Male-Female Conflict Benefits The Left. Why are so Many Women Left Wing?

On today's #NCFDeprogrammed, Harrison Pitt and Connor Tomlinson are joined by Patricia Patnode, a Research Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Patricia is a regular contributor for The Cedar Rapids Gazette and The Conservator, and has also been featured in USA Today, the Washington Examiner and Discourse Magazine.
---------------
SUBSCRIBE:
If you are enjoying the show, please subscribe to our channel on KZbin (click the Subscribe Button underneath the video and then Click on the Bell icon next to it to make sure you Receive All Notifications)
AUDIO:
If you prefer Audio you can subscribe on itunes or Soundcloud.
Soundcloud: / user-923838732
itunes: itunes.apple.c...
SUPPORT/DONATE:
PAYPAL/ CARD PAYMENTS - ONE TIME & MONTHLY:
You can donate in a variety of ways via our website: www.newculturef...
It is set up to accept one time and monthly donations.
JOIN US ON SOCIAL MEDIA:
Web: www.newculturef...
F: / ncultureforum
Y: / newcultureforum
T: / newcultureforum (@NewCultureForum)

[@NewCultureForum]

Join the New Culture Forum Membership scheme and help support our work. Please see: www.patreon.com/NewCultureForum From only £3 per month you'll receive a range of perks and benefits, including exclusive content.

[@Natalia-q9s3z]

I'm a woman, but right wing. I don't get the left... 🤔🤔

[@notorioushsg1]

Where do you live.. we want to marry you 😂 In all honestly, If I was to single again I would be asking a potential partner. What political party do you support and what are your values on critical race theory/affirmative action etc etc I couldn’t live with a someone too far to the left

[@Christoph1888]

Genuine question, would you agree that most women vote left? Would you then support banning women from voting in an effort to shift the political culture back to the centre?

[@notorioushsg1]

Hi Christoph, is that question directed at me? If so, definitely not. I see the issue as two problems. Having the right to vote is a privilege and needs to be taken seriously. The voting age needs to be increased to an age where children (and I want to be ageist here specifically to say. Unless you’ve entered the marketplace and worked at a menial job you cannot appreciate what the ‘real world is’) have become adults. Maybe 25yrs old? People too young are voting with no lived experience. Secondly we are not educating the children in their earlier years and our later years in the success of the west and the values that got them there. This has been taken out of education. These two things alone could help persuade girls/women that we are inherently not evil and our society and way of life is possibly the best there is.

[@Christoph1888]

@@notorioushsg1 Completely agree with everything you said. I have always thought the voting age should be raised. Supposedly your brain doesn't fully mature till 25 so that makes sense. Most people will have also been in the workforce at that point and be paying taxes. I would go Two Steps further with voting restrictions. 1st before you can enrol you must pass a Civics and western history test. 2nd if over half your income comes from the taxpayer you're ineligible to vote. I understand the second one is controversial as that may include Noble professions like nurses and teachers but I believe it is necessary to stop the government from being able to bribe voters with lavish taxpayer funded jobs. Don't want to end up like Argentina. Politicians will always take tax dollars and spend it on generating political capital over what's in the best long term interests of the people.

[@NFSCfan]

Based.

[@David-uf8ex]

That’s an easy one . Blair’s indoctrination camps

[@OrwellsHousecat]

Only £9500/year

[@brianmeen2158]

What about in America though? The women here are very left/liberal types.

[@joce11]

​​​@@brianmeen2158 IMO the answer to your question is Clinton and what's called 'third way' politics. If you recall Blair was PM at the same time as Clinton was President. Both of these men pushed 'third way' politics. The EU has done similar. This in turn gave rise to the social and economic policies and conditions for 'woke' culture and globalisation to take hold. It's worth noting that modern Feminism embraced and pushed critical theory and intersectionality theories. These theories underpin the social justice/woke movement. This may also explain why liberal women support this nonsense particularly if they are university educated and/or their parents are.

[@homemaintenance1234]

@@brianmeen2158women gravitate 5o resources, and the UsA is a very spoilt and entitled society. Women always lead that, and demand things of men.

[@julie-annhall2078]

I'm a woman and I'm right wing, I think maybe as you get older, your views change and you see the value of things in life, what you've worked for, what seems petty as to what holds importance both in the simple things and the major things, suddenly the things around you and the people around you take priority and no-one is going to take them from you, no interlopers, no strangers ect.

[@darkgalaxy5548]

If you're not liberal when you're young, you have no heart. If you're not conservative when you're old, you have no brain. - Winston Churchill

[@ИльяКонстанта]

I think as women get older they finally start to understand the way the world really works instead of the way they want it to work. But not all, they’re are still plenty of older age ignorant women as well on the left.

[@LS-xs7sg]

It’s mostly evolutionary. If you think about the hunter gatherer environment women didn’t build status in the same competitive way men did. They built it by being desirable and showing compassion / motherly traits to the groups children. We now live in a society where men and women often compete for the same job and women are encouraged not to have children. This often means their motherly instincts are wasted on “victim groups”

[@ktcooki276]

Oooh...interesting idea. Thanks for sharing.😊

[@biancabeavis7198]

And I will add to that, that some males then mimic (even if they are only pretending to mimic) these behaviours to win female approval and increase their mating chances. And this then results in similar minded men competing with other similar minded men on this basis. The more woke - the more they get approval and favour from women, and the more they gang up and double down on the true masculine traits - which are probably strength, physical protection and resource providing, which they encourage women to have so they don't need men with those traits.

[@markwillis2800]

We need young working class women on the right.

[@brianmeen2158]

Yes so we need to discourage certain spaces on the right from bashing women all the time. It’s very counter productive for any movement if there’s a big split between the sexes

[@LJMayhew]

​@@brianmeen2158What right spaces are bashing women? Give me some examples as I've not seen it.

[@apebass2215]

​@@LJMayhew comments under Lotus Eater videos have a habit of devolving into blaming women for all of society's problems. Many men online also can't separate US divorce law and family courts from the situation in the UK.

[@jurassicthunder]

​@@LJMayhewbro thinks keeping women accountable is bashing.

[@FruitForBreakfast]

​@@LJMayhew😂 lotus eaters... Sargon's audience blames women/feminism as a 'go to', many youtube male 'creators'.

[@thadtuiol1717]

Answer: MSM + UNIVERSITIES

[@SuperBartles]

I think the indoctrination starts to happen at school-level. Both AT school and in the nonsense content they imbibe on a daily basis; much of the latter is tiktok, but some it comes from their parents, and from the constant messaging on TV. Back in the day, I do remember that for me it was at uni that the very angry, resentful feminists started to appear, though, who would talk about “men” in tones of disgust

[@notorioushsg1]

Without pitting gender against gender in a conversation I had with a work friend the other day about the change in our younger generation. (I’m 50) There was a time 20yr olds would get together to discuss politics and debate topics in a civilised manner. The intent was to get to the truth. (Not their truth btw) Now we have people getting online spurred on by sensationalised media with hyper emotional responses that are devoid of logic and filled with hate. Theres mostly no real progress towards understanding each others positions to potentially reshape your own In relation to this discussion I am suggesting both sexes are being influenced by social media in the west. Generally we are seeing the western society’s dominated by the left in government and media. This is swaying them heavily to the left.

[@brianmeen2158]

The gender war online is very discouraging. So many discussions and content I see online just shocks me as it’s toxic

[@notorioushsg1]

@@brianmeen2158 it is.... you know whats refreshing though... the people in these comments. I've personally had mental health issues relating to digesting so much negativity that you speak of. I'm trying to look at my internet usage as follows. During the day if I've got time, 'consume' some social media. At night 'create', so play the guitar, learn something or educate yourself. But specifically avoid getting yourself up to speed about how the world is out of control. It's helping me.

[@jurassicthunder]

😂

[@Unwise-]

​@notorioushsg1 I remember that range of political beliefs discussing and arguing with no hard feelings and agreeing to do it again the next night. Attending certain parties in college in the "old days" (I'm about your age), you'd see John, the Anarchist, Marjie was a socialist, Steve was into this Anarcho-Capitalist thing that he always loved to explain, then there was always a Lisa, she wasn't attached to an ideology but she'd ask the tough questions. Foreign students from Europe were often the most conservative, and an American roomie I had never theorized what other countries ought to do, but he was an 80s Republican. We all got along. For my part, I was discovering Libertarianism but I'm no economics expert. I'm not sure why Libertarianism gets a bad rap from younger, modern conservatives. I've settled on a non-proscriptive (little L) "libertarianism", not full ancap. I can only say that free markets operating in a population exchanging their labor in it while looking out for their own rational self-interest, creates prosperity for the largest number of people. My vision of Libertarian isn't a specific ideology, so I'm not sure the harm it can cause a society. Sure, there can be some top-down limits on the markets. But it's a dial, not a switch. Dial down the freedom of the markets and it may result in less prosperity, but there may be good reasons on a case -by-case basis. Unfortunately, I don't trust politicians to have my interests if they're in control of the dial.

[@Naren25]

People are more extreme because the world and economy isn't working for them like it did for you. The capitalist system is failing, and will need to be replaced in the lifetime of the young.

[@DM-eo6zw]

Because they want to be taken care of by big government.

[@OrwellsHousecat]

✅ Because Daddy Gov-guv has the biggest stick to beat people with and treats us like a sugar baby

[@ClaireGreen-wd2gm]

Im a woman and I can tell you things I agree with and disagree with on both sides. Reason is somewhere in the shades of grey and most people on either side dont want to admit that.

[@thadtuiol1717]

Yes, but you cannot deny that the Overton window has shifted far to the liberal-left over the last 20 years in Western countries, to an insane decree. Opinions/values that were MAINSTREAM 20 years ago are now equated with "Far Right"

[@MrJohnL21]

Most women intuitively understand that they'll have to be economically and socially dependent at some points(s) to survive fulfilling their reproductive function. Men won't have that option but are programmed feel they have to be 'economically productive' to justify their existence. 'Left wing' ideology depends on promoting social/economic dependence (usually from a desire for social control, not altruism); 'right wing' ideology implies a level of social/economic INdependence otherwise the wealth-generators won't be motivated to generate society's wealth for long; which might explain why women on average would be programmed to be 'left wing' at least as long as they're biologically active, whilst the average male would tend to be 'right wing'. Logical?

[@tomwright9904]

"reproductive function" eh. I'm not sure that's how most people think about having children. Do people work think about their "labour function for the economy". You might like to check out the theory of basic human values. I think it adds a layer of empiricism to questions about gender differences in terms of value.

[@bertrandrussell894]

Id say its because its the most readily available off-the-shelf narrative that permits them to be sanctimonious, hectoring and to be thought of as virtuous. Most importantly, it doesnt require thought, any weighing of moral issue in an serious way, and they get to reputationally destroy someone they dont like.

[@advocate1563]

Compassionate neuroticism (proven in big 5 personality tests)...

[@bobbyunavailable]

Vocal fry + rising inflection + frequent use of ‘like’ as a voiced filler makes this a tougher watch than normal. Sorry to be unkind!

[@pigknickers2975]

I won't listen to any vocal fry and she has a really bad case.

[@sarahhale-pearson533]

I don’t know, but it’s f- ing embarrassing. Conformity?

[@rebekahshantz569]

I noticed a new movie out called Am I Racist? with Matt Walsh. It looks like a comedy that covers some of these issues.

[@notorioushsg1]

Where is it? On their platform only?

[@exebit9366]

This is so true. I am 52 and I spent most of my younger years trying to sleep with as many women and girls as possible, partying, drinking and meeting as many new people as possible , etc. i am lucky as I had great loving parents so I never ended up with addiction problems unlike many friends. I don’t have any regrets except for the guilt of ghosting my conquests… as an older man I now reflect I could have found true happiness with some of them… but I moved on mostly to impress my friends and to get over my some of my inferiorities I grew up on the left, of course. .

[@GUISNIP]

Same here. I’m 58 and have always been “good with women”, which I was led to believe meant scoring a high body count. I was a left winger in the arts sector. The last few years I’ve made a complete 180, in political views, behaviour towards women and employment. Only wish I’d had made this change as a younger man.

[@Christoph1888]

Woman in general are more left wing. When your young you tend to be more left-wing. So young women are unsurprisingly the most left-wing demographic

[@thadtuiol1717]

Word. You can even see it goes way back in history, in the novels of Jane Austen and the Bronte sisters, Dickens, etc.

[@ghfudrs93uuu]

I don't think you understand. This phenomenon is literally 8 years old. Men have been consistently more leftwing than women and even bigger supporters of feminism. The only thing women have been consistently more than men is reactionary. Which is perfectly consistent with the rise in reactionarism and purity testing in the left in these last years.

[@OrwellsHousecat]

More like children?

[@pistonburner6448]

Women depend on providers.

[@apebass2215]

Historically that hasn't been the case in the UK if you look at voting statistics. Women used to be more likely to vote for conservative parties and policies than men until relatively recently.

[@ghfudrs93uuu]

It's simple. The right and traditionalist institutions lost of their power to regulate society. It's authority, specially towards men. Men have been fleeing churches in mass for the last 50 years or so. Men fled these institution for a myriad of reasons, but in short because they did not want to be controlled. That while liberal and leftist institutions gained this terrain. Tho, these institutions were much more 'libertarian' attitude until a few years ago. This changed when the purity testing started to become the norm. This is exactly the around when women started flooding these spaces. Around 2013 we have the article by Mark FIsher "exiting the vampire castle" about what at the time was just a spec of what one day would become. In the end, these women behave exactly the same way as what we called "jesus' police" when I was young. These women who thought themselves in the right to regulate everyone else's inner lives. They were extremely reactionary, obsessed with social control, absolutely nasty specially to other women who did not follow their rules. Now they are just serving the same principles, just by different names.

[@OrwellsHousecat]

🎯

[@sprogg11]

They are more vulnerable to emotional manipulation from the 'education' system.

[@RicktheRecorder]

Interesting, but one can't help wondering if it is possible for young American women to converse without padding their observations incessantly with 'like' and 'you know'.

[@guineapigfarmer6064]

My girlfriend is left leaning and clueless about the state of the world. If i expected to be in a relationship with a senible women Id most lightly be single. I let her have her own beliefs. While getting on with my own life.

[@JSL177]

Better off being single surely?

[@guineapigfarmer6064]

@@JSL177 It depends on what one wants and gets out of a relationship. I'm not looking for my girlfriend to represent me in Parliament....

[@OrwellsHousecat]

She wears your trousers

[@apebass2215]

Sad that you feel unable to communicate honestly with someone you're in a relationship with. You should be able to question her beliefs. Would you want her to instill only her political values in any children you may have?

[@km4089]

Walk away, she'll make your life extremely miserable long term.

[@Daimo83]

Question starts at 18:30

[@Xenophon1]

Why are so Many Women Left Wing? Emotional reasoning.

[@benjamin1720]

Because more women than men are sheep, frankly

[@homemaintenance1234]

They do not all reason at all. Most freeloaders. I know.

[@ebikescrapper3925]

Women are more emotional, men are more logical.

[@saladinbob]

Far too simple a way of looking at it because if that were merely the case all men would be conservative, all women would be progressive and this is not the case. It's part of the problem insofar as the woke ideology targets emotion over logic but it is not the entire reason.

[@lenar.4735]

Women are more 'emotional', yet 90% of all m*rders are committed by men 🤔🤔🤔

[@ComicGladiator]

@@saladinbob It's called generalities, because GENERALLY it's true.

[@briskettacos]

Men have less empathy. That makes them more self-interested, which is not the same as "logical. " Look which sex commits the majority of rapes, murders, war crimes, assaults, ect. These were not the result of logic, but largely borne of rage and hatred. Secondly, men have successfully convinced themselves that anger isn't an emotion. When some men make an angry decision, they will look for a post-hoc explanation as to why they did it, not considering that it was emotion driving them.

[@cavaleirosemlicenca3894]

That's a dumb generalization, men are super emotional when it comes to attractive women 🤣🤣

[@GreenWhitePurple]

Interesting. Reading the comments, everyone seems to have a different idea about why. Personally I think it’s partly to fill a vacuum. Earlier female goals like raising a family are much harder to achieve due to changing values, hook up culture, huge economic challenges etc. Women who might have instead focussed on feminism and careers are now in a very different environment from 30 or 40 years ago, since so much has been achieved. Woke, and therefore the left, seems to provide the ideal “underdogs” to champion, a focus, a sense of purpose and an outlet for the nurturing/protective instinct. All that goes together with the massive media and tech bias towards the left, which will also draw in women who do have families and are too busy to find an alternative view.

[@jamesbryant8133]

Because the most eager and cruel bullies are often bulied themselves. Women think they have been bullied for decades

[@djlow2398]

Because from early on they acted in the dispersal rights over what men went out and hunted, and nowadays they have new sacred people to mother, instead of their own.

[@ancientfuture9690]

Because you can conveniently claim (powerless) victimhood whilst simultaneously wielding the social power of victimhood under the current ‘Oppressor/Oppressed’ narrative we find ourselves in.

[@ljg7777]

From a psychological perspective, studies suggest that women, on average, score higher on empathy and social cognition tests, which may lead them to focus more on nurturing and understanding over potential aggression and threat assessment. This tendency doesn't imply an inability to recognize risks, but perhaps a different approach to handling them. Women may prioritize inclusive and compassionate solutions, which could lead to more lenient policies on issues such as immigration. Threats within an assessment of a sociological perspective may actually negate a potential threat within a societal perspective.

[@louisemarshall9301]

Because they're "young". Wait until they've experienced what's in store for them as they get older 😨

[@serban2139]

When it's too late unfortunately 😞

[@Bob-t8l]

Cats, wine and antidepressants

[@annal2740]

@@Bob-t8l Sorry to hear that happened to you, Bob

[@louisemarshall9301]

@@Bob-t8l don't spoil the surprise

[@annatardlordofderps9181]

Millennial and Gen-X women have both aged and developed their life as much as they can. Their politics have arguably only gotten more radically left.

[@alisin1dland68]

Woman generally think emotionally, whereas men cut out the emotions & think with their head not their heart. Im a woman & recently did this with a stray cat , i was taken in by its cute face & totally disregarded the impact on my cat . Fortunately my sons brought me back to reality & put a stop to my charity. Men make great leaders .

[@paulwary]

The elephant in the room is feminism. Most comments are talking about supposedly innate differences, but people will gravitate toward what you incentivise. Weve had many decades of treatment more favourable to girls and women, and less favourable boys and men. Schools and universities, law, business, media, economics, sports funding, domestic violence policy and so on. Literally every day I see more stories about how women are disadvantaged wrt men, and yet the reverse is the case in almost every case. Every day, statistics are massaged or ignored to 'prove' what is not the case, or simply invented. Women know that if they vote left, they are voting for an unfair advantage over men, which is apparently what they want. Women have a strong 'own-group' bias - a propensity to look out for women, but men have no such bias.

[@notorioushsg1]

Huh? I just replied to your comment and don't see it. Are my comments being taken down???

[@paulwary]

@@notorioushsg1 Could have been deleted if you used certain words or included a link. YT is also very buggy it seems, so it could be that. Just try again to see.

[@notorioushsg1]

@@paulwary Oh man... it's was a carefully contructed word salad that you would have loved. I'm too weary to go through that again. Maybe this is YT's angle I was just agreeing with your thoughts in general.

[@MannyKnowsYourSecrets]

Men just have to value themselves and be selective, men are slaves to sex thats how women manipulate men. As simple as it is.

[@ghfudrs93uuu]

A strong independent women can do everything a man can. She just needs 4x the support.

[@jayjaydubful]

Her comment about organic food was really thick. There are many logical reasons why organic food production is better nutrition, better for the soil, better for animal welfare, better for biodiversiry

[@ericp0012]

Mainstream progressives view sex and gender as social constructs. Whereas mainstream conservatives view race and ethnicity as social constructs.

[@themsmloveswar3985]

Rudyard Lynch - get him on your channel.

[@user-ro3pl6wb9g]

We raised our kids as equal individuals. But it doesn’t mean not recognising their biological differences. We take care of each other. Not because of religion but because we value human. We raised our kids with our values. It’s very challenging because we might be the only family around us. It’s about being accountable to each other and to our society. We are mixed race family with Christian/ humanist values. Previous generation Christianity (practicing) is humanist. At least that is what I experienced from Christians around me. We are left conservatives. If society does not take care of each other will fall.

[@TheNightBadger]

Said 'like' a little bit too much, but a decent interview...

[@ginobiondi2]

IGNORANCE!

[@FruitForBreakfast]

Yes! And similarly why young men are such 'followers' too. I doubt either could define left or right 😂😂 old concepts anyway.

[@Jules-Is-a-Guy]

"Anti-consumerism," was basically the point of the entire 1990's culture. (NOT the same thing as Anti-capitalist).

[@marymochrie3471]

The main issue is economic. Many young people do not earn enough now/have stable, permanent, well paid jobs that enable them to buy a home/have children as both things are much more expensive than was the case in the past. That is Capitalism for you !

[@adrianarchie]

lol capitalism is long gone replaced by socialism

[@terrorists-are-among-us]

The dream died decades ago. We imported too many people, no chance for most these days.

[@FruitForBreakfast]

And failed education system and general hypocrisy.

[@homemaintenance1234]

True, but women still expect men to provide.

[@terrorists-are-among-us]

@@homemaintenance1234 guys still expect sex 😂

[@jemmajames6719]

Another sensible young lady, so good and encouraging to see.

[@beepbeepimmadragon8758]

I disagree with much of Project 2025. The answer to antifreedom ideology like woke isn't another antifreedom ideology but profreedom. The free market is the source of the West's freedom and prosperity but also needs some controls to discourage companies from favoring migrants and outsourcing over its own people. All politics are economics but national loyalty should still be encouraged. Guys will see how progressive the women are and swipe left. People want to date those who don't see their gender as an enemy. Someone can be rejected for being cynical, jaded, ace or bigoted against one of their traits or simply not attracted to them and it's okay to have standards. If a man has options he is not going to settle for someone who hates his gender or has destructive ideologies like Marxism. Many women look way up to date yet if a man dates lower it is because he can get away with more. Otherwise men prefer someone close to them socially since they have more in common. If she wants a transactional relationship she shouldn't be upset when he also sees the relationship as transactional. Such high value men also want women who add value to the relationship like a wife who runs the family business with him. No one wants to be taken for granted or others to feel entitled. Not just feminism but any Marxist trojan horse so unironically saying heteronormative or comphet or other activist terms is another red flag. I'm not against LGBTQ+ rights I'm against Marxist trojan horses and harmful delusions. The left has many hypocritical double standards and they say things where if genders were reversed they'd scream misogyny. Yet misandry is bigotry too but they enforce hypocritical double standards. Societies need to be decentralize power to encourage far more family businesses. If their parents and grandparents are their bosses then they were mentored from birth and have a stake in their work

[@johnwatts8346]

coz its their nature.

[@matthewlynch903]

Because they have uncontrolled emotions.

[@homemaintenance1234]

True. Men and women are very different. Women consume, which is why they like shopping and new things. They are perfect to manipulate in our economy and spend most of the money in a household,p. I have learnt all this the hard way. I would never marry again, and if I had enough money I would divorce my wife and live alone. As a young man I never understood how destructive women could be. I know now.

[@shelleyphilcox4743]

@matthewlynch903 Explain the differences in the prison population and crimes committed by men v women and come back to me on how you came to the conclusion that its women that have uncontrolled emotions.

[@Jules-Is-a-Guy]

Good job. I don't always 'drink' this show, but when I do, I prefer neo-trad, urban commune, high-level analytic, 'gender critical' polysci.

[@blackwarb]

2 very handsome intelligent guys having a great discussion with a cool girl.

[@landoremick7422]

I find young women commentators incredible. Just have blokes on the show, guys.

[@jellybiscuit]

Because they are largely incapable of thinking beyond so-called good intentions.

[@OrwellsHousecat]

Because there's more power in doing so, and wmn do love power over & above everything else (fertility, society, family, community, motherhood, men etc etc)

[@princessmay9921]

Isn't "woke" a new form do-gooder, piousness which has always been the province of "nice" middle class women? (A disappointed old-style feminist.)

[@Redrobinjohn]

Her voice at the beginning.of this is horrible! Interesting subject but no

[@OrwellsHousecat]

Marry Her! 😹😹

[@timwhittome9428]

Brilliant commentary as always Harrison and Connor and what a charming guest with refreshing views that give us hope. Thank you.

[@robynmulder5948]

Christian version of the Taliban.

[@shelleyphilcox4743]

Very bad information there regarding male fertility and age. Chaps, your sperm count takes a big dive as you get older, as does the morphology and motility. The quality of the DNA in the sperm head also deteriorates in quality. That reduces conception rate as well, and sadly results in higher risk of birth defects and likelihood of miscarriage, the consequences of which will be a shared and equal sadness but your partner will suffer the full physical trauma of miscarriage alone. So, keep that all in mind, its wholly incorrect to imagine your fertility stays strong and without increased risk as you age.

[@TARBUNNY2013]

Stupidity?😮

[@harveyyoung3423]

Part A: I will have a proper go into this a bit later. Connor was great on GBNews again. But just on the title and before watching: it makes it look too consequential. ie that the Male-Female conflict is just a tactical situational affordance that is just locally constructed as useful now in a certain context a certain political moment for an advance towards some other goal. That is, as if 1. it could have been cat's verses dog's if that had been a major cultural thing in the moment; and 2. it implies that there is some higher order criteria or standard they are aiming at, in which men verses women is either: a) a type under a more general kind, or b) a lower more fine grained tactical move towards some higher vision; or c) a lower order rule under some higher order principle. there are of course many other ways of presenting this. For example on The Laura K show this morning (22 09 24) instead of interviewing Keir Starmer PM the Labour party must have decided to put Angela Rayner MP in the warm seat. I mean is that indicative of a tactical decision in mere possibility, or evidence of a strategic direction towards a potential of a radical feminist revolutionary dictatorship. I mean it might just be that Keir Starmer is very busy today, or that Angela Rayner twisted his arm because she wanted to enjoy a few rare minutes away from the Labour Conference. Look I wouldn't blame her, i went there to Liverpool last year and it was pretty horrendous, with the grim faces all around and the chaotic disorganisation of all the speaking events. I spent most of the time going to the main building asking where and when the events had been moved to. There was no relation, that I could fathom, between the massive lists of speaking events in the glossy brochure and the reality in the streets and offices of Liverpool. that's kind of indicative in itself. Look spare a little kindness, show some magnanimity for the delegates, its not how i would want to spend a Sunday, and recon it will be even worse this year. I love Liverpool, and I didn't even want to spoil my first visit to the Beatles museum later, so i just got the hell outa there.

[@harveyyoung3423]

Part 2: OK so strategically we are still well within the “believe and trust all women” world, or under the primary maxim of use the women to do all the difficult stuff. I mean we are still in the “for the ethnic minorities world” too, and even “all for the children” moment too. So maybe they might find it affording next year to have some kid in the Laura K warm seat. I mean who would give them a tough time right? We might express this though a difficult distinction between: Social Justice as a universal aim for all humanity in which, because an economic data schema can show women as less wealthy than men generally, and having generally lower hierarchical status, than men then Justice demands that the male-female inequality schema is made decidably prior. It does make for easy policy project focus, such as a focus on child care, domestic violence and prior identity based equality targets. One thing is whenever I see a female labour MP I just expect they will be talking about female issues and inequality correctives. And justify this in terms of representing women or even as if they are legal prosecutorial agents obligated to make only the best case for women, and so men then are the legal opponents in a court kind of architecture. Much journalism these days just does a listening to the advocate along with their female “client” on the sofa. There is no defence person in this architecture, the journalist is not in the role an opposing male defender, they are like a psychotherapist listening to the prosecution with no opposed defence and we are meant to judge this. What a monstrous mixture of selected and partial architectures and incongruent logics with the look of asymmetry buried under opacity.

[@harveyyoung3423]

Part 3: So maybe the question is will the female adversarial prosecutor model and covert metaphor remain as a potential towards permanent actuality of women’s equality actuality, or will it be just a regulatory equilibrium process and then men will be the prosecutors later, maybe when the women excesses push the men into economic subjection. That is, will it be under a reflective equilibrium as in post Rawlsian liberal feminism or will jouisance just keep on going without limit or opposed prosecution, opposing defence. These problems in a liberal feminist context manifest as symptoms of contradiction and hypocrisy people endless point out, somewhat muted against the endless anti-male stories, journalism and documentaries and movies. You know if there is no story in the news today they dig one up from the past or one from some far away country that really is pretty bad for women. Indeed there it is, the equality schema of women and men is not just under the general scope of this country, but the universal scope of the whole world…that is jouisance by space not just time. But there is also as well as liberal feminism, Marxist Feminism and that is different. For they see the gender difference as prior, ontologically, to equality as between persons in general or universal. The revolution, for Marxist Feminists or radical feminists, is to turn the male female anthropology on its head. That is opposite to patriarchy is matriarchy. That is the aim the real destiny or potential actuality. This appears in both liberal orientated feminists like Virginia Held and phenomenological existential feminists like Luce Irigary. The later develop this form Heidegger’s ontological difference, which was the inspiration for people like Derrida, the geopolitics of post Soviet Russia in Duggan and the intellectual inspiration for the Iranian Revolution. Of course the later ontic ontological shifts are not in the same direction as radical feminism indeed they point in the completely opposite direction. Meanwhile the Irainian male dominated politics is a useful emergency reference for the radical feminists and the radical feminists are a useful emergency reference for the Iranian political theological revolution. Down by the sea and sands of Liverpool, what could possibly go wrong?

[@harveyyoung3423]

Part B1: Gosh I thought the above would have been deleted by now. There is hope after all. So for example when i said above "we are still in the moment of all for the children" surly everyone would agree with that. Who wouldn't? Are children not the sacred for everyone? Surly any culture that did not hold that view would be beyond common norms or universal norms. It seems impossible to even argue against some one who did not hold to this principle? Why? because it would seem evidence not just of a some particular normative position, but a position that would not respond to any moral argument, a position unresponsive to any moral or ethical reasons at all. I mean: to what would you appeal to if they don't acknowledge this as universal and absolute. So difficult to address, it seems that we wouldn't easily find a way in. I means what kind of person would you be addressing. i mean if they didn't hold this view of the sacred, you would fear for your life in even getting in the same room with them. We might be forced to say they must be mentally ill or evil, someone outside of any possible human society as a form of life in the sacred as opposed to a form of death in sacrifice of the innocent and most vulnerable. In the tradition of negative theology even the principle "absolute care for the children" cannot really be a principal all since its negation moves beyond all reason so its affirmation must be beyond reason. like down the pub once a long long time ago I was discussing some stuff and the guy suddenly said "If anyone hurt my kids I'd ....". We might say its just understood, it doesn't even need saying, or it cannot really be said as proposition at all. It's rather as Wittgenstein said hinge around which all other propositions turn or move. it cannot itself turn and move.

[@harveyyoung3423]

Part B2: But of course if we place this in the context of utilitarianism or consequentialism it now does not seem to be possible for it to be an absolute unconditional. For here consequentialism or even following greatest happiness for greatest number maxim, now it seems we can rationally justify the sacrifice of a child to save many other people or to save two other children e.g. a maxim of: minimum pain for minimum number of people. Are these maxims the same or in some way necessarily connected like a tautology two sides of the same coin. Well we might appeal to Rights as absolute and put Rights of the child as the highest absolute. But even then, in practice a decision has to be made, choices. Someone has to be sacrificed and then utilitarianism justifies it, often hidden behind complex laws and calculations of outcomes. So we do have to acknowledge what is really being done. You may opt to join a political party that does maintain it as absolute, but then you and they have to hope never to get real power, because something will have to give. It’s ok then to have your cake and eat it too, as long as you can enjoy your principle at no apparent personal cost. Stand outside, resign, and protest: “not in my name”.

[@harveyyoung3423]

Part B3: But the situation is worse than that I fear, because political actors in particular can use this as a tool as a law or calculation to get what they want. They might even say they are protecting their children. This then makes the distinction an absolute friend enemy one between now two opposed absolutes. It seems the use of this strange expressed principle eliminates all objections and allows all things. So I asked a proper grown up feminist activist from back in the day about the Suffragette movement, in particular Cristobel Pankhurst’s and her Women’s group activities in 1914- of using an army of very young girls to hand out white feathers to men who were not in uniform had not volunteered to be sent to France. Only amateur student type feminists don’t know about this, so she couldn’t plead ignorance. I thought she might have excuses like Cristobel had no idea what that war would turn out to be like. Or that she was a little naive young women used by men in the war office. But to my surprise she told me Cristobel and the others knew what that war would be like, and like no other, before most of the men had any idea. They had understood and written about what the new military technologies were going to do. The women went on even further and told me they knew that this war would kill millions of men, and also force the government to have them prove themselves as factory workers and they would then have good proof for their arguments against the arguments against the franchise expansion to all women. The tactic was aimed specifically to reject the common arguments against women in public life. Laser focused as they say.

[@S.L.T.P.E.]

Comment

[@OrwellsHousecat]

Reply

[@pigknickers2975]

Now that's what I call Vocal Fry volume 3. Can't listen.

[@AfricanSouthernCross]

When young females grow up in a two parent household they always have their father to lean on so when they leave the house to start on their own the fatherly figure is somewhat gone and they look for a man to lean on (not in a negative way necessarily) and if that’s not available the government becomes something to lean on.

[@beepbeepimmadragon8758]

That's the other thing about feminism. People encouraged to see their own family as the "enemy." Destructive ideologies pit people against each other and strive to weaken families. Yet fathers, uncles, brothers, and others care far more about them than some ivory tower harpy with a political agenda and ax to grind. Government already oversteps too much in too many ways. Governments should keep a nation secure and stable not coddle people. Government shouldn't do a family and community's job. A nation should itself be like a family but that means social harmony and national loyalty not replacing family. Why can't she stay with her parents in that scenario? Government spending also has a ripple effect leading to debt and inflation

[@richardmartyn7865]

No way women are more empathetic than men

[@ghfudrs93uuu]

A woman will cry with you and tell everyone about how she *feels* about your perils, and make the effort to understand what you are feeling A man will try to help you. Which you is true empathy?

[@OrwellsHousecat]

🎯 Yes, but the right is gynocentric so we have to bow down to wmn

[@apebass2215]

I suggest you read some of the many psychology studies undertaken over decades that explore the differences between male and female empathy.

[@OrwellsHousecat]

@@apebass2215 Dr Nicola Graham-Kavan (fem Aggression). Dr Michelle Elliot (fem sax abhuse of children). Dr Murray Strauss (fem Perpetrators of DV). Dr Deborah Powney (Wmn's coercive control of men). How about those, eh?

[@FruitForBreakfast]

I see a difference in instinctual caution, the empathy thing is a distraction and more 'expected external behaviour' than innate 'empathy'. Not a genuine sex difference.

[@RossKempOnYourMum01]

They tend to lack physical strength, aggression, discomfort tolerance or resourcefulness - in a way, women are actually MORE evolved and more civilised. As such, group dynamics, safety in the herd and using things like cancel culture as a proxy for physical conflict are comforting to them.

[@James-o2u9x]

More evolved? Until it comes to survival on an island. Then they argue and cry 😅

[@RossKempOnYourMum01]

@@James-o2u9x I came to the conclusion when once working in a banker's house. No heterosexual man enters that building and says "what a beautifully appointed kitchen" - the finery, the wealth, the man-hours bought were all to impress the fairer sex. Sexual signalling. Without women, would such things even exist? They are a bullwark against EXCESSIVE male aggression and hyperactivity. Look at homophobia - women will not tolerate a guy who is homophobic now in 2024, and as a result it has largely disappeared. Our cousins the neanderthals had far higher hormone levels than we do, they had no use for a violinist or a novelist. They were more "male" than us but in the end their legacy is just a bunch of broken bones, civilisation never happened for them.

[@RossKempOnYourMum01]

@@James-o2u9x I came to the conclusion when once working in a banker's house. No heterosexual man enters that building and says "what a beautifully appointed kitchen" - the finery, the wealth, the man-hours bought were all to impress the fairer sex. Sexual signalling. Without women, would such things even exist? They are a bullwark against EXCESSIVE male aggression and hyperactivity. Look at homophobia - women will not tolerate a guy who is homophobic now in 2024, and as a result it has largely disappeared. Our cousins the neanderthals had far higher testosterone exposure levels than we do, they had no use for a violinist or a novelist. They were more "male" than us but in the end their legacy is just a bunch of broken bones, civilisation never happened for them.

[@RossKempOnYourMum01]

@@James-o2u9x I came to the conclusion when once working on the renovation of a city banker's house. No heterosexual man enters that building and says "what a beautifully appointed kitchen" - the finery, the wealth, the man-hours bought were all to impress the fairer sex. Sexual signalling. Without women, would such things even exist? They are a bullwark against EXCESSIVE male aggression and hyperactivity. Look at homophobia - women will not tolerate a guy who is homophobic now in 2024, and as a result it has largely disappeared. Our cousins the neanderthals had far higher testosterone exposure levels than we do, they had no use for a violinist or a novelist. They were more "male" than us but in the end their legacy is just a bunch of broken bones, civilisation never happened for them.

[@RossKempOnYourMum01]

@@James-o2u9x I came to the conclusion when once working in a banker's house. No hetero man enters and remarks "what a beautifully appointed kitchen". The finery, the wealth, the man-hours bought were all to impress the fairer sex. Sexual signalling. Without women, would such things even exist? They are a bullwark against EXCESSIVE male aggression and hyperactivity. Look at h*mophobia - women will not tolerate a guy who is h*mophobic now in 2024, and as a result it has largely disappeared. Our cousins the neanderthals had far higher testosterone exposure levels than we do, they had no use for a violinist or a novelist. They were more "male" than us but in the end their legacy is just a bunch of broken bones, civilisation never happened for them - no wine, no music, no banks, no banker's kitchens.

[@gowgowgowgow7215]

There definitely are quite a lot right wing women in Japan! Look at Sanae Takaichi, a japanese prime minister to be😆!

[@colinread1159]

👏👏👏

[@billfarrelly4375]

Sheep

[@scottbilger9294]

You have it backward. The question is, Why Do Young Women Have So Much Influence on the Left?

[@grannyannie2948]

Well said.

[@OrwellsHousecat]

Sadism, FemiNarcissism, Machiavellianism and Psychopathy.

[@pistonburner6448]

They don't have much influence on the left. They're just another tool in the left's toolbox. Useful [I can't write that word on YT].

[@mrror8933]

Typical American: the amswer to woke, "we all live in a Catholic household, no boys, we all go to the same church. I don't know if you're already that advanced in England". Had to stop after 12 minutes.

[@grannyannie2948]

Why?

[@mrror8933]

@@grannyannie2948 one extreme to the other, reactionary, so fking predictable.

[@grannyannie2948]

@@mrror8933 I'm not British or American, but Australian. I do see this happening though, not among the zoomers of her generation but certainly among the alpas. They are quite religious for example. They are very certain of their sex and never stray from their sexes stereotypes. Although they are only 12 or 13 they take marriage seriously and many firmly intend to marry each other when they finish school, they do not approve of sex outside of marriage, so they don't want to wait long to marry. I'm quite pleased to know these are the children who will inherit the future and will vote in the election after next. I don't think it's an excess, just a return to where we all were in 1970.

[@grannyannie2948]

@@mrror8933 PS towards the end she did explain simply why more and more young women of both sides of politics are rejecting the sexual revolution and oral contraceptives. This is a cultural fact recognised in many English speaking countries.

[@peterwillson1355]

​@@grannyannie2948Oral sex is a form of oral contraception. Just saying.

[@alexbetts8291]

Is the whole vid made with this croacking woman

[@VivaVictory]

I think a lot of these young women don't appreciate the touchy feely approach that European men have been steered toward, and want manly men who will domineer. It comes down to genetics in the end.

[@stuartofblyth]

No wonder it was a bad move giving them the vote.

[@Jen-lg4hp]

Don't worry, the muslim imports won't let women vote by 2050.

[@OrwellsHousecat]

😸

[@homemaintenance1234]

Correct, the vote for women has over time eroded the West.

[@LoneWulf278]

From my observation, they’re not really left-wing as in communist or Marxist Leninist, etc. That space is very male. They’re just liberal. Women seem way more likely to have friends in the lgbt community or along different racial groups. They’re also more sensitive to the feelings and needs of other people, especially those that they perceive to be vulnerable. In the absence of children or a spouse, “marginalized groups become a focus of protection and affection. Also, in the US, conservative politicians are pretty unhinged and hypocritical. So, it’s not that complicated to understand. 😂

[@william6223]

Oh, and they like all the privileges and governmental benefits. Thbb. And government serve as a trump against male abuse of power or male failings, according to women and experts.

[@LoneWulf278]

@@william6223 Are you being sarcastic? I can’t really tell. But yeah. Usually, single mothers will be more dependent on government assistance. So, yes. They need democrat/left wing governments more than securely married women since they have husbands with decent income and health insurance to rely on.

[@notorioushsg1]

I’d also say polarising figures like Donald Trump don’t help the right win over the left.. people that could be swayed.

[@LoneWulf278]

@@notorioushsg1 I agree. Figures like Marjorie Taylor Greene and Laura Loomer are putting the final nails in the coffin in terms of image. But I guess they’re just gonna double down. 🤷‍♂️

[@AwakenedAvocado]

They're just more agreeable it's not a good thing it becomes passive aggressive

[@globalnomad1221]

Welfare gynocentric courts and big daddy police state

[@royevetts4900]

women are from venus and men from mars.....emotions run high in women driven by empathy. It is a problem where politics is concerned....because emotionally unpredictable depending on the time of month. The worst thing that happened to the family unit and politics was the female vote.

[@grannyannie2948]

It's not just that though. it's who they choose to empathize for. For example abortion, they could empathize with the fetus instead of the mother. Or immigration they could empathize with the host country's people instead of the immigrant.

[@richardmalcolm1457]

Marriage and fertility have reached record lows among Gen Z, relative to previous generations at the same point. It's impossible to think this is not related to the huge shift left among women -- especially college-educated women. You can see it in the polling when married voters are broken out in the crosstabs.

[@Beef_Supreeeme]

It's amazing how quickly she started diverting and changing the subject at 20:16.

[@OrwellsHousecat]

😉

[@homemaintenance1234]

She’s a woman, who, as she admits, has been paid for.

[@kiljoy3254]

The fundamental tenet of Progressive Liberalism, that our enemies skilfully exploit for the weakness that it is, is as follows: A woman must never EVER feel bad about having played, or even playing, the Uncommitted Sex Game. Consider, by contrast: A man must never EVER feel bad about having played, or even playing, the Uncommitted Sex Game. It’s preposterous isn’t it? Of course a man should, men are toxic, they should feel bad about everything… it’s barely even up for debate. Now, that may seem absurd; which only highlights how serious the problem is. To further illustrate, to misquote G K Chesterton: ‘When men cease to worship God, they don’t worship nothing, they worship her body, her choice’. David Cameron and Boris Johnson clearly don’t care about being on the wrong side of history; but they most certainly do care about being on the wrong side of ‘her body, her choice’. Hazony calls this the Liberal Construction; he traces it back to John Locke’s Second Treatise Of Government. This was an early political distillation of the transition from a Covenant worldview, where people broadly assume the sovereignty of God, to a secular Social Contract worldview, which assumes individual sovereignty whereby ‘consent’ becomes the ruling ethos. Fast forward to the 1960’s, the advent of the pill, a massive decrease in stigma concerning promiscuity (David Cameron would know about that), the ensuing industrial scale abortion, fatherlessness, the catastrophic breakdown of the traditional family (see Mary Eberstadt) the attendant rise in delinquency, drug addiction, ‘mental illness’ (really, bad conscience; the substitution of the therapeutic state for the church and the concept of sin), crime, suicide, millions of young impressionable minds turning to Identity Politics (Luxury Beleifs/Primal Screams) especially in the indoctrination camps aka ‘Universities’ etc. As hard as the feminists might find this to believe, at a primal level we tend to give women a special status for obvious evolutionary reasons. This is power, and severed from religiosity and nurturing of children, it manifests as idolatry - the idolatry of consent. Consent is like a magic wand, it tends to be egocentric. In other words, what is often referred to as human rights is really epitomised by Russian girlband Pussy Riot - the Pussy ‘Rights’ connotation is no accident. Pussy Rights pervades everything; the hatred toward Putin is primarily because, unlike Stalin, Putin has presided over the dramatic resurgence of the Orthodox Church. Our *Father* who art in heaven, *hallowed* be thy name… [feeling ‘mentally ill’?] thy kingdom come, *THY* will (not ‘her’ will… not Carries, not even Sam’s, will) be done on earth as it is in heaven. This is Putin’s unforgivable sin. The simple fact is, Pussy Rights, which is what the proxy war in Ukraine is really about, radically undermines true Human Rights.

[@annal2740]

Oh yes, the 1950s. When women were stuck at home, mainlining valium and sleeping pills. Halcyon days.

[@BrianMartin-ox2ru]

Did a Man force them to do it?

[@annal2740]

@@BrianMartin-ox2ru Collectively, yes, since men held most positions of power in the fifties.

[@ComicGladiator]

Bored well off women did that, now they become Karens or push dangerous causes. Definitely a demographic that society needs to keep busy, for everyone's sake.

[@briskettacos]

​@BrianMartin-ox2ru actually, YES. Women were running domestic production while men were at war, earning their own money, and no longer forced to ask their father or husband for money (which he might deny), and when the war ended, the men came back. Women who were competent, self-sufficient, independent, and great at their jobs were fired to make room for the men, which left many women with little choice but to again become reliant on men. Social pressure was applied at a top-down level by government and advertisers alike to push women into the kitchen and tight housewife outfits. Now look at the rate of antidepressants consumed by miserable housewives in the 60s. It was so common that the Rolling Stones wrote a hit single about it. Funny how the Greek statue PFP/"Return to Tradition" crowd suffers from this convenient historical blind spot.

[@grannyannie2948]

I was born in the 1960s and almost all the women I knew had been 1950s housewives and none of them were like that. They were productive in their farms and households. Growing vegetables, milking the cow and making butter, sewing the family's clothes, and doing the cooking and cleaning with very few household appliances. They had shared bank accounts with their husbands, and their husbands fully appreciated how hard they worked, they were strong teams determined to provide the best they could for their children. You've been lied to, don't let falsehoods destroy your own future.

[@FruitForBreakfast]

😂😂Well religious bores 😂

[@FruitForBreakfast]

Jimmy Saville was a devout catholic and the church gave him a grand funeral. Religions created and dominated by men!

[@Raymond-d2l7n]

Simple. Abortion rights.

[@OrwellsHousecat]

Because even God himself can't help wmn

[@ИльяКонстанта]

5,000$ personal loan? Was she only in DC for a month? Cause 5,000 gets you nothing in DC these days.

[@exebit9366]

This is so true. I am 52 and I spent most of my younger years trying to sleep with as many women and girls as possible, partying, drinking and meeting as many new people as possible , etc. i am lucky as I had great loving parents so I never ended up with addiction problems unlike many friends. I don’t have any regrets except for the guilt of ghosting my conquests… as an older man I now reflect I could have found true happiness with some of them… but I moved on mostly to impress my friends and to get over my some of my inferiorities I grew up on the left, of course. .