Transcription
Somebody says I have to talk to the board, or I have to talk to the chairperson of the board, or I have to talk to the CEO or CFO, or whoever. I will say, "Let me know what she says." Always, she, like, by default, is she or her instead of he or him. If I'm saying Jane and John, I'll say Jane first instead of saying John first. I will say, "I think Jessica's 100% right. This is correct. I just want to add something like that." Like, I'll affirm and then continue. But, like, if a man says it, I'll just say, "I want to add," and I'll just go into whatever I'm going to add.
"A lot of little tiny things that I do that are micro-feminism, little acts that make men pissed off, and it's my favorite thing to do."
"Things she does to piss men off. I promise you, no man has noticed. You think she's doing some, like, what is she called? Micro-feminism. Like, this is a revolutionary thing. She's just operating inside her own mind. Nobody has registered that she's doing this. I promise you."
She said this is her favorite thing to do. Do you remember when women's favorite thing to do was, like, cuddle up with their husbands or kiss their babies? Now women's favorite thing to do is micro-feminism. God help us.
Stuff like this just makes it so clear that our civilization is collapsing. We've got the rising rates of loneliness and depression and suicide. There's no faith in the government or the media or education. Our birth rates have collapsed, so we are relying on immigration. And to top it all off, just fundamentally, the worst part of it all is men and women, that the two genders that make up our species, they just fundamentally don't trust each other. People underplay the significance of that when talking about what's causing our societal deterioration. You know, they'll blame capitalism or socialism, you know, whatever the political party, they'll blame social media. But the stuff that we talk about on this channel is still largely taboo in the mainstream because it's truly the one sacred cow of our culture. You're not allowed to criticize, and that's feminism. And that's not good that we're not allowed to talk about it because it's largely responsible for everything that we're going through. But we have this collective mind sickness where we can't actually analyze it. We can't even name it. Which is extraordinary when you consider that feminism and women are different things. Being anti-feminism doesn't mean that you're anti-femininity or against women in any way. And when you consider the stuff that you are allowed to talk about, that you can blame this conspiracy, you can blame racism, you can blame fiat currency, like, we're we're allowed to blame so many things. But the one thing you can never suggest that might be the root rot of everything is feminism. And why not? You know, is it because we are so protective of women? Well, maybe. But guess what? Feminism doesn't represent women. Less than a third of American women even identify as feminists. Just 29%. That's not a strong majority. It's not even a majority at all. It is a minority position. Feminism does not represent most women. Never has. Why then exactly is this awful, hateful, divisive ideology beyond criticism? Who or what are we protecting? Exactly.
I think it's time to just state this clearly. Feminism is the enemy of our civilization. And that's not me giving it that label, calling it an enemy. Absolutely not. If you listen to feminist rhetoric, they explicitly name themselves as an enemy of our civilization. They're proud of it. Their explicit goal is to tear down our civilization and and create something new. They've positioned themselves as the enemy. They've been saying it for decades. I think maybe it's time to actually take them seriously and treat feminists as the enemy that they have already declared themselves to be.
"My face, you freak."
"Please don't scream at me."
"I haven't raised my voice."
"I don't care if you didn't raise your voice. It doesn't make you sound like any less of a misogynist. Get the out of my face."
"That was kind of scary."
"Yeah, you should be scared. You should be scared 'cause you're a piece of stranger. Stranger. You want to look at my Get the out of here."
"I never said I wanted to look at her."
"You all you like white supremacist people think you just talk calmly. You seem normal. Why are we upset? Because you're psycho."
"I can't talk with her. She just screamed. Okay, let me explain."
Are you aware that there are two different types of social movements? Reformist and revolutionary. They are very different. And the reason why the enemy label is appropriate for feminism is because they are not a reformist movement. A reformist movement works inside an existing order. At a fundamental level, they accept the legitimacy of the society that they live in. But they identify specific problems and then they propose specific solutions. And the goal there is to improve society, to take the thing that exists and make it better. Think of the historical labor movement that's trying to get better wages and better working conditions within capitalism. They're not trying to abolish capitalism. Or think of the original civil rights movement that's trying to get Western countries to live up to their own stated ideals, to honor individual rights. Those original movements weren't trying to destroy the country. They want to improve it. That's what a reformist movement is. But that does not describe modern feminism.
"I don't have any words prepared today. I just want you to feel our pain. So I am going to spend the next minute screaming. IMAGINE THAT."
If you want to know what makes a revolutionary movement different to a reformist movement, it's that a revolutionary positions themselves as an insurgent, you know, operating outside of that civilization. They don't accept the legitimacy of the existing order. They see society as it is as something that's fundamentally flawed and broken and sick. It's corrupted at its core, you know. So, you can't just reform it. It is irredeemably corrupt. So, when you hear that feminism says that our civilization is a patriarchy that must be destroyed, dismantled, you know, "we got to smash the patriarchy." Understand that feminists don't see themselves, they don't position themselves as being a part of our culture that and they're wanting to improve it. They want to burn the whole thing down and replace it with something new. In some cases, it actually becomes theological. Feminism acts as a religion, complete with original sin, the fallen world, the priesthood, confessions, heresies, the the whole thing. It's a religion. And I explain how that works in part two. But just know that the the mentality, the psychology of a feminist like this, it's not one of citizenship. These women, they feel completely alienated from the society around them. They don't identify with it. They don't feel like they belong to it. They experience living in the country with its existing systems as though they are living under a foreign occupying force. They are living under oppression, and their very identity comes from being oppressed people within that culture.
"Men do not want your protection. If that is contingent on you continuing to oppress us, you should never use protecting us as an excuse to further the patriarchy. We have declined your protection. We do not need it. We are not children. We have agency. We choose freedom. And if you think that women should be oppressed because they need your protection, you win the Darwin Award. It is the foundation of the free Western world to choose freedom over safety. Give me liberty or give me Anybody who chooses safety over freedom deserves neither. That's Ben Franklin. We choose freedom. Leave us alone."
Who would have thought that feminists would all become Ron Paul libertarians quoting the founding fathers about liberty? Never saw that coming. But I want you to understand that the the language that feminists use is not accidental. It's very revealing because if you listen to them, they're not saying that women are being marginalized or undervalued or underestimated or underappreciated because all of those words would speak of a reformist movement. You know, women's criticism would be that they're not being given a fair go, a fair opportunity to contribute and to appreciate and to participate. That's why feminists don't use those words. They they use different language. They say that they are oppressed. That word has a very specific meaning. It speaks to the mindset of someone who's they're experiencing what what they'd probably call like an internal colonialism. They've been colonized by the patriarchy. They feel themselves to be like an occupied people. Now, I don't want to dwell on this, but first off, it needs to be said how incredibly offensive it is to use this kind of framework to discuss the plight of women. Given that you are equating what you've been through with like the indigenous people of all these countries, there's no way a white woman in Australia and her story of victimhood has anywhere near the legitimacy of the Aboriginal people. You know, the intersectionality like, you know, we have so much in common. We're both oppressed people. Wow. But leaving that aside for the moment, it speaks to the hollowness of their claims of oppression that they need to borrow the language in the framework of genuinely oppressed people in order to legitimize their movement. You know, they've gone out specifically and picked up the language of, you know, people who are like revolutionaries and fighting against colonizers. That's the way that they want to frame this. That's the language they're comfortable with because they are so desperate to paint themselves as a liberation movement. But for a genuine liberation movement, they have to fulfill three very distinct and measurable characteristics. And feminism fails on all three. I go into detail on that in part two. But while the legitimacy of their claims are laughable, their goal does need to be taken seriously because everything that I spoke about at the start of this video, like the increased depression, the drop in birth rates, all of that stuff, they all indicate a civilization in collapse. And for a revolutionary movement, that's good. That's the purpose. They want to destroy the society. You know, that was the plan. This is not an accident and it's time that we seriously contend with this. You know, I'll say it again that feminism is the enemy. The feminists are enemies of our civilization. Again, not from me. These are the words. This is the language that they have chosen to describe themselves. And when you understand that the goal was not to improve Western society, but to replace it, it means that you can reflect on everything that's happening inside our culture through a very different lens. It puts it in the appropriate context because when you see that feminism is trying to destroy our society, then you understand why it's evidence of their success. You know, we're all desperately trying to plug the holes and fix this thing so the ship does not go down. But there are people on board who are actively sabotaging our efforts. They don't want to correct course. They want to see the ship go down. And you think, well, that makes no sense. Surely the self-interest is going to kick in at some point. You know, if the ship goes down, don't you realize that we all drown? Well, revolutionary movements have never been well known for their ability to plan what comes afterwards. Primarily, they're interested in destroying things. They haven't figured out what's going to come afterwards or how things are going to function. That's not the point. The point is to express pain, to burn the whole thing down. They've got laser focus on just the total destruction of what exists now.
"Said, 'I actually think men should be oppressed.' You said, 'God, I hate men.' Yeah."
"I'm sorry. I love that."
"You said you love it."
"Maybe it's 'cause she gets the joke and you guys don't."
"What's the joke? Explain the joke to me. What is the joke?"
"I'm sorry you don't dislike. I'm ignorant. Explain the joke to me."
"Don't you think if I was trying to make a complex point about like my dislike of men?"
"So you admit that you dislike never working while a man pays for all your stuff is kind of queen. Feminist. By the way."
"It means that I can choose whatever path I want to take. That should be my right. In a place in my life where I cannot hang out with men who make less money than me, please don't waste my time."
"I'm sorry. It's funny. I live for that."
At the risk of repeating myself, I really need to drive this point home because its significance can't be understated. Understand that feminism defines itself in opposition to the patriarchy. That's its identity. It knows how to destroy, but it does not think about what to create afterwards. You already know this at an intuitive level. Like if you think about a feminist organization, an institution, you already know what kind of an organization you're going to encounter. It's not going to be responsible for building and creating things. No. If there's a feminist institution, its primary purpose is going to be complaining and criticizing and dismantling things. That is not a coincidence. Do you understand? That's by design. We need to take this seriously. On this channel, I always say that we love femininity. We dislike feminism. This is not anti-women. This is anti- this corrupt, hateful ideology that has infected women. Femininity is not the enemy. Femininity is an ally. And it's easy to see why. Just look at these two things and compare them and look at what is the substantive difference between the two of them. You'll see that one set of goals has to do with procedure and the other has to do with substance. When you look at the values of femininity, you can see that it's all about substance. It's all about creating something. They create beauty. They create relationship bonds. They create new life. Femininity is glorious. I love it with all of my heart. But the values of feminism are not about substance. They're about procedure. It's so focused on making sure that women get placed in positions of power. Procedurally, a woman is at the helm of the ship. But there's no discussion on where the ship's actually heading. If we get women into power, there's no talk about, well, what are things going to be that's different? How's that power actually going to get used? You say that it's so important that we have female CEOs and female politicians and female representation in all of these different industries, but why? Like specifically, what's going to be different? Stop telling me about the procedure of who's going to be making these decisions and tell me what are the decisions going to be? Because diversity and representation are not inherently values in their own right. They don't have any actual substance on their own. But this is the exact slide of hand that feminism has manipulated us with because it has smuggled procedural values into substance values and tried to present it as though the two are one and the same, but they're not. And it's especially dangerous because it's unfalsifiable, right? Like anything that's procedural. Anything that's value comes from substance can be measured and evaluated. We can test it. We can look at the outcomes. But when you mix procedure and substance together, then no matter how bad the outcomes are, you can always just say it's because we didn't have enough diversity, you know, under representation from women. That's the problem. And so what do you do? You know, we just what accept this framing and just continue to hand more and more procedural power over to feminism even though it has no plan for the future. Even though it's creating nothing, it stands for nothing except more procedural control. And even as things are just, you know, falling off a cliff. We're not allowed to actually point out that the outcomes being created are terrible. I know that this is primarily a men's channel and I speak with compassion for men's problems, but honestly, I I feel so sorry for women as well because men and women have suffered under feminism. We're not equally complicit, you know, in pushing it out there, but just looking at this list, it's heartbreaking. Look at everything that they gave up. Look at all the positive things of femininity. The beauty and the warmth and the grace and the loyalty, all of that. Look how powerful and strong femininity is. Look at what it can create. Look at how much purpose and identity it could give women. Look at how positive its orientation is. And they gave it up. They betrayed their own nature. They turned their backs on their own femininity in exchange for what? Feminism? You [ __ ] serious? That's like the worst trade in all of human history. No wonder women are absolutely miserable. But there are positive signs. Thank God. I think that there are a number of women who are finally waking up to this and realizing that this trade was terrible and they would much rather have their femininity.
"Stay-at-home mom. My husband's at work providing for our family. I have some sourdough fermenting on the bench, a baby, an apron, a cute dress. I'm tittling around the house cleaning things, making myself food. I can go to the beach if I want. I can go to a cafe if I want. I can take my kids to the park if I want. I can go lay out in the sun. I have this cuteness right here that I get to look at all day that I get to hang out with. Okay. I've been out like have had a 9-to-5. I've, you know, had the corporate job, you know, live the boss babe lifestyle and I hated it. It was so exhausting. I was constantly overwhelmed. My gut health was in the trash. My cortisol levels and my stress hormones were like through the roof. Now I just get to bake bread and hang out with babies all day. Isn't it the best thing in the world? It's the best thing in the world."
Okay, let's recap what we've covered in the video. We've talked about the difference between reform movements and revolutionary movements. We've spoken about how women have this mindset of internalized colonialism. We've talked about the difference between values of substance versus values of procedure, and how feminism only knows how to destroy while femininity knows how to create. In part two, I want to talk about why feminism became theological and what the implications of that are. And I also want to examine and go into that claim I made that feminism is not a legitimate liberation movement. And that's because of these three criteria. There's no ability for feminism to point to some concrete prior state that they're trying to return to. The oppression that they claim to be under is externalized, and they're not seeking re-entry into society. The video, it's a little bit psychological in the religious part, but then it gets pretty sociological, even a bit political. So, I don't know. If you're into that kind of thing, you'll probably absolutely love it. You can watch part two right now for free if you come over to Patreon and sign up for the free 7-day trial.