Reactionary Feminism - Mary Harrington | Maiden Mother Matriarch 5

[@MrMurph73]

Two of the most interesting women around at the moment. Thank you for this.

[@jamesmurphy1389]

Do you know all the women around then? 😎

[@bushwacka5187]

@@jamesmurphy1389 I do and OP is right. Those are two of the most interesting women around at the moment.

[@christianwilson9677]

Agreed!!

[@Anonymous-tm7rj]

I'm in bioinformatics. Trust me these conversations need to be engaged in a lot more. We already have the technology to create super soldiers. We already have the ability to choose what kind of children you may want. The clock is ticking. Glad you both brought these topics up it's why I listen to you guys because I see this stuff every day.

[@JenCurtistraining]

This was amazing. Just here to say I'm a bit obsessed with you two at the moment. Binge-listened to both of your books in the past week and it's been a big missing piece of the puzzle for me and made the term "feminism" somewhat relevant for me again! Thank you so much!

[@maliagar]

Same here.

[@sanyopoweraid1]

Same. It is as if they've cleared a tangled pile of debris away and I can start to make sense of things again

[@patrickbarnes9874]

The thing that seems glaringly obvious but that none of these feminists or the people such as this commenter who follow them ever seem to acknowledge in their philosophy and social commentary is that work is necessary. Just because Ms Feminist wants the option of working or not working, doesn't mean it's optional for the work itself to get done or not. If you aren't doing it, someone else is. The reactionary feminists don't care one bit more than the radical feminists do about equality. Do any of them say that as reactionary feminists who oppose the mistakes and excesses of feminism in the 20th century, they care about fathers' rights, about the suicide rate among men, about men earning less than women? Nope. But this commenter is excited that feminism is relevant again. Apparently achieving equal rights between men and women isn't what makes feminism relevant.

[@meghan8020]

Harrington is so bloody intelligent and sharp. Thanks Louise. I’m so so thrilled that you’ve started your own podcast 💪🏼🙏🏼

[@thecommonword6996]

Quite, Mary is good intellectual fun.

[@ValleyoftheRogue]

She is a joke pretending to be a "feminist." She is nothing of the sort. She is merely a Jordan Peterson in drag, the ultimately in stupidity.

[@estelaluciau.v3450]

I was so waiting for this interview!

[@tish3092]

Absolutely riveting and wide ranging discussion. I have written about Martine Rothblatt and Transhumanism myself.Nice to see the class analysis. I also wrote about the mining of our kids bodies for profit as exemplified by the trans-medico industrial complex. As a feminist and sex based rights campaigner with a son (gay) now victim of this new Gay Eugenics I find Mary’s analysis fascinating (and recognisable).

[@BlackRain_]

Ugh. Must be awful to be inside your head with that word-salad.

[@tish3092]

@@BlackRain_ Bless you, there’s a block button. Be my guest

[@BlackRain_]

@@tish3092 I'd rather just tell you, pumpkin.

[@momotyan11]

@@BlackRain_ ah, can baby not deal with long words and complicated concepts?

[@BlackRain_]

@@momotyan11 Are you her -gay- queer son?

[@allancoote1221]

I come from Marxism but went through a similar break with 'the left' that Mary mentions, I feel I stayed the same in principle but it has become the avant-garde of neo-liberal ultra atomised techno utopianism. I hold to the old left but with a good dose of Plato and Aquinas inspired natural law. Fantastic stuff, been really enjoying the podcast!

[@Warstub]

Interesting discussion with a woman in a group around the covid pandemic, but was general enough to have a wider political range, and she said I'm left of centre, and I pointed out that I've always been left of centre, but without even changing any of my views or opinions, I'm now right of centre. It's like the left suddenly went hard left and the centre line moved!

[@マリー-v4p]

Economically left, socially conservative is more and more interesting to me as time goes on. Italian Marxist feminists from the 70’s (I’m no expert) don’t seem wildly at odds with ideas Mary Harrington has

[@BlueBeamProjectionist]

I think if you actually hold to marxist analysis wrt to the evolution of political economy primarily being driven by material conditions, you'd have to be lying to yourself to believe that the revolution is coming or even possible under the current conditions or the trajectory of conditions. The proletarian revolution seemed like the natural progression of things in the industrial era, but Capitalism was able to mutate itself into something that was incompatible with the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. I believe the reason the USSR truly fell was that it was only really viable in an industrial environment and once the global economy was transitioned to a finance and service based capitalist model, they were by definition unable to adapt and began degenerating. The way the global economy is structured now makes Socialism impossible, but also makes the end of capitalism inevitable. We are transitioning towards a rent-seeking economy driven by technology, like a futuristic type of feudalism. Some of the more bizarre reactionary rich tech freaks like Peter Thiel seem to recognize this and embrace it, hoping to be part of the new coming Aristocracy.

[@ValleyoftheRogue]

Mary has no clue what the "left" is because she wasn't around when the "left" was fashionable. What she and Louise are upset about is the fraud of "third wave feminism," which is NOT feminism AT ALL.

[@subehoops9522]

As you spoke about progress being being an illusion it reminded me of CS Lewis’s essay on the “death of a great myth” . The myth being progress where one civilisation naturally thinks they are better than the previous. You also raided the old fashion ideal if Chivalry which C S Lewis also writes about in “Present Concerns on Chivalry “. If you haven’t already read these essays I think you would get something from them.

[@TheRachel0623]

Thank you Louise and Mary for all of your work and thoughtful contributions to this topic! I’ve been following along and have read both of your work and appreciate the poignant perspectives shared, particularly around motherhood. I would love to hear a conversation between you and Abigail Favale- I think there are certainly some shared Catholic concepts here around embodiment, human nature, and it’s ethical implications. Thanks again to both of you intelligent, compelling women!

[@anthonybevilacqua3074]

Excellent conversation. Thank you, Mary & Louise.

[@netizen814]

Hearing you two talk about the SOUL revealed something to me. Thank You :)

[@blondetapperware8289]

Ms. Perry, I highly suggest having Abigail Favale on the show. She's more of a Catholic speaker, but she had "conversion" from mainstream feminism like Harrington and her views now pertain to these topics. She's quite interesting.

[@maliagar]

Thank you for mentioning her. I don't know her but I'll look her up. Any suggestions?

[@jenniferlawrence2701]

Contrary opinion: Left/Progressives are actually very good at memes, it's just that their memes are language rather than images. The Left alters and controls language very effectively. Look at the word "Gender" for example. Some progressive academic will coin a term or phrase (e.g. "Mansplaining") and within a short time it is being used in media all over the world.

[@charlieweaver6322]

Very good point.

[@frankgradus9474]

That's right. E.g., the insidious capture of language by gender identity ideology is done to confuse the masses. A lot of the general population don't know that "trans woman" is not a woman who identifies as trans, or if they do, that this man can just ID's a woman with no meaningful transition at all.

[@MisyeDiVre]

You're bang on bro. Eg. Reproductive health -mostly referring to methods to prevent reproduction or to discard the being, resulting from successful reproduction. Value judgements aside, none are exactly "healthy" in the proper sense.

[@JeffCaplan313]

​@@frankgradus9474 What's a woman?

[@johnisaacfelipe6357]

Thats to be expected, the left has control of the media, it can just will terms into existence.

[@patrickselden5747]

Excellent conversation - thanks! ☝️😎

[@manfrombritain6816]

Mary is honestly my favourite pundit of recent years, she's hilarious but also right on the money as well as ahead of the curve of the other pundits. this is one hell of a crossover

[@agracechase]

Great interview. I feel so invigorated and sane when I listen to you two.

[@TheAcad3mic]

Extremely interesting chat. And thanks to the AI, just discovered Mary Harrington today via Triggernometry, and now not only is there more but I discover that Louise Perry has a podcast! Fantastic. Like it or not, and I don't, but men are increasingly irrelevant in the public sphere and especially white ones that don't happen to be incredibly rich and famous. So it's fantastic to see this humanist, holistic almost spiritual approach be discussed by two of the sharpest women alive today. Subbed, gonna have a butchers at more of Louise's content now. Good times!

[@nottyseel949]

I think it's illusion that anyone besides a very small elite group are demonstrably "relevant". For example, the number of black or women's voices that are in disagreement with narratives about their own lived experience and situation are dominantly ignored if not berated. It's like all of the people are puppets, some strung in seats of prominence and value but none with independent power to affect the story.

[@BeeGirl316]

SO excited for this interview!

[@vieiradelimafilho]

Brilliant stuff. I love these ladies. If feminism is still salvageable and will have a place in a sustainable society it'll be largely due to women like them, Camille Paglia and Christine Hoff-Sommers. Brave on, dears.

[@maliagar]

Excellent conversation. Thank you to both of you for this video and for your recent books. I look forward to coming to MH's book presentation in DC. Quick observation: Going forward, there is an obvious blind spot that needs to be addressed: Men, their bodies, their sensibilities, how the last 60 years have affected them, and their participation in a solution.

[@felipedigre]

Beautiful conversation. I hope we hear more from you both together

[@kaza.3431]

Brilliant conversation, excellent!

[@AnaBrigidaGomez]

The crossover I was waiting for! *grabs popcorn*

[@basswindu6121]

Brilliant conversation!

[@zgobermn6895]

Very interesting conversation!

[@iamlukekelly]

Brilliant as ever. The discussion on conservatism vs reaction, particularly with the anti-capitalist framing, reminds me of this Durrutti quote: "We are not in the least afraid of ruins. We carry a new world here, in our hearts." Spoken in respect of industrial ruins, but even more relevant today in respect of our bioethical ruins.

[@MYOB2023]

I'm so thrilled to see Louise Perry with her own podcast and to have the brilliant Mary Harrington on as a guest!! Many thanks! (Perhaps an interview with author Angela Chen on asexuality and allosexual relationships next?)

[@they365]

You two are awesome. I listened to both your books in the last fortnight. On to Nina Power next. Thank you!

[@ljlibro]

Thanks for an excellent conversation, particularly with the final insights around the sacred integrity of the person and what will or will not replace this framework if it disappears. Two very disparate suggestions for interview subjects: Ruth Goodman, a historian of the domestic with tons of practical insights on women's work in British history and David Bentley Hart, a philosopher and theologian who has thought deeply about the nature of freedom and the interconnectedness of personhood.

[@grannyannie2948]

I'm a huge fan of Ruth, that would be a great conversation.

[@carbonicoyster5907]

Nice to hear an intelligent woman penetrating into the discourse for once. Feminism has become an Orwellian term that has in fact promoted more female suffering for the benefit of Wall Street than any other tool. Well done Mary

[@wyleecoyotee4252]

It hasn't promoted any female suffering but freed women. The only ones suffering are men who can no longer control women to the point of trying to influence them to marry and have children. At least women now don't have to have 10+ children and marry

[@sarahrobertson634]

@madderbadder Modern feminism is super crazy. I favor the more basic model. But instead of being capitalist or communist, I like a separatist approach. We don't try to participate in the civilized world, we disengage with men and go our own way. We can collect sperm when needed, but other than that we keep to ourselves. When male children turn twelve, they go to male society. It's unlikely that men would leave us alone to go out way, unfortunately. They tend to be a bit needy and try to pursue us. Men are quite problematic.

[@sarahrobertson634]

@madderbadder It's just a pipe dream. Trust me, lots of women would love to get away from men, but it's not very feasible. Mother Nature might help us out with that, when civilization collapses. Maybe the men will all kill each other. That would be nice. There's no way for humans to be separatists of their own volition. For one thing, even if women could be talked into separating, the men would never leave us alone. They're pesky little buggers.

[@grannyannie2948]

I rejected feminism as a child. It was not only big business that benifited. It was government. Families used to have one working taxpayer, in addition in my country, a man could claim a wife who didn't work as a tax deduction. Anything the wife produced within the home was untaxable. Today it takes three taxpayers to raise a child, Dad, Mum and the childcare provider.

[@sarahrobertson634]

@@grannyannie2948 You fail to see what feminism has done for women. If you don't believe that women have rights, then get off the internet. You don't get a say in anything.

[@GodsOwnPrototype]

I wonder if Karen Straughan (girlwriteswhat) will appear as a guest, it seems to me she covered a lot of the groundwork a decade ago. A conversation with Erin Pizzey would also be great.

[@sarahrobertson634]

Karen Straughen is such a hack.

[@GodsOwnPrototype]

@@sarahrobertson634 By hack you are obviously thinking of a word with a different definition than usual, given that she was a manually working mother that blogged/commentated on the side, rather than a professional journalist that churned out a line.

[@tjohannam]

"In defense of the human." As an adult human female (= woman) I thank you very much!

[@justanothermaid]

I was hoping to catch a talk between you two. Quite interesting and thought provoking. Looking forward to your videos. 🎉

[@izzya8116]

I can't wait to get my hands on a copy of Feminism Against Progress!

[@robertabrahamsen9076]

Mary defines feminism, not as an equality movement, but as a women's interest lobby. This is precisely correct.

[@RolandEB]

This might just be the most interesting conversation on the internet

[@consciously73]

I greatly respect and admire both these ladies & hope both their voices are heard far and wide 🙌

[@charleswells481]

Just about to watch this. I am hoping that Louise's calm interviewing style will help slow Mary down a little, sufficiently to perhaps allow for more discussion between the two.

[@slowdown7276]

Louise, if you are locked up in a dungeon, forced to do podcasts day after day by a madman, give a morse message by blinking okay? See you in next episode 😅

[@markkavanagh7377]

It will record another podcast or it will get the hose again!

[@BeeGirl316]

Hahahahaha

[@JasonSilverMusic]

Mary Harrington is so smart. I can hardly keep up with her - actually, I'm being too generous to myself. She's far surpassed my ability to keep up, but I love it. Thanks for the interview.

[@jonim5190]

I really enjoy your podcast. Thanks. I have been watching some videos of Carlo Lancellotti talk about Augusto Del Nocce and Simone Weil and there seems to be a lot of overlap with Mary's views on topics such as Christianity, progress and the sexual revolution. It seems they have reached the same conclusions but through different paths.

[@brianandcindy1]

Great interview! I will soon be reading both of your books. I wonder if you are familiar with Sophie Lewis and "Feminism Against Family". A debate between one of you and her would be very interesting.

[@brianandcindy1]

I finished Louise's book and am more than half way through Mary's. So I see you both are familiar with Sophie Lewis :) I read her book a year or two ago and was amazed at how someone as smart as she seems to be believing what she believes.

[@philodonoghue3062]

By the way, cool name for the channel Maiden Mother Matriarch

[@Teaandephemery]

Continuing to post until Michelle Goldberg agrees to come on the show. ;) Excellent as always.

[@haydenwalton2766]

wonderful conversation. It's so refreshing to listen to two women in intelligent dialogue that is not imbued with insane rhetoric and current ideology. one bone of contention though - I think you are addressing correlation and not causation when talking about 'the west' and its 'christian values' christianity got its values from the people who developed it. if christianity were to fade (as it appears to be doing in the west) the tendency for these values would still be there right where they've always been. Of course there are a multiple amount of ideologies waiting to fill the vacuum (as you've elliquant discussed here), and, of course many conservatives will say ' this is all too dangerous, let's just stick with christianity' but we shouldn't let that stop us from moving forward with as much wisdom and courage as we can muster.

[@stevenseagull7.7bviews47]

Look, if the AI that wins the AI wars/race isn't a Christian based AI, humanity is screwed.

[@vthompson947]

I find it quite extraordinary to hear Mary Harrington talk about legal abortion only in the context of "freedom". What about women who have an abortion because they simply cannot cope with yet another child, for example, or women who are bullied into abortion by a partner? Nearly as odd as hearing her (elsewhere) talk about the Pill as though it was an unalloyed blessing for randy teenage girls, with no pressure from men's wants. She has a lot of very interesting things to say, but mostly because she's rewriting Greer's The Female Eunuch in light of modern technology. With even less sympathy than Greer for vulnerable women.

[@inana3408]

Quite fascinating how different this conversation is from the ones with Freddie Sayers and Chris Williamson. Mary seems much more relaxed (or just has less of a cold?) and the two of them go uch deeper here. Now to the tiggernometry one....

[@mikewalsh9041]

Oh, and I *loved* "Dark Satanic John Stuart Mills"!

[@user-rx162r]

😂

[@cluisdotorg]

When I ordered Mary's book Amazon suggested Thomas sowells forthcoming book. At first that seemed odd, but after listening to her on a few pods I am feeling there will indeed be some overlap. Mary's might beat the ol man to the punch on a few topics. 😁

[@paulsummerville5497]

I've always thought feminism had three parts, first, that women be able to live their lives as much as possible on their own terms, second, that society provide the tools - legal and substantive - to make this possible, and third, that this would contribute to the liberation of men.

[@princekermit0]

cishet white fundamentalist Judeo-Christo-Patrairical male Christian here. Still reading? I found the two of you a breath of fresh air. Faint damning praise indeed. Reactionary Feminism is, at first glance, something of a kind of Feminism, that I can find acceptable as a comrade in arms, against the assaults on human decency, bodily autonomy, and the Imago Dei basis of human dignity enjoyed by all humanity. I will have to read more of your guest's work, but she is a treasure. full stop. I first heard of your book "the case against the sexual revolution" when you were a guest on Dr. JBP's podcast/video.

[@suedavis1781]

Fascinating discussion. You haven't mentioned autonomy in the talk, and I'd appreciate a podcast which explores the sacred as reverence for the natural world, e.g. for systems of water, soil, air, and....for Indian carers of abandoned elephants, for protectors of the Amazon rainforest and 'cleaners' of our oceans. There is slavery, forced work, and sex trafficking across the globe, but how do African women, indigenous Australian and north American women perceive their bodies in relation to spirituality? I know we're long past it, but can we return to mortality and acceptance of nature without the white fear?

[@philodonoghue3062]

Harrington is the first feminist with some refreshingly new analysis since Camille Paglia in the Sexual Personae - which says something about the ideological aridity of dogmatic feminism

[@sarahrobertson634]

Camille Paglia is a hack.

[@philodonoghue3062]

@@sarahrobertson634 Hmm. Sophisticated ‘argument’.

[@donaldthompson5144]

Both the terms "post-liberal" and "reactionary feminism" still "cedes the forum to Caligula"

[@matttiberius1900]

"Liberating yourself" is a rebranding of Christian asceticism.

[@charlesstanford1310]

I would with the beleaguered fools be told, that keep an inner fastness where their gold, impure and scanty, yet they loyally bring to mint in image blurred of distant king, or in fantastic banners weave the sheen heraldic emblems of a lord unseen. -Tolkien, "Mythopoeia"

[@fionawhiteford2128]

i want to understand and keep up with these interesting women

[@dennyj8650]

The sexual revolution is over...We all lost! Women especially, kids suffered most. And men are dispossessed and confused.

[@wendellbabin6457]

41:36 Miss Kim, yeah, I think the appropriate phrase might be "a piece of work", maybe even in multiple senses of the phrase?

[@mildajasaite871]

I love both of them, I am just not very fond of the idea that it is capitalism to blame for pornography or transhumanism. Socialism and communism also looks terrible when it arrives to its logical conclusions, thus I think we should look at which economic model helped people to prosper the most and find mechanism how people in power should be stopped from exploiting it. Let's not forget that liberal left(who majority hold strong socialist beliefs) are very much in favour of so called women empowerment and everything that comes with it - abortions, pills, prostitution, pornography. As Posie Parker, ex-leftie, put it - the left is pro pimp; i'll take sexist over misogynist any time of the day and saldy it is left that is misogynist and right that is sexist. Yes, women earn from porn industry thanks to capitalism. In no way it means women would not be forced into doing the same without being paid in socialism. An example of Indian workers proves just that.

[@hallowakers3d2y]

Forced is a strong word they have the choice of working regular shitty lower paid jobs they choose not to. You cant remove personal agency just because they are women

[@skylinefever]

Sex work is capitalistic, I love mocking any Republican that keeps up the sex work ban, yet spends the rest of their time saying free market economics rule. Same goes for the war against drugs. Hey, I thought conservatives wanted a smaller cheaper government. How much does it cost to decide what consenting adults do in their own bedrooms?

[@mildajasaite871]

@@skylinefever sex work exists in communist and socialist countries as well. In fact, when economy or what you call free market goes down to shit, sex work is the first thing women turns to. The issue is that consenting adults doing it not in their bedrooms, but on the internet today. And as sex work is so normalised, nobody is even putting an effort to protect kids from exposure to it. I love how someone thinking they have ability to mock starts talking about Republicans or Conservatives because hey we are Consenting ADULTS!!!!.... except when it comes to using contraception though lol. In that case we need abortion. Were not adults enough to take care of that one. Over 97% of abortions happens because of careless sex. Really amazing how so many empowered, independent and CONSENTING women puts themselves in situation they don't wanna be in. Btw, I'm not Republican or Conservative. Just not a fan of stupid and weak people.

[@PaulCarr1]

When Louise talks against the black background at the beginning, she looks like she could be the latest digital incarnation of Holly from Red Dwarf.

[@friedawells6860]

I am so happy to finally hear the feminist case against birth control! Before I became catholic, I really hated the Church's teaching against birth control. It was exactly because of what Harrington said: I was trapped in this progressive/cyborg mindset where I could not conceive of myself as a free person without the ability to artificially control my reproductive function! Now, I have learned to live without artifical birth control (both through NFP and periods of abstaining), and what I never would have expected happened, which is that I acquired a huge appreciation for my humanity as a woman and grew in dignity in my identity as a woman. I also gained feedom from birth control side effects as a nice bonus. It really came full circle to the point that I now love the Church's position against birth control and see it as very feminist!

[@skylinefever]

It's great, so long as every woman's equipment works 100% as expected. I think about how not everyone has that, and it ends up becoming Catholic roulette.

[@kiwisteveb]

Just on the stuff around Indian peasant workers hysterectomy - I have seen elsewhere saying this is a scam pushed on these woman by doctors in a scam for financing for the operations and basically trapping them in the work to repay dodgy financing for operation.

[@chrish5184]

I love these two. But I have to say that not many conservatives would describe conservatism as a desire to turn the clock back. That is just regression. Conservatism is protecting eternal truths and values often passed through tradition, and as such conservatives are much more akin to the "hunter of sacred shades on eternal hills'. I suspect that 'conservative' is such a maligned term that the battle has now been lost. It is remarkable that Mary and Louise have found it easier to rehabilitate the term reactionary than the term conservative. I guess this is mimetics at play.

[@frankgradus9474]

The book's on my short list to devour.

[@GraceHarwood88]

39:18 Do people want the organ of a criminal? I suppose they’re desperate. What if the criminal was real evil?

[@carbon1479]

With Mary's concern about transhumanism, she might appreciate some other people who are beating on this dynamic from another angle of their own - particularly John Vervaeke and Wolfgang Smith. I'm listening to them right now on 'The Meaning Code' (their first discussion) and they're suggesting that one of their core deliverables from their research, and really delivered by James J. Gibson, is the death of both nominalism and representationalism, which both embodies cognition and elevates the relationships between subject and object to a degree to where the Cartesian worldview and truncated rationality strictly built on the propositional level is going to be ejected as a consequence.

[@AndyDoto1776]

Very interesting conversation! Hyper-intellectuals are such incredible artists of articulation. For me, it always comes back to why. WHY should we treat others with dignity? WHY should we not commoditize the female body, etc? We know it deep down because it’s written in our hearts by Almighty God :) That is the ultimate justification for beliefs or value statements.

[@skylinefever]

They have to make articulate arguments, because to many intellectuals, "God" is a collection of childhood fairytales, or the ramblings of a paranoid schizophrenic.

[@jamesmurphy1389]

After forty years of periodically wrestling with the subject, I realised last Thursday (metaphorically speaking) that feminism has never really been a struggle waged by women against the patriarchy (whatever that very dodgy word is supposed to mean) but is rather a covert civil war carried on by woman against her own biology and the reproductive determinism inherent therein. Hence - and as you both articulated - the primal importance to feminists of abortion and the pill - both of which are, of course, life-denying resources. Indeed, a pretty good argument could be made for feminism being a disguised death cult; especially when one considers how European birth rates have fallen off a cliff under its influence. How many young women have the time or the inclination to be mothers these days? No, that cranky old destiny is way beneath them - which is great if you don't mind the human race dying out. But if you happen to love humanity (despite all its horrible flaws) you pretty soon realise that the fate of the human race depends on women: they must have babies or we die out. They must also be loving mothers who nurture their babies rather than just dumping them in 'childcare' (or 'baby-abandonment centres', as I call them) - Marx and Engels, of course, 'invented' the idea of the creche. What a surprise! Our tragedy is that, thanks to feminism, self-evident truths about motherhood and marriage have been made to sound outrageous and offensive. Of course, feminism is not exclusively to blame for the derogation of motherhood and 'home'; the banksters, with their fractional reserve system that floods us with false credit, debauches currencies, promotes grotesquely inflated house prices and makes it compulsory for both parents to work, are profoundly wicked (I use the word advisedly). How do we get out of this? I'm not sure that we do, tbh: it's way past the midnight hour, culturally speaking. Transhumanism, far from being the answer, is a child's nightmare (don't talk to me about cyber-wombs!). Indeed, transhumanists have no mature idea of what it is they're trying to escape - as if life were all just about increased gratification to the nth degree! - However, if we could escape the hell we've created for ourselves it would surely involve the restoration of a kind of reverence between the sexes, a recalibration of our reasons for loving each other. These are all old-fashioned words for which I make no apology. 'The timeless is always timely' as the recently deceased British Buddhist monk Sangarakshita averred! Just to add that I enjoyed your deep-dive discussion; though, as someone new to your channel, it was not always clear to me which side of the fence you were both on - or, indeed, if you were seated roundly on it!

[@skylinefever]

If making babies was for everyone at all times in history, monks and nuns wouldn't have existed. A nsex drive is not a reproductive drive, that's a reason birth control exists. There are already enough unwanted babies being treated like shit.

[@AliciatheCho]

Freedom is not license. The country is confused. Or willingly confused to bypass restraint for the greater good.

[@S.J.L]

Christianity is a mixed bag but it has it's virtues. It forcefully replaced much older religious and spiritual traditions that also had their virtues. There are universal virtues and there is a world of spirit beyond all forms. "God" is. Christianity will not hold because it's dogmas ask people to lie and to lie is evil. Honesty is perhaps the first good. We could all just as easily be Mithraists if it had won the popularity contest among Roman elites. It's true that without spiritual foundations demons run amok but the better angels are just as real and the truth is eternal and universal. Life will go on.

[@kevincurrie-knight3267]

I disagree with Mary on a lot, and anticipate disagreeing further once I read her book. But she gets a fundamental and broad point right: we cannot and should not assume that all women (or members of any identity group) have the same interests solely by membership in that group. And we should not assume - as feminists long seem to have - that progress and liberation will be defined the same way for everyone.

[@skylinefever]

Absolutely. People are highly individualistic, with limited alliances to uphold their interests. I love joking about how many conservatives say they love small government, until it comes to drug wars and prostitute cops.

[@gumdeo]

@@skylinefever Ironically, it was progressives who banned drugs and prostitution.

[@baxterandcotton]

Fantastic discussion. Sadly enough the ads during the episode were full off another insidious expression of transhumanism- facial cosmetic procedures. Im an atheist, previously aggressively so, also previously transhumanist and motherhood changed a lot of my views as well. Actually, just mentally preparing for eventual motherhood did - for example I considered a particular minor cosmetic surgery (extra eyelid skin) and decided against it based on that my genes will pass on to children who I will obviously cherish regardless of their eyelid shape. We *are* our bodies. No matter what we do to them, we are our DNA. Interestingly I've also always been somewhat detached from my physical self in the way many intellectuals are, and the motherhood of course really challenges the idea that we're our thoughts rather than our bodies. Much talk on the left and feminist sex politics hinges on people thinking we're our thoughts and not our bodies- sex work is empowering just as much as any intellectual job allegedly. Also due to the fixation on "lived experience" becoming more important than objective reality. I'm a stay at home mom now and the days of my anti natalist transhumanism are long behind me, and I'm so glad that I've chosen the path of hope and continuation for the plucky, bumbling, occasionally magnificent human race.

[@Kelsea-im8ob]

While it's dangerous to air some of this rhetoric to conservatives who might misappropriate it, an illuminating conversation.

[@user-rx162r]

Illuminatiating.

[@richardabbot8724]

The only problem is have here is that the Progressive Cyborg Left seem to me the natural, inevitable extension of the Old Left.

[@russellmania3000]

Harrington's phrase "Elon Musk's babymamma" at 31:30 is unfortunate and reveals a certain hardening of the mind. But still a very engaging conversation.

[@paulmullany7147]

Hello. That was a thought provoking conversation although I had to listen to it twice. Both your voices are so relaxing I fell asleep the first time😊. Although I think in general womens bodies can and are commodified in a more invasive way than mens I do not think they are commodified disproportionately. Even in our modern society there are still physical (sometimes extremely) jobs that need to be done and these jobs are overwhelmingly done by men. These men are exploited for their physicality and tolerance of risk often with the cost of chronic or acute injury and even death. With that in consideration and in relation to transhumanism; I wouldn't mind some technology that could rebuild or augment my joints. Im only 39 and already Im falling to pieces. That same technology could also be used to prevent the ware on peoples bodies so they could avoid the situation I and other people doing a physical job find themselves in at a relatively young age. Furthermore, would you consider glasses, pacemakers or continuous glucose monitors transhuman interventions? Technology and social progress is scary and we should be cognisant that change often has a cost but that should not deter us from trying . One could argue that the above are examples of how transhumanism could be beneficial. There are potential horrors but they are not inevitable and their risk could be managed. Cheers for the long form content and have a lovely day. Regards Paul

[@princekermit0]

I think there was a cogent point in the conversation wrt a woman's body default state naturally cycling, versus being flipped to the offswitch. And the change of medical intervention for something gone wrong, vs treating the natural bodily function of the female's reproductive system which has not gone wrong, as something that has. Worn out joints and eyeglasses and pacemakers, lets throw inhalers, and epipens for the treatment of anaphylaxis from a deadly reaction to an allergen as being in the vein of medical intervention where the body has failed, something has gone wrong, and medical intervention is a wise thing. implants for cosmetic purposes, and other elective tinkering with thr body for esthetic reasons alone is her second category, imo.

[@paulmullany7147]

@@princekermit0 Hey Zed I did not mean to detract from their main concern regarding womens bodies and on reading my comment again that is not obvious, my apologies. My response pertained more to their concern about building super humans. If you can augment or rebuild a joint then inevitability you could also choose to do the same and make a super soldier or the like. One use of technology has advantages however that same technology could be used in a malevolent way or there could be unforeseen negative consequences. A more related example could be imagine scientists got to the stage where they fully understood the female reproductive system. This level of understanding leads them to be able to artificially grow or abioticly replicate any or all parts of the system meaning they can replace or fix anything that causes fertility issues. This would be great for those who wish to have kids but otherwise could not however this same technology could also be used to construct a viable artificial womb in whole outside the body. Should we stop the scientists researching female reproductive system just in case it lead to an artificial womb? That is false dichotomy but I hope it clarifies my point. Cheers Paul

[@princekermit0]

@Paul Mullany I never took a sense of detraction from your comment. Nor was my response written to counter a detraction. Good conversations, loving the energy around here. I will have to collect my thoughts about the points you've raised about the scientists researching the F.R.S. for the boons. my hot take is any knowledge gained at the cost of any group of humans, is unethical, and immoral. Financial compensation is coercion to the poor. And, because BigPharma isn't interested in actually helping people, but opperates on, what is best for the corporate bottom line... it would be unrealistic, perhaps naive, to believe that research gains would trickle down in a meaningful way.

[@skylinefever]

@@princekermit0 If financial compensation is coercion to the poor, how does employment work?

[@princekermit0]

@@skylinefever Every individual owns the fruit of their effort/work, life energy/and time. Each individual has the innate right to trade such*, for things of value, after reaching an agreement with another party. I will give my time/knowledge/effort in exchange for X or Y or Z. Other than (time) the others recharge and are not lost. The individual has the right to leave the agreement, stop working, and choose to go somewhere else to seek and enter into employment. The "power" is primarily on the side of the paying party, who is wanting work to be performed, on their behalf. Eg They control the hiring/firing and allotment (think manhours) of work, and scope of work. But employment is under intense scrutiny, at least, in the West, so it isn't near as bad historically, as the medical abuses/coercion which has far more permanent harm and far less scrutiny, as were referenced in the conversation / video.

[@andrew5456]

So, just what exactly does progress mean? If I have a Boeing 737, and I want to change an engine component, should I? Isn't this progress? I tell my manager that this is progress and it will cost less and increase efficiency, so the question that I would ask is "should we change it?" The answer is maybe. First of all, I am not going to make any changes on any jet unless stress analysis, reliability predictions FMECA, and efficiency analysis are all completed and reviewed. When reviewed, and approved, then I am going to start testing to verify the analysis. Only after these tasks are completed will I consider making modifications to jets. Now, why the caution? If we fail, then the potential to kill thousands of people exists and the Boeing company could go out of business. Now, getting back to progress, I think you are thinking about it all wrong. Think of society as a controlled object, and you need to wrap a control system around this society (in control theory this is referred to as the plant). What happens to the overall system if the "improvement" doesn't work? Thousands of people may die and society may collapse. Remember how communism promised that progress would make for a better society, but what were the outcomes? I have to admit that sometimes changes need to be made to society, but all I am asking for is that before you make these changes you first do some analysis on what you are doing and then do some small scale testing to validate your theory. Is this unreasonable? My issue is that the United States was an operational system that worked pretty well. However, we were told that it was patriarchal and needed changing. These changes were implemented and here we are in the 21th century with things apparently falling apart. Thousands of people are dying because of these changes (ref. deaths of despair), but where is the outcry? The only reason this is becoming an issue is because it is starting to impact women. I think it makes sense to stop using the word progress because it only muddies the water. It gives an impression that something good will happen (desired outcome) when this is not at all verified. Yes, there are some changes that I would like to see, but what if the costs are too high? What if I don't even know what the costs are? It seems to me to take these courses of action, without adequate evaluation, is foolish in the highest degree. Worse than this, because people become wedded to an idea, even if the objective results point to an incorrect theory, those who proposed and implemented the change will not objectively check the outcomes. Again, reference the communist ideal. It should have become painfully obvious that the results were wildly different from the predicted outcomes. At this point the experiment should have been stopped and the system restored to it's original operation. This is also true with feminism today. Objective reality is showing that it is an abject failure but feminists still push forward and will not change. So, what will be the outcome? What will happen if an INCEL army starts to take over territory? Who will defend you? Feminism has spent the past half century demonizing and belittling men, will these men come to your rescue? I, for one, will not. I will not join the army, but I will not oppose them either. This risk must have been anticipated, so what I want to know is what are you going to do? Are you ready? Do you have a plan on fixing it? I have not heard much about what needs to be done, but this should not be a surprise. All empires fall pretty much the same way, and we are no exception. Just some thoughts.

[@skylinefever]

The incel army is usually pacified with p*hub, video games, and weed. However, numerous people want to make that impossible.

[@kaybrown7733]

It doesn't matter if you believe in progress or not. History doesn't stop for your beliefs. 😂

[@whatnextincomo]

Would be interested to read Mary’s book! And to this interview! But am disinclined to sadly (having listened to one with Tammy Peterson already) because of the sniffing. Perhaps Mary has a cold or an allergy. If so, she clearly does a stellar job of battling through that runny nose and I wish her a speedy recovery.

[@uncleskipsprairiejustice9367]

Why aren't condoms the same as the pill for purposes of this argument?

[@baxterandcotton]

Because condoms don't alter your physiology, hormonal birth control does. Just like sunglasses don't alter you but eye surgery does.

[@skylinefever]

In that case, I say praise the IUD. I think it's great that IUDs exist, people too stupid to take a pill everyday can avoid pregnancy and not breed the Idiocracy.

[@uncleskipsprairiejustice9367]

@@baxterandcotton but she's talking about the behavioral aspect

[@マリー-v4p]

I’ve wondered this too. Though I did see her mention condoms negatively in an article she wrote.

[@blafonovision4342]

I do not understand the objections to pornography, from either direction. If people wish to make it, and others want to view it, it’s their business. As long as you don’t seek it out, it’s not intrusive.

[@skylinefever]

They want men to work harder at the dating game, nevermind that so many men will end up incel anyway. Men not giving a shit is bad for the economy, and politicians want line go up.

[@blafonovision4342]

@@skylinefever The dating game is hard work?

[@skylinefever]

@@blafonovision4342 For non high status men, it's work, not fun.

[@マリー-v4p]

Well, I mean, look what it did to you.

[@SajberVanderlast]

Women can't opt out of being feminine, one cannot choose not to be a male or female. What works for some doesn't work for everybody. I would for sure get to studying Chinese "personhood" the way they understand it. Interpretations are not a good way to start if you have little to no time to waste. 😅

[@masscreationbroadcasts]

Feminism is not Designed to be Reactionary, and as one, you should give it credence. It doesn't mean "when women have it good".

[@wendellbabin6457]

54:43 To me that will be a cost/benefit race between supermen, cyborgs, and AI controlled robots. Controlled by "our SkyNet".

[@jroddog1]

Does Louise have a conservative Christian sister or female cousin? She is an attractive human lady. Thanks for this podcast!! Y’all are doing very great work.

[@BlackRain_]

Horny again?

[@russellsharpe288]

¨Cyborg progressivism¨ is an even better coinage than ¨reactionary feminism¨. Hopefully this new binary can oust the tired and useless left-right one.

[@Lily8980]

I've long been concerned by a lot of this new technology from an environmental and animal cruelty standpoint (for example, Elon Musk's horrifically cruel brain experiments on monkeys). So I'm finding it really interesting to also hear from somebody talking about it from a feminist perspective.

[@ethanb2554]

The first victim of feminism is ironically always women. The solution to the problem is not in reacting to any emerging phenomena but can ONLY found in the proper orientation of *attention*. A hint can be found in the name of the guest.

[@AmeliaBodilia]

I enjoy what Mary has to say ,but I think she may benefit from speech therapy/coaching to help her with the constant stuttering and stammering.

[@bumpercoach]

Brilliant insights BUT often taken too far in the blithe assumption agricultural life is as hobbits in the shire... The overlong discussion about the glib but not more than half clever term "reactionary feminism" isn't the worst of it... But her net contri- bution is profound despite failures like assuming human rights aren't worth conserving

[@RenegadeContext]

I have a personality that has led to me to career choices that are majoritivly male such as street performance, circus skills and stand up comedy. They aren't physical but they do require you to have little risk aversion. In those spaces where it's a male culture you find out very quickly which aspects of gender matter. Particularly in street performance where being threatened with violence. Now I've not experienced violence on teh street because it's a public space and I'm not easily scared but I ave experienced male violence before and gender still matters

[@blindjusticeandcommonsense2786]

I am overwhelmed by recursive humour here. The left can't meme. Progresssives can't meme. Because wall of text... Ms Harrington then goes on to spout a load of pointlessly over complex gibberish. Insert the 'No U' image macro here.

[@RCCarDude]

Louise is so pretty.

[@minkz4097]

I get most of Mary's take, except on abortion. I just don't see how an early fetus is any more human than an egg or sperm cell.

[@skylinefever]

It has the ability to be a profit generation unit for the capitalists.

[@minkz4097]

@@skylinefever Birthing babies has the potential of generating way more profit tho

[@sadiemakesmesmile]

Thank you for mentioning Grimes, Elon’s baby mama… whom I used to love but now she is doing interviews that seem completely unhinged. Sad.

[@annarboriter]

I'm the true traditionalist. I believe that women ought to return to the time honored manner of controlling their fertility and number of offspring through exposure.

[@painbow6528]

These two women should kiss.

[@linmorell1813]

The fertility to have 15 children, high infant mortality, children working in mills with their mother and father running under looms?

[@clintit1]

No one is suggesting going back to that. Only feminists immediately go to the worst examples they can. You are actively hurting my generation. Women have become the men they crusaded against. And the overwhelming majority of men my age have absolutely checked out. So if you would rather young women being one of the six girls a rich man is keeping up then I pity you. I assume you are a boomer, who generation this ideology stems from.

[@skylinefever]

I love how if someone is going to say slippery slopes exist, just show slippery slopes can work both ways. I love joking about people who would bring on chastity belts to get what they want.

[@gumdeo]

15 children was never the norm.

[@vladpewt5896]

Women are finished you will never come back from this. Cat world is waiting....

[@user-li1gp2jw8k]

Western women for sure it’s too late

[@vladpewt5896]

@@user-li1gp2jw8k Eventually all women.

[@user-li1gp2jw8k]

That’s fine I would hope the unruly would weed themselves out.

[@grannyannie2948]

And yet on the actual ground, outside of major cities, here in Australia the majority of people I know spend their twenties and thirties paired up raising children, and I suspect most will still be together in their forties, fifties and beyond. And families have cats as well, so cats will be fine.

[@wyleecoyotee4252]

I hope women never go backwards from this