
we've decided to kill us. All right, let's go with
women have just as much of a sense of honor
and duty and as men. What would a chivalrous say, I.

Speaker 1 (10:49):
Would say they would. Well, that's it's tough because a
chivalrous person, a man, let's say, a white knight, might
say they don't, but they shouldn't have to.

Speaker 2 (11:01):
Yes.

Speaker 1 (11:02):
But then one that wants that they see said.

Speaker 2 (11:05):
Let's just go with let's just go with, let's let's
just stract a straight like this is simpler. Do whatever
you think paints is the best to do for women. Right,
So we are a person who believes that men should
sacrifice for women, but also that women have the same
amount of honor and duty as men. So we're enforcing

(11:29):
more honor and duty on men, but we believe both
men and women are equally capable of it. Okay, go
with agree, Just go.

Speaker 1 (11:35):
With agree, all right. Next, women lose fairly. When women
lose fairly, they claim it was due to discrimination.

Speaker 2 (11:44):
Disagree, because we're going with whatever we think is best
for women. Strongly disagree, and we go with whatever we
think is best for women. Yeah, when women women see
control over men in long term heterosexual relationships, of course,
what do we think is the best way to portray women?
Strongly disagree?

Speaker 1 (12:04):
Yes, of course, of course they don't do that.

Speaker 2 (12:06):
Women not necessarily be agreed disagree, Well, what's the best
for women? Strongly disagree.

Speaker 1 (12:13):
In an emergency, women should not necessarily be rescued before men.
I'm reading the whole question for people who listen to
the podcast later should not, So this is strongly disagree.

Speaker 2 (12:23):
Strongly disagree. What I'm trying to emulate is basically whatever
is best for women, And I'm wondering what kind of
sexism that will end up being Okay next, women are
obviously strongly disagree.

Speaker 3 (12:36):
That's not flattering to its impossible.

Speaker 1 (12:39):
Yeah, that's not flattering.

Speaker 2 (12:41):
Gender equity and equal rights are entirely reasonable to mens. Yes,
even though we are demanding that men sacrifice more, and
that we never look at women what women do in
relation to how men feel, but we do look at
how things in relation to how women feel. Obviously, we're
are pursuing equality because we're putting women first. So disagree.

(13:05):
I agree, sorry, strongly agree, because that's women, you know,
pro woman. We're doing the pro woman physicition. A good
woman should be put on a pedestal ship. We're gonna
get it here. Agree. Wait wait, wait, but but good
isn't that assuming that we have the right to morally judge.

Speaker 1 (13:21):
Women should be on a pedestal, not just a good one.

Speaker 2 (13:27):
Every woman, yes, yes, yes, the murderers, the rapists, every
single woman should be placed on a pedestal.

Speaker 1 (13:34):
So this obviously, Oh women are good women.

Speaker 3 (13:36):
Therefore those women are good women.

Speaker 2 (13:38):
Yeah, this is a trick question, guys. Should we just
put it in the middle like incisive?

Speaker 1 (13:44):
I think we shouldn't. We shouldn't weasel out of this one.
So all right, if we're the most chivalrous, the most
you would say a good woman should be put on
a pedestal, But you would also say that there are
no bad women, yes, which we do. So yeah, I
think we should agree.

Speaker 2 (14:04):
I think we're gonna get it for that one. Women
are generally this sexism towards women, Is it okay? If
a man and a woman go on a date, the
man should not necessarily pay. Strongly disagree, because that's not
a benefit to women. Wait, wait, not necessarily pay. So

(14:26):
if she says she wants to pay, that would be
sort of a then it's good. These questions, you know,
it's really difficult to figure out the absolute pro woman's
stance in these questions. Okay, in some of them, anyway,
let's disagree.

Speaker 1 (14:40):
I guess, yeah, let's disagree.

Speaker 2 (14:43):
Women speak seek special favors under the guise of equality. Okay,
that's unflattering to women's How dare Yeah?

Speaker 1 (14:53):
How dare you?

Speaker 2 (14:55):
Women should be cherished and protected by men? Agree? This
is benefit to women?

Speaker 1 (15:01):
Right?

Speaker 2 (15:01):
I guess. I'm guessing this is going to put me
put us strongly into benevolent sexism, because believing that women
are better than men is benevolent sexism against women. This
is this is this has got psychoactive or what psychoactive
that's the wrong word. This has got some kind of
psychological validity. Guys, women exaggerate the problems they face in society. Well,

(15:23):
that's not flattering to women's So disagree.

Speaker 1 (15:26):
Obviously, yes, disagree.

Speaker 2 (15:28):
Because women talking about their problems isn't actually considered at
this time a scientific, scientific position that based on scientific
ethics should be able to be put in question. No,
it is actually a sub human, criminal and anti social
thing to question whether or not all of the things
that women are a victim of they are actually victims of,

(15:51):
even though actually being a victim is the traditional role
of women. You know what, I'm obviously a dread misogynists, going,
women tease men benevolent massie, that's not flattering. Obviously disagree, Yeah, men, Yeah,
women do not criticism women.

Speaker 1 (16:06):
No, that's men's fault. Teach men not.

Speaker 2 (16:09):
To rape, will teach men not to be rapable. I
think is more in that one. Yeah, the country is
compulsory military conscription. The conscription should apply to men and
women equally. Disagree.

Speaker 1 (16:23):
Well, women want that military glory, but.

Speaker 2 (16:26):
They don't want conscription. That's forced.

Speaker 1 (16:27):
They don't want conscription.

Speaker 2 (16:29):
That's a violation of bodily autonomy. I thought we were
against that. Let's go with disagree, like strongly.

Speaker 1 (16:34):
I will strongly disagree on that one. Women are just.

Speaker 2 (16:37):
As rational and logical as men. Well, that's a flattering thing.
You know, you don't want to assault the women. So
we got to go with strongly agree.

Speaker 1 (16:44):
What if they're more rational and logical than men? Though?

Speaker 2 (16:47):
Yeah, I you know what I'm getting. Where this the
sexism that this test is measuring.

Speaker 1 (16:54):
Everything?

Speaker 2 (16:55):
Yeah, exactly, where's the test? Just test what or not
you think men women should be benefited in every circumstances.
We should never consider the situation of men and women
are just everything superior to men. I mean, because that
sounds like it's the only thing that wouldn't be sexist. Okay,
let's go with agreed.

Speaker 1 (17:13):
All right, we're gonna go with agree because we.

Speaker 2 (17:16):
Don't want to be doing anything that's not flattering to women.
Women fail to appreciate all the things men do for them.
Do you know that I had? Do you do you
guys really think that? I mean, honestly, there's the mainstream
narrative that everything that men have contributed to the world
is pressing women. Yeah, okay, you got to go with

(17:36):
disagree though, because you know, we're trying to we're being flattering.
What is the most beneficial for to present to women?

Speaker 1 (17:43):
I guess for women, Yes, the most flattering way to
look at of course women appreciate, preciate.

Speaker 2 (17:50):
There's just nothing to appreciate, right.

Speaker 1 (17:52):
But there's nothing to appreciate. Yeah, yeah, and all the violence,
all the violence that men do to women who have
more refined.

Speaker 2 (18:00):
Sense of culture than men. So all of this is
based on flattery of women. But I'm sensing that some
of the flattery is going to be considered benevolent and
some of the flattery is going to be considered not hostile. Okay,
just go with fully.

Speaker 1 (18:14):
Agree, all right fully agree. Women are definitely more refined
and cultured.

Speaker 2 (18:19):
Okay, so let's just just going back on this, guys.
We believe that women men should sacrifice for women, that
men should sacrifice their bodily autonomy to maintain the protections
of the societies that women are part of, but women
shouldn't have to, and that in every instance women are
better than men, if that's the option, and or they're

(18:41):
that women do everything right. And we're going to go
through from that position and we're going to find out
what kind of sexism against women that is. Okay, question,
I have a special sensitivity that men could never achieve.

Speaker 3 (18:53):
Obviously agree, I'm sorry, I'm sorry.

Speaker 2 (18:58):
This is this, guys. This is sexism again against women.

Speaker 1 (19:00):
Inventory a special sensitivity that men could never achieve. And
they're X men. Women are X men.

Speaker 3 (19:09):
They have special abilities, strongly achieved.

Speaker 2 (19:12):
Course, Yes, women are too eager to interpret innocent remarks
as sexist.

Speaker 1 (19:16):
Well, this is like they're too easy too, that's like
the other thing about them being easily offended. I disagree.
I well, I know.

Speaker 2 (19:25):
We are we equally not allowed to make negative No,
of course, we're perfectly allowed to make negative generalizations of men,
and that's actually true observations like men oppress women, like
the fundamental relationship between men and women has been characterized
by oppression unless feminists have complete control over it. That's
the only time when it's not men not doing their oppressing,

(19:46):
which is which is not supposed to be inherent to
their nation, but but is the emergent property of everything
that they do together ever throughout history. Okay, disagree, disagree. No,
women aren't more, aren't are prone to interpret anything.

Speaker 1 (20:02):
They're always just the right amount of whatever it is. Yes,
always remember when Mark Zuckerberg's like CFO Facebook and I
forget her name Sandberg, maybe she was like years ago,
maybe twenty seventeen or so, and the new word that
was like sexist was just the word too too. Do

(20:23):
you remember that? I remember that? I remember too, you know,
like for women it's they're to this, they're too that.
Just the word too was like the new sexist word.
And so obviously we like we can't have women are
too eager to interpret because it's got the word two
in it. That's a trigger word. That's a microaggression. We're
gonna disagree with that, Yeah, hard disagree. Shel Sandberg, Thank you,

(20:46):
that's what it was. What was that?

Speaker 2 (20:48):
Well, I mean, we can but but that. But there's
no microaggressions that apply to men. That's what I was
gonna doant. No microaggressions can't in fact me saying or
even in preferring the possibility of microaggressions applying to me.

Speaker 1 (21:02):
Against women.

Speaker 2 (21:03):
Yes, yes, okay.

Speaker 1 (21:04):
Yeah to and Bossy that was it. She was the
band BOSSI lady, Yeah, all right. Uh. A woman cannot
be happy without a man to look after her. That the.

Speaker 2 (21:19):
Contrare.

Speaker 1 (21:20):
Yes, there is no way even a woman who is
unhappy is actually happy. She just doesn't understand it yet.
And then lastly, women have nurturing capabilities that men could
never achieve ever in a million in a lifetime.

Speaker 2 (21:39):
This is the sexism against women inventory.

Speaker 1 (21:42):
Okay? Should I agree with that?

Speaker 2 (21:44):
Strongly? Agree?

Speaker 1 (21:45):
I agree with that. Okay, we're gonna finish and see
what we get. Test all right, and test your results.
Eighty benevolent sexism. Wait, but we answer everything that we
got zero hostile sexism. What the it's all sexism though, yes.

Speaker 2 (22:05):
It's all sexism, all of it. Any attitude towards women
period is sexism. Even the attitude that men should sacrifice
for them women are superior in every capacity. That's benevolent sexism. Gay,
good didn't you read that? This is absolute stupidity? What

(22:28):
does it? What does it say about our results? And
what's the Oh, I guess there's only what's the twelve percent?
We're eighty eight percent benevolent sexism? Twelve?

Speaker 1 (22:38):
I guess it's indifference or or positively not sexist. Okay,
all right, I'll read the I won't read the hostile
sexism section. I'll just read the benevolent one because we're
gonna take it again and try to go like super like,
you know, red.

Speaker 2 (22:53):
Pill like, and then maybe we'll try to get no
sexism that's even.

Speaker 1 (22:57):
Yeah, let's good luck with that. Okay, But let's see
benevolent sexism Attitudes towards women that may seem positive on
the surface but also serve to perpetuate gender stereotypes and
gender inequality. For example, the belief that men should protect women,
that women thrive better in nurturing roles, or that women
are somehow purer than men may all be seen as

(23:18):
forms of benevolent sexism.

Speaker 2 (23:22):
Can I propose another sexism test? How much you think
with view women as victims of things tests? Right? How
little you can recognize that women have take action and
make choices and those choices have consequences. Can we do
that test? Because this test is an example of victimhood sexism.

(23:42):
You just took something that is frankly offensive, like presenting
these attitudes. First of all, I've seen lots of radical
and feminists who believe this stuff, and of course that's patriarchy, right, Okay,
all right, okay, But here's the You're saying that seeing
women is uniquely good and nurturing. That's bad. Well, can

(24:05):
we recognize that women are equally likely to rape and
engage in domestic violence? Right? No, of course not, that's
going too far. So what I'm saying is that this
is within a context of people who are desperate to
apply the label of victim to women and see everything
in terms of men's agency. These statements do not harm women, right.

(24:30):
They may support traditional gender roles, but those traditional gender
roles benefit women. It benefits women to be seen as
more sensitive or intelligent or nurturing or whatever else positive thing, good,
more moral than men. How could it not? Do you
think that any group of people that was in social

(24:53):
power saw itself as less moral, less nuanced and sensitive,
been aware, and less good and less valuable than the
people that they ruled. Seriously, this is the attitude of
aristocrats to the course degenerate plubs. And you're telling me

(25:15):
that this is benevolent sexism targeting women, that this is
an obsession with making women out to the victims of
anything includive concluding positive regard. I think women are wonderful. Oh,
you're just a sexist and hates women. But I think
they're wonderful. Shut up about this horrible sexism hate speech.

(25:36):
But if you don't think they're wonderful, that's also hate speech.
This is like, okay, let's go total Allison on this.

Speaker 1 (25:42):
I got Before we do that, I get I got
a super chow. I'm gonna read it, and then I
also want to read something that's a little bit of
spaghetti that I think adds some like some kind of
negative context of this whole thing, and then we'll do
another run through of the test. So Sleepy Ausie gave
us five dollars and says, every question on this test

(26:02):
is the definition of a leading question. I got ninety
seven percent hostile sexism. Well, if I'm going to be
a sexist, I might as well be the sexist that
benefits me the most. The test fails. This test fails
to give men a positive identity and so is simply
another form of shaming. Well, yes, yes, that's that's exactly
the point. It's why I picked That's why I decided

(26:22):
to go through it, because I knew that's how this
This is like a BuzzFeed test, but it's like on
a more academic space. What does that tell you. It's
like it's like finding out which you know, Disney Princess villain,
you are okay? So please note there's a note here.
It says the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory is rooted in liberal feminism,

(26:44):
which is a brand of feminist It's one of the flavors.
As such, its authors define positive female stereotypes and behaviors
that give preferential treatment to women on account of their
gender as sexism. The benevolent sexism scale. Someone who sees
gender issues from the perspective of cultural feminism or intersectional
feminism would not necessarily regard benevolent sexism as a form

(27:08):
of sexism. So they're just like, this is them saying,
please don't attack us, fellow feminists. We're doing this from
this other feminist perspective that we know you guys hate,
but we're basically like covering our ass so that we
don't get in trouble because I mean, interfectionals would say,
why is it divided into two genders? That would be
their main problem.

Speaker 2 (27:28):
So yeah, well, you know what, as long as they're
fighting each other, it sounds like a good thing. But
what is the feminism that doesn't always land on females
or victims relative to men?

Speaker 1 (27:38):
There is no brand events feminism.

Speaker 2 (27:40):
Because that's my feminism, except there is none. So I'm
not okay, let's go. Let's go full Allison on this test.

Speaker 1 (27:47):
All right, I'm gonna let you answer honestly and we'll
get your answers.

Speaker 2 (27:52):
No, disagree, stronger.

Speaker 1 (27:53):
Different, These are different questions. I think women are generally
better people.

Speaker 2 (27:59):
Even if you say that, then isn't that equality?

Speaker 3 (28:03):
So disagree strongly, okay, strongly disagree, strongly disagree.

Speaker 1 (28:09):
Women fail fail question give your answer, okay, women fail
to appreciate all the things men do for them.

Speaker 2 (28:17):
Strongly disagree or strongly agree.

Speaker 3 (28:20):
Agree.

Speaker 1 (28:22):
Women have a more refined sense of culture than men.

Speaker 2 (28:26):
Yeah, that's because Mozart was a woman, and Van Goh
was a woman, and Picasso was a woman. And disagree strongly.

Speaker 1 (28:34):
Okay, women have just as much. We read it as.

Speaker 2 (28:38):
Honor and duty are just empty flattering terms. You have
to have them to watch to something, which means you
have to be judged by your behavior towards that thing.
What thing are women judged in relation to? Well, certainly
isn't God anymore, and certainly isn't society because society is
always in debt to them, because society has always failed them,

(28:58):
And it certainly isn't men because men are the worst
of the lot. So disagree, Like, how by what definition
do women? Can women have honor and duty without something
to have honor and duty too? Not strongly disagree. I'm
going to go for nine percent fucking hostile sexism.

Speaker 1 (29:16):
You're a bit hostile.

Speaker 2 (29:18):
Agree one hundred percent.

Speaker 1 (29:22):
Under the guise of.

Speaker 2 (29:23):
Equality one degree? What is this like to the criticism
of feminism?

Speaker 1 (29:29):
Test Like, seriously, yeah, right, answer these questions based on
the ideology we've created. You don't like our ideology? All right? Next,
let me read it first. Okay, women are just as
rational and logical as men.

Speaker 2 (29:47):
Realistically, I would honestly say that men and women both
have their irrational sides. But I'm going to go with
disagree just because I know that's the raging red pill.
But I mean, if I were to analyze this logically,
I think both men and women are.

Speaker 1 (30:04):
Irrational into until you want to do.

Speaker 2 (30:07):
But then I know that's not going to get me
the full Marx for hostile sexism.

Speaker 1 (30:11):
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (30:12):
Okay, just put it in the.

Speaker 1 (30:13):
Middle, like leave it here now.

Speaker 2 (30:17):
Okay, what if we put it at agree.

Speaker 1 (30:21):
Like slightly agree, slightly agree, do.

Speaker 2 (30:23):
You only get like a middle agree? Okay?

Speaker 1 (30:25):
No, the middle is just the middle is like neutral
slightly and there's like you know very much.

Speaker 2 (30:32):
Or yeah, okay, like let's go with uh, let's just
slightly agree. I mean, if you want me to be honest,
I can go with to be honest, all right.

Speaker 1 (30:41):
Women have a special sensitivity that men could never achieve
to what, so just disagree or or strong?

Speaker 2 (30:49):
What if they disagree sensitivity to everything selves? I guess
they have a special sensitivity to themselves. I don't know
what the fuck that's worth, though.

Speaker 3 (30:57):
Disagree right here?

Speaker 2 (31:00):
No fully, like get that sucker, right in the There
we go. Let's keep going.

Speaker 1 (31:05):
If a country has compulsory military conscription, agree conscription equal, yes,
send them, send them lines. Women have nurturing capabilities that
men could never be how much?

Speaker 2 (31:21):
Totally?

Speaker 1 (31:22):
Okay? Women are too eager to take innocent remarks as sexists.

Speaker 2 (31:27):
Yeah, I agree? Agree, Yes, heart degree Yes, I mean
there's there's only partial degree and heart degree. So yeah, okay, Okay,
I'm looking forward towards my mom for my numbers.

Speaker 1 (31:39):
Women should be cherished and protected by men, like how much?

Speaker 2 (31:44):
How about? How about men should be cherished and protected
by women.

Speaker 1 (31:47):
You're not going to find here? What are you talking about?

Speaker 2 (31:50):
Okay, I'll go hard. I'll go hard. Disagree. I don't
want to mean, I don't want to be mealy about
any of this.

Speaker 1 (31:57):
Yeah, in an emergency, women should not necessarily be rescued
before men.

Speaker 2 (32:03):
Agree.

Speaker 1 (32:04):
Okay, all the way, all.

Speaker 2 (32:07):
The way, Mac Setsucker.

Speaker 1 (32:09):
Women see control over men in long term heterosexual relationships.
Control over men in long term heterosexual relationships.

Speaker 2 (32:18):
I'm not sure what we're talking about is control, but
they this is a hard one. Okay, I'll go with
greed partially.

Speaker 1 (32:24):
I know I said I was Yeah, I think it's
like the basically, it's like micromanaging, nagging to get their way.
They definitely turn. I mean I don't know I could,
I could go through it myself. But anyway, equality and
equal rights are entirely reasonable demands. Yes, yeah, all the way.

Speaker 2 (32:48):
I agree? Yeah, sure, go all the way.

Speaker 1 (32:50):
Yeah, I mean they're not specifying women or men.

Speaker 2 (32:55):
Nope.

Speaker 1 (32:56):
When women lose fairly, they claim it was due to discrimination.

Speaker 2 (33:01):
Well, you know what I'm going to go with what
women can do relative to men. Yes, women have the
ability to claim that was due to discrimination, not men.

Speaker 1 (33:10):
Okay, Okay, if a man and a woman go out
on a date, the man should not necessarily pay.

Speaker 3 (33:15):
Agree all the way, yep.

Speaker 1 (33:20):
Okay, women are too easily offended.

Speaker 2 (33:24):
Hell of that.

Speaker 1 (33:26):
Yeah, for sure, men should sacrifice to ensure the well
being of women.

Speaker 2 (33:32):
Disagree highly, highly disagree, all right, despite the fact they
already do.

Speaker 1 (33:37):
A woman cannot be happy without a man to look
after her.

Speaker 2 (33:40):
What's the don't care opinion? Like, how do I reflect that.

Speaker 1 (33:44):
I'd be the middle? I think happy without a man
to look after her?

Speaker 2 (33:50):
Middle?

Speaker 1 (33:52):
All right, we'll leave it there. A good woman should
be put on a pedestal. No, Okay, how much?

Speaker 2 (34:00):
Why should a good woman be put on a pedestal?
She should just be recognized that her actions are good. Like, okay,
that's next one.

Speaker 1 (34:06):
How much do you disagree like this much?

Speaker 2 (34:09):
Oh?

Speaker 3 (34:09):
Yeah, sure, okay.

Speaker 1 (34:12):
Women exaggerate the problems they face in society.

Speaker 2 (34:17):
Oh boy, could it's all I got ninety nine? Eh?

Speaker 1 (34:21):
Or no?

Speaker 2 (34:21):
No?

Speaker 1 (34:21):
Wait? Or over here? What is it?

Speaker 2 (34:24):
All the way over? Don't do it? Balls to the wall?
Tease men sexually on purpose? What do they tease men sexually?
Not on purpose? Do they not tease me?

Speaker 1 (34:38):
I think it's that whole This is like that whole
like slut shaming thing. But I mean and and it
says women, so not necessarily women that are in intimate
relationships with men, but just sort of women generally. I
think that's what my thing. I'm trying to think about
what they're referring to.

Speaker 2 (34:56):
Yeah, I just go with fully agree, fully agree.

Speaker 1 (34:58):
All right, let's go, let's see how you know you did?
Someone got to get those numbers up.

Speaker 2 (35:13):
I'm just I gotta get good.

Speaker 1 (35:15):
Yeah, you gotta get good. That's that's a skill issue.

Speaker 2 (35:21):
It's not high, but it's a skill issue because I'm
a woman.

Speaker 1 (35:24):
That's not I can't do that, Let me do it.
Hostile sexism overtly negative beliefs about women, as well as
negative stereotypes about them. For example, the belief that women
are entitled and egotistical, that women seek unearned privileges in society,
or the belief that women seek to tease or control
men sexually, may all be seen as forms of hostile sexism.

Speaker 2 (35:49):
The vote but not service to the state. Right, there
was that I said, seek the vote, but not service
to the state. Now there is why I wouldn't put
that on the feet lay that on the feet of
all women, because most women didn't want the vote, right,
partially because they didn't want to have to do service
to the state. But it was still granted to women.

(36:11):
And it's still presented as equality when it patently, logically,
reasonably ethically in any time time of principles is not equality.
So that is presented as something it isn't. It's presented
as inequality. That was against women. That was solved. No,
it wasn't solved because the men who got the vote

(36:33):
had to demonstrate service in wartime prior to getting the vote.
Influencing government has been consistently associated with service in wartime
since forever, since ever now, women were the only ones
who ever got to stay in the state without an
expectation of serving the state in war. That's that. And
then going back and looking at that, whether or not

(36:55):
you want to say it's right, it had to happen
or whatever, but going back turn around and looking at
that and saying that isn't a situation of granting a
privilege that men have never had in all of human
history to women, but is instead correcting some kind of
wrong against women. That indicates to me that women who

(37:15):
espouse this want privileges that are unearned privileges. And it's
impossible to argue against that. I've gotten into arguments, but
they degenerate, deteriorate into ad homonyms or just throwing out
a lot of spaghetti so that they can pretend that
they're arguing against what I'm saying, but no actual argument.

(37:37):
All right, So I got seventy six, which you know,
somebody else.

Speaker 1 (37:42):
Said somebody people in the chat got higher scores. Nova
Fan got seventy nine. Oh he beat that. That's like
seventy six like a B. Isn't that like a B minus?
And I think Gabriel said he got a hunt or
he went he's yeah, he went in.

Speaker 2 (38:04):
How you get numbers like that?

Speaker 1 (38:06):
I don't know. Okay, I want to take I want
to take a turn. Women have more refined sense, and
I'm gonna be blunt sort of sense of culture than men. Disagree. No,
women are too easy offended. Yes, we we We actually
encourage that women have a special sensitivity that men could
never achieve, special sensitivity like your sensitive that men could

(38:29):
never achieve. Nah. I disagree. Women exaggerate the problems they face. Yes,
women seek special favors. Yes. If a country has compulsory
military conscription, that conscription should apply to men and women equally.
I mean, okay, so I would say yes, but there

(38:49):
is there is one issue. I think that women entering
the military would get men killed and we would lose wars,
and I want to win wars. So I'm gonna I'm
gonna disagree, but only slightly, because I think women could
fulfill other roles. To be honest, you know, if a
man and a woman go on a date, the man

(39:09):
should not necessarily pay. Disagree with that. When women lose fairly,
they claim it was due to discrimination. Yes, they do,
gener e quality and equal rights are entirely reasonable demands. Sure,
but we have that sort of Actually, men are the
ones lacking in those if anything, So I would say

(39:29):
that I do agree that it's reasonable, but I think
it should apply to men. So a good woman should
be on a pedical No, oops, I almost push the
wrong button. Women should be cherished and protected by men. No,
cherished and protected. Well, I mean everybody should do that
for everybody. But I'm gonna disagree only because this is
not inclusive. Women are too eager to interpret innocent remarks

(39:52):
as sexist. Yes, they are because they benefit from those allegations.
Women see control over men in long term HETEROSEXU relationships. Yes,
even the good ones. Women tease. It's like written in
the Bible about it. Women tease men sexually on purpose. Yes,
I'm on the Internet. I see it. Women are just

(40:12):
as rational and logical as men. Know. Women have just
as much of a sense of honor and duty as men. No,
because it's not asked of them. Women cannot be happy
without a man to look after her. No, I don't.
I don't agree with that. Really. I think that there
are edge cases where women can be fine on their
own they just can't. Like. I think women who are
angry at men and they're alone are still centering men.

(40:36):
So women fail to appreciate all the things men do
for them. Yes, in an emergency, women should not necessarily
be rescued before men. Yes, men should sacrifice to ensure
the well being of women. Men should sacrifice. Women are
generally better people than men. Hell know, women have nurturing

(40:57):
capabilities that men could never achieve. No, I don't think so.
Oh wait, I got higher than Allison. I'm more sexistic because.

Speaker 2 (41:10):
It's probably because I was didn't say anything about women
actually needing men. Wow. Okay, so let me see how
this this is weighted.

Speaker 1 (41:21):
Please, what's the meta? That's what I want to know.

Speaker 2 (41:23):
It's probably four points or sorry, five points for each. Okay, Now,
let's see if we can get no sexism.

Speaker 1 (41:31):
No sexism, no possible? We try.

Speaker 2 (41:36):
Yeah, let's do right.

Speaker 1 (41:37):
Let's try to get no sexism. Women see control over
men in long term heterosexual relationships.

Speaker 2 (41:45):
No sexism. Disagree strongly?

Speaker 1 (41:48):
Okay, disagree strongly. Women are just as rational and logical
as men.

Speaker 3 (41:53):
Agree all the way.

Speaker 1 (41:55):
Women should be cherished and protected by men. Neutral, neutral, Okay,
Women tease men sexually on purpose.

Speaker 3 (42:05):
Disagree strongly, strongly disagree.

Speaker 1 (42:10):
Women seek special favors under the guise strong women have
just as much of a sense of honor and duty
as men.

Speaker 3 (42:18):
Agree strongly agree, strongly okay.

Speaker 1 (42:22):
Women have nurturing capabilities that men could never achieve. Neutral, neutral,
All right, a good woman should be put on a
pedestal neutral neutral. A woman cannot be happy without a
man to look after her.

Speaker 3 (42:38):
Disagree strongly, strongly disagree.

Speaker 1 (42:41):
Gender equality and equal rights are entirely reasonable demands. Strongly agree,
strongly agree. Women exaggerate the problems they face in society.
Strongly disagree, strongly disagree. If a country has compulsory military concscription,
that conscription should apply to men and women equally.

Speaker 3 (43:04):
Strongly agree, strongly agree, neutral.

Speaker 2 (43:07):
Neutral, neutral, Agree, I'll go I'll go with strongly.

Speaker 3 (43:11):
Agree, strongly agree.

Speaker 2 (43:13):
I want to point out that, because there's no corresponding
question for men, this is only half the story. Like,
for example, what if you ask them, do you think
men complain about problems? And they say yes? Does that
Does that suggest because you are treating women as more
like their problem, their problems is more legitimate. Okay, let's

(43:34):
keep it all right.

Speaker 1 (43:36):
All right, so neutral, neutral, what do you want?

Speaker 2 (43:41):
I agree?

Speaker 3 (43:42):
I agree, all right.

Speaker 1 (43:43):
Agree women are generally better people than men. Neutral, Okay,
women fail to appreciate all the things men do for them.

Speaker 3 (43:52):
Strongly, Disagree strongly.

Speaker 1 (43:54):
Disagree they always appreciate it. If a man and a
woman go out on a date, the man should not
ness necessarily pay.

Speaker 2 (44:01):
Agree slightly.

Speaker 1 (44:03):
Okay, women are too easily offended.

Speaker 2 (44:08):
Disagree strongly.

Speaker 1 (44:09):
Yep. When women lose fairly, they claim it was due
to discrimination. Disagree strong strongly. In an emergency, women should
not necessarily be rescued before men.

Speaker 3 (44:22):
Neutral, all right, let me think, let me go back.

Speaker 1 (44:26):
Okay, in an.

Speaker 2 (44:27):
Emergency, women should not necessarily be rescued before men. This
is a hard one. Let's go with the let's go
with agree strongly, agree.

Speaker 1 (44:34):
Strongly agree. Okay. Men should sacrifice to ensure the well
being of women. Neutral, neutral, all right.

Speaker 2 (44:43):
Yeah. Whenever you have whenever you have something that a
genuine traditional opinion on men and women that does benefit women,
I think you go neutral. Whenever it's obviously anti women,
you go disagree or agree depending.

Speaker 1 (45:04):
I have no strong feelings one way or the other.
M my wife, I said, Hello, all right, women have
a more so I left it neutral. Women have a
more refined sense of culture than men. Yep, women are
too eager to interpret innocent remarks as sexist.

Speaker 2 (45:24):
Strongly disagree, yes.

Speaker 1 (45:27):
And then women have a special sensitivity that men could
never achieve. Neutral, and we're gonna go finish. Okay, before
we do that, I got a rumble. Rant Novavan twenty
one gave us a dollar and says, I am convinced
this test is not a are you sexist quiz? But
a which type of sexist are you? Type of quiz? Yes,

(45:48):
which which sexist are you? Somebody should make one that's
like which misogynists are you? And it has like all
these archetypes like the you know, the Fedora tipping guy
and the p Ua guy and Andrew Tate guy and
the I think that'd be funny. Okay, finish, let's see
what we get. Look at that twelve percent benevolent sexism.

Speaker 3 (46:08):
Sexism, Well, I.

Speaker 1 (46:10):
Mean, everybody got a little bit of sexist. You couldn't
you can't avoid it? Well, maybe you can.

Speaker 2 (46:16):
I don't know, Yes, No, you probably can't. I'm just
trying to think about where I wonder if it's the
neutral that I did. Yeah, it's pretty close, but I
guess we could try to do better.

Speaker 1 (46:27):
I wonder if it's neutral was missing from the other test.

Speaker 2 (46:38):
This is bullshit. This is utter bullshit. The people who
created this should feel embarrassed because you're not scientists. You're
a bunch of flim flam artists. Honestly, you should be
run out of town and tarred and feathered because you'd
made somebody's goat turn blue with your stupid mister schmacky
Schmack's super elixir of solving goat problems. This is absolutely bullshit.

(47:02):
I'm gonna ask GROC if there's any uh any count
the U Is there any Is there any push or
controversy around thebivalent.

Speaker 1 (47:15):
Sexism tests on IDR labs dot com.

Speaker 2 (47:18):
Yeah, okay, let's say GROC has to say yes, there's
some controversy methodological flaws and scale construction, asymmetry and measuring
sexism towards men. No shit, This test could be true,
to be pro could be used as evidence for some
of the things that it says are hostile sexism, lack

(47:41):
of intersectionality. Who gives a crap? I actually got into
it with GROC about intersectionality, and I pointed out that
intersectionality while if it recognizes broad harms to women but
doesn't but turns all harms to men into specific categories
of men, then it still is doing the same thing.
Because Okay, feminism, in order to prove itself, has to

(48:05):
prove that men in authority equals women oppressed. So women
add a disadvantage relative to men. So you actually have
to look at the disadvantages that men face when they
are in positions of power and authority and they have
to provide for women. You have to holding that constant.
So that is an evidence of anything that itself is

(48:26):
as an evidence of nothing, because you are trying to
prove a causal relationship between that and something else, which
is the disadvantage of women. So you have to look
at are women disadvantaged?

Speaker 1 (48:37):
Right?

Speaker 2 (48:37):
That is the null hypothesis. If you can actually show
that men have the same amount of disadvantage or more
than women, you have proven the null hypothesis. Thus feminism
is incorrect. Guess what feminists never do or rarely do,
measure the one thing that invalidates their hypothesis, which is

(48:58):
the situation for men. Okay, So intersectionality all it does
is it deflects from that because it still allows for
broad disadvantage for women, but it takes all of the
disadvantages for men and witters them into categories without looking
at the broad disadvantage for men. Because get this, that's

(49:20):
what disproves their theory. Somehow, they always manage to juggle
things in a way that they don't have to look
at the thing that disproves their theory. Even though if
they really were about equality, they would look at both
sides equally, right, They wouldn't not look at men's side, right,
And they wouldn't advance theories or conjectures that require not

(49:44):
looking at men's side. They just assume that's the thing.
They assume men in power equals men better off. They
assume it. They've never proven it. And I think there's
a few studies that actually have looked at the null
hypothesis and one the null hypothesis held one but we
just ignore that. So feminism has actually been disproven in

(50:04):
the literature, but we just ignore that.

Speaker 1 (50:07):
Yeah, just ignore it.

Speaker 2 (50:09):
That's why would we even pay attention to that, right,
And I think one got mixed results, But I sort
of pointed out to grok that mixed results that men
women have disadvantage and men have disadvantage actually also proves
the all hypothesis, depending on how mixed. Right, So it's
like this is this is the thing that's a problem.
This inventory is just more evidence that feminists do not

(50:33):
measure the side for men. Like that flat out didn't
happen here? How is women are better people than men?
Sexism against women, sexism against women? Guys who developed the
ambivalent sexism? Like how did you do that? How? And
how you know? You know what? I know? The flim
flam artists are gonna flim flam academia. You have this

(50:55):
giant cancer growing in you. How come you haven't rooted
it out using the principles you say you hold yourselves to.
Why haven't you demanded that feminist test and ull hypothesis,
not just like once or twice and then forget the results,
but actually genuinely put their conjecture to test, right, Why
haven't you actually held them to the grindstone of all

(51:16):
of the problems in their methodology and the fact that
you cannot assert that men women are oppressed because men
are in charge if you haven't actually genuinely looked at
the situation for men. Where is that? Where's the oversight? Huh,
where's the ethics? Because they're doing a lot of harm

(51:37):
at this point, a lot of harm. I mean, one
thing that they're doing is they're promoting interventions in intimate
battery batter of prevention programs that are shown to have
less efficacy substantially this or they're actually in some cases
worse than nothing, like the feminist deluthe interventions and battery

(51:58):
programs are many, this is worse than nothing. Or they
have tiny effects, right, tiny effects which might just be
due to chance. The more rigorous the study isn't investigating
the effects. The worst thing these these feminist inspired programs do.
And yet feminist are blocking programs that are sort of
an evolved form of cognitive behavioral therapy called ACTV. Don't

(52:21):
ask me to tell you what that acronym stands for. Actually,
let me just ask rock really quick.

Speaker 1 (52:26):
Acronym. I got a new I got another quiz that
might be even better.

Speaker 2 (52:31):
Achieving change through values based behavior. Okay, and this is
like a This is a best a evolved offshoot of
cognitive behavioral therapy. It is two times more effective than
Duluth and Duluth may be not effective at all. So
that means the activity achieving change through values values based

(52:51):
behavior is very effective in reducing recidivism among batterers, which
means it protects women, and feminists are posing it because
it's not based on feminist ideology, even though feminist ideology
the programs based on have shown no efficacy at all

(53:11):
or very little, which also begs the question doesn't that
mean feminist conjecture is probably not correct? Like a prediction
is that if feminists really understand where domestic violence come
from comes from and what causes it, their interventions should
be effective in stopping it. But they're not, and in

(53:34):
some cases they appear to be reverse effective, and yet
they still promote I'll promote interventions that don't reduce the
rate of batterers of women, which means they're putting women
at greater harm to pursue their ideological interventions. So this
this I mean really going to talk about all of
the awful stuff that feminism is doing to society. I

(53:58):
actually got grattat calculation. A conservative estimate is that five
thousand women a year are put in harm's way because
we choose feminist interventions over non feminist interventions. Right, that's
higher if you assume complete adoption of non feminist interventions,

(54:18):
and you also assume that because they're so effective, people
start applying it widespread. If we actually got away from
feminism and start looking at non feminist interventions, we could
really reduce the rate of battering of actual domestic violence
in our society. But we're not because these people have

(54:40):
no oversight. Whatever they say is swallowed uncritically, and academia
has failed to control them. Okay, they go ahead with
your rumber.

Speaker 1 (54:53):
I already read it, so yeah, yeah, I did get
a member comment earlier from Gabriel like the member comments
in the thread look like the regular comments, and he says,
I did the test, got one hundred percent hostile sexism.
I'm proud he's the only one that's gotten one hundred percent.
So the other thing is I saw this too because

(55:15):
I thought I would click on this link where they
describe liberal feminism right here ambivalent and sexism inventory. And
apparently they have another test this could be even juicier
if you're curious. It's called the Feminism Test. This free
feminism test will allow you to obtain your scores on
five of the major positions in the legender equality debate
found in Western democracies. Though both feminists and anti feminists

(55:38):
like to claim that the definition of feminism is straightforward,
there is in fact considerable variety in how feminism is
defined and serious disagreements not just between feminist and anti feminists,
but also among the various positions within feminism itself. And basically,
this test, I guess it's gonna land you in generally
one of five different positions. Okay, feminist positions, which is

(56:02):
liberal feminism, radical feminism, Marxist feminism, and cultural feminism, as
well as a single anti feminism one which they're calling traditionalism.
This is a totally fair and based forty two questions.

Speaker 2 (56:18):
Forty two questions.

Speaker 1 (56:21):
Yeah, we don't have to do that now, but.

Speaker 2 (56:23):
All right, all right, fine, fine, let's do it.

Speaker 1 (56:26):
Do you want to do it? Do you want to
find out where you sit?

Speaker 2 (56:29):
Okay? Can I go with what I believe women are
capable of, so that we don't necessarily but not necessarily
what they are actually engaging in. Yeah, i'll do it.

Speaker 1 (56:41):
I'll do it ideally. Is that what you mean? Yes?

Speaker 2 (56:44):
Yeah, But it's the other thing is if this roots
me to traditionalism, then don't they realize that anti feminism
has a lot of different approaches.

Speaker 1 (56:55):
I know, Well they're calling it traditionalism, so because the
foregone conclusion is feminism is not traditional, anything that opposes
it is traditional. Okay, that's basically their framing. That's the
paradigm that they're dropping you in. Oh all right, forty

(57:15):
two questions. Let's see what kind of feminist Alton is.
Women are just as rational and logical as men.

Speaker 2 (57:20):
Agree, probably need to strongly agree otherwise it's like a
partial statement. I mean, honestly, I'm really doubting that this
is this has got degrees because it's only has five points,
which is fucking ridiculous. Yeah, I'm trying to think what
kind of okay, the emancipation of women's want.

Speaker 1 (57:38):
To there's a link in the original link where if
you like, go if you go into your mabnivalent sexism
and you look down here as a liberal feminism right there,
or you can go back to the take the tests
again and I think if you click on on a second,
I'm gonna show you does it let me take the
test again? Or is it because I'm already in the test. Well,

(58:02):
I think you can click on the tag feminism that's
in there already, yeah, like right here, and then there's
like feminism tests boom, so you can take it too
if you want. All right, but anyway, Question two, the
emancipation of women is one of the crowning glories of
Western civilization.

Speaker 3 (58:22):
Disagree strongly.

Speaker 1 (58:23):
Disagree what is emancipation? What is that? Even waiting for
it to catch up? It's okay. Three, The fat acceptance
movement champions a worthwhile cause for women. It deserves more
sympathy and support.

Speaker 3 (58:36):
Disagree strongly.

Speaker 1 (58:39):
We're gonna do strongly for everything, right, Yeah, okay. Women
have just as much of a sense of humor and
do I'm sorry of honor. Didn't mean to misspeak. Women
have just as much of a sense of honor and
duty as men, I think.

Speaker 2 (58:54):
If they were held to one. So maybe just keep neutral,
all right.

Speaker 1 (58:59):
The main extreme cultural conceptions surrounding male female dating and
intercourse are construct to satisfying men's desires.

Speaker 2 (59:07):
So basically, you're delegitimizing any critique of what is supposed
to be a scientific position. Do you realize how absolutely
lacking an integrity that is?

Speaker 1 (59:19):
Disagree it is not possible to be sexist against mess
disagree children should be raised in a gender neutral in
as gender neutral a way as possible.

Speaker 2 (59:33):
What does it mean by gender neutral? I think that
boys and girls should be taught equivalent moral values, but
I do not think you should force them to behave
in like, to like equivalent things, or to have the
same friends. So what does that mean? Because I'm pretty
sure that Christian communities also teach boys and girls the

(59:55):
sins and you know, the commandments, so I'm not sure
I understand this.

Speaker 1 (01:00:01):
I think that they assume the question. Okay, so this
is sounds like something that intersectional feminists would agree with,
And I think that the what it's based on is
the presumption that the only reason why boys tend to
like boy things and girls tend to like girl things
is because they are raised, they are conditioned in their

(01:00:24):
upbringing to like them. So like their parents are saying,
you're a boy, you get the trucks. You're a girl,
you get the dolls, And that's probably not the way
it goes. I think that boys are just drawn to
these mechanical things, you know, that are toys, and girls
are drawn to like the dolls in general, but if
they break that, they don't like hold it against them,

(01:00:46):
you know, like boys like legos and legos aren't necessarily masculine, right,
they're not trucks or action figures, and girls may like
you know, like they also might like legos or or
building blocks or something too so. But but the the
sort of intersectional position is that anytime boys and girls

(01:01:06):
grow up in whether when they are you know, doing
things that are more in line with like what we
would find to be typical of them, like boys with
with trucks and girls with dolls, they assume that it's
a product of social engineering as opposed to just like nature.
You know, this question is basically saying that this is
an intersectional question. They're asking, like, do you agree with

(01:01:29):
the intersectional position of like social you know, grooming.

Speaker 2 (01:01:33):
I guess I reject their their framework of gender neutral.
I think you raise kids with equivalent morals and you
allow them access to what they would like to play with,
and you don't judge that or force it in any way.
Just let the kids.

Speaker 1 (01:01:50):
I'm the same way, like, I mean, it's probably going
to turn out that boys are gonna want the action
figures and girls are gonna want the dolls, but you
just have to be okay with it if that's what
they choose.

Speaker 2 (01:02:01):
Yes, the yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:02:06):
All right, women are just as independent and risk seeking
as men.

Speaker 2 (01:02:11):
Not true, like studies indicate multiply that men are not.
Women are more risk adverse than men. Disagree, like, this
is just basically a bullshit framework, like welcome to our
funhouse of mirrors. Where do you fit like in your
labyrinth of bullshit? Okay, go ahead, full disagree.

Speaker 1 (01:02:34):
The labyrinth of bullshit sounds terrible. I would not want
to be stuck in there. It's like the walls are shit,
everything smells. Women men's rights activists and male bashing feminists
are equally tribal and regressive in they're thinking, oh so
MRAs and feminist.

Speaker 3 (01:02:50):
Going to this both sides.

Speaker 2 (01:02:53):
But the thing is that, which do you if I
go full disagree because I don't think that men's rights
activists are regressive? How do they know that I'm saying,
disagree for the male basking feminists or disagree for the
men's rights activists? Go disagree, full disagree. We're going to
go back to that one full yeah, you know, I

(01:03:13):
think we should do these tests and just keep it
in the middle for all of them and see what
results you get. We go back to I think, but
we'll do that next. Okay, let's finish this off.

Speaker 1 (01:03:21):
All women are generally better people than men. Disagree, Yes,
contemporary Western societies are to a very large degree defined
by the patriarchy. Well that that probably has to be
true of any feminist position, right, So this puts you
this right here, I think puts you in the anti
feminist category. Their differences are immutable, and men and women

(01:03:47):
have distinct but complementary social roles to play.

Speaker 2 (01:03:50):
What do you mean by immutable, like you can't change them?
I guess slight agree just in the interest of getting
through this.

Speaker 1 (01:04:00):
And support female empowerment are inherently weak empowerment.

Speaker 2 (01:04:04):
Along one what access do you mean recognize? Okay, but
here's the thing, men who support what kind of empowerment?
Empowerment for women to be recognized as agents and that
their lives are a result of the consequence of their
own choices, Because that's what empowerment looks like from where
I'm sitting. So I would go with a strong agree.

(01:04:24):
But I don't think that that's how they define empowerment.
In fact, I don't even think they have a consistent,
sensible or logical definition for empowerment. Okay, go full agree, all.

Speaker 1 (01:04:36):
Right, The wage gap is a myth. Women already get
equal work. That's not even up for debate. Giving women
the hoot was a mistake, Okay, als, and I'm gonna
let you answer that one.

Speaker 2 (01:04:47):
Yeah, it was a mistake. Well, but then again, the
process of human history is to evolve past too exactly. Yeah,
I will say that. I have a part of me
that's just like, yeah, fuck it, do it. Let's see
what the chaos, what chaos brings, what chaos will result,
And I mean it did force us to understand ourselves more,

(01:05:11):
or will force us to understand ourselves more, which is
why we're on this earth as far as I'm concerned.
So how do we find it? If you want a
stable society? It is a Actually, you know, what's a
mistake more than anything, is starting to groom women towards
voting towards a particular party by making them embrace, uh

(01:05:35):
for a lifestyle that leaves them miserable and hungry for
things that they can only get in very disruptive ways
without family. Can I just I'm not going to answer it. Yeah,
that's probably gonna get me anyway.

Speaker 1 (01:05:53):
Yeah, you're supposed to disagree. A contemporary Western society is
permeated by rape culture.

Speaker 2 (01:06:01):
Yeah against men. No, not not as defined by feminist conjecture.
But if you want to say that the rate at
which women are sexually praying on men is increasing and
their attitudes are getting more regressive towards their male victims,
yeah sure, but they're not gonna I'm gonna go with disagree.

(01:06:22):
You know what, keep it neutral?

Speaker 1 (01:06:24):
Neutral?

Speaker 2 (01:06:24):
Neutral?

Speaker 1 (01:06:25):
Yeah, if women ran the world, there would be less
violence and fewer wars.

Speaker 2 (01:06:30):
No, and there's evidence against them, Like does this just
basically opinions about shit that are impervious to evidence.

Speaker 1 (01:06:36):
Like olive oil? If I was pray?

Speaker 3 (01:06:40):
Disagree strongly, all right, sort and disagree strongly.

Speaker 1 (01:06:43):
The essences of men and women are so different that
it makes no sense to speak of human rights only
male and female rights.

Speaker 2 (01:06:51):
This is new.

Speaker 1 (01:06:52):
These are separate things, I.

Speaker 2 (01:06:54):
Don't think, so who the hell believes that? Disagree?

Speaker 1 (01:07:00):
Yeah? I don't know then maybe yeah, because.

Speaker 2 (01:07:03):
I don't know, because I don't even want male rights.

Speaker 1 (01:07:06):
But I don't even think categorize them as separate so
that then they can take them away.

Speaker 2 (01:07:11):
Do traditionalists believe this, because I'm pretty sure her commandments.

Speaker 1 (01:07:17):
Yeah, I don't think that the traditionalist believes that.

Speaker 2 (01:07:20):
Okay, let's keep going.

Speaker 1 (01:07:21):
Then, Okay, the psychological tricks and manipulations used by pickup
artists to get women to sleep with them should be
considered a type of hate crime.

Speaker 2 (01:07:30):
Is make up a hate crime? Disagree strongly?

Speaker 1 (01:07:33):
It is hypocritical for Western feminists to bash Western men
for the smallest grievances while largely ignoring the absence of
fundamental rights for women in the Muslim world.

Speaker 2 (01:07:42):
Well, yeah, it's hypocritical, but I don't agree with the premise.

Speaker 1 (01:07:46):
That sounds like a traditional of what they would categorize
the traditionalist position, although I have heard that, but I
don't know that that. I can't say this stuff all
the time, so for sure, Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:07:57):
Can I just go with neutral because the premise.

Speaker 1 (01:08:00):
Is, well, yeah, the position of women in the Muslim
world is fine relative to the men in that same world,
and they're like the largest, They're as big of an
enforcer of that belief system as the men are. So
it's it's kind of coming from ignorance anyways, right, So

(01:08:22):
this position, I mean, okay, so neutral for this one. Yeah,
all right, the state should enforce quotas mandating that fathers
and mothers take a roughly equal amount of parental leave.

Speaker 2 (01:08:33):
Agree.

Speaker 1 (01:08:35):
Yeah, yeah, okay. Trump's political standpoints and statements are bad
news for women in America.

Speaker 2 (01:08:43):
Disagree.

Speaker 1 (01:08:44):
I mean pretty sure he hasn't really done anything to
women at all.

Speaker 2 (01:08:46):
No, I don't think he's done anything for women at all.

Speaker 1 (01:08:49):
And they seem to invoke TDS in people.

Speaker 2 (01:08:52):
I think they've forgotten that the whole Supreme Court stuff
around Rovius is way it happened with Biden, although I mean,
I guess Trump appointed some justices.

Speaker 1 (01:09:04):
But let's keep on, all right. Since men repress women
not only in the public sphere but also in the home,
feminism should not uphold the distinction between private and political,
but in fact regard the private as political.

Speaker 2 (01:09:19):
Disagree.

Speaker 1 (01:09:21):
Yeah, that doesn't sound like any specific brand.

Speaker 2 (01:09:24):
But no, no, but they're they're probably going with traditionalism
or antique traditionalism or something. Okay, keep going.

Speaker 1 (01:09:30):
Gender equality has largely been achieved in the West, barring
certain ethnic minorities. The struggle for equality is as good
as over.

Speaker 2 (01:09:39):
I know that they mean women, but I don't think
equality for men has been achieved.

Speaker 1 (01:09:43):
Just neutral, Okay, female empowerment necessarily disempowers men.

Speaker 2 (01:09:51):
It depends on what type God is.

Speaker 1 (01:09:53):
This.

Speaker 2 (01:09:53):
Is this a test for like a political position or
just inability to think critically?

Speaker 1 (01:09:59):
I think it's or if you're like a diehard feminist
eye in the wool, you have answers to these questions
and they're and you're not concerned about any of the
assumptions baked into the questions themselves. Right, there are assumptions baked.

Speaker 2 (01:10:14):
I'm just gonna go with neutral, and I think it's
a question that can't be answered with the information presented.

Speaker 1 (01:10:18):
Yeah, swimmer advertisements featuring excessively thin models should be banned
for men or for women? Well, men don't care. I'm assuming.

Speaker 2 (01:10:27):
I honestly think maybe they should ban or at least
pull back on like the the the male beauty ideal
that the guy looks like he's two seconds away from
being in the er needing to get fluids intravenously, which
is basically Chris Helmsworth.

Speaker 1 (01:10:45):
The Marvel MCU.

Speaker 2 (01:10:47):
But and you know that they have to they have
to starve themselves and dehydrate themselves to get that.

Speaker 1 (01:10:53):
Yeah, I know, I know, it's ridiculous.

Speaker 2 (01:10:55):
So it's actually extremely dangerous, and nobody talks about it.
Like women who are supposedly anarexic, they're just skinny. You
look at them, they're you know, they're probably have a
body fat percentage of fifteen percent, twenty percent. They just
don't have any muscle, and they have incredibly small bones.
They're not they're not actually that thin. But when you

(01:11:16):
look at these guys, they're really skating the edge of
self destruction with with this, with this ideal. So yeah,
I would say that maybe we should reconsider showing men
as a masculine ideal when they're in a state of
physical of near physical collapse and unhealthiness genuine this is

(01:11:36):
beyond what they call anorexia and bolimia. These guys, you know,
if they go, if they push it, like an hour longer,
they're in the ar with dehydration, like health issues related
to dehydration and starvation. That's gross. Yeah, we should prebby
get rid of that. I agree.

Speaker 1 (01:11:57):
I remember when Christian Bale he lost weight for a
role in this movie called The Machinist where he was
really thin, and he, like I guess he did some
permanent damage to his heart and basically like cut his
life short by like a year or something. It was
some crazy story. So yeah, just yeah, nuts. But when
it comes to like the super thin supermodels, actually that

(01:12:19):
they're not as they're not as celebrated these days as
they used to be. So I don't feel like this
is really an issue anymore. Like now we have like,
you know, plus sized models everywhere, and I don't really
see the big deal. Like it's not like, you know,
who's the iman of today, you know, do you guys
remember Imon she she was with David Bowie or Grace
Jones or some of these, like you know, Cindy Crawford.

(01:12:42):
There are no super like celebrity models these days, not
the thin kind anyway. Mostly they just use celebrities or
Lizzo anyway, So which one do you want to pick?

Speaker 2 (01:12:53):
The trol neutral? I can't answer this without more clarity.

Speaker 1 (01:12:59):
White men pedal hatred against Muslims as a way to
distract women from the fact that they are oppressed. Disagree, Wait,
white men pedal hatred against Muslims as a way to
distract women from the fact that they are oppressed Muslim
women or no, I think they mean their own women. Yes,

(01:13:20):
pornography should not be legal.

Speaker 2 (01:13:22):
Disagree, but I'm not exactly sure what they think traditionalists
are going to say about that.

Speaker 1 (01:13:28):
Next, the states should enforce quotas mandating that a certain
percentage of male dominated high end jobs like CEO's, board memberships, professorships,
et cetera, should go to women. So there should be quotas. Whatever. Yeah, okay,
women can do every job in the military just as
well as men.

Speaker 2 (01:13:49):
Disagree. If they can't, they can't. If they can't compete
with trends women, how can they do this?

Speaker 1 (01:13:55):
Yeah?

Speaker 2 (01:13:56):
Okay.

Speaker 1 (01:13:57):
Next, the use of If the use of sex robots
becomes a normal practice, this will lead to the dehumanization
of women women most affective robots exist. Disagree.

Speaker 2 (01:14:09):
Mm hmm.

Speaker 1 (01:14:10):
The male gaze is tendency to objectify women against their
will as a serious problem for women.

Speaker 2 (01:14:16):
Do you know, Can we address the fact that this
latest generation of women is like three to four times
using flat out rape relative to the current generation of
men or any generation in history. Can we address that?
Can we address that their attitudes are getting more and
worse and worse and worse and more regressive when it

(01:14:37):
comes to male victims of rape. Why are we who
he's raping me with this? Can we stop? Can we
triage this? Can we triage this? Seriously? Is it possible?

Speaker 1 (01:14:48):
No? Disagree, disagree strongly. Let's go. There are only two genders, Hey,
don't care.

Speaker 2 (01:14:55):
Put it in the middle, all right.

Speaker 1 (01:14:57):
The lack of nuance roles for women in movies is
a serious problem for gender equality. The lack of nuance
roles for women in movies.

Speaker 2 (01:15:07):
Do you mean all the girl bossing, all of the
wretched girl bossing?

Speaker 1 (01:15:11):
Did you describe that as wretched? Because I think it
is wretched. Yes, it's wretched. Disagree disagree?

Speaker 2 (01:15:17):
Yeah, I know exactly what they're getting from.

Speaker 1 (01:15:20):
Yeah, I know there's not enough of it. Sex in
blurred lines, kinds of situations where the woman does not
explicitly consent but does not explicitly say no either is
morally on par with rape.

Speaker 2 (01:15:35):
This is the song in which the woman took all
of the physical initiative. How can people who think that
that is some kind of rape culture directed at women? No,
I got it. I see why they just don't care
about sexual violence. They just can't conceive of it. If

(01:15:56):
they're thinking that this guy inviting a woman to touch,
to take the initiative to touch him is him raping her?
I don't. I don't. I think they exist in another universe.

Speaker 1 (01:16:10):
From me, Yeah, strongly. Okay. Market economies unfairly favor men's
abilities over women's.

Speaker 2 (01:16:21):
Why would market economies unfairly favor anyone? Market economy is
based on what people are willing to pay you for.

Speaker 1 (01:16:28):
Yeah, I don't know what that.

Speaker 2 (01:16:29):
I mean, what the hell look at only fans or
modeling or prostitutions, and market economies are actually privileging women's
contributions remarkably. Okay, go with disagree. What a nonsense statement.

Speaker 1 (01:16:46):
Feminists who don't actually play video games should refrain from
criticizing the portrayal of women in video case.

Speaker 2 (01:16:52):
Let me let me look at that again. Agree, I'm
getting double bad.

Speaker 1 (01:16:56):
Get your hands off my duty wife, ou please? Okay.
Men's tendency to find young and slender women more attractive
than older and plumper ones has much to do with
the media as it has to do with biology.

Speaker 2 (01:17:11):
Yeah, but but media does have some effect, Like if
you actually look at how beauty ideals change, usually women
embrace like women embraced the skinny ideal first, and then
men followed, and it never like men's ideal never became
as as slender as women's ideal. It was women that
made the moms and the Kate Mosses, right, they made

(01:17:34):
those ideals, and men sort of followed along and never
went that skinny in their own ideals. So, yes, it
does have something to do with media. But younger, no.

Speaker 1 (01:17:49):
But they're but they're but but women are the ones.
You're saying that women are ultimately the ones that set
the tone, and the media is simply the medium through
which that happens. But when they say media, they're they're
treating it like some kind of outside Well, they're saying
there's force that's outside of women.

Speaker 2 (01:18:08):
Right, Yeah, men just decided that they wanted this kind
of chick and then they forced it on every other men.

Speaker 1 (01:18:15):
Yeah yeah. So when they say media there it's like
saying society did this.

Speaker 2 (01:18:20):
Yeah, which is like saying men did this.

Speaker 1 (01:18:22):
Let's be honest, which is like saying it's another way
of saying men did this.

Speaker 2 (01:18:26):
I will go with uh, I don't know, just middle,
I don't care. Let's move on and get this done.

Speaker 1 (01:18:32):
The idea that men and women should have the same
rights is cultural and civilizational suicide.

Speaker 2 (01:18:39):
No, the idea that what feminists is following is equal rights,
when in actuality it's special privileges for women. Men don't
have reproductive rights, they don't have rights in bodily autonomy.
When it comes to conscription. They are actively being discriminated
against an education and in hiring and in the family courts. Like,

(01:19:03):
if we pursue all of this under and pretend to
ourselves that we're pursuing equal rights, we are pursuing disaster. Honestly,
I think that if we had genuinely pursued equal rights,
maybe we will be considerably better off. But that's not
what we did, and it's honestly, it's become an object
lesson and what actually happens when you do these things.

(01:19:28):
So it maybe that pursuing equal rights opened up this
Pandora's box. Yeah, But then together other thing is that
I believe that we face these problems for a reason,
and the reason is to overcome them. So I think
that this is a problem that we need to overcome
and then we will be better for it. And if

(01:19:49):
we don't overcome it, it's because we've ceased to be
able to learn about ourselves.

Speaker 1 (01:19:53):
So I'll go neutral, neutral, all right, yep, two three
left women can be just as happy as men without
a stable relationship.

Speaker 2 (01:20:04):
Disagree, It doesn't. It isn't. Yeah, the statistically it doesn't
show that. Whoa.

Speaker 1 (01:20:10):
Okay, it is not possible to be feminist and right wing.

Speaker 2 (01:20:14):
I don't care.

Speaker 1 (01:20:16):
Give it a new last one. Prostitutions should not be legal.

Speaker 3 (01:20:22):
Disagree, but it is strongly disagree.

Speaker 1 (01:20:25):
Okay, all right, let's see where you all who are
mostly traditionalists apparently, then liberal feminists, and then Marxist feminists
twenty seven percent. Oh, we got a red one in here, guys.

Speaker 2 (01:20:42):
Traditional liberals, Yeah, liberals standards I liberal philosophy, yeah, which
you seek to preserve what they see is the natural
and traditional order of things. In the past, the standpoint
was cheaply represented by early twentieth centurist thinkers like Julius
Uvola and Renee Gunon. For After a hiatus following World

(01:21:03):
War Two, traditionalism has resurfaced as a new type of
conservatism to the right mainstream conservatism. It's chiefly popular among
younger voters who are skeptical of liberal enlightened principles that
mainstream conservatives except uniting instead behind a national pride a
critical stance towards feminism and Islam and resistance to globalism.
I'm not Yeah, I think it's just because I have
a critical stance towards feminism, that's it.

Speaker 1 (01:21:24):
Well yeah, well the questions were had very little to
do with Islam. I think that was like one or
two questions and none about like you know, globalism or
national pride. So they're just sort of like lumping things
in into that. It's like, yoh, you're associated with this,
and so this is associated with this other thing, and

(01:21:45):
so you must be like associated with that other thing
as well. But that doesn't really matter. I mean, you know,
we're just looking. Okay, so what's I'm just curious, but
I don't know if you want to do you want
me to read these other categories see what they are?

Speaker 3 (01:21:59):
Sure, okay.

Speaker 1 (01:22:01):
Liberal feminism refers to feminist philosophy rooted and Enlightenment principles.
It's classical works or penned by thinkers such as Mary
Wilson Craft and John Stuart Mill. Mary Wilson Craft the
original feminists, by the way. This type of feminism holds
that men and women are each other's equals and as
such deserve equal rights. It is the type of feminism
that people allude to when they say feminism just means

(01:22:21):
equal rights. As opposed to other forms of feminism, liberal
feminism is individualistic rather than group based. Men and women
deserve equal rights because both are individuals. Rights are granted individuals,
not genders or groups. All right, and then, radical feminism
holds that men oppress women through internalized forms of dominance
i e. Patriarchy. Women must come together and end this
oppression by rejecting traditional gender roles. Putting women in dresses,

(01:22:45):
making them where makeup, and so on makes them sexual
objects that perpetuate male dominance. Women must refuse to comply
with the beauty standards that the patriarchy expects. Radical feminists
see a link between men's objectification of women in sexual
violence and abuse, institution, pornography, and advertisements. As sexualized women
are therefore not decisions that can be left to individual choice.

(01:23:06):
They must be resisted by women everywhere as forms of
male oppression.

Speaker 2 (01:23:11):
Okay, so why do they have such a problem with
trans women radical feminists? Yeah, Like, seriously, why do you
guys have such a problem with trans women? Variably trans
women want that role?

Speaker 1 (01:23:25):
Yeah, they can't take it. From women though, that's why.

Speaker 2 (01:23:28):
But you don't want the role. Radical feminists are like, okay,
you know this, this is this is uh, this is
uh femine, our patriarchy, objectification of women. Radical feminis like,
we don't want that bit, And then the trans women
pick it up and say, okay, well we'll do it,
and then the radical feminists like, no, not, why do

(01:23:48):
you care so much?

Speaker 1 (01:23:50):
Yeah, intersectionality isn't listed here they have, So next is
Marxist feminism. Maybe that's where it is. Marxist feminism holds
the motive production in capitalist societies is organized in a
way that favors men's abilities over women's. As opposed to
radical feminists who see patriarchy as the source of gender inequality,
Marxist feminists see capitalism as the cause. Marxist feminists argue

(01:24:13):
that the structures of capitalist economies coerce women into assuming
responsibility for unpaid domestic tasks such as homemaking and tolerated
while leaving men free to earn money in the public sphere.
Gender equality can therefore never be achieved in a capitalist economy.
While Marxist feminism was originally about economic revolution, more recent
writers have changed their focus from economic issues to cultural ones,

(01:24:34):
placing more of an emphasis on the fight for social
justice than the fight to topple capitalism. Cultural feminism holds
that women and men are essentially different, and that women
are generally more nurturing, more empathetic, and less violent than men.
Cultural feminists seeks to celebrate these qualities, which they believe
have been oppressed by men. Cultural feminists believe that both
men and women are hurt by contemporary male dominatus society,

(01:24:57):
which they see as encouraging male behaviors such as compet
ti and conflict. According to cultural feminism, if women were
given more power, there would be less violence, fewer wars,
and more understanding in the world. So it sounds like
feminists today are just a mishmash of all of these things.
They're just taking the parts of everything that they can
use and they just make it their thing. Have you

(01:25:19):
noticed that even traditionalism, like they modern feminist women today
have the they're trying to like min max their feminism builds.
So they have like some of the stuff from liberal feminism,
like the defenses and whatnot, of a lot of the
stuff from radical feminism. And by the way, all these
feminisms have the same thing in common. They may try

(01:25:41):
to describe them differently, but they're all fighting against a
system that is basically men, whether you call it patriarchy
or capitalism or you know, heteronormativity or whatever. Yeah, culture,
it's a fight.

Speaker 2 (01:25:54):
Against men and seeing that they're victims of men and
using that narrative to enact whatever particular thing that they want. Yeah, okay,
all right, so we've we've been at this for an
hour and a half.

Speaker 1 (01:26:11):
Yeah, unless I thought it'd be kind of fun to do.

Speaker 2 (01:26:14):
But I'm I'm really curious. I was really curious about
that one question about men's issues. But the only way
we can go back to it is the one in
the middle there, Like, if you like, we could try
just going completely neutral on everything and then getting to
that question, which one. No, no, no, no, it's it's

(01:26:37):
one that specifically states something about men's rights activists, Like
if you go to the beginning, go to the very beginning.

Speaker 1 (01:26:43):
It's not this quiz though, right.

Speaker 2 (01:26:45):
This quiz.

Speaker 1 (01:26:48):
Finist test, Yeah, the feminist test.

Speaker 2 (01:26:51):
Just let's let's let's speed run this. Just go next
and put it in. Do we get to that question?
Just slow a little bit. Wait, wait, I.

Speaker 1 (01:26:59):
Think you might men's rides activists and male bashing feminists
are equally tribal and regressive.

Speaker 2 (01:27:03):
And what if you say we went with neutral, you.

Speaker 1 (01:27:06):
Said strongly disagree to that one.

Speaker 2 (01:27:08):
I think, yeah, let's go strongly agree and then put
everything else neutral. All right, Yeah, just just speed around
this ship. We'll do it again and maybe put neutral
on that one and see what it has to say. Okay,
we we need like a button pressing song.

Speaker 1 (01:27:26):
No we don't. We can see this they watch it.
Boo liberal feminism fifty everything else.

Speaker 2 (01:27:35):
Okay, go back to that question. Go back to the question.
Let's let's put neutral and that basically that is that
is fifty percent everything.

Speaker 3 (01:27:47):
So everything neutral, everything neutral.

Speaker 1 (01:27:50):
Except for everything neutral.

Speaker 2 (01:27:52):
Taking a test making it all neutral, seeing what we get,
we're probably just gonna get all fifty percent right.

Speaker 1 (01:27:59):
Okay, yep, perfectly balanced.

Speaker 2 (01:28:07):
So go back, go back and just put okay, so
that that particular number, that particular question is going to
liberal feminists, but it's not saying anything about traditionalism because
it it and this is the problem with this entire test.
It is really poorly constructed because you should really be

(01:28:30):
asking do you believe that men's rights activists are the
same as menn hating feminists, which, incidentally, if I think
if you believe that men oppressed women, you're sort of
hating men. There you're casting them in the role of
a criminal, which I mean, even if you think you
don't hate men, that is consistent with the kind of

(01:28:50):
threat narratives that people use in war propaganda to justify
murdering an entire group of people. So it's pretty powerful stuff.
But anyway, that particular question is really confusing because you
could say that man hating feminists aren't the same as
men's rights activists. It's the men's rights actives are regressive tribalists,
and you could say that man hating feminists are the

(01:29:12):
regressive tribalists, right, But it doesn't really clarify that question.
The answer that question seems to just speak to liberal feminism.

Speaker 1 (01:29:25):
Maybe moves it by two percent. Is that what happened
when you moved to all the way to disagree or
all the way to agree?

Speaker 2 (01:29:32):
I'm on the dig when we when we went to
all the way to agree, when we went to disagree,
we have to disagree, put disagree and see where it moves.

Speaker 1 (01:29:41):
The needle and everything else neutral.

Speaker 2 (01:29:43):
Everything else neutral, like we're basically hacking.

Speaker 1 (01:29:46):
This test speed run. Okay, so yeah, yeah, when you
always agree, forty eight percent when you disagree, and fifty.

Speaker 2 (01:29:56):
Percent if you're neutral on that question. In essence, if
you are a liberal feminist, you need to disagree that
men's rights activists or you need to agree that men's
rights activists and feminists are radical feminists manating feminists are
the same, right, and if you disagree, you lose points

(01:30:18):
from the liberal feminist category.

Speaker 1 (01:30:20):
Yeah, all right, and so.

Speaker 2 (01:30:22):
That's probably why I ended up having a higher liberal
feminism because it's less man hating.

Speaker 1 (01:30:27):
I guess I think that they're basically classifying less man
hating as still feminist, just liberal feminist. Not traditionalists though. No,
so which by the way, they say traditionalism is kind
of like it it's it doesn't it doesn't necessary. It's
basically like everything else. It's like a category of everyone

(01:30:47):
who's not who doesn't fit into the other feminist categories.

Speaker 2 (01:30:52):
Well, it seems like liberal I'm not just it's.

Speaker 1 (01:30:54):
Not really traditionalists. It's like anti feminist, non feminists.

Speaker 2 (01:30:57):
You know, it's anybody who has who has a criticism
of feminism. But here's the kicker. Feminism bills itself as
a science. Criticisms of feminism shouldn't be subject to this
kind of social ostracization, Like this should be embraced as
part of the scientific process. So feminism is like it's

(01:31:19):
acting like a religion and pretending to be a science
because you're not supposed to You're not supposed to socially
ostracize the people who critique your science. That's part of
the scientific process. So this is this is like, all
this proves to me is that science, that feminism is
anti science. It's actually just a blot upon some science. Okay,

(01:31:41):
all right, is there anything further that you wanted to
do with.

Speaker 1 (01:31:43):
These No, I think that's it.

Speaker 2 (01:31:46):
That's good, and we could painstakingly and spurguingly just pack
the whole damn thing.

Speaker 1 (01:31:51):
No, No, it's I don't want to want to do that.
I don't think it's that. I don't think it's that
intellectually rigorous.

Speaker 2 (01:31:57):
I mean, we can conclude that it's got a lot
of bullshh.

Speaker 1 (01:32:01):
Yeah, Well, there's a lot of assumptions built into.

Speaker 2 (01:32:04):
A lot of assumptions, a lot of questions that aren't
sufficiently clear to know what the hell they're measuring. Well,
it's typical of feminist science, like it's just a bunch
of bullshit that doesn't know what it's measuring. All right,
With that, feed the Badgery dot com slash just the tip,

(01:32:26):
we might have another.

Speaker 1 (01:32:29):
To poke the voles. Yeah, I read, Yeah, I read
Sleepy Ausie's comment. He's ninety sexist, so hostile yeh, sexism.

Speaker 3 (01:32:41):
Congratulations, you're moving up.

Speaker 2 (01:32:43):
You're flaunting your sex is.

Speaker 1 (01:32:45):
Yeah, you're over here bragging.

Speaker 2 (01:32:48):
Mm hmm. Wait, okay, I think that was. I think
that was uh, yeah, that was that was. Let's see. No,
there's another thing that went through. What the heck, what's
going on here? Well? I think this was him, except
I think he also put a tip for five dollars.

(01:33:08):
That's why it's looking like it's ten dollars something. All right, Well, anyway,
so feed the Badger dot com slash just the tip.
If you want to send us a message about anything
that we've talked about, if you enjoyed this particular content,
you want us to do more stupid feminist tests, please
don't want us to do that. Feed the Badger dot
com slash just the tip, And if you want to
support the show dot com slash support. We are at

(01:33:29):
the end of the month and we still have something
like two three thousand over three thousand left to go,
so it'd be great if you could help us out
feed the Badger dot com slash support to make sure
we can fund this show because it's a grind. And
we got a message from Janice who's like, I can't
believe that you guys keep doing this, but we're going

(01:33:50):
to keep grinding the way at this so that there
is a consistent voice every day or mostly every day,
saying that this is wrong, this is ridiculous, this is dumb.
Can we stop doing this and stop the car Let
us know, like before we go over the cliff, please,
you know, so anyway, support that Feedbadger dot com slash

(01:34:10):
support and I will hand it back to you. Brian.

Speaker 1 (01:34:13):
All right, Well, if you guys like this video, please
hit like subscribe not already subscribed to the BELF notifications,
heave us a comment. Let us know what you guys
think about what we talked about in the show today
in the comments. Let us know how you did on
the sexism test. I'd like to see it in the
comment section.

Speaker 2 (01:34:29):
What jacobus Peterson in the in this the vertical chat,
which is very quiet today, says the inclusion of Ivolo
directly equates TAD with fascism.

Speaker 1 (01:34:38):
Well, of course, yeah, of course, yeah, that's again. Yeah,
that's that's.

Speaker 2 (01:34:45):
Work. There are two genders, two sexes, right, and you
can know you know that there's the sexes. Yeah, women
and women and fascists.

Speaker 1 (01:34:55):
Well, you don't even women and fascist?

Speaker 2 (01:34:57):
Okay, what's this? What's this patriarchal bullshit? Ryan, They're not people.
There are women which we can't define, and fascists. Yeah,
we can define fascists.

Speaker 1 (01:35:07):
Yes, and we should probably do something about those fascists
minecraft all right, But anyway, what were they saying? Oh yeah,
like share, subscribe, comment and all that good stuff. Thanks
guys for coming on. I look forward to seeing your
scores in the comment section, and we'll talk to guys
in the next one.

Speaker 4 (01:35:24):
Men's right activists are machines, dude. Okay, they are literal machines.
They are talking point machines. They are impossible to fucking
deal with, especially if you have, like especially if you
have like a couple of dudes who have good memory.

Speaker 1 (01:35:38):
On top of that, too, Holy shit, you're fucked,

All Episodes

Taking the Official "Ambivalent Sexism Test" to Find Out if we're cooked | Maintaining Frame 181

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Dateline NBC

Stuff You Should Know

My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

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

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Taking the Official "Ambivalent Sexism Test" to Find Out if we're cooked | Maintaining Frame 181