Transcript
Speaker: Hello, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the Low Production Value Sphere podcast, which is shot from my terrorist hideout under Fordow Mountain.
Speaker: As you can see, it's quite sunny because somebody poked holes in the ceiling like a couple weeks ago. I don't know what that's about, but um it's really nice. We have a veranda now. um So I have with me today a returning guest ah who's one of my favorite e-friends, ex-friends, Twitter friends.
Speaker: Ex-friends is not the right word. Wilfred Riley, who by day is a professor of political science at... Kentucky State University. like Yeah, very good.
Speaker: I have good memory. ah Yeah, and there is no particular agenda today. ah I just wanted to have a conversation because Wilfred's one of the most interesting guy guys I follow. We had a lot of fun in the previous podcast, which I'll link to, where we talk about his books, Hate Crime Hoaxes and Lies My Liberal Teacher Told Me, which are very good books.
Speaker: And so you should watch the podcast and then buy the books and then maybe even read the books. ah But here we're just going to chat about ah whatever strikes our fancy. So how are you doing, man?
Speaker: ah Doing pretty well. Doing pretty well. We're doing some academic chores this summer. So we're hiring a new dean, some potential members of our department. But um you know other than that, not much has been going on the past couple of days. I'm working on a new book I'm writing, just living life.
Speaker: Yeah. Can you tell us about the book or is it too early? Sure. Yeah. the the upcoming the yeah The upcoming book is called Confidently Wrong. And it's actually in the tradition of my first book, Hate Crime Hoax. It's a fairly statistical academic style book, a it'll probably be out with one of the larger presses.
Speaker: vision of Harper Collins. But ah what I'm looking at is why so many expert predictions over the past really 30 or 40 years have been so wildly wrong.
Speaker: and There's an element of humor to this. I mean, some of them, some of them are pretty funny. I mean, I remember in high school i was terrified of getting AIDS and dying. And I think for all American and many European men, this was this is a common fear, the coming heterosexual AIDS epidemic.
Speaker: And that that didn't happen. There was actually a book called The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS by a Mike Framento that came out that pointed out that as a heterosexual white guy or Midwestern black guy in the USA, your lifetime chance of getting HIV is on the order of one in 600. And yeah that's just one of ah many. The Club of Rome saying the world was going to run out of resources.
Speaker: you know As an investor, I think we're on peak oil eight right now. Yeah, right. Right. Yeah. I mean, but just on and on, you know the population bomb is probably the classic quantitative example where Paul Ehrlich went to India.
Speaker: Yes. Notice there were a lot of Indians in India. and predicted that the world was going to end, you know, that the humans couldn't ah sustain ourselves on the planet at current levels of biomass versus food.
Speaker: And he, in the book, he failed to predict feminism, the green revolution, let's say three or four other things. Yeah. top of The book is why this keeps happening. Why we did it again with COVID I think there actually is a model that people, academics and investors can look at. I mean, people are free to consider the model trash. It's pretty predictive.
Speaker: But it's basically the idea that when people make projections in the academic space, there are usually three or four charts in the paper. There's the worst case scenario. There's what's actually going to happen, which is buried in the middle.
Speaker: And then there's sort of the the best case glowing scenario. What U.S. media and British media have done pretty consistently for 50 years is take the worst case scenario and present it as objectively real.
Speaker: And that then goes out even from the scientists and even from the reporters who have some incentive to exaggerate. But that goes out into just the general public space. So you have stupid people. I mean...
Speaker: One of our Congresswomen, it was Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, I believe, took the the projection is that we have 12 years left where the USA and Europe can contain the rise in temperature globally.
Speaker: China hopefully will help within one degree. So the planet will get one degree warmer if we don't meet this deadline. The way that's been presented in our media is we have 12 years left to live. So we have someone in Congress now printing out these signs that say we have 12 years left and so on.
Speaker: And that's the message most people are getting. um If you actually read, and last thing on this, but if you actually read any of the climate ah predictions, like I read Bjorn Lomborg's book, obviously.
Speaker: And then I looked at the papers he was responding to. And the actual projections in most of them are some people will die, mostly in the horror background. the I'm assuming our audience know who Bjorn Lornborg is. But in case some people don't, he's this great Danish, I believe, statistician who sort of became like an anti-Bernard.
Speaker: environmentalist by realizing how you know completely absurd a lot of their claims are. And by the way, as somebody who like writes about policy for living, like environmental groups, you know I read the the stuff that's put out by all groups, and on average, environmental groups lie far more than any other category of group. it's like It's environmentalists here, pro-immigration here, and then everybody else is is like not as like in a different league.
Speaker: Anyway, just bracketing that, just in case, if you don't know who Bjorn Lundborg is, go read his stuff. He's got a lot of stuff online. He's a very cool guy. Go ahead. Yeah, no, Lundborg is a great guy in person. but um one of the So, by the way, first, as as an American, I would challenge the environmentalists lie more than anyone else. I think in my experience, feminists lie the most.
Speaker: And then black activists. I don't i don't know if you guys have the same distribution of groups, but like everything that a BLM type or a radical women's advocate says is not going to be true. And I mean, I remember. they're They're a good candidate. I mean, the the the the. the The wage gap canard is is like pretty well established at this point. And I guess you know a lot of the rape statistics are BS.
Speaker: Or you know they they use different definitions of of rape. Or they use... you know like phone surveys or whatever. and it's like, oh, you know, they just ask women like, oh, have you been you know sexually assaulted in the last year? And it's like I was catcalled or, you know, a guy grabbed my ass on the subway, which obviously is not good. And people who do that should be arrested. But that's not rape. And then they they they come out with that and they say, oh, you know,
Speaker: 80% of women have been raped or whatever. um So I guess, yeah, that that's a good one too. Yeah. it's It's worth actually talking about a couple of those things like in some detail. like at First of all, a lot of it's just lying.
Speaker: Like I recently prepped a 20 year review of Naomi Wolf's, the beauty myth. And it wasn't like mild misunderstandings of the data by these women. I mean, at one point in the book, they say that the leading cause of death for young women is anorexia.
Speaker: I mean, like half of the people that die are women and about ah fourth of them perhaps are young. So mean, if that were true, there'd be ambulances pulling up to sorority houses every day. You'd have 200,000 deaths a year from that. So it wasn't true.
Speaker: um But I think like the rape stats are an interesting example of how to lie with numbers. So the usual way you get a statistic like one in four college women has been raped.
Speaker: is to ask people, have you ever had sex that you didn't particularly want or under the influence of alcohol or drugs? And that's a definition of rape. But right.
Speaker: I mean, there's some heterodox scientists that have given the same study to men like ever had sex you didn't much want after wine tasting day for your girlfriend or. You know, while you were drinking a club, I mean, and it was the same rate. It was about 30% for men. And it just, you you realize that's just completely meaningless.
Speaker: But you would then, the second level is that you would then take that kind of thing where you find that one in five women has been raped and you'd compare that to the number of convictions for rape that year.
Speaker: And the British feminists do this a lot. You would then say, well, only 2% of in a conviction. What you would actually do... i actually think it was Julie Bendel, who doesn't much like men, but it's a pretty serious person who looked at and debunked this. I could be wrong about the the scholar.
Speaker: But I mean, what you'd actually do is just take the number of charged sexual assaults in the UK or US again or whatever. And you'd look at the number of convictions. And when you do that, you find that the conviction rate of rape cases like 60%.
Speaker: People are extremely unsympathetic to rapists. But you can't wander around bars You know, looking, I mean, it's it's just, it's it's all made up and the environmental stuff is almost at that level.
Speaker: The, the lot, the thing Lombard was debunking was basically all of these environmental papers say, look, the world's going warm up a little. They're going to be dead, particularly in the horn of Africa. And I would never as a empathic former veteran of the business world say, who cares? These enemy states that are a long way away.
Speaker: We should help them somehow. But these are going to be some deaths. But the world in general, in terms of income, you know, population, it is going to continue to improve through this period.
Speaker: And that's just always left off. The idea is, well, there'll be 2 million deaths in Somalia. We must do anything we can to stop that. And that's a very novel attitude in terms of how we look at morality.
Speaker: Right. Right. And it's not and yeah, it's not 2 million people dying in Somalia versus the status quo. It's 2 million people dying in Somalia versus like life improving a lot on every metric for everybody else.
Speaker: um Yeah, no, I think that's probably true. We can bank the economic growth from like burning oil and then use some of that to pay for some way to to rescue the Somalians, preferably in Somalia.
Speaker: ah I think something that and I mean, I would honestly in many situations advocate for this. Like I was clearly joking when I said, like, I'm the most empathic man in the world. But one solution to the problems of foreign enemy states would simply be not caring.
Speaker: I mean, and I don't think that's what we're going to end up doing. I mean, I think that there are enough liberal voters for good or ill that we would probably send 5% of our GDP to help the the poor bastards that are actually hurt by climate change.
Speaker: But when when people say, well, we might have to cut our quality of life by a third, which, by the way, will have a massive, devastating impact on suicide rates and so on, like COVID lockdowns. Right. To help the people of Eritrea,
Speaker: One response to that is, well, no, we don't. I mean, those people currently are polluting at higher rates than we are. That's a country that has about the GDP per cap that we did in the 50s.
Speaker: You know, if they can't manage to build the seawall, well, that's their problem. And I think that any previous society would have simply said that and continued moving on. Now, we're going to help, and I suppose I think that's good. But the the idea that we need to destroy our quality of life by going back to burning wood and so on, it's...
Speaker: All of this, to me, what what's being done is the legitimate but very resolvable problem as a justification for utterly changing our style of life toward gay race communism.
Speaker: And we see this over and over again. like And I don't mean to be too glib about this, but like, aha, we found the problem of male sexual violence and the solution is gay race communism. you know we found the problem of overpriced education and the solution is, and it's just sort of like, maybe you're just a communist at a certain point. When you look at this. Yeah, it's, I don't, I think there are many ways a nuclear power to resolve these environmental issues.
Speaker: Yeah. Yeah. I mean, i I like this is this is, you know, the the very French thing. Like we're we have the like lowest per capita carbon emissions ah of any developed country on the planet. And it's not even close. And we just power everything with nukes.
Speaker: ah And, you know, and in France, we have ah we we we call them watermelons because a watermelon is green on the outside and red on the inside. um And yeah, I mean, the the goal is to turn France, America, Germany, especially Germany, Britain into like East Germany circa 1984.
Speaker: And like, and especially the Europeans, they, they, I mean, they go pretty crazy. Like they talk, you know, oh, you know, we're, we're only going to be able to use electricity like eight hours a day. and it's like, no,
Speaker: and you know I don't think these people understand the potential of alternative realities. So, I mean, to some extent, as a formerly fairly competent fighting man or someone with money in the bank, I mean, if someone tells me, if you stay in this state, we're going to restrict your ability to drive to two days a week.
Speaker: I mean, it's it's a five mile jog to the campus. I would probably just say, well, that I'm going to move. Or, you know, I'm going to join the party that's resisting this economically and probably militarily after a couple of years.
Speaker: So the the this is the great mistake of socialism in general. I mean, people say things that are even accurate, like we could get every Russian to an improved level of income. If we took all the land from the quote unquote kulaks, the wealthy peasants and craftsmen and distributed evenly throughout the country.
Speaker: But the problem with that is there's a guy sitting on the porch of his farmhouse with a gun saying, well, that's that's not going to happen. You see, right. You're going to have to work out another technique. And that that's what's going to happen if you start in the USA, for example.
Speaker: confiscating private weapons, telling people they can't drive their big, ridiculous cars, but doing doing a lot of other things. I mean, a lot of our country is in the semi-arid West. So there's a whole, as you probably are aware, there's a whole tradition of riparian law about who gets to use water.
Speaker: ah Any attempt to centralize that and prevent good-sized towns or native tribes from watering their own pasture would be met with a war. Like there would be an angry response because people would be living in Death Valley now without water from the aquifers and the rivers and other states.
Speaker: So I think the idea of just people will go along with our large scale scheme, because what else would they do? Well, the answer is shoot you and take power. So I really think the leftists don't understand that, which is odd from a historical context, because that's been what they've done whenever whatever they've had a chance.
Speaker: Right, yeah. Historically, I mean, historically, that's and that's where the logic ends, which is you can't implement the program without, you know, putting people in gulags, at the very least, or, you know, that a hole in the ground, a big hole in the ground.
Speaker: ah The gulag came after that. And... and Yeah. And but, you know, thus far, guilt tripping and moral blackmail has been enough. I don't think that's going to work permanently, especially with aggressive males who would have to be the group to be targeted for total feminist or environmentalist revamping of society to work. I mean, I think most people at some level know that beyond the Christian or Buddhist eight things,
Speaker: rules aren't real. Like our policy on marijuana or whatever, the speed limit, water use is something we made up in response to conditions in our society. It has nothing to do with ethical standards from Bronze Age Israel.
Speaker: So, I mean, I think if people attempt to pursue this and say, well, you have a moral duty to help the the starving fighting men of Somalia, a lot of people will just look through their Bible and their code of laws and say, well, no, I don't.
Speaker: Even to the extent that I believe these rules are real, which for me is moderate, you know, this isn't among them. I don't have to do that at all. I can simply keep my car and, you know, yeah vote for nuclear power and kick you guys out of the White House. And there seems to be a real element of confusion about this just being an obvious possibility.
Speaker: mean, a lot of young men are moving to the, you know, right of Goebbels right now, which I think is a bad thing for everything from race relations to Olympic athletics. But like, if you try telling these guys,
Speaker: What we're going to do is take away your entire future because we need to let these non-functioning immigrants of your country in large numbers. I mean, once again, you're just going to see guys sit in the front steps of their houses with guns. It's not that's not going to occur.
Speaker: And it's considered almost ungentlemanly, I think might be the word to say, well, no, man, we're just not going to let you do this. because we actually have all the power in society. But there is a point where people start coming around, turning off the lights, where you're you're going to see that happening. I think you're seeing that in parts of the Western Cape and South Africa. You're seeing that in parts of Europe now.
Speaker: The USA would be a lot more blunt and violent about it, or not known for our subtlety.
Speaker: Oh, no, no, no. That's fine.
Speaker: Okay, it sounds good. All right. Sorry, guys. We've had a little technical difficulty. um more More bombing from B2s. So ah we were talking about ah Gen Z men turning to the right.
Speaker: And um i mean, this is definitely a true thing in the US. It's like the first time basically ever in the history of polling that ah I think that young men are more Republican than than the general population.
Speaker: ah It's also definitely a thing in France, like the RN, the National Rally, which is the quote-unquote populist right party, is the number one party with young people. And certainly anecdotally, I mean, you know, if if if you think that race discourse on on Twitter is too spicy, you don't want to see Gen Z, French Gen Z TikTok, because it will melt your face off.
Speaker: ah which is a huge cultural change for me because like the French people, and we can, we can talk about this separately, but like French people are genuine genuinely like among thely the least, arguably the least racist, certainly among the least racist people on the planet and genuinely not in the sort of fake PC way of Anglos, but like,
Speaker: Zoomer Frenchmen have zero taboos for good or ill. Just.
Speaker: And so. ah Yeah, I mean, it's a real thing. What is it that you think that drives it? Is it just like, you know, it's like it's today's form of youthful rebellion and just like, you know, the hippies, you know, eventually like got a job, got a car and voted for Reagan. The Gen Z rebels will, you know, buy a house and vote for ah Gavin Newsom or whatever.
Speaker: What do you think? i think I think there's an element of that, first of all. I mean, I do think that traditionally people have moderated as they've gotten older and gone into the actual business world and seen that you have to, and if you're doing sales or something like that, do outreach to a whole bunch of people and they're mostly just people. I mean, I've worked on those bullpen sales floors myself.
Speaker: yeah I think it'll happen to some extent. But I think the radicalism of young men is real. And I think it's if you put aside and it might be odd for me to say this, but if you put aside like the complex social science, like I put 18 controls in my regression model and just think about this logically, it's not at all surprising.
Speaker: mean, if you're a young white man in the USA or much of Europe, and this isn't very much different for black or Asian men for a bunch of silly ass reasons we'll get into. But if you're a young Caucasian male in those societies, you've been told since birth that you're one of the big problems in that society.
Speaker: And we we sometimes minimize how much this is true because there's still residual racism and hiring against minorities and all that. So like when you bring this point up, someone else will say, well, Yeah, but it's 2% easier for the young whites to get jobs in the blue-collar fields.
Speaker: Some of it's true. But if you look at just, like Metta, for example, once did a study where they were trying to track down anti-feminist rhetoric on, i guess, Facebook. And incidentally, they found, and I posted this link to my ex, for those that are interested, a couple of days ago, this would be July,
Speaker: Um, they actually found that 90% of negative rhetoric online that met their qualifications, like we should kill, which were pretty intense, was directed ah at men and at whites. Um, and this, this is very common. I mean, whatever it is, 70% of teachers are female, 78%.
Speaker: um Most of those 80 something percent lean to the political left. So if you're a guy and you go all the way through grade school, middle school, that a high school or trade school, almost everyone that teaches you is going to be a left leaning woman that's promoting these ideological narratives.
Speaker: The American Psychological Association recently ah narrowly avoided voting to label normal masculinity as a mental disorder. I believe toxic masculinity is, I could easily be wrong, but they had a discussion about the standard traits of masculinity, like aggression, willingness to fight or duel, this kind of thing. And they they tried to label them as a mental illness, which would be along the lines of calling like women's kink or lesser aggression insanity.
Speaker: I mean, it was it was just the craziest thing you've ever seen. And as a guy, you've... No pun intended. And as a guy, you've been seeing this in the USA or in core Europe most of your life. And I think that a lot of people at the same time are noticing that a lot of things are that they're being told are not true.
Speaker: Like, women do not seem to gravitate toward non-kinky, kindly, respectful guys who rarely hit the gym, to put it mildly. I mean... You know, minority immigrants, you know, Asians and Nigerians do well, but in general, aren't overperforming whites. They're USA. If you look at IQ points are eight behind generally.
Speaker: Now, I think that most of that's cultural and closable, if not all of it. But you still notice it. You notice that your Spanish buddy is not some kind of magic genius. who's enriching every element of your life.
Speaker: He's just a guy. And he's a guy who's doing worse in school than you are. So all of this, there's reality. And then there's this narrative that you're constantly told. And I think a lot of people are rebelling against that for kind of the same reasons that young women or young working class men rebelled against the narrative of the nineteen fifty s where everything sounds pleasant and society often looks bucolic. I mean, everyone likes seeing the United Nations looking kids in their clean cut polos trooping into a school.
Speaker: But then you start you start analyzing it and unpacking it and realizing like they're gonna send me to Korea. And it it looks a lot less pleasant and that the rebellion now, in one sense, rebellion is directed against the dominant cultural institution by young people, traditionally working class men.
Speaker: The dominant cultural institution today is the mainstream left. And that's what we're that's what we're seeing. Rebellion against that. Yeah. ah Yeah, I mean, I'm i'm curious because of um of something you said, which is, is okay, so ah young men are radicalizing to the right. Of course, young women are radicalizing to the left. We know that.
Speaker: And, you know, if you think about it from an electoral perspective, you know, does it even out? Yes, no, you sort of... look at the number with the magnifying glass and, and, and you can debate that. But of course, if you think about it from the perspective of like actual conflict, ah you know, and you put all the young men against all the young women, that's a very short war.
Speaker: And so, you know, ah circling back to what you were saying earlier about how, you know, A lot of this stuff doesn't meet the test of reality. A lot of this stuff doesn't meet the test of, you know, if you go too far, me and my friends are just going to physically stop you from doing it because it's too crazy and I'm just not going to accept it.
Speaker: um And and the the most potent, quote unquote, force, violent force in a society is the young men. But at the same time, ah another famous, and I don't even know if it's true as for a fact. It's one of the things you always hear, but you don't know if it's true. But, you know, the societies where you have major upheavals are the societies that are young, the societies that have a young average age. But America and Europe, but also America now, are aging societies.
Speaker: So I don't know. i don't know, you know if this sort of like radicalism of the young men, um and I'm not, I'm not even asking like, is there going to be a civil war? I'm just more asking in a broad sense, like a large cohort of young men being radicalized into some sort of right-wing opinion is like a powerful force, whether politically, culturally, or whatever.
Speaker: um And, and, I have no idea what the outcome is going to be. Maybe the outcome is just going to be like, ah you know, J.D. Vance and Jordan Berdella as presidents of the US s and France, and then we just have normal right wing politics.
Speaker: Or maybe the outcome is going to be ah some sort of civil conflict. I don't really believe that unless things go really bad. Or maybe it's going to be something weird that we don't, you know, we're not even anticipating. I don't know. I just think it's very interesting. What do you think?
Speaker: Yeah, I don't think there's going to be ah I remember I recently, I guess now more than a year ago, but I did an interview with Tim Poole, who's a really funny guy in person. But I mean, like that that panel of guys is very much like Civil War, like people just yell it.
Speaker: um I don't think that's going to happen. And I mean, I think there are a lot of practical reasons for that. Even leaving aside stuff like Everyone's Fat, which Ozempic will probably work on. That's a big one.
Speaker: But that that actually is also one of the big reasons that young women are so liberal and are not being pursued by men and are not dating. I mean, the the average woman is something like 70 pounds overweight in the USA. it's It's less of a problem in Europe. But I mean...
Speaker: You know, I think if you took that away, one of the predictors of feminism, and I'm obviously not idiotically saying this is why all women were second wave feminists or something. But one of the predictors of feminism pretty strongly, this has been said by everyone from Rush Limbaugh joking to Camille Paglia running decent models, is feeling isolated from the reproductive game.
Speaker: So like society traditionally, the idea that society has been bad for women isn't necessarily true. Women have my my friend Brooks Crenshaw, the writer and former Navy a SEAL intel guy would say that women have normally nested it in the middle.
Speaker: Like in historical societies as a man, you were if you're in the bottom 30 percent of males, you're to be killed in war. Right. Historically, only about 45 to 50 percent of men have passed on DNA.
Speaker: But if you were in the upper elite of men, you probably weren't raping your wife or anything like that, but you definitely had oh one or more wives. They weren't saying no very often as as society was structured. You lived in a castle.
Speaker: So, I mean, the men had that ah extremely broad distribution. Most women, if you look at something like what are called maids narratives, lived in reasonably happy marriages with one male partner.
Speaker: So i don't think that this was inherently abusive, but it certainly wasn't equal across every legal right. Blah, blah. If you get into what predicts participation in women's movements, very often that was feeling disenchanted with the way the mating game worked.
Speaker: Like you didn't like not having fully equal rights that tended to be women on the right tail of the bell curve. Or you were excluded from the mating process. You were suffragette to a point where people found this annoying.
Speaker: You refused to allow wine in your house in France or, you know, the U.S. s Southwest. Like, you there was something there that made it difficult for you to date. And i would I would assume that a lot of the stuff that women are being told now, and this is, it's not totally non-scientific, actually. I'm a tenured professor, but this isn't something I have, like, a paper prompt about.
Speaker: But, I mean, I would assume that things like... being 100 pounds overweight, or having followed sort of what young women are supposed to do through high school and into college, the blue hair, left wing politics, nose ring, all of that probably makes you much less dateable and so much more likely to swing to the radical left. And I would tend to suspect that if you had a husband and a firstborn son, you would move considerably to the right.
Speaker: Anyway, that that's a bit of a sideline. But, ah you know, pull of those guys. Civil War might happen. USA, not only is everyone fat, which is where this came from, but also like America or France has a nuclear armed military. We've got drones.
Speaker: I mean, there's just not going to be like an army of young right wing Hispanic men like walking toward D.C. where that's allowed to happen. This is that we're not talking World War One conditions. A last point.
Speaker: You said the most radical group in society is the young men. and That's obviously true. The difference with an aging society isn't that the most radical or reactionary group isn't the young men. It's just that they're more older, still somewhat competent men.
Speaker: And I do think that's a regulator. And I think that that's a regulator in the positive sense and that we're less likely to have an on the ground military conflict. It's also a regulator negatively, because one thing I do sympathize with the young guys about is this idea of it's impossible for us to move up.
Speaker: A lot of this stuff like we can't buy a house in the slums. Like, shut up. That's not true. But the the stuff like we can't make partner, like we can't make senior salesmen, we can't do anything because these old bastards are all here.
Speaker: These are from the largest generations in history. And they're refusing to leave because they don't think they can comfortably retire. I've seen that. I mean, if you're in a bullpen environment, your boss, he's probably a great guy, has some wonderful stories, but he's like 62. He's not going anywhere. He'll be there in eight, 10 years.
Speaker: So what do you do? All of this is an issue and the practical things here, like women are being told to be unattractively radical. Men are not as appealing because they can't move up in the job market.
Speaker: From an Evo psych perspective, this is probably driving a lot of this as versus how persuasive Gavin Newsom is or or something like that. Yeah. ah Yeah, no, that's that's right.
Speaker: um And I mean, this is this is, you know. ah
Speaker: This is another thing, which is like a big driver of quote unquote revolutions and especially left wing revolutions from the French Revolution to the Bolsheviks to Zoran Mamdani is this very specific slice of people, which is downwardly mobile elites.
Speaker: It's like people who have some sort of elite credential, but didn't quite didn't quite make it. and or didn't do as well as they think they deserve. There's a famous letter by Danton, who is one of the leaders of the French Revolution, who was like, all of us are like lawyers who went to law school on a royal scholarship and then couldn't make money as lawyers.
Speaker: Yeah. and That was Robespierre. All of them were poor kids who got a scholarship from the king ah to attend university.
Speaker: ah and And then they got their law degree and they could and they can make money and they could be successful as a lawyer. And so they became activists and blah, blah, blah. And and this is this is also the Mabdani demographic. This is the... the the various socialists in Russia demographic. This is the other side of youthful radicalization that doesn't work.
Speaker: um If I can jump in there briefly, i think that's important because I think we're going to win you know if we each have to claim one block of obnoxious young men. But like it it is important to realize that there also are a lot of minority men in the United States and there are a lot of young women.
Speaker: So we're not seeing one-sided radicalism. That's kind of that's New York Times talk. That's what The mainstream media tells the people we're seeing young men swing far to the right. In fact, we've seen young men swing about six points to the right.
Speaker: What we're what we're seeing actually is a bigger split between young men and young women or young white and minority men. And the biggest reason for that is that young women and young people, but not some young people of color have moved further to the left.
Speaker: So, I mean, if women move 18 points to the left and men move four points to the right, you can present that as a liberal journalist as a 22 point gap and blame men. Right. Not really. So you're seeing as much of this.
Speaker: I mean, Mamdani is, as I understand, an Indian American, just became a citizen, communist from Uganda. He says he's a socialist, not a communist. But i mean, that's a hell of a profile for a candidate.
Speaker: And we're going to see more candidates like that. I mean, in Minneapolis, there's Omer Fateh, who is... yeah Somali, second generation. i believe it's him that's joked about his family being involved in piracy back in the home country. That might be a joke.
Speaker: but i mean like you're talking Well, if he did, I respect that. Yeah. Now, if no if his parents were pirates, that's actually pretty badass. But I recall if you go on the message boards in Minneapolis, they're talking about politics.
Speaker: that That's actually a claim that's been made about one of the candidates. So, you know, no slander it's not him. But nonetheless, this is the guy who this is. I mean, he is his focus is. The Somali community in that city, he, again, I believe is a democratic socialist.
Speaker: ah He's running with DFL, a Democratic Farmer Labor Party, although it's quite mainstream in Minnesota. Which is the the the Minnesota version of the yeah Democratic Party. Yeah, but I mean, like, ah you're basically the point is, without Doom saying, you're going to see more candidates like that, just like you're going to see more candidates sort of doing, you Luftwaffe talk in the next 20 years. And I mean, that the the ultimate example of that will be if you see J.D. Vance, who I don't think is as far to the right as he's been painted, but certainly is a favorite of the online right.
Speaker: Running against probably not Zoran, but say AOC or something like that, where the people yelling in your computer will really seem to have popped out and started running for the presidency.
Speaker: I mean, and like the the spokespeople for those two are going to be exactly who you think they're going to be on both sides. It's all. This is my ah ah out of the money bet, by the way, for 2028. It's JD versus AOC.
Speaker: I don't know if it's going to happen, but you know i I would put like a little bit of money on that ah with good odds. um Not saying it's going to happen, just saying with good odds, I would put money on that.
Speaker: Yeah. Yeah, I mean, the whole Mamdani thing, ah ah sidebar, but you know
Speaker: you know the origin of his family. So basically, ah when the British were running Africa and various other places, they would essentially like import Indians to be like their mid-rank, mid-manager caste that would sort of like run the run the blacks for them, essentially.
Speaker: And so... when And so you had those in South Africa, you had those in various ah places. And so when the British decolonized, of course, the first thing that the blacks in those countries did was try to murder all the Indians and take all their shit because they had they had a lot more ah And so another famous ah progeny of that is, of course, Freddie Mercury, who's being reinvented as this like BIPOC hero, even though his family were like rah-rah supporters of the empire, because, of course, the empire protected them. And when the empire, you know, went away, they lost everything and they had to live and they had to move to the UK as refugees.
Speaker: um And so Mamdani is this, you know, BIPOC hero of the people, even though the reason his family has education and status and money is because they were essentially like a middle manager of like that the British colonial empire.
Speaker: Yeah, I mean, I think that if you take an honest and amoral look at history, things tend to be complex. And if you're ah assuming yes incentive-based behavior, not all that surprising. So like, just to throw out a couple of things in random, the British Empire was basically good.
Speaker: I mean, there's some dispute in India because India is one of the great historical civilizations. So when the British arrived in India, India was actually more relatively wealthy versus the whites than it was after the British left.
Speaker: But even there, like overall prosperity in India, if you're looking at rail, as you know, I'm sure. But if you're looking at railroads, miles of road, income per year, you know, education for women, all of that improved under British leadership. And you there are a lot of there's a lot of debate about whether it would have improved under Indian leadership.
Speaker: The empire, the native empires in that the subcontinent were fighting each other and collapsing. which is why the Brits were able to beat them, blah, blah. But anyway, for the rest of the British Empire, places like Kenya, Nigeria, I mean, I don't think there's any dispute that the overall impact was positive. Bruce Gilley wrote a book about this called The Case for Colonialism, yeah where he just said, I mean, like some of these had you know, large, formidable tribes, but the things like grade based school that the British introduced just weren't there.
Speaker: I mean, even moving outside of black Africa, i mean, some of the areas like Hong Kong, there's there's just no debate. I mean, that was a fishing village. And the ability of the Brits to combine sort of the best Western and the best Chinese practices and build a city is what created probably the seventh, eighth world financial capital there.
Speaker: So there's yeah i mean, I don't have a problem with Mamdani because his family were British colonial officials or whatever the native equivalent were called. I mean, I think that's so positive in some ways. Neither do I. I just i just think that he uses that status to then portray himself as like Che Guevara.
Speaker: Yeah, well, Che Guevara is actually a similar case. I mean, you know, Mahatma Gandhi is probably the ultimate example of this. Yeah. I mean, like Gandhi was another example of this because he worked as a lawyer in South Africa.
Speaker: Yeah, Mahatma Gandhi was a was a British military veteran who fought well. I think he got one serious medal and who became a lawyer. I mean, he was a member of one of the Indian quote-unquote forward castes. I forget whether Brahman or Chaitanya, there are hundreds of jati within those.
Speaker: But I mean, Gandhi's whole thing when he decided to seek liberation was basically a silly facade is a little rude, but it would be the equivalent of a white revolutionary dressing up as Jesus.
Speaker: I mean, he took his Brooks Brothers suits and hung them up in the closet and he put on one of those dopey loincloths and he started walking around speaking to these passionate crowds, mostly made up of members of the lower cast. yeah And at first, the Brits, including many of his former school friends, thought this was a joke.
Speaker: they weren't sure what to do with it. Like, oh, is this Mahondas out there? This street preacher outfit with the henna paint on? And I mean, it it turned out to be very successful because it appealed to this broad base of Western leftists.
Speaker: Yeah. People who wanted revolution in the colonies. And I didn't know this. I thought of Mahatma Gandhi, as I suppose most Westerners do, it as a secular saint until I was maybe 25. And then you start looking at this and realizing, oh, British and the Indians were both and Civilized but brutal in their way. Probably improved the place.
Speaker: This guy was a lawyer. He was a civil practitioner. And you you ah you start to understand some things that were useful to me later when I started re-reviewing the U.S. civil rights movement and so on. yeah, Mamdani presenting himself as an oppressed son of the soil is...
Speaker: entertaining. I guess last line on this, I mean, his own family at its final level that produced him is and not just wealthy, but extremely well known. I think both of his family, are mother and father have Wikipedia pages.
Speaker: His yeah mother directed on Mississippi Masala with Denzel Washington. read that Mamdani had a rap career, and I assume this was a joke. like I mean, I've released horrible mixtapes with people and so on.
Speaker: But no, he actually did the song Number One Spice for a Disney movie. There are videos of him rapping about the Holy Land Five and so on. So no, I mean, a typical typical rich kid who was able to use the fact that he's technically a person of color, like a Lebanese or a forward cast Indian would very technically be, to market himself to ah an entirely new audience.
Speaker: Yeah, that's, I mean, that's that's the future of democratic politics, man. ah It's going to be really hilarious. All right. ah Do you want to talk about men and women?
Speaker: Because, you know, i think you and i ah we've never had a real conversation about this, but ah we follow each other, ah have a sort of similar outlook, which I would quit call sort of moderate red pill, which is, you know,
Speaker: A, men and women are different. B, men and women have, you know, dark sides or a science that it's not polite to talk about to their psychology, but there are nevertheless real.
Speaker: But also, like, you know, like, be realistic, live in the real world. Don't hate women for existing or being women.
Speaker: ah Don't, don't. I mean, don't be an incel. Some people don't choose to be an incel, but don't don't, you know, turn inceldom into this thing. ah So, I mean, like, all of the discourse I see ah makes me want to tear out my own hair, so I don't know where to start. I mean, we we were talking in the green room about this ah this piece in the New York Times about heterofatalism, which apparently is a thing, where, yeah, crazy left-wing women...
Speaker: ah are attracted to men, but also decide that men are horrible. But also, you know, all of the men that they're surrounded by are like low T Brooklyn hipster male feminists. So, you know, maybe they have a point, but maybe for the wrong reason. I don't know. I don't know what to I don't know what to think about this.
Speaker: Well, I mean, I think, first of all, there's there's a lot of truth to the last thing you said. I mean, I think if you were if you're familiar with the sneaky fucker strategy in biology, I mean, I would assume that you'd find one of the highest rates of sexual assault and so on among these twee little fellows that refer to themselves as male allies and are always there to take you home after a drinking party and so on. I would strongly encourage a sister a close female friend to avoid that group altogether.
Speaker: but um yeah But moving to the broader topic, I think eat Point one would be, yes, you see a lot of mainstream modern women telling themselves how wonderful they are and bemoaning heterosexuality.
Speaker: yeah And I think a big element of that is that they've been fed this mainstream Western narrative, which now comes from the center to the fairly hard left, as we we established.
Speaker: That's really hard on sort of human nature. So like wanting male dominant sex as a woman is considered really anti-feminist to about half a feminist. People will say things in writing like you want me on all fours like a beast.
Speaker: And there seems to be it's funny. It's just, of course, that's how the position works. You me to touch the bump down there? But like it's there's this attempt to radicalize all of this in the same way vegans will say you you're comfortable tearing apart the flesh of a living creature with your teeth.
Speaker: One of the things that I do actually with my students, whenever I'm stuck teaching teaching a writing class or something like that. ah intro stats and research methods include a big write a paper piece. One of the things I do is actually have them write out 50 completely normal sentences in hysterical, angry fashion.
Speaker: Just to get you, like if you ever do become a journo, you're going to, this is probably what you're going to And it's a fun assignment. The kids have fun with it, but that really is kind of what you're getting with the takes I just gave on eating a steak and the doggy style position.
Speaker: But a lot of that is pumped into just the average normal business woman. You should not want men to be sexually and emotionally dominant.
Speaker: You should want to be a fully equal financial partner in your relationship, but you should also want to raise your own kids like the mommy wars are still very real in the US upper middle class.
Speaker: Just all of it. and it presents a really negative picture of male-female relationships. Like if I was a woman and I thought all sex was like what you see in hardcore pornography, and I thought that I was going to be expected to do all of the childcare, my friends would laugh at me, but I was also expected to outperform my husband in the workplace and just on and on and on and on.
Speaker: I would start hating heterosexuality. But the the blue pill for the sisters listening to this, the probably a selected group of women, but is that that's all just bullshit? I mean, like when you look at reality, like a starting point would be that men and women are obviously different.
Speaker: As you said, that does include a dark side. So 98% of rapists, unsurprisingly, the other 2% are probably trans. But, um you know, 80% of murderers, so on, are male.
Speaker: The flip side of that would be that women seem to be much better at long-term manipulations and intrigues and are no nicer to people weaker than them. Psychological damage.
Speaker: Yeah. Encouraging suicides. I mean, there are an incredible number, 50,000, I believe, across just white and black male suicides per year in the USA. yeah But also, like, in terms of control over the week, like, if you add up abortions and infanticides every year, it just in my country, there's 700,000.
Speaker: So, like, when female friends start saying, like, we we could not conceive of killing, it's just like you pull the infanticide numbers and the abortion numbers, like, what's all that? And they'll start saying, well, you know, that's not really a person. It's, you know, like,
Speaker: parasitical infestation of my body. But I think that you can say that men and women have very similar levels of of darkness, but are are different in general. So sexually, like 90% of men prefer to be quote unquote Dom, like you do most of the talking, you do most of the motion.
Speaker: 80% of women prefer to be submissive. yeah This has been found over and over and over again. It's not a bad thing. I will note also for the people dating. It depends on how you define it. Like if you define submissive dominant, not just like taking the initiative versus ah letting happen, but like a more kinky way, there's a lot more women who are submissive than men are dominant.
Speaker: Because being dominant is actually work. Yeah, no, it definitely is. you got to do all that talking. and I mean, it's definitely... I think that while you are distracted, having to Dungeons & Dragons game everything you're doing is a little annoying. If you're really talking about someone who's actual BDSM sub, like, get over there, are you dirty, in exactly this position. Like, it's that we can maybe you just move to not doing that.
Speaker: But yeah the point, though, I think... And that actually is a very interesting point that there are far more women who are kinky and mildly dark, like sometimes yeah have rape or CNC fantasies than there are men who enjoy this kind of thing.
Speaker: And I actually, i like, I don't care about this. i think what you do in the bedroom is no more moral or immoral than me playing Call of Duty. You know, i mean, the simulated rating is the favorite game of humans because it's what we did for 20,000 years. And it's important to keep that in mind.
Speaker: But if you do view this as a mild moral positive, ah men, I think, would come down more on the the light side of this. Like when you look at men watch too much porn, but when you look at men's favorite books, it's like Kipling.
Speaker: You look at women's favorite books, it's like number one is Fifty Shades of Grey. Number two is The Story of O. Number three is Fifty Shades of Grey, too. So I think that the the people that are buying these lecturing me about the brutality of sexuality does wear a little thin.
Speaker: But so point one, women are hearing this this terrible sounding narrative. you're You're the superwoman. You're doing all of this. Two, this is just BS. You should accept male-female differences. Men do tend to be more dumb. Women do tend to be more...
Speaker: secondarily controlling, receptive, whatever other term you want to use. But I think that there's a reason why the negative narrative about masculinity and femininity is so prevalent. And in recent years, I've started using the term womanosphere.
Speaker: Because there really is an incredible amount. I want to hear you talk about that because I completely agree. And and and yeah, I think it's really important. Go on. Thanks, man. But I mean, I think in terms of just the the practical frame that we're setting up here, there's this negative narrative of heterosexual relationships from basic submission at the level of enjoying the missionary position is bad or receptiveness or whatever else else you want to call it.
Speaker: That also includes some crazy takes on you working as a businesswoman, childcare, all this stuff. Your life's going to be miserable if you date one of those boys. And the question is, where's this coming from? And the answer is that there's an immensely organized block of female content. I mean, an example would be the Are We Dating the Same Guy groups on Facebook.
Speaker: yeah Where there are hundreds of thousands of women involved in these networks, and they're doing things like posting pictures of random men and calling them rapists. That's not an exaggeration. Or saying things like, I mean, just a simple example would be, he he prefers the doggy position. He must hate our faces.
Speaker: Like, everything becomes this weird. And by the way, you can still see the face. You just see a lot of other positive things as well. It's not an insult, ladies. It's compliment. But, like, the... In all seriousness, though, leaving banter aside, like, you really do see this stuff. And, I mean, if I were one of the guys in these groups, I would i would get a lawyer immediately.
Speaker: Like, there's a massive... but but i mean, this is just insane. Like, I've had friends that were posted in the... ah One of my friends who's a lawyer in... A major Midwestern city was posted in one of these groups.
Speaker: And the claim was that he had herpes. This is from his ex-girlfriend. He does not say have herpes. But like once this gets out there, how do you stop it? These are all anonymous female profiles with names like Cleveland cat girl from Facebook or Instagram.
Speaker: um And this is just one of many examples, like the number two podcast in the country. We're not talking about like Andrew Tate's Hustlers University or something. This is Joe Rogan level is call her daddy, which is just conscious discussion of like every sexual topic.
Speaker: in a way that somehow criticizes both men and women. a typical episode name would be like Sweet White Rain, Why I Like Facials or something like that. And there's also just a massive amount of of criticism of males in there. And it just goes on and on. I mean, like I said, 90% of the content between the sexes that was negative was directed at men. So you have these Reddit forums, should I divorce them?
Speaker: And a consistent theme of this stuff is that- And the answer is always yes. Yeah, the answer is about 89% of the time, yes, yeah. And the the things that people did, like one of the most famous cases that actually broke out of this weird world and went viral on Twitter, where normal men were saying, oh this is absolutely insane, was a guy who was a phone lineman, which is one of the most dangerous jobs in the country.
Speaker: So he's climbing these poles in storms, he's clipping these electric live wires. And when he went home when he goes home, he only does about 20% of the chores. He also makes all the money, as I recall. and And this woman said, I feel like he doesn't contribute.
Speaker: Should I go? And all of these women were saying, yes, queen. And are you beautiful lady? Don't do it. You deserve better. And I think it it is actually it probably saved a marriage that all these men and housewives that on Twitter and Facebook started chipping in and saying. Yeah.
Speaker: right And by the way, like men who do these kinds of jobs make like. good six figures, like at least 150 K and more with seniority and like extra hours and, and, and, and hazard pay and so on, because like not many people want to do these jobs and they're skilled. So guys who are like, you know, oil rig workers and all that, like these guys are making good money.
Speaker: ah yeah They're working really hard. They're working with their body. And as you say, they're like taking physical risks with their safety. So like that's, I mean, Yeah. That's the kind of partner who actually like deserves a sandwich ah when he comes home ah from work and maybe even a blowjob in the morning.
Speaker: Yeah, absolutely. Because you're going, but I mean, I think that that actual point, like, This is one of the points I made online, that if you made the extremely obvious point, you should sometimes give your romantic partner head and make them food, which i think in either U.S. city or in France would have been utterly non-controversial for right all of time.
Speaker: i mean, maybe since 1910s when people stopped taking the sodomy laws all that seriously. Right. But I mean, for 100 years, this is just a piece of relationship advice. If you say that online now, especially as a man, you're guaranteed to be mobbed by these crazy people who say things like and it's important to break down all of these like I can divorce at any time for any reason.
Speaker: I have no responsibility to sexually satisfy my man is something you see over and over again. You sometimes see emotionally satisfy. yeah I have no duty to play a domestic role, even if he makes money most of the money.
Speaker: And like a lot of these claims are objectively wrong. Like you no one can ever make you do anything. You shouldn't rape your partner. You should just leave. But I mean, the idea that you don't have some responsibility to financially, emotionally, physically, et cetera, make the person you're married to happy is crazy.
Speaker: Like that's actually a violation of Christian and civil marital law, like lack of normal marital relations, which includes sex, includes men working as a grounds for fault divorce in every state in the union.
Speaker: But you have this every every law. Oh, so in France as well. Yeah, just in every country, I would imagine. Yeah, yeah, yeah. There was a famous, so the the the term in the Napoleon Code is that one of the obligation of marriage is common life.
Speaker: And some woman tried to get a divorce because her husband moved away for work and and the Supreme Court had clarified that no, common life doesn't mean living in the same place. It's just a euphemism for sex.
Speaker: ah And so they were like, well, i mean, did he come home on the weekends? Yes. Did you have sex when he came home? Yes. Okay. Well, no. So you have no ground for divorce. This is a very French decision. I mean, I picture some judge sitting there like, no, that is not. I mean, it refers to the mid room, you fool. We're simply polite in Europe.
Speaker: But no, i mean, at any rate, like, I think there's there is an element of obvious reality to that, though. I mean, the U.S. terms of it. And. fun but theyre Sorry, just finishing this. there's The other obvious element of reality is that you know there was always this idea that one of the rules of marriage is obligation to to have sex and to sexually satisfy each other. But like it's not like our great-grandparents...
Speaker: were like our great grandfather was like brutally raping his wife whenever he he felt like it. Like in real life, you know, you live with another person. And so you're constantly like making compromises because even if, you know, quote unquote, legally the male has all the power, whatever, you know, you're living with this person and you have to raise kids with them. And so even though technically or theoretically, you could do all sorts of heinous shit to them, you're actually not going to.
Speaker: um And so, but yeah it's it's also worth noting yeah that it was considered normal, just make things easier. It was a lubricant, no pun intended for,
Speaker: um for having a um more active and regular sex life. um Anyway, ah just bigger to make that second point. Yeah, that's correct. And we actually, like I said earlier, we have the diaries of sort of young working and farm wives from this period. And we can and we know how often sexual and domestic violence occurred. And it was it was significantly rarer than it is today.
Speaker: Like not excusing the bad husbands of that era, but an important point is like the least likely person to go crazy on you is a husband or wife. So what we've seen, because women, and this actually probably accounts for a lot of the disenchantment with heterosexuality, right?
Speaker: The lack of committed relationships with men, partly because modern women are making them impossible, combined with modern dating and erotica culture. And so it's like you are being asked to do you excuse me all kinds of wild shit with people that you just met at a nightclub.
Speaker: And that's actually much more dangerous than having to give your husband a blowjob twice a week, having in quote marks. So like the rate of sexual violence, a lot of this is due to weird redefinition, I will be honest and say.
Speaker: But the rate of sexual violence in the USA or core Europe has increased dramatically since 1950. I could pull up Disaster Center or FBI and check this right now, actually, but it's something like 40,000 reported rapes a year. And this is after the point where people would have started reporting to 231,000 or something, because you're much less likely to be abused by your partner than by strange people or in right situations like some guy you invited home yeah for quote unquote a drink.
Speaker: yeah And I mean, again, there's women. ah never Rape is never OK, but women are not free of all logical culpability there. I mean, it one when people say that rape cases are very difficult to prosecute, that's because the typical rape case isn't.
Speaker: Yeah. You know, a recent immigrant with a knife jumping out from behind a bush and grabbing you, although that does happen just disturbingly often. It's a situation where you go to a rave or a fraternity event. yeah You're comfortable having oral sex with two guys, but not vaginal sex with a third guy.
Speaker: And you try to bring that to a totally unsympathetic police detective who's got murders to solve. And it's the report sits for a while. Yeah. You know, not justifying that, but there are very easy, like as a guy, I'll put it this way. There are very easy ways not to get into a violent brawl.
Speaker: We've, I'm sure both been in one. and These happen at bars. These happen at athletic events. But like, you can just do things like not get drunk and wear the rival team jersey to your section and talk trash. And it cuts your odds of fighting down about 95%. And there are similar rules, like don't get drunk with opposite sex strangers.
Speaker: This is true for men as well in the era of false allegations that I would give to a daughter or a son that would presumably keep them out of 90 percent of these situations. You can't avoid the other 10 percent. There's risk in life.
Speaker: Right. Yeah. I mean, i I think that telling people that they don't have any emotional, sexual or financial duties in relationships and that they should get divorced whenever there's an argument is a negative and foolish thing to tell them.
Speaker: And it's going to lead to extreme conflict. So the womanosphere, when I'm using that term, I'm referring to everything from CHD, the pod, over to the massive Reddit pages on divorce, over to the Facebook groups full of women, to Twitter's whole sphere of feminist women that will jump in every time you say something like, why wouldn't she hook up and give me a sandwich after work?
Speaker: All of that is is promoting a certain view of heterosex relationships that's almost entirely negative. And a last thing, but like when you talk about marriage and you say, and again, we have the records of this, when you say like traditional marriages weren't wildly sexually abusive, there's a whole network of things that played into that. Like the average woman had four brothers for much of history, four siblings, two brothers.
Speaker: But you're and theyre not just going to do that. They would leave and go live with their mother for a year and you'd have to physically deal with their relatives. You know, women in Europe and most of the USA were in charge of the poisons and guns in the household. Like you're not just going to ah abuse your, by the way, also the rule that violence within a family was not considered a crime. They're not going to abuse the some the person who makes the food.
Speaker: Yeah, and who controls all the rat poison. I mean, like the the, but the rule though, that probably wouldn't have been prosecutable either. The rule was, as I understand, I don't know much about French law, but actually an expert American law.
Speaker: The rule was that violence within a family, you get a fist fight with your brother about the family business, that was not prosecuted in the same fashion as external stranger violence. and And you can argue that at the extremes that could lead to sexual violence against a wife, it could also lead to her saying no by swatting her husband with a frying pan, by the way. No one would prosecute that either.
Speaker: But the reason for that rule is that you don't want family members to have small internal disputes. around he forgot the safe word kind of points and go to the police and get devastating home ending divorces. And that actually is where we are now because there was such insistence on changing that rule.
Speaker: Now you do have entire internet groups that will tell you how to get a divorce. And the divorce rate is down. but It's 43%. Something like that. It's a terrible figure. Yeah. Yeah. And yeah, I mean, that the the the, the, the, this is one of the things that I, I can't stop obsessing about. We're running out of time.
Speaker: I know. uh, ah
Speaker: You know what? let's i I think we've got enough material um and I need to release you. ah we have so we have the traditional question, which we do at the end of every podcast.
Speaker: ah Recommend a book. can be any book, fiction, nonfiction, recent, old, but it cannot be in your area of expertise. Okay. The book I usually recommend when people ask that is Thomas Sowell's Vision of the Anointed, which everyone should read. But I would actually recommend the Collected Poems of Rudyard Kipling this time, which I actually just read.
Speaker: um You know, he yeah his aneststor his ancestors probably fought some of mine, given where they were distributed globally. But it's one of the great- His ancestors probably fought some of mine. Yeah, that's a good point. His ancestors fought everybody and conquered half the world.
Speaker: Blimey fans. So did mine. Yeah, no, mean, it's, there's actually an interesting story there. Like I'm Celtic, Irish, Bantu, apparently from the the lower nobility in that region, although I'm sure they tell everyone that on the DNA test and a bit Plains Indian.
Speaker: And so all of my ancestors were pretty notable warriors, but they all lost to specific British descended people within about 150 years. So it's ah it's dark. But anyway, your honorary Frenchman.
Speaker: Oh, that's a good point. now Thank you. um i'm I'm touched by that, actually. but so But Kipling, though, one of the great, even though his his people roguishly fought both of ours, i'm one of the great guy poets.
Speaker: Oh, yeah. He's great. He's amazing. All that. i would Anyway, I'd recommend that people actually read some of those. They're all very chantable if you go out drinking. But it's a totally different view of poetry than like Maya Angelou's.
Speaker: a word, a bird on the page, a verb style, which has become the norm in rap and slam and so on. So anyway, go go check out some traditional poetry. That'd be my starting point. That's a really good recommendation. i I love this question. I always get such great recommendations. Anyway, Wilfred Riley, thank you so much for your time. This was a lot of fun just bantering for an hour.
Speaker: I could have gone too easily, but we both have jobs. ah But this was a lot of fun, and I really appreciated it. I hope you enjoyed it as well.
Speaker: I did. Thanks for having me on. All right. Have a good day, sir.
