WEBVTT - Are Gen Z Men All Republicans Now 0:00:01.760 --> 0:00:05.240 All media. 0:00:08.720 --> 0:00:12.600 Oh boy, howdy, welcome back to it could happen here 0:00:13.080 --> 0:00:18.840 a podcast about about those wacky gen Z kids and 0:00:18.920 --> 0:00:22.840 how all of the things that the mainstream media used 0:00:22.840 --> 0:00:26.040 to say about millennials I have now embraced to say 0:00:26.079 --> 0:00:29.320 about gen Z who are destroying the world through their 0:00:29.400 --> 0:00:37.480 through their greed and evilness and good knees comparatively. Yeah, Miah, 0:00:38.200 --> 0:00:39.559 how are you doing? You're you're gen Z? 0:00:39.760 --> 0:00:39.960 Right? 0:00:40.840 --> 0:00:45.120 Yeah, so I'm on okay, I am on the exact 0:00:45.280 --> 0:00:49.120 borderline of I am either the oldest Zoomer or the 0:00:49.200 --> 0:00:50.120 youngest millennial. 0:00:50.960 --> 0:00:53.320 So you're you're a day walker, right like you're the 0:00:53.400 --> 0:00:57.560 you're the Blade of gen Z. Yeah, yeah, okay, so 0:00:57.640 --> 0:00:59.680 you could go out in the sub onions, but you 0:00:59.760 --> 0:01:03.080 still blood. Yeah, I get it, I get it. Yeah, 0:01:03.160 --> 0:01:05.760 who's the Chris Christal I guess I'm the Chris Christofferson. 0:01:05.880 --> 0:01:09.640 If we're doing the original Blade movie, which I watched 0:01:09.680 --> 0:01:13.200 over Thanksgiving break pretty good. I hadn't seen it in 0:01:13.240 --> 0:01:17.319 like fucking twenty years, but solid movie, solid movie. 0:01:17.360 --> 0:01:19.680 I feel like it's kind of downhill from the Blood Rave. 0:01:19.760 --> 0:01:21.760 But the Blood Rave is pretty sick. It's all every 0:01:21.840 --> 0:01:26.399 everything in culture was downhill from blood rave. But yeah, 0:01:26.480 --> 0:01:29.400 it's got some it's got some good bits to it. Still, 0:01:30.840 --> 0:01:36.000 you know what doesn't have good bits to it. 0:01:34.560 --> 0:01:35.920 The institution of marriage. 0:01:36.959 --> 0:01:40.840 That I mean, I don't disagree with that, but I 0:01:40.880 --> 0:01:44.440 was going to say the Washington Post editorial board, Ah, 0:01:44.680 --> 0:01:48.440 you know, yeah, so we are talking is that this 0:01:48.520 --> 0:01:51.600 is an episode about some gin z panic shit that 0:01:51.720 --> 0:01:54.320 came out recently. That thought I felt was worth digging 0:01:54.360 --> 0:01:57.480 into because of the pretty interesting ways in which it's 0:01:57.520 --> 0:02:01.080 wrong if you were, you know, celebrating being with your family, 0:02:01.280 --> 0:02:04.360 eating turkey or just shooting up Heroin alone in the bathroom. 0:02:04.600 --> 0:02:08.480 Last week, on November twenty second, twenty twenty three, the 0:02:08.639 --> 0:02:11.920 Washington Post Editorial Board published an opinion column with the 0:02:12.000 --> 0:02:16.880 provocative title, if attitudes don't shift, a political dating mismatch 0:02:16.919 --> 0:02:18.320 will threaten marriage. 0:02:18.560 --> 0:02:24.360 Hell yeah, yeah, I love this. Vitally destroy the institution? 0:02:24.600 --> 0:02:28.079 Yeah yeah, we're doing this through a political dating mismatch. 0:02:28.200 --> 0:02:28.359 Now. 0:02:28.720 --> 0:02:34.160 I think an article with roughly this premise drops every year, 0:02:34.320 --> 0:02:37.160 sometimes a couple of times a year, on a couple 0:02:37.160 --> 0:02:39.720 of different places. This time it came in through the 0:02:39.800 --> 0:02:43.000 Washington Post editorial Board, and the basic premise of this 0:02:43.040 --> 0:02:47.320 specific article is that gen Z and millennial men are 0:02:47.400 --> 0:02:52.639 growing more conservative while women are growing more progressive. This 0:02:52.760 --> 0:02:56.880 threatens marriage as an institution because all these closed minded 0:02:56.960 --> 0:03:00.880 gen Z lib broads won't date report opplicans. Right. That 0:03:00.960 --> 0:03:03.519 is literally like the point of the article is a 0:03:03.760 --> 0:03:06.239 gen Z liberal women, they are less willing to date 0:03:06.280 --> 0:03:10.320 outside of their political beliefs, and men are getting more conservative. 0:03:10.720 --> 0:03:13.240 So it's really a danger for marriage. 0:03:13.320 --> 0:03:13.639 Now. 0:03:14.280 --> 0:03:17.600 I understand if your first impulse is to say something like, well, 0:03:17.600 --> 0:03:20.320 when has the Washington Post editorial board ever been right 0:03:20.360 --> 0:03:23.520 about a single goddamn thing? And that is a correct 0:03:23.560 --> 0:03:24.360 attitude to have. 0:03:24.600 --> 0:03:28.200 Sometimes they make the decision not to publish an article. 0:03:28.720 --> 0:03:30.920 There are some days where they don't write anything. 0:03:31.400 --> 0:03:33.400 Yeah, you have to, that is a good decision. If 0:03:33.440 --> 0:03:36.120 they made that decision every day, I would be fully 0:03:36.160 --> 0:03:39.320 supportive of the Washington Post editorial board. And if they'll 0:03:39.400 --> 0:03:42.720 hire me, I can make that decision for them every day. 0:03:42.760 --> 0:03:47.440 I'm very good at not doing anything. That said, even 0:03:47.440 --> 0:03:50.760 though it is correct to say the Washington Post editorial 0:03:50.760 --> 0:03:55.240 boarder basically always wrong, I've still run into overwhelming numbers 0:03:55.280 --> 0:03:57.680 of my peers who think this article is silly but 0:03:57.800 --> 0:04:01.840 still buy into the basic point in this piece. This 0:04:01.920 --> 0:04:05.080 is generally married to a widespread belief which is actually 0:04:05.160 --> 0:04:08.760 cited in the article, that toxic male influencers like Andrew 0:04:08.800 --> 0:04:11.640 Tate have tilted huge numbers of young men to the right. 0:04:11.720 --> 0:04:13.760 So even though people will be like, well, it's stupid 0:04:13.760 --> 0:04:16.280 to expect people to date, you know, folks who believe 0:04:16.440 --> 0:04:19.440 horrible political things that would hurt them, it's true that 0:04:19.520 --> 0:04:22.520 men are getting more young men are getting more conservative right, 0:04:22.560 --> 0:04:27.320 and this is I think generally down to this belief 0:04:27.400 --> 0:04:29.960 that has I don't think people examine often. They just 0:04:30.000 --> 0:04:33.400 sort of like they get concerned about the popularity of 0:04:33.400 --> 0:04:37.080 guys like Tate, which is valid, he's concerning, but assume 0:04:37.120 --> 0:04:40.040 that does mean that like, yeah, we're losing the young men. 0:04:40.080 --> 0:04:43.800 They've all been tilted towards these guys. And so, without 0:04:43.839 --> 0:04:47.200 discounting the damage of dudes like Tate, I wanted to 0:04:47.200 --> 0:04:50.120 give a breakdown of how common the so called right 0:04:50.160 --> 0:04:54.400 word tilt of young men actually is because spoilers, this 0:04:54.440 --> 0:04:57.080 is a pernicious bit of disinformation, and I think it 0:04:57.200 --> 0:05:01.200 kind of blackpills a lot of people unnecessari Let's start 0:05:01.240 --> 0:05:03.880 with the obvious point here. Young men are not growing 0:05:03.920 --> 0:05:07.680 more conservative across the board than men of other generations. 0:05:08.000 --> 0:05:09.720 So first off, I want to read you a quote 0:05:09.760 --> 0:05:14.279 from this Post editorial. Since mister Trump's election in twenty sixteen, 0:05:14.360 --> 0:05:16.840 the percentage of young women ages eighteen to thirty who 0:05:16.920 --> 0:05:20.080 identify as liberal has shot up from slightly over twenty 0:05:20.080 --> 0:05:23.719 percent to thirty two percent. Young men have not followed suit. 0:05:23.920 --> 0:05:28.839 If anything, they have grown more conservative. Now that claim 0:05:29.040 --> 0:05:32.120 is based, you want to guess, did they cite a 0:05:32.160 --> 0:05:34.719 bunch of different sources to prove like that it's a 0:05:34.720 --> 0:05:40.000 really widespread problem, or do they have a single statorial. 0:05:38.760 --> 0:05:39.600 Board they have? 0:05:40.080 --> 0:05:43.440 Those people could not find a second study if you 0:05:43.520 --> 0:05:46.760 nailed it to their face, they share, couldn't they share? 0:05:46.800 --> 0:05:50.640 Couldn't they googled real quickly? Or I'm not even going 0:05:50.720 --> 0:05:53.000 to give them credit for googling. One of their friends 0:05:53.000 --> 0:05:55.320 who works at a right wing think tank sent them 0:05:55.320 --> 0:05:57.760 a survey from that right wing think tank, because that 0:05:58.160 --> 0:06:01.919 the entire statistical base of that claim is a study 0:06:01.960 --> 0:06:05.440 by the American Enterprise Institute, which is a center right 0:06:05.520 --> 0:06:08.800 think tank that tends to produce center rights surveys. And 0:06:09.080 --> 0:06:14.080 even then, the study that they are actually citing doesn't show. 0:06:14.080 --> 0:06:16.800 With the Post editorial Board claims again, their claim is 0:06:17.000 --> 0:06:19.120 young men have not followed suit. If anything, they have 0:06:19.200 --> 0:06:23.200 grown more conservative, right, young men. So they are talking 0:06:23.320 --> 0:06:26.880 across the board about gen Z and millennial males. Right, 0:06:27.560 --> 0:06:32.080 I'm going to quote from that study. Previous research identified 0:06:32.080 --> 0:06:35.400 a growing gap and ideological orientation between young men and women. 0:06:35.560 --> 0:06:38.719 The gender gap in liberal identity is notable among members 0:06:38.720 --> 0:06:42.240 of Generation Z, but it's relatively modest. Forty three percent 0:06:42.279 --> 0:06:45.000 of gen Z women identify as liberal compared to thirty 0:06:45.000 --> 0:06:48.200 five percent of gen Z men. However, the gender divide 0:06:48.240 --> 0:06:52.039 among white, non Hispanic gen Z adults is considerable, close 0:06:52.040 --> 0:06:54.800 to half. Forty six percent of gen Z women are liberal, 0:06:55.000 --> 0:06:58.040 a far greater share than white gen Z men, among 0:06:58.040 --> 0:07:01.960 whom only twenty eight percent identify liberal. Among gen Z adults, 0:07:02.000 --> 0:07:04.480 white men are significantly more likely than white women to 0:07:04.560 --> 0:07:08.280 identify as politically conservative thirty six percent versus twenty six percent. 0:07:08.320 --> 0:07:09.680 So you see what number one of the study is 0:07:09.720 --> 0:07:12.320 doing there is it's saying forty three percent of gen 0:07:12.440 --> 0:07:16.320 Z women, all gen Z women identify as liberal, whereas 0:07:16.440 --> 0:07:19.360 and then it goes to thirty six percent of white 0:07:19.400 --> 0:07:23.360 gen Z men identify as an app it's switching it 0:07:23.400 --> 0:07:23.680 on them. 0:07:23.760 --> 0:07:23.960 Right. 0:07:24.240 --> 0:07:27.520 And while it does eventually acknowledge the differences, where because 0:07:27.520 --> 0:07:29.640 it says that like across the board, all gen Z 0:07:29.720 --> 0:07:32.320 men thirty five percent or conservative, forty three percent of 0:07:32.360 --> 0:07:35.560 gen Z women are liberal. That's not a massive gap, right. 0:07:36.080 --> 0:07:39.160 The Washington Post editorial board just makes the claim that 0:07:39.240 --> 0:07:42.200 young men have grown more conservative, which is not supported 0:07:42.240 --> 0:07:46.080 by the study. And also the study is specifically talking 0:07:46.080 --> 0:07:49.480 about how gen Z white men have gotten more conservative. Right, 0:07:49.840 --> 0:07:52.960 very different things being claimed here. So the Post just 0:07:53.040 --> 0:07:56.000 ignored what was actually in the survey to claim all 0:07:56.320 --> 0:07:59.520 young men, not just young white men, are more conservative, 0:07:59.560 --> 0:08:02.800 not just Z white men are more conservative. Now, this 0:08:02.920 --> 0:08:06.000 is weird. But even if you take the study, which 0:08:06.040 --> 0:08:09.640 is misrepresented by the editorial board at its face value, 0:08:09.720 --> 0:08:12.040 that study does not gel with all of the other 0:08:12.200 --> 0:08:15.000 data that we have. Now, when I went through this, 0:08:15.160 --> 0:08:17.880 it was hard to find good data on just gen 0:08:18.000 --> 0:08:20.360 Z men that is not broken down in most of 0:08:20.400 --> 0:08:22.600 the studies that we get. But we do have some 0:08:22.720 --> 0:08:26.480 information on how gen Z adult men voted as a 0:08:26.600 --> 0:08:29.880 group in the twenty twenty two midterms, and that data 0:08:30.040 --> 0:08:34.360 is telling based on the twenty twenty two midterms seventy 0:08:34.400 --> 0:08:37.120 one percent of young women. That's a that's gen Z 0:08:37.800 --> 0:08:40.719 mostly gen Z eighteen to twenty nine. So I think 0:08:40.800 --> 0:08:42.600 gen Z taps out at twenty six right now. So 0:08:43.120 --> 0:08:47.400 presumably a percentage of the people in this are technically millennials, 0:08:47.400 --> 0:08:49.679 but they're like you, they're day walkers. 0:08:49.960 --> 0:08:53.800 Yeah, that's like what, like, oh my god, I can't 0:08:53.840 --> 0:08:55.440 I can't do math live on air. 0:08:56.520 --> 0:08:59.319 I think it's like twenty seven to forty something is 0:09:00.040 --> 0:09:00.640 the millennials. 0:09:00.679 --> 0:09:02.880 But I'm going to say it's close enough to this. 0:09:02.880 --> 0:09:03.440 This is closes. 0:09:03.520 --> 0:09:06.440 It's only like three years of people right exactly, and 0:09:06.480 --> 0:09:08.360 they're the three years that are that are right in 0:09:08.400 --> 0:09:08.800 the middle. 0:09:09.120 --> 0:09:11.440 But of that of these voters in the twenty twenty 0:09:11.480 --> 0:09:14.600 two midterms, seventy one percent of young women voted for Democrats, 0:09:15.040 --> 0:09:18.440 twenty six percent voted for Republicans, fifty three percent of 0:09:18.520 --> 0:09:23.800 young men voted for Democrats, forty two percent voted for Republicans. 0:09:24.360 --> 0:09:27.839 And among LGBT, and again this is not broken down 0:09:27.880 --> 0:09:32.600 male or female, ninety three percent voted for Democrats, and overall, 0:09:32.679 --> 0:09:36.480 among non LGBT youth, fifty eight percent voted for Democrats, 0:09:36.520 --> 0:09:42.080 thirty eight percent voted for Republicans. So again, not massive 0:09:42.520 --> 0:09:46.320 discrepancies here. And one thing that may help to explain 0:09:46.360 --> 0:09:48.400 this that again is not really broken down in the 0:09:48.480 --> 0:09:52.360 Washington Post editorial is that while gen Z white men 0:09:52.720 --> 0:09:56.400 have are more conservative compared to like gen Z millennial 0:09:56.480 --> 0:09:59.839 white men, gen Z itself is a lot less white 0:10:00.200 --> 0:10:03.240 prior generations, which means overall gen Z men are not 0:10:03.280 --> 0:10:07.400 really getting more conservative. About fifty five percent of gen 0:10:07.480 --> 0:10:12.080 Z is white compared to about seventy percent of boomers. Right, 0:10:12.360 --> 0:10:16.120 So this is one major reason why. Again because again 0:10:16.120 --> 0:10:19.320 if you actually factor in all of gen Z, there's 0:10:19.360 --> 0:10:23.160 not this huge worry about like a marriage discrepancy as 0:10:23.200 --> 0:10:27.079 long as you assume that people. You know that interracial 0:10:27.160 --> 0:10:29.679 dating is not a problem for most people the way 0:10:29.679 --> 0:10:34.040 it is for apparently the Washington Post editorial board. Now 0:10:34.080 --> 0:10:36.840 there's a couple of caveats here. One is that midterm 0:10:36.920 --> 0:10:40.400 voters are historically more engaged and educated than voters of 0:10:40.440 --> 0:10:45.040 other generations. However, that may not necessarily hold true with 0:10:45.200 --> 0:10:48.080 gen Z or millennial voters today due to a variety 0:10:48.160 --> 0:10:51.400 of factors. One worthwhile point is that young people tend 0:10:51.400 --> 0:10:53.880 to be driven far more by what they encounter through 0:10:53.880 --> 0:10:56.440 social media, which is probably part of why gen Z 0:10:56.520 --> 0:10:59.560 and millennial voters consider abortion to be a more important 0:10:59.600 --> 0:11:02.200 thing to vote on than the economy by a margin 0:11:02.240 --> 0:11:05.760 that bears no resemblance to older generations. This is why 0:11:05.800 --> 0:11:09.640 we've actually seen unless for elections, soaring youth voter turnout, 0:11:09.880 --> 0:11:13.600 particularly during the midterms, record levels of youth voting, Which 0:11:13.600 --> 0:11:16.400 doesn't mean it's completely wrong that midterm voters may be 0:11:16.400 --> 0:11:19.160 a bit more engaged and educated, but that's probably less 0:11:19.200 --> 0:11:21.120 of a factor for young voters than it is for 0:11:21.200 --> 0:11:25.040 older generations. Right, some of the conventional wisdom about who 0:11:25.120 --> 0:11:28.559 votes when is not as accurate when we're talking about 0:11:28.600 --> 0:11:32.400 younger people. This is not something that you can prove objectively, 0:11:32.480 --> 0:11:37.400 but there's significant, sort of circumstantial evidence around this. Speaking 0:11:37.440 --> 0:11:41.880 of circumstances, you know what circumstances get me to spend 0:11:41.920 --> 0:11:43.200 my money? 0:11:43.920 --> 0:11:46.200 Is it being served products and services? 0:11:46.000 --> 0:11:48.680 It's well, it's when those products and services advertise on 0:11:48.760 --> 0:11:55.960 this podcast and only this podcast. So check that shit out, homies. 0:12:07.679 --> 0:12:09.280 Dah and we're back. 0:12:09.760 --> 0:12:13.240 So yeah. One of the overall points to make that 0:12:13.280 --> 0:12:15.199 I think goes against this kind of panic a lot 0:12:15.200 --> 0:12:17.480 of people have that gen Z is somehow being like 0:12:17.600 --> 0:12:21.720 pilled away from progressive politics is that as a result 0:12:21.760 --> 0:12:26.319 of stuff primarily abortion, gen Z voters supported Democrats over 0:12:26.360 --> 0:12:30.199 Republicans in the midterm elections by and astonishing twenty seven points. 0:12:30.720 --> 0:12:32.839 This is again a large part of this came down 0:12:32.920 --> 0:12:37.040 to abortion, which gen Z voters prioritize by a higher 0:12:37.040 --> 0:12:39.800 amount than any other generation. One of the things that 0:12:39.880 --> 0:12:41.600 was noted in one of the studies I found is 0:12:41.679 --> 0:12:45.200 like a potential line of hope for Republicans is that 0:12:45.320 --> 0:12:47.280 while this and this is part of where I think 0:12:47.320 --> 0:12:50.840 some of the fear mongering and the these Washington Post 0:12:50.920 --> 0:12:52.839 articles comes from, although I don't think it says what 0:12:52.880 --> 0:12:56.280 they think. It says is that lower numbers of young 0:12:56.360 --> 0:13:00.840 people support specific parties. Right, so only about thirty percent 0:13:00.920 --> 0:13:04.800 of gen zs align with Democrats compared to twenty four 0:13:04.840 --> 0:13:08.120 percent of Republicans. And if you just look at that, 0:13:08.120 --> 0:13:11.360 that's way less of that seems like you're seeing like 0:13:11.440 --> 0:13:14.840 these numbers sort of kind of tighten up. But again, 0:13:15.200 --> 0:13:18.920 they still voted over Democrats of Republicans by twenty seven points. 0:13:18.960 --> 0:13:22.319 It's just that gen Z is less loyal to political parties, 0:13:22.480 --> 0:13:25.600 which doesn't necessarily mean that progressivism is in danger just 0:13:25.600 --> 0:13:28.559 means that most young people hate the Democrats too, and. 0:13:28.520 --> 0:13:30.199 That could and the other thing is like the thing 0:13:30.240 --> 0:13:32.400 that actually legit and I think this is legitimately. A 0:13:32.400 --> 0:13:33.959 part of it is like, well, okay, so what happened, 0:13:34.160 --> 0:13:36.000 what's happening to all those people? And the answer is 0:13:36.040 --> 0:13:39.440 they're becoming socialists And it's like, well that doesn't help 0:13:39.480 --> 0:13:40.960 the Republicans either, yeah. 0:13:40.840 --> 0:13:43.120 So yeah, and it's it's I mean, part of it 0:13:43.200 --> 0:13:45.360 is that more young people identify with like kind of 0:13:45.400 --> 0:13:48.840 more politically radical chunks of progressivism. Part of it is 0:13:48.840 --> 0:13:51.559 that a lot more of them identify as independent and 0:13:51.600 --> 0:13:55.800 may not may not identify themselves super much as a 0:13:55.800 --> 0:14:00.960 specific political chunk, but in general, like they vote progressive, 0:14:01.040 --> 0:14:04.520 they just don't have any faith in like the ossified 0:14:04.600 --> 0:14:07.960 political structures in our society, which is a rational thing 0:14:08.200 --> 0:14:09.680 to do as a young person. 0:14:09.880 --> 0:14:10.120 Right. 0:14:10.880 --> 0:14:13.480 So I also want to address kind of the elephant 0:14:13.480 --> 0:14:15.320 in the room with this piece, which is that the 0:14:15.400 --> 0:14:19.320 Washington Post editorial Board's obsession with political divide among the young, 0:14:19.440 --> 0:14:23.800 harming marriage specifically, is also kind of gay panicky, right, 0:14:24.080 --> 0:14:26.920 because one of the reasons why there seems to be 0:14:26.960 --> 0:14:29.560 this divide that they see as like this threatens marriage, 0:14:29.600 --> 0:14:32.080 is that a higher percentage of Gen Z kids are 0:14:32.160 --> 0:14:34.760 less interested in straight marriage. And these gen Z kids, 0:14:34.760 --> 0:14:38.120 male and female, are not getting more conservative, but they're 0:14:38.120 --> 0:14:41.160 also presumably not going to do the kind of marriage 0:14:41.240 --> 0:14:44.960 that the Washington Post editorial board was right. I'm going 0:14:45.000 --> 0:14:48.080 to quote from a Time magazine rite up here. In 0:14:48.160 --> 0:14:50.320 late twenty twenty and early twenty twenty one, gen Z 0:14:50.520 --> 0:14:53.360 was the only US generation in which a majority believed 0:14:53.400 --> 0:14:56.040 there are more than two genders. As recently as the 0:14:56.080 --> 0:14:58.680 first half of twenty twenty, this was a minority opinion 0:14:58.720 --> 0:15:01.560 even among Gen zs, remarkable amount of change over just 0:15:01.640 --> 0:15:04.360 six months. In contrast, there was only a small uptick 0:15:04.360 --> 0:15:07.640 in this belief among older generations. That type of data 0:15:07.680 --> 0:15:10.440 is finally available. Starting in June twenty twenty one, the 0:15:10.560 --> 0:15:13.800 US Census Bureau offered four options on its Household Pulse 0:15:13.840 --> 0:15:17.760 survey question about gender male, female, transgender, and none of 0:15:17.800 --> 0:15:20.280 these The last a rough gage of those who identify 0:15:20.320 --> 0:15:23.160 as non binary, gender fluid, or another gender identity. 0:15:23.560 --> 0:15:25.640 With that more a terrible way of phrasing that court 0:15:25.720 --> 0:15:26.440 It's not a great way. 0:15:26.480 --> 0:15:31.880 It's better than nothing, but yeah, it's not God more 0:15:31.920 --> 0:15:34.640 than With more than a million respondents, the survey is 0:15:34.720 --> 0:15:37.600 large enough to provide accurate estimates. The results are clear. 0:15:37.680 --> 0:15:39.880 Gen Z young adults are much more likely to report 0:15:39.960 --> 0:15:43.000 identifying as either trans or non binary than other generations. 0:15:43.200 --> 0:15:45.320 Will Only one out of a thousand boomers report they 0:15:45.320 --> 0:15:48.320 are transgender one tenth of one percent. Twenty three out 0:15:48.360 --> 0:15:50.760 of one thousand gen Z young adults two point three 0:15:50.800 --> 0:15:54.560 percent identify as trans, twenty times more. By this estimate, 0:15:54.560 --> 0:15:56.600 there are now more TRANSI young adults in the US 0:15:56.640 --> 0:15:58.880 than the number of people living in Boston, which is 0:15:58.960 --> 0:16:02.400 great because I have long felt that what we need 0:16:02.400 --> 0:16:05.120 to do is arm trans people to take over the 0:16:05.160 --> 0:16:07.560 city of Boston. I believe this for years, and I 0:16:07.600 --> 0:16:09.320 think we can finally make it happen. 0:16:09.640 --> 0:16:11.480 Okay, but here's the problem, though, you still have to 0:16:11.520 --> 0:16:14.280 live in Boston afterward. Well, I guess we could take 0:16:14.280 --> 0:16:14.880 the city. 0:16:14.680 --> 0:16:17.320 Of Boston and live somewhere else and then sort of like, yeah, you. 0:16:17.240 --> 0:16:20.520 Can use from it, Yeah, presumably, yeah you could. You 0:16:20.560 --> 0:16:24.600 could basically become like collectively the landlords of Boston and 0:16:24.640 --> 0:16:27.160 then use it to afford rented in a better place. 0:16:29.120 --> 0:16:31.920 This is viable, I believe. I believe in our lifetime. 0:16:32.000 --> 0:16:34.880 So we can tell this and this will finally increase 0:16:34.920 --> 0:16:38.680 gen z's like home ownership numbers. Right if collectively all 0:16:38.720 --> 0:16:42.280 of the transnd non binary people own Boston. Yeah, this 0:16:42.440 --> 0:16:46.160 is a workable plan. I think I'm gonna continue that quote. 0:16:46.280 --> 0:16:48.880 Fewer than one percent of boomers identify as non binary, 0:16:48.880 --> 0:16:51.280 compared to more than three percent of gen Z young adults. 0:16:51.640 --> 0:16:53.760 Combined with the more than two percent to our trans 0:16:53.760 --> 0:16:56.040 that means one out of eighteen young adults identified as 0:16:56.040 --> 0:16:58.200 something other than male or female in twenty twenty one 0:16:58.320 --> 0:17:01.120 or twenty twenty two, which is again, it's not true 0:17:01.200 --> 0:17:04.000 because half of Note that's not it's not it's not 0:17:04.160 --> 0:17:07.800 the time because again two percent are trans, which presumably, 0:17:07.840 --> 0:17:10.240 based on this survey and how it's asked, presumably means 0:17:10.400 --> 0:17:14.040 identifies either male or female, whereas three percent are non 0:17:14.080 --> 0:17:17.040 binary of some sort, may not, may not identify as 0:17:17.080 --> 0:17:19.560 either mail or It doesn't say that this is this 0:17:19.600 --> 0:17:23.040 is this is not well written, but the data is interesting. 0:17:23.040 --> 0:17:25.639 It suggests five to six percent of gen Z are 0:17:25.680 --> 0:17:29.040 trans are non binary, which is a wild departure from 0:17:29.040 --> 0:17:33.520 previous generations. Right, And also that's a significant chunk of 0:17:33.560 --> 0:17:36.000 this these gen Z numbers that are not being included 0:17:36.000 --> 0:17:38.639 in this Washington Post because presumably a decent chunk of 0:17:38.640 --> 0:17:40.080 these people will want to get married. 0:17:40.240 --> 0:17:40.840 They just don't. 0:17:40.880 --> 0:17:43.520 I identify in a way that the gen Z that 0:17:43.560 --> 0:17:46.000 the Washington Post editorial board respects. 0:17:46.080 --> 0:17:46.240 Right. 0:17:46.720 --> 0:17:49.320 And again, one of the things that's interesting about this, 0:17:49.720 --> 0:17:52.960 and contra to all this fearmongering about Andrew Tates destroying 0:17:53.000 --> 0:17:56.080 all the men, is that male or female gen Z 0:17:56.160 --> 0:18:00.480 and millennial voters overwhelmingly support LGBT rights more than they 0:18:00.520 --> 0:18:04.639 support almost anything else. And this is consistent across the board, 0:18:04.920 --> 0:18:07.480 and markedly higher than it is for other generations. 0:18:07.560 --> 0:18:07.720 Right. 0:18:07.720 --> 0:18:11.440 Presumably this seems to include even like more independent or 0:18:11.480 --> 0:18:13.720 even more conservative gen Z and millennial voters. 0:18:13.800 --> 0:18:14.240 Right, They're just. 0:18:14.240 --> 0:18:19.240 Across the board less shitty on this, I'm guessing presumably 0:18:19.280 --> 0:18:22.600 because a lot of their friends are our trands or 0:18:22.640 --> 0:18:26.760 non binary or just queer, and that that makes them 0:18:26.840 --> 0:18:30.360 less bigoted about this stuff. And again doesn't really fit 0:18:30.440 --> 0:18:33.720 into this this narrative. Right, And this is again part 0:18:33.760 --> 0:18:37.160 of why I'm not as doomor about you know, there's 0:18:37.200 --> 0:18:40.600 this there's this big fear, oh, you know, progressives are 0:18:40.840 --> 0:18:43.760 desert young people are deserting progressivism, which is going to 0:18:43.760 --> 0:18:46.520 do must electorally, and I'm just not seeing that in 0:18:46.560 --> 0:18:47.080 the numbers. 0:18:47.119 --> 0:18:47.280 Now. 0:18:47.280 --> 0:18:49.639 Again, everything that's been going on with like the Biden 0:18:49.640 --> 0:18:55.040 administration's you know, support of Israel certainly may and probably 0:18:55.080 --> 0:18:59.000 will have an impact politically, but it's not necessarily, it's 0:18:59.080 --> 0:19:02.119 not very clear, not a result of young people getting 0:19:02.160 --> 0:19:05.240 pilled by Andrew Tate, Right, that's not why that's happened. 0:19:05.320 --> 0:19:06.960 And there's there's a thing I wanted to talk about 0:19:06.960 --> 0:19:10.359 with the Andrew Tate stuff too, because like everyone's treating 0:19:10.400 --> 0:19:13.320 this as like a completely new phenomena and it's like 0:19:14.160 --> 0:19:16.399 most of the people who are talking about this should 0:19:16.440 --> 0:19:19.439 be old enough to remember gamer Gate, Like this stuff 0:19:19.480 --> 0:19:21.760 has all happened before, and it was like, yeah, like 0:19:22.000 --> 0:19:24.879 gamer Date did produce a bunch of fascists and also 0:19:24.960 --> 0:19:28.359 the millennials were still unbelievably further left than like the 0:19:28.400 --> 0:19:29.600 generations that came before them. 0:19:29.760 --> 0:19:31.679 Yeah, so like it's like this is this. 0:19:31.240 --> 0:19:34.000 Is this is just a thing, Like every generation has 0:19:34.720 --> 0:19:36.960 a a giant thing where there's like a bunch of 0:19:37.040 --> 0:19:42.840 right wing like yeah, push yeah. 0:19:42.480 --> 0:19:44.399 Yeah, it's like this just happens periodically it's just like 0:19:44.400 --> 0:19:46.520 a part of it. It's a part of Baltics. It sucks, 0:19:46.600 --> 0:19:48.800 it's bad, but it's also like not a thing to 0:19:48.840 --> 0:19:50.800 be humored about. No. 0:19:51.080 --> 0:19:54.159 I do think another thing that is happening here is 0:19:54.200 --> 0:19:56.800 that the kind of people who become members of the 0:19:56.840 --> 0:20:01.359 Washington Post editorial board have this, have this brainworm, the 0:20:01.480 --> 0:20:05.680 sickness that infects members of the American media worse than 0:20:06.160 --> 0:20:09.440 almost anyone else, which is like they're always looking for ah, 0:20:09.520 --> 0:20:12.280 contrary to popular wisdom. You think this, but the reality, 0:20:12.480 --> 0:20:15.960 you know, it's it's Malcolm Gladwell syndrome, right where you've 0:20:15.960 --> 0:20:17.800 got to come up with some like clever thing that 0:20:17.880 --> 0:20:20.359 shows that you're smart because you know, buy into the 0:20:20.400 --> 0:20:23.239 standard wisdom, which is always wrong. And there's that, and 0:20:23.280 --> 0:20:27.479 so that they have to believe that whatever is really 0:20:27.560 --> 0:20:31.520 happening is the opposite of what's obviously happening, right, which 0:20:31.560 --> 0:20:35.159 is why this Actually young men are getting more conservative, 0:20:35.200 --> 0:20:37.440 and it's I'm the only one who realizes, and I've 0:20:37.440 --> 0:20:39.600 got to warn every one of the danger to marriage. 0:20:39.760 --> 0:20:42.119 Speaking of which, here's a quote another quote from that 0:20:42.200 --> 0:20:47.120 Washington Post article. In another era, political or ideological differences 0:20:47.200 --> 0:20:50.320 might have had less impact on marriage rates, but increasingly 0:20:50.440 --> 0:20:53.560 the political is personal. A twenty twenty one survey of 0:20:53.640 --> 0:20:57.480 college students found that seventy one percent of Democrats would 0:20:57.480 --> 0:21:00.639 not date someone with opposing views. There is i'm logic 0:21:00.680 --> 0:21:03.440 to this marriage across religious or political lines. If either 0:21:03.480 --> 0:21:06.280 partner considers those things to be central with their identity, 0:21:06.560 --> 0:21:09.840 can be associated with lower levels of life satisfaction, and 0:21:09.880 --> 0:21:13.960 politics is becoming more central to people's identity. This mismatch 0:21:14.040 --> 0:21:17.240 means that someone will need to compromise, As the researchers 0:21:17.320 --> 0:21:20.040