Speaker 1: Hey, everybody, Robert Evans here and I wanted to let
Speaker 1: you know. This is a compilation episode. So every episode
Speaker 1: of the week that just happened is here in one
Speaker 1: convenient and with somewhat less ads package for you to
Speaker 1: listen to in a long stretch if you want. If
Speaker 1: you've been listening to the episodes every day this week,
Speaker 1: there's got to be nothing new here for you, but
Speaker 1: you can make your own decisions. Hello, this is it
Speaker 1: could happen here, and I am Sharne and today it's
Speaker 1: just me. It's me and I am alone, So that
Speaker 1: means I am probably going to tell you about some
Speaker 1: fucked up shit that happened in the Middle East, which
Speaker 1: is exactly what I'm about to do. I just think
Speaker 1: some things are purposely underreported, and even when they are
Speaker 1: seldom reported about, it's always a bit skewed and biased.
Speaker 1: So I just try to draw attention to certain countries
Speaker 1: and their people as best as I can because of this,
Speaker 1: and today I think we're do you for an update
Speaker 1: on Palestine. Israel continues to be humanize Palestinians daily and blatantly,
Speaker 1: and it's not just through murdering them. Last year under
Speaker 1: new Israeli restrictions on foreign entry into the West Bank.
Speaker 1: Foreigners romantically involved with Palestinians must declare their relationship to
Speaker 1: the occupying Israeli government. Yes, you have to tell them
Speaker 1: if you are involved with the Palestinians. Why. I don't know,
Speaker 1: because they're treated as less than human and this is
Speaker 1: one of many laws that deny Palestinians of basic human
Speaker 1: rights and keep them under apartheid rule. I want to
Speaker 1: talk about all that's happened in just these first few
Speaker 1: months of twenty twenty three, because this cycle of violence
Speaker 1: in Jerusalem and the West Bank in particular has suddenly
Speaker 1: surged to levels that we have not seen in years.
Speaker 1: As of this recording on March seventh, at least sixty
Speaker 1: six Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces and settlers
Speaker 1: since the start of twenty twenty three, and at least
Speaker 1: seventeen of those killed have been children. For comparison, in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty two, which was the deadliest year in the
Speaker 1: West Bank in decades, forty eight Palestinians were killed in
Speaker 1: the combined months of January, February, March and April. The
Speaker 1: deaths are increasing day by day and the rest seemed
Speaker 1: to be a stop to them at all. Twenty twenty
Speaker 1: two saw the highest number of civilians killed by Israeli
Speaker 1: security forces in the past seventeen years, and the highest
Speaker 1: number of Israelis killed since twenty sixteen. Renewed violence flared
Speaker 1: up between Palestine and Israel and January of this year
Speaker 1: for many reasons, and it continues to build and intensify
Speaker 1: after a cascade of concerning events. And before we jump
Speaker 1: into those events that happened in January and onward, I
Speaker 1: think we need to look back on twenty twenty two
Speaker 1: in order to understand this a bit better and to
Speaker 1: hopefully provide some context. So let's take a look at
Speaker 1: twenty twenty two and how we got here. We are
Speaker 1: going to be focusing on the West Bank with the
Speaker 1: majority of the data in this episode, in particular, the
Speaker 1: one tomorrow will be more broad. I'm going to explain
Speaker 1: a little bit about what the West Bank even is,
Speaker 1: just for some more context. The West Bank is a
Speaker 1: landlocked territory near the coast of the Mediterranean in Western
Speaker 1: Asia that forms the main bulk of the Palestinian territories.
Speaker 1: It is bordered by Jordan and the Dead Sea to
Speaker 1: the east and by Israel to the southwest and north.
Speaker 1: The West Bank includes East Jerusalem. It's been under Israeli
Speaker 1: military occupation since nineteen sixty seven, and its area is
Speaker 1: split into one hundred and sixty five Palestinian quote unquote islands.
Speaker 1: These islands are under total or partial civil administration by
Speaker 1: the Palestinian National Authority or the PNA or PA. There
Speaker 1: are also two hundred and thirty Israeli settlements into which
Speaker 1: israel law is being pipelined. The West Bank initially emerged
Speaker 1: as a Jordanian occupied territory after the nineteen forty eight
Speaker 1: Arab Israeli War, before being in xed outright by Jordan
Speaker 1: in nineteen fifty, and it was given its name during
Speaker 1: this time based on its location on the western bank
Speaker 1: of the Jordan River. This annexation was widely considered to
Speaker 1: be illegal and was only recognized by Iraq, Pakistan and
Speaker 1: the UK. The territory remained under Jordanian rule until nineteen
Speaker 1: sixty seven, when it was captured and occupied by Israel
Speaker 1: during the Sixth Day War. The Oslo Accords, which were
Speaker 1: signed in nineteen ninety three between the Palestinian Liberation Organization
Speaker 1: and Israel created administrative districts with varying levels of Palestinian
Speaker 1: authority in specific areas. In the West Bank, there was
Speaker 1: Area A, which is administered exclusively by the PA, there
Speaker 1: is Area B, which is administered by both the P
Speaker 1: and A and Israel. And then there's Area SEA, which
Speaker 1: is administered exclusively by Israel. And this Area C, which
Speaker 1: is controlled exclusively by Israel, accounts for over sixty percent
Speaker 1: of the West Bank's territory. Twenty twenty two was the
Speaker 1: deadliest year for West Bank Palestinians in nearly two decades.
Speaker 1: Israeli forces killed more Palestinians in the West Bank in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty two than in any other year. The United
Speaker 1: Nations began systematically recording Palestinian fatalities in two thousand and five,
Speaker 1: and they started doing this after the last major Palestinian
Speaker 1: uprising aka the Second Intifada that lasted five years. And
Speaker 1: knowing that, I want you to keep in mind that unfortunately,
Speaker 1: the number of Palestinians that have been killed by the
Speaker 1: IDF is far greater than some of the numbers I'm
Speaker 1: going to say in this episode. And again that is
Speaker 1: because I am focusing particularly on the West Bank. I
Speaker 1: want to talk about Israel's twelve month crackdown that has
Speaker 1: been happening in the West Bank. Nearly twelve months ago,
Speaker 1: Israel begana has become a year long violent crackdown in
Speaker 1: the West Bank. Israel last year prompted a sweeping Israeli
Speaker 1: military campaign that they called Operation Breakwater beginning March of
Speaker 1: two and twenty two. It was created after attacks occurred
Speaker 1: by Palestinians against Israeli settlers. Since then, Operation Breakwater has
Speaker 1: conducted nearly nightly IDF raids in the West Bank, which
Speaker 1: of course causes heightened friction between the IDF and the
Speaker 1: Palestinian population. So far, Israeli security forces have made over
Speaker 1: two thousand arrests, and that's way too big of a number,
Speaker 1: just to give you an idea of the terrifying scale
Speaker 1: of this operation. Operation Breakwater is the biggest IDF operation
Speaker 1: in the West Bank since the Second Intifaba that I
Speaker 1: mentioned earlier that lasted from two thousand to two thousand
Speaker 1: and five. Since the start of this operation last year,
Speaker 1: nearly every day Israel has conducted raids in the West Bank,
Speaker 1: which is part of the Palestinian territory, which encompasses the
Speaker 1: Godza strip in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and
Speaker 1: this whole territory has been illegally occupied by Israel since
Speaker 1: nineteen sixty seven. In spite of this, because Israel does
Speaker 1: whatever the fuck it wants, because it's already founded upon
Speaker 1: existing illegally in the first place, thousands of Palestinians, many
Speaker 1: of them young, have been arrested, and nearly every week
Speaker 1: more Palestinians are being killed. Last year, this all resulted
Speaker 1: in the highest cumulative death toll in the West Bank
Speaker 1: since two thousand and four. Palestinian rights groups and UN
Speaker 1: experts have said that the bloodshed is due to Israel's
Speaker 1: excessive use of force and open fire rules during near
Speaker 1: daily military operations, as well as rising assaults by settlers
Speaker 1: in the West Bank, where again Palestinians are living under
Speaker 1: illegal Israeli occupation. Israel justified their intensifying violence because of
Speaker 1: the fatal attacks on Israelis by Palestinian militants, which also
Speaker 1: spiked last year, which is also very bad, but blaming
Speaker 1: the people you've been oppressing for nearly a century for
Speaker 1: being angry and fighting back people without an army faced
Speaker 1: against one of the most powerful armies in the world.
Speaker 1: It just does not sit right with me. In twenty
Speaker 1: twenty two, Israeli security forces killed at least one hundred
Speaker 1: and fifty two Palestinians in the West Bank and predominantly
Speaker 1: Palestinian East Jerusalem, compared with seventy five Palestinians in twenty
Speaker 1: twenty one. These are figures provided by the UN Office
Speaker 1: for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs or OTCHA. Four Palestinians
Speaker 1: in the West Bank were killed by Israeli settlers, not soldiers. Settlers,
Speaker 1: settlers that have been emboldened and even encouraged in their
Speaker 1: hate and violence by the Israeli far right, and the
Speaker 1: Israeli far right is basically the Israeli government at this point.
Speaker 1: And we're going to get into some of the extremes
Speaker 1: that these settlers go through in their hate and their
Speaker 1: violence more tomorrow, but for now, let's focus on twenty
Speaker 1: twenty two. Most of the Palestinian deaths occurred during Israeli
Speaker 1: military raids and clashes in the West Bank cities of
Speaker 1: Jenin and Nablus. More than half of the Palestinians who
Speaker 1: were murdered were under the age of twenty five. They
Speaker 1: never even had a chance to live their lives with
Speaker 1: their families and their loved ones. Each one of these
Speaker 1: individuals that were killed have people mourning them and missing
Speaker 1: them every day, and I never want anyone to forget that.
Speaker 1: Among those killed last year were also US citizens El Jazeero,
Speaker 1: journalists Sharin Abu Akhle, and seventy eight year old Omar Assad,
Speaker 1: And because of their US citizenship, their deaths gained rare
Speaker 1: worldwide attention and briefly sharpened international criticism of Israel. Sharine,
Speaker 1: if you remember, was shot in the head while wearing
Speaker 1: a press vest. She was there as a reporter doing
Speaker 1: her job. No violence was taking place around her, she
Speaker 1: was targeted and killed. Israel says she was probably killed
Speaker 1: by a soldier's gunfire unintentionally, and that was that. The
Speaker 1: world moved on. I did an episode last year about
Speaker 1: Sharene Aboahle and how Israel murdered her in broad daylight,
Speaker 1: So if you guys want to revisit that, that is there,
Speaker 1: back to the episode. I don't want us to forget
Speaker 1: that this data is regarding the West Bank. Only hundreds
Speaker 1: of Palestinians die at the hands of Israel's terrorist organization,
Speaker 1: that they call an army every year. In May of
Speaker 1: twenty twenty one, if you can remember that far back,
Speaker 1: at least two hundred Palestinians were killed in a week
Speaker 1: of Israeli airstrikes, just one week, and the deaths included
Speaker 1: fifty nine children and thirty five women, with nearly thirteen
Speaker 1: hundred people wounded. Women and children made up nearly half
Speaker 1: of the casualties. Fifty nine children, fifty nine children that
Speaker 1: were just taken with families that will never be the same.
Speaker 1: I just want people to remember these things when I
Speaker 1: mentioned numbers, that each number is an actual living child
Speaker 1: or person. In twenty twenty two, in a statement to
Speaker 1: The Washington Post, Israel's military said that Israeli soldiers used
Speaker 1: live fire when quote necessary during counter terrorisumectivities in response
Speaker 1: to quote violent riots, which often include explosive devices, molotop cocktails,
Speaker 1: and rocks hurled at the idef soldiers and Israeli civilians.
Speaker 1: Are you kidding me? One of the most powerful and
Speaker 1: supported armies in the world is saying that it's killing
Speaker 1: people in response to rocks being thrown at them. Armed
Speaker 1: and protected soldiers covered in swat gear with all the
Speaker 1: weapons they could ever fucking dream of fighting against the
Speaker 1: people without an army at all, blaming them in an
Speaker 1: official statement to the Washington Post for throwing rocks. I mean,
Speaker 1: just just get the fuck out of here. The idf
Speaker 1: are all fucking clowns. And maybe I shouldn't be cursing
Speaker 1: and I should pretend to be professional, but they make
Speaker 1: me fucking mad, And I think we should all be
Speaker 1: fucking mad because I don't think it's fair, and I
Speaker 1: know life isn't built to be fair, but to terrorize
Speaker 1: and genocided population, drive them into a corner and then
Speaker 1: blame them for having the audacity for fighting back and
Speaker 1: the only ways accessible to them is fucking ludicrous. You
Speaker 1: can't both sides a conflict when one of those sides
Speaker 1: has one of the most advanced and supported armies in
Speaker 1: the world that oppresses the other side that has no
Speaker 1: army and no support of any kind, a side who
Speaker 1: has rocks in their hands resorting to violence because absolutely
Speaker 1: nothing and no one is helping them. A total of
Speaker 1: two hundred and twenty four Palestinians were killed in twenty
Speaker 1: twenty two, including the forty nine people that I mentioned
Speaker 1: earlier that were murdered during a three day Israeli assault
Speaker 1: on the besieged Gaza Strip, Seventeen were children. And I'm
Speaker 1: emphasizing this because Palestinian children have started keeping goodbye letters
Speaker 1: in their pockets in case they're killed by the Israeli army.
Speaker 1: No child should have to live in fear that they
Speaker 1: might be killed at any moment, but that's the reality
Speaker 1: for Palestinian children. Nearly every day, Palestinians wake up to
Speaker 1: news that the Israeli military has killed yet another Palestinian.
Speaker 1: This daily violence against Palestinians has traumatized generations of Palestinian children,
Speaker 1: and their parents have no way to protect them. Many
Speaker 1: of the casualties in the West Bank in twenty twenty
Speaker 1: two were young Palestinians who have only ever known military
Speaker 1: occupation and the oppression of the Israeli government. The West
Speaker 1: Bank also has to deal with the repressive politics of
Speaker 1: the Romala based Palestinian Authority, the PA, which was set
Speaker 1: up as a caretaker government three decades ago and is
Speaker 1: now widely unpopular among Palestinians. And I'll get into this
Speaker 1: more after a quick break, So brb Okay, we're back.
Speaker 1: As I mentioned earlier, the West Bank has to deal
Speaker 1: with repressive politics of the Romala based Palestinian Authority, which
Speaker 1: was set up three decades ago and is now widely
Speaker 1: unpopular among Palestinians. A spokesperson from the Palestinian rights group
Speaker 1: Al Huch said people are very, very fed up. Whether
Speaker 1: it's in Jerusalem or Jenin or Nablus. The last twenty
Speaker 1: years have not shown any improvements in the situation. This
Speaker 1: spokesperson spoke only on the condition of anonymity for fear
Speaker 1: of reprisal by Israeli security forces, because the Israeli security
Speaker 1: forces raided the organization's headquarters in Romola last August. The
Speaker 1: spokesperson explained that quote the near daily raids in areas
Speaker 1: under control of the PA showed that the sovereignty of
Speaker 1: the PA does not exist. So they're saying that the
Speaker 1: Palestinian Authority is basically useless. If these Israeli raids are
Speaker 1: happening in areas that are supposedly under control or quote
Speaker 1: care of the PA, then what the fuck are they
Speaker 1: even Therefore toward Wensland, the UN Special Coordinator for the
Speaker 1: Middle East Peace Process, told the Washington Post last year, quote,
Speaker 1: we have a new dynamic in the West Bank and
Speaker 1: around Jerusalem with a quote new generation of Israelis and
Speaker 1: Palestinians in conflict, there is an urgent need to de escalate.
Speaker 1: He also cited the quote tension and so called friction zones,
Speaker 1: which are areas where Israeli settlements continued to encroach on
Speaker 1: Palestinian lands and where violence is mounting, probably in part
Speaker 1: due to the frustration with the lack of action by
Speaker 1: the Palestinian authority. Twenty twenty two also saw the emergence
Speaker 1: of two new Palestinian militant groups, thee Genin Battalion and
Speaker 1: the Lions Den, both led by disaffected young men with
Speaker 1: local support networks. Meanwhile, Israel's military has repeatedly declined to
Speaker 1: provide the number of internal investigations they supposedly opened last
Speaker 1: year regarding their misconduct related to the Palestinian deaths. In
Speaker 1: September of last year, Israel announced the results of its
Speaker 1: inquiry into the death of Sharin abu Akhle, who again
Speaker 1: was shot in the head while covering a military raid
Speaker 1: near Jenin last May. The IDF said that a quote
Speaker 1: found a high possibility that Miss abu Akhle was accidentally
Speaker 1: killed by IDF gunfire towards suspects identified as armed Palestinian
Speaker 1: gunmen during an exchange of fire, though it has not
Speaker 1: released any evidence whatsoever showing the presence of gunmen in
Speaker 1: the area. An investigation by The Post contradicted the IDF's
Speaker 1: claim that there was an exchange of fire in the
Speaker 1: minutes before Abu Akle was killed, and surprising absolutely no one,
Speaker 1: the IDF said it would not pursue criminal charges against
Speaker 1: its soldiers. No one is being held accountable for the
Speaker 1: killing of Palestinian life, including Palestinian children. Israel has continued
Speaker 1: to operate as though they have immunity, which in a
Speaker 1: way they do thanks to the United States, who does
Speaker 1: nothing but give Israel more money and weapons and good press.
Speaker 1: Even more concerning, far right politician Itamar Ben Gevid, who
Speaker 1: was Israel's new national security minister, has proposed giving police
Speaker 1: and soldiers wider latitude to use live ammunition and putting
Speaker 1: laws in place that would shield them from criminal prosecution
Speaker 1: for killing or injuring Palestine. And this should be a
Speaker 1: red flag for everybody. The other Hawk spokesperson said that
Speaker 1: many of those killed in Israeli raids last year appeared
Speaker 1: to be either bystanders or victims of excessive force. Let's
Speaker 1: not forget that they also killed members of the press
Speaker 1: who clearly wear press vests in a moment where no
Speaker 1: violence was ever taking place, just a camera and reporters
Speaker 1: trying to raise awareness that the crimes that Israel commits.
Speaker 1: An early December, Israeli fire killed a teenage girl in
Speaker 1: Jenin who was on her roof as a raid unfolded nearby.
Speaker 1: Days earlier, Israeli forces fatally shot a sixteen year old
Speaker 1: boy who was throwing stones at a checkpoint outside Ramula.
Speaker 1: We're getting to the end here, so let's take our
Speaker 1: last little break and we'll be right back, and we're
Speaker 1: back talking about how the IDF shoots Palestinians as though
Speaker 1: they're basically playing a video game. They had shot a
Speaker 1: teenage girl and a sixteen year old boy, and there
Speaker 1: are many disturbing videos of idea of soldiers shooting Palestinians
Speaker 1: like they are playing a video game. There's one video
Speaker 1: in particular that I'm thinking about that is so fucking
Speaker 1: disgusting where one soldier is crouching down and aiming his
Speaker 1: gun at a Palestinian who was hiding behind a dumpster.
Speaker 1: I know that the Palestinian is hiding behind a dumpster,
Speaker 1: because the soldier says something to the effect of what
Speaker 1: does he think he's doing behind that dumpster? And then
Speaker 1: the soldier shoots and jumps up in pure elation, cheering
Speaker 1: for himself because he shot this person. There's another soldier
Speaker 1: in the frame next to him who seems to be
Speaker 1: more aware of the camera that is recording them, who
Speaker 1: keeps telling his annoying murderer friend to we professional instead
Speaker 1: of jumping up and down like he just scored a
Speaker 1: point in a game, because that is all this is
Speaker 1: to them. There is much more evidence of this infuriating
Speaker 1: and horrific attitude and culture of the IDF and Abby
Speaker 1: Martin's two nineteen films Gaza Fights for Freedom, which I've
Speaker 1: probably already recommended a million times and will continue to recommend.
Speaker 1: It is free on YouTube tour Wensland. We mentioned earlier
Speaker 1: the UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process said, quote,
Speaker 1: the continued killings of Palestinians by Israeli security forces an
Speaker 1: incidents where they did not appear to present an eminent
Speaker 1: threat to life are disturbing. He went on to say
Speaker 1: that quote, I am increasingly concerned by the fragility of
Speaker 1: the current political and security dynamics, particularly in the occupied
Speaker 1: West Bank including East Jerusalem. Vulker Turk, the UN High
Speaker 1: Commissioner for Human Rights, said, for this violence to end,
Speaker 1: the occupation must end on all sides. There are people
Speaker 1: who know this. The violence of last year reflects a
Speaker 1: dangerous mix of on the ground and generational changes, and
Speaker 1: this could only escalate further as Israel's mostly far right
Speaker 1: government becomes more far right because Jewish supremacists who have
Speaker 1: incited violence against Palestinians were recently sworn into office, including
Speaker 1: Israel's aforementioned new Minister of National Security. And he's just
Speaker 1: one of the many cogs in the machine of Israel
Speaker 1: being controlled by far right terrorists. And yes, to me,
Speaker 1: they are terrorists because literally everything they do was either
Speaker 1: a crime or a crime against humanity, regardless. At the
Speaker 1: end of last year, Israel's new government was sworn into office.
Speaker 1: It's nationalist, exclusionist and far far right. It's the most
Speaker 1: extreme Israeli government in the nation's history. Benjamin and Yahoo,
Speaker 1: who's already the country's longest serving prime minister, is at
Speaker 1: the helm of the country for the sixth time, and
Speaker 1: this time he's assembled the most far right cabinet in
Speaker 1: Israel's history, with the most notable posts given to ultra nationalists,
Speaker 1: one of them being the person we mentioned at tamar Ben,
Speaker 1: the new Minister of National Security aka a position that
Speaker 1: oversees the police. There's also Bezalel Simotric, who will have
Speaker 1: significant power over Israeli settlements. In addition to his role
Speaker 1: as Finance Minister. The government has promised to expand those
Speaker 1: settlements those already illegal settlements. The members of this new
Speaker 1: coalition have also made extensive comments denigrating the queer community.
Speaker 1: They've also called for stricter definitions of who even qualifies
Speaker 1: as Jewish. In making its vision abundantly clear, the government
Speaker 1: released policy guidelines at the end of September, announcing the
Speaker 1: Jewish people's quote exclusive and inalienable right to all parts
Speaker 1: of the land of Israel. Toward the end of January,
Speaker 1: the policies of the Enyaho's newly swording government coalition brought
Speaker 1: out about eighty thousand protesters in Tel Aviv. The protesters
Speaker 1: were largely focused on the government's proposals to overhaul the
Speaker 1: judicial system, which could weaken the country's democracy and separation
Speaker 1: of powers quote unquote democracy yet right, But the effects
Speaker 1: of the policies on the one point six million Palestinian
Speaker 1: citizens of Israel and the five point two million Palestinians
Speaker 1: living in the occupied territories, all of these effects are
Speaker 1: going to be catastrophic and only building upon years of
Speaker 1: policies that Israeli human rights organizations say constitute crimes against humanity.
Speaker 1: The human rights defenders and experts in Israeli politics emphasize
Speaker 1: that this government is not a departure from the previous ones.
Speaker 1: And yes, it is Netanyahu's sixth time leading the country,
Speaker 1: but instead of being a new government, it's instead a
Speaker 1: culmination of Israeli politics that are only drifting farther and
Speaker 1: farther to the right, and then decades longer of policies
Speaker 1: that amount to defacto annexation of the occupied West Bank
Speaker 1: and policies of Jewish supremacy. What's different now, however, is
Speaker 1: how clearly these ideas are stated in the new government's
Speaker 1: coalition guidelines by prominent ministers of the fundamentals of how
Speaker 1: the country runs. This time, it is clear it is
Speaker 1: written in the guideline. There's no longer subtlety to their hate.
Speaker 1: It is in writing. The new Israeli government is somewhat
Speaker 1: of a turn from the brief centrist government of last year,
Speaker 1: but it's still seeking to implement policies that are anti
Speaker 1: Palestinian and anti liberal. But again, it is certainly not
Speaker 1: the first Israeli government to do these things. The executive
Speaker 1: director of the Israeli Watchdog Bitsalem again apologize, probably must
Speaker 1: pronounced that said, it's key not to pretend, as many
Speaker 1: seem to already be doing, that it'll somehow be a
Speaker 1: sudden departure from Israeli quote unquote democracy. What worries me
Speaker 1: is that even this level of clarity will not be
Speaker 1: sufficient to trigger an adequate international response. And the new
Speaker 1: Israeli government is shaping up just to be extreme as
Speaker 1: we anticipated. Israel's parliamentary system is made up of many
Speaker 1: fragmented parties, and it's slowly been collapsing, and there's been
Speaker 1: turmoil and whatever, because there have been five national elections
Speaker 1: since twenty nineteen. The quote unquote change government in twenty
Speaker 1: twenty one brought together opposing parties last year to Auston
Speaker 1: n Yahoo finally once and for all, right, But that
Speaker 1: fell apart last summer, and in the ensuing elections, nan
Speaker 1: Yahoo built a coalition of ultra orthodox and religious Zionist
Speaker 1: parties that returned him to power, leading to an even
Speaker 1: more extreme government. So even they tried to get rid
Speaker 1: of him, but he came back worse than ever. And
Speaker 1: so this extreme government is already acting in extreme ways
Speaker 1: and again the new government's ministers have made long standing
Speaker 1: attacks on the queer community, as well as religious freedom
Speaker 1: and Israeli in Palestinian civil society, as well as who
Speaker 1: can call themselves Jewish. Above all, there are going to
Speaker 1: be drastic implications for Palestinians living in the occupied West
Speaker 1: Bank and for the civil liberties of Israeli citizens, mostly
Speaker 1: because Nenyahoo's internal coalition negotiations have brought settlers into key
Speaker 1: ministerial posts, and only days into the government being sworn in,
Speaker 1: there have been already multiple signs and signals of how
Speaker 1: these personalities are going to rule. Justice Minister Yarev Levin
Speaker 1: has introduced legislation that would weaken judicial review and the
Speaker 1: power of israel Supreme Court to strike down legislation. Another
Speaker 1: proposal would revamp and politicize the country's longstanding process for
Speaker 1: selecting judges. And of course we can't forget about the
Speaker 1: fucking new National Security Minister aka to Marvin Gavide, who
Speaker 1: is part of the Jewish Power Party. His political ideas
Speaker 1: are inspired by the late radical iconoclass Rabbi Mayor Kahane
Speaker 1: Bengavie has stepped into a role that is basically tailor
Speaker 1: made to oversee the police both within Israel and the
Speaker 1: occupied West Bank, and in early January, he on somehow
Speaker 1: legal grounds directed the police to tear down any Palestinian
Speaker 1: flag in public spaces. And then there's also Finance Minister
Speaker 1: Bezalel Summatric. He is the head of the Religious Zionism Party,
Speaker 1: and he's also a settler whose anti gay rhetoric is prolific,
Speaker 1: to say the least. He has already seized customs revenues
Speaker 1: that belong to the Palestinian Authority, and he's called the
Speaker 1: Palestinian Authority a terror abetting body that he thinks should fall.
Speaker 1: He also holds newly created authorities that give him oversight
Speaker 1: of the West Bank occupation through a role crafted for
Speaker 1: him in the Defense Ministry. So they're essentially just creating
Speaker 1: these roles and creating these rules that only allow them
Speaker 1: to have more control corruption one oh one. I suppose
Speaker 1: we can also see clearly Hona and Yaho and his
Speaker 1: partners are going to govern. In the coalitions agreement that
Speaker 1: sets out the new government's guidelines, it's not legally binding,
Speaker 1: but it states plainly in its ideology that quote, the
Speaker 1: Jewish people have an exclusive and in allegal right over
Speaker 1: all areas of the Land of Israel. The government will
Speaker 1: promote and develop the settlement of all parts of the
Speaker 1: Land of Israel, and this includes to them the Occupied
Speaker 1: West Bank. Israeli human rights organization of Dull La wrote
Speaker 1: in a report, this goes further than any previous agreements.
Speaker 1: The government has made explicit the coalition's party's long standing
Speaker 1: intent to further entrench Jewish supremacy in Palestinian repression throughout
Speaker 1: the State of Israel and the Occupied West Bank through
Speaker 1: a two tiered system of governance on all levels. The
Speaker 1: new government's approach to the occupied West Bank revolves around
Speaker 1: the illegal annexation of Palestinian land. The government plans to
Speaker 1: legalize the illegal outposts that are built on private Palestinian land,
Speaker 1: and the likely result of that is Palestinians being stripped
Speaker 1: of rights and protections and left even more vulnerable to
Speaker 1: violence and the hardship they're already enduring. The Israeli Rights
Speaker 1: organization of the LA goes on to say that these
Speaker 1: changes to the judicial system and bestowing ministers like Symatrek
Speaker 1: with new authorities over the occupation threatened civil rights and
Speaker 1: individual rights in Israel, but it is mainly going to
Speaker 1: be a big, big issue against the national minority, the
Speaker 1: Palestinian citizens of Israel, who make up about twenty percent
Speaker 1: of the country. They are going to be the first
Speaker 1: and most severely damaged by those changes. And clearly the
Speaker 1: Israeli government even before all of this, but now it
Speaker 1: is clearly stated it has all the components of fascism.
Speaker 1: And yet the US still appears to beholding out hope
Speaker 1: that it can somehow work with and Yahoo and his
Speaker 1: fucking government and its fucking ministers. Even now politics are
Speaker 1: all a scam. Everyone fucking sucks. Israel has been violating
Speaker 1: Palestinians human rights with impunity for decades, but this new
Speaker 1: government again just illustrates the most brutal intentions with greater clarity.
Speaker 1: Bits Salem, another human rights group, said the hypocrisy is
Speaker 1: denying that Palestinians have already been living for many years
Speaker 1: under extreme, organized criminal Israeli state violence underwritten by the US,
Speaker 1: and the lack of accountability and the acquiescence of the
Speaker 1: international community is to a great extent responsible for driving
Speaker 1: this and as we mentioned in this episode, last year,
Speaker 1: twenty twenty two was the most deadly year for Palestinians
Speaker 1: living in the occupied West Bank since the UN began
Speaker 1: recording the deaths in two thousand and five. It was
Speaker 1: also the year that the most Palestinians have been held
Speaker 1: in administrative detention, and the attacks on Palestinians throughout the
Speaker 1: center right government leading up to all of this, the
Speaker 1: governments of Ya Lapide and Nefatali Benett cannot be understated.
Speaker 1: It's always been bad. Now it's just extremely bad. And
Speaker 1: in sharpie, the US has a role here too, because
Speaker 1: it continues to supply Israel with billions of dollars of
Speaker 1: military aid, and it has also failed to publicly criticize
Speaker 1: the En Yahoo's new political allies. An analyst covering Israel
Speaker 1: and Palestine for International Crisis Group said there's no way
Speaker 1: that the en Yahoo, as desperate as he is, would
Speaker 1: have gone to form this kind of coalition. If it
Speaker 1: wasn't for years and years of US abdication of sponsibility
Speaker 1: for what happens here, he just wouldn't have felt that
Speaker 1: he could do it. It would have been too outlandish.
Speaker 1: And all of this brings us to twenty twenty three,
Speaker 1: which we will talk about tomorrow because I like short episodes,
Speaker 1: so I'll see you there and welcome back to it
Speaker 1: could happen here. It's still Sharine, and we are going
Speaker 1: to continue our discussion about Palestine. Yesterday we talked about
Speaker 1: the atrocious things that Israel has done to Palestinians in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty two, and it brought us all to now
Speaker 1: twenty twenty three. And as a reminder, as of this
Speaker 1: recording on March seventh, at least sixty six Palestinians have
Speaker 1: been killed by Israeli forces and settlers since the start
Speaker 1: of twenty twenty three, and at least seventeen of those
Speaker 1: killed were children. Thursday, January twenty sixth marked one of
Speaker 1: the deadliest Israeli army operations and the occupied West Bank
Speaker 1: since at least two thousand and five. Israeli soldiers invaded
Speaker 1: a crowded genin refugee camp on Palestinian land and massacred
Speaker 1: nine Palestinians, wounding at least twenty others. Among these nine
Speaker 1: Palestinians were two children and a sixty one year old woman.
Speaker 1: The injuries of the wounded were in the head and chest,
Speaker 1: indicating that Israeli soldiers were shooting to kill. Israeli soldiers
Speaker 1: also blocked paramedics from delivering medical aid to the injured,
Speaker 1: and they tear gassed the children's ward of a hospital.
Speaker 1: This massacre is the deadliest Israeli attack in the Palestinian
Speaker 1: West Bank in nearly twenty years. I just want to
Speaker 1: repeat some things in case I said that too fast
Speaker 1: or it's just glossed over. But nine Palestinians were killed,
Speaker 1: two children, a sixty one year old woman, and the
Speaker 1: injuries were in the head and the chest. They were
Speaker 1: shooting to kill, They blocked paramedics from delivering medical aid
Speaker 1: to the injured, and they tear gassed the children's ward
Speaker 1: of a hospital. What is the justification of that? Someone
Speaker 1: please tell me. I'm all ears just monstrous things that
Speaker 1: Israel is doing to Palestinians. And in addition to the
Speaker 1: massacre in Jenin Israeli soldiers killed three other Palestinians within
Speaker 1: twenty four hours of the massacre, a child and two
Speaker 1: young men. This raid on January twenty sixth led the
Speaker 1: Palestinian Authority aka the PA to stop coordinating with Israel
Speaker 1: on security matters, officially suspending it's US supervised security cooperation
Speaker 1: with Israel, but it's unclear to what extent that will
Speaker 1: take place, and this spike in violence is occurring on
Speaker 1: both sides. A day after the raid aka massacre in
Speaker 1: the Gena refugee camp, a Palestinian gunman near a synagogue
Speaker 1: outside of Jerusalem killed seven people and injured three more.
Speaker 1: Violence is often the response when you lead with violence,
Speaker 1: and this event marked the deadliest Palestinian attack against Israelis
Speaker 1: since two thousand and eight. Israel's colonization and military occupation
Speaker 1: of Palestinian land and its violent apartheid rule over millions
Speaker 1: of Palestinians are the root cause of this violence, but
Speaker 1: US media largely ignores Israel's violence, as Israeli's soldiers routinely
Speaker 1: murder Palestinians, including children, destroying their homes, and stealing their land.
Speaker 1: Remember yesterday when I mentioned that we would talk about
Speaker 1: the heinous things that Israeli settlers have been doing well.
Speaker 1: On January twenty eighth, Israeli settlers attacked Palestinians at least
Speaker 1: one hundred and forty four times. The attacks ranged from
Speaker 1: assaulting Palestinians to setting Palestinian homes and cars on fire.
Speaker 1: No arrests were made. In fact, Israeli soldiers often allow
Speaker 1: Israeli settlers to attack Palestinians, even joining in themselves or
Speaker 1: arresting the Palestinians who have been attacked. Israeli settlers live
Speaker 1: on stolen Palestinian land and violation of international law. They
Speaker 1: shouldn't be on Palestinian land in the first place, let
Speaker 1: alone be given free reign to attack Palestinians without any
Speaker 1: sort of consequence. These are all obvious hate crimes that
Speaker 1: are only supported and encouraged by the military and the government.
Speaker 1: If a government treats those it oppresses as less than human,
Speaker 1: its people will only do the same. This January was
Speaker 1: the deadliest January for Palestinians in fourteen years, and Israel's
Speaker 1: violence shows no signs of stopping. It seems like Israel's
Speaker 1: new extremist far right government is determined to exact more
Speaker 1: violence against Palestinians this year than ever before, and with
Speaker 1: the US officials refusing to condemn their actions, Israel's leaders
Speaker 1: are getting a green light to continue to terrorize Palestinians.
Speaker 1: Never held accountable for the daily violence and apartheid rule
Speaker 1: over Palestine, Palestinians deserve freedom from Israel's daily violence and
Speaker 1: at the very least, fair media coverage so that the
Speaker 1: world understands what's really going on. On March third of
Speaker 1: this year, Israel killed a fifteen year old Palestinian boy
Speaker 1: by shooting him in the back. This occurred in the
Speaker 1: West Bank town of Azoun, when an israel military vehicle
Speaker 1: drove into town. Teens were hurling rocks at the car.
Speaker 1: Soldiers responded with live fire, which is a very reasonable
Speaker 1: response to having a stone thrown out your fucking tank.
Speaker 1: In addition to shooting and killing a fifteen year old
Speaker 1: Palestinian boy a child in the back, two others were
Speaker 1: wounded in this attack, including a child. He was currently
Speaker 1: still in critical condition. Israeli forces have carried out three
Speaker 1: large scale raids on Palestinian cities since Israel's new government
Speaker 1: took office at the end of last year, including one
Speaker 1: in Nablus on February twenty second that led to the
Speaker 1: largest Palestinian death toll in a single military occupation since
Speaker 1: two thousand and five. Israeli forces killed at least eleven
Speaker 1: Palestinians and wounded more than one hundred more. Among those
Speaker 1: killed were a seventy two year old man, a sixteen
Speaker 1: year old boy, and a sixty six year old man
Speaker 1: who died of tear gas in hillation. New armed Palestinian
Speaker 1: groups have also emerged in response to this violence, and
Speaker 1: there has been a spate of Palestinian attacks against Israelis
Speaker 1: going back though to the fakery of the Israeli settlers.
Speaker 1: On February twenty sixth, at least four hundred Israeli settlers
Speaker 1: attacked several Palestinian villages in Nablus, including Kawara, killing one
Speaker 1: man and injuring hundreds of others. The violence came after
Speaker 1: calls were made by Israeli Kanesset member Zabaka Fogel apologies
Speaker 1: obviously mispronounced. I tried my best, but this violence came
Speaker 1: after this Kanesset member told the settlers to burn the
Speaker 1: town down. Settlers burned down more than thirty homes and
Speaker 1: at least one hundred cars while beating Palestinians with metal
Speaker 1: rods and rocks. None of these settlers were arrested. About
Speaker 1: a hundred Palestinians are also being treated for tear gas
Speaker 1: in hialation. In one of the many videos of this event,
Speaker 1: and yes, there are actual videos of like this happening
Speaker 1: without any justice, crowds of Jewish settlers can be heard
Speaker 1: reciting the Jewish prayer for the dead as they stare
Speaker 1: at a building in flames. There's a video of Israeli
Speaker 1: settlers fucking dancing as the violence takes place. And earlier,
Speaker 1: a prominent Israeli cabinet minister and settler leader had called
Speaker 1: for Israel to quote strike without mercy. On March first,
Speaker 1: Beziel Samatric, who was Israel's finance minister who also handles
Speaker 1: civil administration in the West Bank, said the village of
Speaker 1: Hawada should be wiped out. He told a journalist quote,
Speaker 1: I think Hawada needs to be erased. The state should
Speaker 1: be the one to do that. Back to that, Israeli
Speaker 1: Knesset member Zivika Fogel again apologies for mispronouncing that. He
Speaker 1: tweeted that quote. Hawada closed plus burnt down. That's what
Speaker 1: I want to see. On an earlier occasion, Fogel said
Speaker 1: that quote a hundred Palestinians must be killed in a day,
Speaker 1: and he described these Palestinians as terrorists and to force
Speaker 1: them to the quote Israeli will. In response to Symmetric's
Speaker 1: statement that the Palestinian village of Hawaida should be wiped out,
Speaker 1: the Human Rights Chief of the United Nations AKA Volker Turk,
Speaker 1: who we mentioned briefly yesterday, he said that these commas
Speaker 1: are an unfathomable statement of incitement to violence and hostility.
Speaker 1: He went on to say the situation in the occupied
Speaker 1: Palestinian territory is a tragedy, a tragedy above all else
Speaker 1: for the Palestinian people. This was during a report that
Speaker 1: he presented on the situation and the occupied territories to
Speaker 1: the UN Human Rights Council. He said, my report finds
Speaker 1: that over the reporting period, lethal force has been frequently
Speaker 1: employed by the Israeli security forces, regardless of a level
Speaker 1: of threat, and at times even as an initial measure
Speaker 1: rather than a last resort. My office has also documented
Speaker 1: several cases of apparent extra judicial targeted killings by members
Speaker 1: of the isof the Israeli security forces. The report finds
Speaker 1: that one hundred and thirty one Palestinians were killed by
Speaker 1: the isof personnel over the past year in a context
Speaker 1: of law enforcement, that is outside any context of hostilities.
Speaker 1: This includes sixty five people who we understand were not
Speaker 1: armed or not engaged in any attacks or clashes. The
Speaker 1: occupation is eating away at the health of both societies
Speaker 1: on every level, from childhood to old age and in
Speaker 1: every part of life. For this violence to end, the
Speaker 1: occupation must end on all sides. There are people who
Speaker 1: know this. I did mention the end of that report
Speaker 1: briefly yesterday, but I wanted to mention more of it today,
Speaker 1: just to really give you the whole context of what
Speaker 1: this report was saying to the UN. The European Union's
Speaker 1: envoy to the Palestinians also called for accountability for these
Speaker 1: settler attacks. It is absolutely necessary for us that accountability
Speaker 1: is fully ensured, that the perpetrators are brought to justice,
Speaker 1: that those who lost property be compensated. In what seemed
Speaker 1: like a very rare move, the Defense Minister Yolav Gallant
Speaker 1: said that he signed administrative detention orders for two suspects
Speaker 1: over this rampage, and he court ordered police to release
Speaker 1: all seven people who have been detained in connection to
Speaker 1: the rampage. Amnesty International condemned this release of the suspects.
Speaker 1: It also condemned the use of administrative attention, which it
Speaker 1: said was a practice that violates international law. But Israel
Speaker 1: doesn't care about that, because it violates international law a lot,
Speaker 1: and here it is Israeli, writes group yesh Din found
Speaker 1: that ninety three percent of investigations into settler attacks in
Speaker 1: the occupied West Bank between two thousand and five and
Speaker 1: twenty twenty two were closed without indictment. And even though
Speaker 1: the US demanded that ne Enyahoo disavow symatrics call for
Speaker 1: Hawaara to be erased, nothing has happened. Nunyah, who on
Speaker 1: the night of the rampage urged people not to take
Speaker 1: the law into their own hands, but he never publicly
Speaker 1: addressed sematric statement or responded to the unusual criticism by
Speaker 1: the US, who was obviously a close ally. The situation
Speaker 1: in Israel today is clear. Israel has become a state
Speaker 1: for the settlers, where some of these militias have the
Speaker 1: support of the Israeli ministers, such as Symatric and Bengavid.
Speaker 1: Israeli settlers who chant death to Arabs and mayor village
Speaker 1: burn have the direct support of people in uniform and
Speaker 1: the Israeli government. And just like the other Israeli settlers
Speaker 1: who set hundreds of Palestinian homes on fire and uprooted
Speaker 1: thousands of Palestinian olive trees and got away with their crimes,
Speaker 1: it is highly unlikely that the Israeli settlers who burned
Speaker 1: homes in Hawada will be touched. And there have been
Speaker 1: protests that are actually secular and liberal in a desperate
Speaker 1: attempt to stop this growing far right government, but they
Speaker 1: don't do much, obviously, when you're in a fascist government regime.
Speaker 1: I can't believe we haven't talked about him yet, but
Speaker 1: President Isaac Herzog, who is Israel's eleventh president and he's
Speaker 1: been president since twenty twenty one, he stepped in after
Speaker 1: these protests were happening, and with support from President Biden,
Speaker 1: he was facilitating a compromise between the government and these
Speaker 1: protesters and what seemed like a well intentioned effort to
Speaker 1: build some kind of consensus, it was only in fact
Speaker 1: this ill advised attempt to appease fascists and pander to evil,
Speaker 1: and any compromise that is offered by Herzog would be
Speaker 1: skewed toward the ruling majority, which holds the power to
Speaker 1: interpret its articles at will. A compromise will also whitewash
Speaker 1: and empower the ruling fascists, presenting them as responsible and
Speaker 1: pragmatic actors as they pursue their extremist agenda, and as
Speaker 1: a street opposition loses momentum and disintegrates slowly but surely.
Speaker 1: In a recent article, Haretz said that Herzog's plans were
Speaker 1: born in sin to whitewasher government led by a criminal
Speaker 1: defendant who was in a conflict of interest in everything
Speaker 1: regarding changes in the judicial system and certainly regarding such
Speaker 1: a radical quote unquote reform. And obviously, the more sinister
Speaker 1: and dangerous ramifications of such a compromise lies in its
Speaker 1: focusing on Israel's liberal democracy for the Jews while ignoring
Speaker 1: its tyranny toward the Palestinians. In fact, reaching any sort
Speaker 1: of compromise on domestic affairs is sure to free the
Speaker 1: government's hand, only to widen its oppression, deepen its occupation,
Speaker 1: and multiply its illegal settlements, Israel has no security solutions
Speaker 1: in Palestine. Former intelligence officer Chief Ami Ayalon, in his
Speaker 1: biography Friendly Fire, said of Israel, because of its occupation,
Speaker 1: Israel's democracy will evolve into tyranny. Let's go back to
Speaker 1: Izamar Binevide, Israel's Minister of Security, who the New York
Speaker 1: are actually called Israel's Minister of chaos. He has been
Speaker 1: convicted of eight charges, including supporting a terrorist organization and
Speaker 1: incitement to racism, and who, according to former Prime Minister
Speaker 1: a Hud al Marte, presents a more eminent danger to
Speaker 1: Israel than a nuclear armed Iran. And as we mentioned,
Speaker 1: Bin Gaveer serves as Minister of Security alongside his genocidal
Speaker 1: partner and crime but Zabel Sumatric, the Minister of Finance.
Speaker 1: Both of these men have risen to the highest echelons
Speaker 1: of power thanks to their racist campaigns and incitement against Palestinians.
Speaker 1: Their fanatical religious movement has sprung out of the illegal
Speaker 1: settlements in the occupied West Bank based on these Zionist
Speaker 1: belief in the necessity to take full control of all
Speaker 1: of historic Palestine aka the quote the Land of Israel
Speaker 1: as they call it, in order to redeem the Jewish
Speaker 1: people by any means necessary. In other words, Israel's fanatics
Speaker 1: have a divine ordained, vested interest in greater turmoil in
Speaker 1: Israel and Palestine that strengthens and expands their base, especially
Speaker 1: among their youth. After decades of military occupation. Polls and
Speaker 1: surveys suggests that about sixty percent of Jewish Israeli's favor
Speaker 1: segregation from the Palestinian Israelis, and sixty percent identify as
Speaker 1: right wing today, a number that rises to seventy percent
Speaker 1: for those aged eighteen to twenty four. This does not
Speaker 1: bode well for a future piece or security. It's not
Speaker 1: exactly a generation that's going to die out. It's a
Speaker 1: generation that's being formed as we speak. And even though
Speaker 1: Palestine has the Palestine Authority or any kind of leadership,
Speaker 1: that is obviously weakening. Even when Israel pretends to coordinate
Speaker 1: with them on security and intelligence matters, it persists on
Speaker 1: humiliating the Palestinian leaders, undercutting their authority, and undermining their
Speaker 1: legitimacy as it forces settlers to rampage through the Palestinian
Speaker 1: neighborhoods and refugee camps without out any sort of repercussions.
Speaker 1: And I know Israel gets called an apartheid state a
Speaker 1: lot these days, and it isn't apartheid state. But basically
Speaker 1: the engine of turmoil and violence today is only because
Speaker 1: of Israel's decade long military and civilian occupation, This occupation
Speaker 1: that has rapidly transformed into an entrenched system of apartheid
Speaker 1: government because of the two separate set of laws, rules, standards,
Speaker 1: and structures designed to favor the illegal settlers and to
Speaker 1: maintain and expand Jewish supremacy from the Jordan River to
Speaker 1: the Mediterranean Sea. The ruling fascists plan to unleash greater
Speaker 1: state and settler violence against the Palestinians as this year progresses,
Speaker 1: and in the process transform Israel into a fascist garrison
Speaker 1: state and worsen regional turmoil. Let's take our first break here.
Speaker 1: We will continue when we come back. Brb Okay, we're back.
Speaker 1: In twenty fifteen, the world was shocked by the kidnapping
Speaker 1: of Palestinian child Muhamment of Jadid from Jerusalem by Israeli
Speaker 1: settlers who burnt him alive. This was depicted in the
Speaker 1: HBO show Our Boys. It's a decent show. I recommend
Speaker 1: you swatch it just for more information. It's really hard
Speaker 1: to watch, but it's still a really good show. But
Speaker 1: this event, this kidnapping of a Palestinian child who was
Speaker 1: burnt alive by Israeli settlers. This is the mentality of
Speaker 1: Israeli settlers in the West Bank today, where birding Palestinians
Speaker 1: in their homes is celebrated by their political leaders. These
Speaker 1: groups have carried out dozens of attacks against Palestining families
Speaker 1: by birding their homes and their farms, including burning the
Speaker 1: Palestinian Dawabshi family in the village on Duma in late
Speaker 1: July twenty fifteen, where an eighteen month old Dali Dawapshe
Speaker 1: and his parents lost their lives. Between six hundred thousand
Speaker 1: and seven hundred and fifty thousand Israeli settlers live in
Speaker 1: at least two hundred and fifty settlements and outposts built
Speaker 1: by the Israeli government and settlers across the occupied Palestining
Speaker 1: West Bank and East Jerusalem. That is equivalent to roughly
Speaker 1: eleven percent of the total Jewish Israeli population. They live
Speaker 1: beyond the quote internationally recognized borders of their state on
Speaker 1: Palestinian land. That Israel militarily occupied in nineteen sixty seven
Speaker 1: and continues to do so until today. Settlers also lived
Speaker 1: in the besieged Gaza Strip until two thousand and five,
Speaker 1: when they were evacuated. The Gaza Strip has also been
Speaker 1: described as an open air concentration camp if you want
Speaker 1: an idea of maybe why they left. The majority of
Speaker 1: settlers are armed, and Palestinians living on the occupied West
Speaker 1: Bank and East Jerusalem suffer from hundreds of Israeli settler
Speaker 1: attacks each year. Such attacks, which include shootings, stabbings, arson beatings,
Speaker 1: and rock throwing, have become more organized over the last
Speaker 1: few years. Every year, thousands of Palestinian trees and cars
Speaker 1: and homes are burned by these settlers. Many of these
Speaker 1: incidents have been recorded on video, showing that the attacks
Speaker 1: often take place under the protection or in coordination with
Speaker 1: the Israeli Army, sometimes with soldiers and settlers shooting side
Speaker 1: by side. Israeli settlements are illegal under international law, as
Speaker 1: they violate the Fourth Geneva Convention, which banns and occupying
Speaker 1: power from transferring its population to the area it occupies.
Speaker 1: This is for a variety of reasons, including protecting civilians
Speaker 1: from the theft of resources by the occupying power, and
Speaker 1: to prevent changes in the demographic makeup of the occupied territory,
Speaker 1: which both things have happened. Israel is doing that very successfully. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: the majority of settlements have been built either entirely or
Speaker 1: partially on private Palestinian land. Despite being outside of Israel proper.
Speaker 1: These settlers are granted Israeli citizenship and they receive government
Speaker 1: subsidies that significantly lower their cost of living. In contrast,
Speaker 1: Palestinians living in the West Bank are subject to Israeli
Speaker 1: military Harry law, and there has been an increasing number
Speaker 1: of settler attacks. Between twenty ten and twenty nineteen, the
Speaker 1: United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs recorded
Speaker 1: at least two thousand, nine hundred and fifty five settler
Speaker 1: attacks in which at least twenty two Palestinians were killed
Speaker 1: and at least one thousand, two hundred and fifty eight
Speaker 1: others were injured. The governance of Nablos, Tebron and Romola
Speaker 1: had the highest numbers of these incidents. Since the start
Speaker 1: of twenty twenty three, Israeli settler related violence reached an
Speaker 1: average of three incidents per day, compared with two incidents
Speaker 1: per day in twenty twenty two, still really shitty, and
Speaker 1: one incident per day in twenty twenty one. This is
Speaker 1: what the UN had told El Jazeera, and this is
Speaker 1: the highest daily average of settler related incidents affecting Palestinians
Speaker 1: since two thousand and six. And criminal charges are rarely,
Speaker 1: if ever pursued, And although not every attack can be
Speaker 1: tied to another, it seems that since the launch of
Speaker 1: Israel's Operation Breakwater last March, it's only driving the surge
Speaker 1: and violence further. The imbalance between these two forces doesn't
Speaker 1: get any better when you add politics and leadership into
Speaker 1: the mix. While Israel is appointing more and more far
Speaker 1: right politicians to higher positions of power, there has been
Speaker 1: a weakening of Palestinian security forces. Palestinian security forces are
Speaker 1: trained by the US and international forces to patrol the
Speaker 1: West Bank, round up Palestinian militants, and coordinate with Israeli
Speaker 1: officials to prevent attacks on Israelis, but those forces have
Speaker 1: lost a law of legitimacy among their own people. Many
Speaker 1: Palestinians see them as doing Israel's bidding, maintaining Israel's military occupation,
Speaker 1: rather than resisting it. Increasingly, pockets of the West Bank
Speaker 1: have become no go zones for the Palestinian authority forces,
Speaker 1: who now either refuse to enter or find it too dangerous.
Speaker 1: That includes the Genin refugee camp, which is a dense,
Speaker 1: highly populated district. Israel says it's stepping in to fill
Speaker 1: the void of leadership, intensifying its arrest raids in these
Speaker 1: densely populated areas, and unsurprisingly this leads to deadly clashes.
Speaker 1: But Israel has occupied the West Bank for nearly fifty
Speaker 1: six years and continues to deepen its grip on it.
Speaker 1: It says Palestinians are not ready to make peace with
Speaker 1: Israel and that the occupation is a security necessity. But
Speaker 1: it has also allowed and supported hundreds of thousands of
Speaker 1: Israeli settlers across the West Bank, which we've seen manifest
Speaker 1: and the far right parades and the rallies that chant
Speaker 1: for the quote death of Arabs. Additionally, Israel's new far
Speaker 1: right government vows to legalize dozens of small settlement outposts
Speaker 1: deep in the heart of the occupied territory, making it
Speaker 1: harder to envision a future Palestinian state there, which is
Speaker 1: part of their whole agenda. Younger Palestinians have grown up
Speaker 1: not knowing anything but Israel's brutal permit regime, which controls
Speaker 1: Palestinians entry and movement, and some of their only interactions
Speaker 1: with Israelis are often with hostile settlers or with occupation
Speaker 1: enforcing soldiers who raid their homes and jail people for
Speaker 1: months without charges. And because of the inaction of both
Speaker 1: the Palestinian Authority and the international community, some young Palestinians
Speaker 1: see violent resistance against Israel as their only viable path
Speaker 1: to freedom, With young militants lionized on social media, let's
Speaker 1: take our last break here, we'll be right back, talk
Speaker 1: about Palestinian leadership, Israel's far right, and a bunch of
Speaker 1: other terrible stuff. So whoopee, you're back and we are back.
Speaker 1: So as Palestinian leadership weakens, Israel's far right only gets stronger.
Speaker 1: According to Poles, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas eighty seven,
Speaker 1: one of the Middle East's oldest leaders, has lost the
Speaker 1: support of most Palestinians. Palestinian protesters and activists have long
Speaker 1: accused Abas of not taking a more active role in
Speaker 1: dealing with Israeli aggression. In his nineteenth year of what
Speaker 1: was supposed to be a four year term, a Bas
Speaker 1: has lost control of Gaza to the mil to Hamas,
Speaker 1: calling off elections for new leadership and allowing government corruption
Speaker 1: to thrive, never laying out a clear future for Palestinians.
Speaker 1: But it's not the end of Abbas's reign that worries Palestinians.
Speaker 1: It's what comes next when the eighty seventy year old
Speaker 1: is no longer president. But the question of who will
Speaker 1: replace a Bas is not currently at the top of
Speaker 1: the Palestinian public's agenda. Doctor Mustapha Baghruti, the head of
Speaker 1: the Palestine National Initiative Movement, said that Palestinians, particularly the
Speaker 1: younger generation, are no longer viewing the two state solution
Speaker 1: as a viable option. They are also recognizing that they
Speaker 1: can't expect anything from Israeli governments, particularly the coming one
Speaker 1: that is discussing annexation, bolstering settlements and suppressing Palestinian rights.
Speaker 1: He said, the notion is strengthening among the young generation
Speaker 1: that Israel only understands force and opposition. It doesn't matter
Speaker 1: whether national resistance is violent or not, which is why
Speaker 1: there's growing support for armed groups in Jenin and Nablus.
Speaker 1: Baruti said that Israel's prevention of a two state solution
Speaker 1: will eventually make the Palestinian authority irrelevant. He said the
Speaker 1: PA's current model as a type of subcontractor for Israel,
Speaker 1: which implements apartheid against the Palestinians, cannot go on forever,
Speaker 1: regardless of who runs the PA. On the flip side,
Speaker 1: Israel's longtime leader Benjamin and Yahoo is back as prime ministers,
Speaker 1: a prise surprise, with a far right coalition that has
Speaker 1: laid out a plan for deepening its grip on the
Speaker 1: West Bank and taking tougher action against Palestinians. And with
Speaker 1: only a couple months in office in this new year,
Speaker 1: the government has already sparked a series of controversies, including
Speaker 1: over the status of the Uximosque in Jerusalem. The Uximosque
Speaker 1: is a very holy and special place for Muslims, and
Speaker 1: it has been subject to violence for years because of
Speaker 1: Israel's government. More far right politicians have also come into office,
Speaker 1: including the National Security minister we mentioned earlier, who essentially
Speaker 1: wants to give Israeli police and soldiers immunity to use
Speaker 1: live ammunition, which would shield them from criminal prosecution for
Speaker 1: killing and injuring Palestinians. Israel's also planning to destroy an
Speaker 1: entire Palestinian town, beginning their plans last month. Khan Alhamad
Speaker 1: is a town just miles from Jerusalem with nearly two
Speaker 1: hundred Palestinians. Israel is planning to destroy the entire town
Speaker 1: in order to expand two illegal, racially segregated settlements nearby.
Speaker 1: Israel plans to bulldoze all the homes, schools, and businesses
Speaker 1: in Khan Hmad, forcing families into homeless. It's a process
Speaker 1: they've done in countless Palestinian towns. Kahn Rahma is simply
Speaker 1: Israel's latest target. Just miles away from this town, Israel
Speaker 1: is destroying the Palestinian community of Masafiriata, where over a
Speaker 1: thousand Palestinians are living in fear that Israeli soldiers will
Speaker 1: violently tear down their homes at any given moment. No
Speaker 1: government should be allowed to forcibly uproot entire communities in
Speaker 1: order to steal their land. Israel should be no exception,
Speaker 1: and the fact that it continues to operate in this
Speaker 1: way as the entire world watches is it's shameful. Israeli
Speaker 1: officials are already prepping for a tense month in April
Speaker 1: when Ramadan and Passover coincide, which could be a combustible
Speaker 1: mix for potential religious and nationalists fueled violence. The Israeli
Speaker 1: military is inflicting horrific, deadly violence and Palestinians every single day.
Speaker 1: Instead of condemning Israel or take any kind of action
Speaker 1: to protect Palestinian lives, the US continues to turn a
Speaker 1: blind eye while also continuing to send Israel billions of
Speaker 1: dollars every year. These billions of dollars are used to
Speaker 1: commit massacres of Palestinians. The world should bring to account
Speaker 1: to the Israeli government, which has encouraged violence against Palestinians publicly,
Speaker 1: and supportive settlers with arms and money to carry out
Speaker 1: their crimes. The Israeli government just legalized nine illegal settlement outposts.
Speaker 1: If the international community, including the US, does not criminalize
Speaker 1: settlement activities in the West Bank, Israeli settlers, who in
Speaker 1: recent years have leaned towards the far right in alarming ways,
Speaker 1: will continue to enjoy impunity when they commit crimes against
Speaker 1: the Palestinian people and Israel's brutal occupation shows no sign
Speaker 1: of ending, so will continue to hear news like this
Speaker 1: until any sort of action is taken to defend Palestinians
Speaker 1: and end Israel's apartheid rule of Palestine and end the
Speaker 1: ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people. Until then, we won't
Speaker 1: stop raising awareness of the crimes against humanity that Israel
Speaker 1: commits against Palestinians every single day. And that is the episode.
Speaker 1: Who I hope some of that was informative or educational,
Speaker 1: and I will probably be back with more upsetting news
Speaker 1: about the Middle East very soon. So goodbye, dearly beloved,
Speaker 1: Welcome to it could happen here. We are gathered here
Speaker 1: today to get through this thing called life. Electric word life.
Speaker 1: It's a thing that only happens with the addition of
Speaker 1: a couple of ingredients, and one of those ingredients is
Speaker 1: the subject of our episode today. Oh yeah, you guys
Speaker 1: like that? Everybody really happy with that? I love that. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm feeling not at all like I want to kind
Speaker 1: of shower. You can you can you can hear the
Speaker 1: moment where we're all like simultaneously questioning every single decision
Speaker 1: we've ever made in our entire lives. Yeah, now we're
Speaker 1: all bonded together. So how's everybody doing today. We've got
Speaker 1: mea Wong, Garrison Davis, James Stout, and I should let
Speaker 1: people know I wasn't joking about the come thingum. So
Speaker 1: those of you who are two online will know this.
Speaker 1: Those of you who are not online enough, this is
Speaker 1: one of the online things that you will want to
Speaker 1: know because it's very funny. And the gist of it
Speaker 1: is that like four days ago, doctor Jordan B. Peterson
Speaker 1: got sent a link to a Twitter account that is
Speaker 1: that purports to be spreading like hidden news about the
Speaker 1: evils of the Chinese communist regime, and they put out
Speaker 1: a video that was a segment from British Milking fetish
Speaker 1: pornography video. Now, if you're not aware the milking, as
Speaker 1: far as I can tell, I believe they're kind of
Speaker 1: descended from the long lineage of like rubber fetishists, right,
Speaker 1: and there's like a lot of medical fetish stuff it
Speaker 1: tied into it. But the idea is that men are
Speaker 1: entirely wrapped up on hospital gurneys and giant pump sucked
Speaker 1: the semen out of them. So it's like the machine
Speaker 1: is very like a cow milk. This Twitter account put
Speaker 1: this up, claiming that it was the Chinese government stealing
Speaker 1: the semen of young men, and Jordan Peterson shared it,
Speaker 1: saying it was an unbelievable act of evil and then
Speaker 1: everyone had the best day of their lives. And an
Speaker 1: hour of two later he deleted it. Now I have
Speaker 1: been continuing, coward, coward, coward. Yeah, so strange, so stranger.
Speaker 1: He left the world of peer reviewed academia. Yeah, it's
Speaker 1: it's wild that he's no longer professor. Um, it's very funny.
Speaker 1: We're continuing to give him shit for it online, but
Speaker 1: it set us off down an interesting road, and because
Speaker 1: some other stuff fell through, we're going to talk about
Speaker 1: the wide world of weird right wing come conspiracies. Most
Speaker 1: of them released are going to be right wing. There's
Speaker 1: a surprising number of semen based conspiracies. Everybody did research
Speaker 1: on their own special thing. I wanted to start by
Speaker 1: talking about this this Jordan Peterson video and giving kind
Speaker 1: of some of the some of the background on it,
Speaker 1: so I believe it. Last July, the Chinese Human Sperm
Speaker 1: Bank of Shanghai announced that it was hosting a competition
Speaker 1: for college students to find out whose semen was the
Speaker 1: best in terms of, like, you know, a number of
Speaker 1: modal sperm per milli leader, I think is the way
Speaker 1: that they judge it. And basically the idea was that
Speaker 1: they were trying to find like people with sperm concentration
Speaker 1: greater than sixty million per milli leader, and if they
Speaker 1: visited a sperm bank a set number of times in
Speaker 1: a six month period, they could receive a prize that
Speaker 1: was equivalent to about twelve hundred dollars right now. The
Speaker 1: reason this is happening is that China, for the first time,
Speaker 1: as a result of a number of different policies, had
Speaker 1: negative population growth very recently, and this is the thing
Speaker 1: that can cause a problem for a country for a
Speaker 1: variety of reasons. So the government is trying to shore
Speaker 1: up birthrates, and there are a lot of couples in
Speaker 1: China that have had issues conceiving, and so there's a
Speaker 1: huge amount of demand for sperm in the country right now.
Speaker 1: So this is not a weird story. It is actually
Speaker 1: a thing that happens all around the world regularly. But
Speaker 1: right around the time that this happened, a little bit
Speaker 1: after that, it came out that a Japanese company started
Speaker 1: selling what is called in the articles I found an
Speaker 1: automatic sperm extractor to Chinese sperm banks. Now this is
Speaker 1: I'm gonna send y'all the link. I was hoping you
Speaker 1: would oh, oh, yes, good friends, thanks, but yes, we're
Speaker 1: all going to see this. So the Machines price listing
Speaker 1: on Ali Baba, where it sells for about five to
Speaker 1: six thousand dollars, describes it as a device that quote
Speaker 1: merges modern digital technology, automatic control technology, and simulation technologies
Speaker 1: with semen collection and premature ejaculation desensitization training function. So
Speaker 1: it has a number of purposes, including guests to help
Speaker 1: guys stop coming too early, which no shame. It's funny
Speaker 1: that someone built a machine for it. It's extremely funny
Speaker 1: I that you can buy an Ali Express. It's like
Speaker 1: I personally, I'm not attaching anything. I bought an Ali
Speaker 1: Baba too sensitive parts to my body's thousand dollars. It's
Speaker 1: not cheap. Now the primary these are not being used
Speaker 1: for people who are coming to too quickly. Um, it's
Speaker 1: just like the worst ever were two D two. This
Speaker 1: it is. It is weird. It's see orientation. Does it
Speaker 1: stand on the ground and you just approach it. You
Speaker 1: have to stand up. Yeah, but what if you're a
Speaker 1: shock king, Yeah, I said, I'm sure they have options.
Speaker 1: It has like the rough shape of like canteld massage device,
Speaker 1: but it's kind of like formed like almost an art
Speaker 1: deco robot vagina. And basically, from what I've read, kind
Speaker 1: of the reasoning is that, like, hey, we need people
Speaker 1: to donate sperm. Some people feel weird about just masturbating
Speaker 1: in a clinic, and we hope this is a more
Speaker 1: pleasant experience for them. So again this we're laughing because like, look,
Speaker 1: a machine designed to capture seamen is kind of a
Speaker 1: funny thing. That's okay, no shame on anybody for that.
Speaker 1: But the fact that you have both the government trying
Speaker 1: to encourage people to donate sperm and this weird machine
Speaker 1: kind of created fertile ground for a bunch of right
Speaker 1: wing weirdos to start making grounded I know, fertile ground
Speaker 1: tom to make the completely un ungrounded claim that like
Speaker 1: the government was trying to steal people seemen, right, And
Speaker 1: that is the basis of doctor Jordan B. Peterson's fun
Speaker 1: little freak out on the internet. And I will say
Speaker 1: you should try to find the videos of the automatic
Speaker 1: sperm extractor. This this amazing Japanese machine, because it is funny, fascinating.
Speaker 1: We should change some of these on the cool Stone account.
Speaker 1: Do they have to like like like change like I
Speaker 1: assume they like to. Ye, yeah, you can't clean that.
Speaker 1: If you watch the video, there's like a there's a
Speaker 1: rubbiot that like comes out, like the thing that the
Speaker 1: penis goes in is also the captured device, so it
Speaker 1: is removed with the sperm donation when you take it out. Um.
Speaker 1: So again this is, you know, funny because come, but
Speaker 1: there's nothing sinister here. It's just in the same way
Speaker 1: that literally everything is. People have like spun it up
Speaker 1: into a nonsense thing. But because of this beautiful, beautiful story,
Speaker 1: which I hope we've all gotten to enjoy, I got
Speaker 1: to do a lot of work on the some of you,
Speaker 1: if you've lived, if you've worked in agriculture, you're not
Speaker 1: going to be surprised that stealing come is a massive industry,
Speaker 1: like it is a there is a lot of money
Speaker 1: to be made in stealing semen. There's enough money to
Speaker 1: be made in stealing semen that there are two different
Speaker 1: official terms that I have found for semen theft. The
Speaker 1: first is sperm jacking. How could it get better? How
Speaker 1: could it get better than that? Garrison? It gets better
Speaker 1: because the second, the second is spurgling. These are like
Speaker 1: professionals who like come up with these terms. Huh, these
Speaker 1: are genius. There actually is. I did find in my
Speaker 1: research there is one actual Chinese based sperm conspiracy. It's
Speaker 1: just not a very sinister one. There's this Chinese businessman,
Speaker 1: Jesse Jabbai zoo Um who stole there. There's this I
Speaker 1: think it was a Canadian company. It was a US
Speaker 1: company who had So this is for like bull semen.
Speaker 1: And one of the things that you want for bull
Speaker 1: semen is you don't want if you're inseminating cows, you
Speaker 1: want all of the babies to be female generally, right,
Speaker 1: because bulls are not very with outside a certain space.
Speaker 1: If you're like trying to make more breeders or whatever,
Speaker 1: if you're in industrial agriculture, you don't want any of
Speaker 1: the boys, right. You just want to keep making those sweet,
Speaker 1: sweet lady cows that that are, you know, more useful
Speaker 1: to you in a financial sense. So there's a US
Speaker 1: company that developed a method of before insemination looking through
Speaker 1: the sperm and like sorting out the sperm that will
Speaker 1: make female cows um and that is apparently hard to do.
Speaker 1: I mean, it sounds like it would be hard to do, right,
Speaker 1: And this, uh, this Chinese businessman was like reverse engineering there.
Speaker 1: It's kind of Actually it's basically the same story as
Speaker 1: Jurassic Park. And anyway, this guy has gotten sued for
Speaker 1: a bunch of money a raptor cattle. I hope it
Speaker 1: works out just as well as Jurassic Park. Yeah, it's
Speaker 1: very funny. I will say. There's a couple of really
Speaker 1: wild lines from this the CBC story I found. I'm
Speaker 1: just going to read one to you. Um Zoo's activities
Speaker 1: could best be described as machiavellian. At various points he
Speaker 1: outlined a plan to make X Y that's the American
Speaker 1: company quote feel all the time, the sort of damocles
Speaker 1: is on their heads and brag the law is strong,
Speaker 1: but the outlaws are ten times stronger. Yeah. Jesse Jabezoo
Speaker 1: my hero, the sperm Bandit incredible sperm jacker, one of
Speaker 1: the best burglers in the business. This man lives on
Speaker 1: an island with his cow raptors. What a hero. Um
Speaker 1: there was also a case of a Japanese man who
Speaker 1: illegally took wag you cattle sperm to China to try
Speaker 1: to give them sperm, and like the Chinese government immediately
Speaker 1: caught him and was like, no, this is actually incredibly dangerous,
Speaker 1: Like you're not allowed to just take animal breeding material
Speaker 1: into the country without because you know, there's a wide
Speaker 1: variety of reasons that that could be in horribly So
Speaker 1: he got into shipload of trouble. Yeah, anyway, that's my
Speaker 1: that's my sperm stories. Everybody, thank you for yeah, thank you,
Speaker 1: thank you for spurgling my knowledge. Garrison. Ah, we're back
Speaker 1: and James is here to talk to us about the
Speaker 1: kind of sperm jacking that you do when you don't jack.
Speaker 1: I'm talking about jacking your own sperm by keeping it
Speaker 1: inside of you seem in retention. Yeah, it's it. How
Speaker 1: was that, James, beautiful? Unscripted? Did you just didn't even
Speaker 1: write that a Garrison? Yeah, so on the back of
Speaker 1: his hand. He had a brainwave at two in the
Speaker 1: morning and I got that down. Those are the kind
Speaker 1: of things you can do when you've been podcasting as
Speaker 1: long as I in a come space. I've been in
Speaker 1: those saggy trenches for a long time. Yeah, all right,
Speaker 1: we are after all, it works, so let me continue.
Speaker 1: So I'm going to talk about what happens when you
Speaker 1: keep your comb inside you. Okay, yeah, this is the thing.
Speaker 1: What are we doing today? What this is? This is
Speaker 1: critical journalist. We are making content doing Okay, talking of content,
Speaker 1: let's talk about the content of some Reddit posters. So
Speaker 1: the what it's called the semen retention movement, and this
Speaker 1: will this will shock many of you began on reddit
Speaker 1: dot com. Oh my god, yeah yeah yeah, yeah, yeah yeah,
Speaker 1: like so many ones. I feel like, I feel like
Speaker 1: because I feel like if you type that into your phone,
Speaker 1: it would have finished the sentence the same autodirect What
Speaker 1: is the auto directed to Reddit? I would believe me.
Speaker 1: We're gonna go there, Garrison, because when you google sperm retention,
Speaker 1: you do indeed find some stuff on Reddit. So now
Speaker 1: they've spun off from Reddit, right then I have their
Speaker 1: own organization, which is No Fat dot com and No
Speaker 1: fact dot com is a community centered sexual health platform.
Speaker 1: I'm I'm using, I'm allowing them to define themselves here,
Speaker 1: I guess designed to help people overcome poorn addiction and
Speaker 1: compulsive sexual behavior, which is not necessarily really like like
Speaker 1: the this isn't not all seamen retention, as we're going
Speaker 1: to learn, is basically helping people I become addiction to
Speaker 1: pawn but so far as that is a thing that
Speaker 1: people actually have. And if someone was accusing Rabbit of
Speaker 1: being addicted to pawn on on his timeline this weekend,
Speaker 1: that would be because I keep Ratio and Jordan Peterson
Speaker 1: with the pornography video that he mistaking. That's correct, Yeah, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I just want them to respond, so I could ask him, Jordan,
Speaker 1: tell me in your own words, what you thought was
Speaker 1: happening in that video. I really hope he thinks it's
Speaker 1: like milking, Like they have RFID collars and they get
Speaker 1: fed based on their production level. That would be great. Yeah,
Speaker 1: And what did you you you're a medical doctor, did
Speaker 1: you think that come actually worked that way and you
Speaker 1: could just stick a sucker anyway? Yeah, just get it out, Okay. So,
Speaker 1: after this movement began on Ready dot com, it quickly
Speaker 1: pivoted to kind of offering all kinds of weird physical
Speaker 1: and mental health benefits, and that's where it was adopted
Speaker 1: by friends in the podcast the Proud Boys, and luckily
Speaker 1: we do have a bit of insight into why and
Speaker 1: into the exact nature of the no fat fascism that
Speaker 1: the Proud Boys practice. Sanks to Kyle Cheney, who's a
Speaker 1: political reporter who was reporting on the trial of one
Speaker 1: of the Proud Boys accused of additional January six called
Speaker 1: Zach Rell and that trial for reasons that I'm not
Speaker 1: exactly clear on the Proud Boy I guess it's like
Speaker 1: their handbook, like that the kind of a Proud Boy
Speaker 1: bybe was introduced and into the into the record. Somebody's
Speaker 1: in there. Yep, it's in the court record, buddy, because
Speaker 1: because what the lawyers decided that it was pertinent to
Speaker 1: the cause. So a Proud Boy may not ejaculate alone
Speaker 1: more than once in every thirty days. That means he
Speaker 1: must abstain from portography during that time. And if he
Speaker 1: needs to ejaculate, this is really weird, it must be
Speaker 1: within one yard of a woman. Fascinatingly specific. Yeah, yeah, right,
Speaker 1: And I like that they've they've gone with imperial measurements
Speaker 1: with her consent, so that's nice. The woman may not
Speaker 1: be a prostitute, so that that's the Proud poison nature.
Speaker 1: They know FA fascism. But I think I think the
Speaker 1: way of of understanding why some people practice this perhaps
Speaker 1: best is to is to go on to reddit dot com.
Speaker 1: So I found a post by Reddit user you slash
Speaker 1: Monk one nine one eight one seven. It seems like
Speaker 1: a nice guy and there are four votes. What I
Speaker 1: did was I went to semen retention and I looked
Speaker 1: at you know, sorted by popular posts, found this one
Speaker 1: from a bunch of numbers. And so this guy has
Speaker 1: nine years of experience with semen retention. So I'm just
Speaker 1: going to read I'm presuming it. Boy, yeah, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: him and some mugs off the coast of fucking lind
Speaker 1: Spark cannot be healthy. No, I don't think it is.
Speaker 1: There is I will get to this evidence that you
Speaker 1: shouldn't do this. So in his nine years of experience,
Speaker 1: he has experienced the following things. Semen, when retained in
Speaker 1: our bodies, has healing, rejuvenating effects. Loss of semen has
Speaker 1: the opposite effects. This may not be scientifically proven, but
Speaker 1: it's proven by experience. That's a red flag. That's interesting.
Speaker 1: Getting Reddit medical advice while attempting any task. It demands
Speaker 1: high physical, mental or intellectual abilities. If we are semen
Speaker 1: tension powered, we would actually enjoy the task, which would
Speaker 1: otherwise seem dull. This is called sexual energy transmutation in
Speaker 1: layman's terms. Oh no, that's the layman's the what's the
Speaker 1: non layman terms? It's got even more. I have no
Speaker 1: idea spermozoic fucking fission. So for peak performance, it's always
Speaker 1: necessary to be powered by seamen, and it would be
Speaker 1: best to use seamen only for regeneration purposes, since nature
Speaker 1: originally intended it for regeneration, and not use it for
Speaker 1: sexual purposes apart from to create a child. If not
Speaker 1: serving that purpose, Master whatever teach techniques are useful in
Speaker 1: not letting the seed out while having sex. At the
Speaker 1: end of the day, don't let your seed out like
Speaker 1: a worthless thing. There's more so, just contain yourself great great,
Speaker 1: which is exactly the reason why core religions are based
Speaker 1: on celibacy, because opposite of regeneration is degeneration, which will
Speaker 1: cause a man to fall into a lower state controlled
Speaker 1: by his lower nature, rather than when he's subduing it.
Speaker 1: We should let seem in retention be part of our lives,
Speaker 1: not something that is done for superpowers. For superpowers are,
Speaker 1: in my experience, the sudden ecstasy that we feel once
Speaker 1: we transition from the degenerated to the regenerated state, and
Speaker 1: that will stabilize after some time, similar to how a
Speaker 1: flight maintained stable altitude after takeoff. Very simple, very similar. Actually, yeah,
Speaker 1: that's that's what you can hear when the when the
Speaker 1: engine a spinning up. If just a dude trying really
Speaker 1: hard not to nut and it makes that noise. So
Speaker 1: excited for the next Marvel film, the where the superhero
Speaker 1: power from Paul Rods and not come so he can
Speaker 1: get tiny no fat man. Yeah so yeah he didn't.
Speaker 1: I should add that this person confess us to having
Speaker 1: elapsed at some point in the nine years. Yeah, it
Speaker 1: stole Armstrong was on steroids. It's just disappointing. Yeah, no
Speaker 1: one would have seen it coming. See what I did there. Okay,
Speaker 1: So this person then urges other posters on the Sema
Speaker 1: Retention subredit to not use streaks to outperform others or
Speaker 1: look better about ourselves or bring others down. The battle
Speaker 1: with lust is a lifelong fight, and the more we
Speaker 1: get better at finding victories, Yeah, yeah, buddy, at finding
Speaker 1: victories over internal battles. The battle, we become as high
Speaker 1: valued men. Hell yeah, I've often wished that, you know,
Speaker 1: if the if the pandemic hadn't been a thing, and
Speaker 1: I could force you all to work in a central location,
Speaker 1: I could have like a wall of murals where I
Speaker 1: put under each of your faces a quote from an
Speaker 1: episode that you've participated in, and James that that would
Speaker 1: be your quotes. The battles lust is a lifelong struggle. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that'll get some T shirts knocked up, but we can
Speaker 1: do a fundraise. We eventually get the cools on media offices.
Speaker 1: But you have a portrait hanging on the wall of
Speaker 1: each of us have one quote under the yeah yeah
Speaker 1: yeah on a plaque with a yeah. We get the
Speaker 1: cool when we when we take over the meta officers
Speaker 1: three weeks from now. Yeah, there is a marketing company
Speaker 1: that has been emailing me for about six months telling
Speaker 1: me how cheap it is to buy a billboard by
Speaker 1: the side of a road and send a message to
Speaker 1: a loved one. So maybe great, maybe I'll do bang
Speaker 1: rang yeah yeah yeah, yeah, Well there will be until
Speaker 1: I put my positive messages about the controlling lust and
Speaker 1: holding seamen inside our bodies true and return ment to
Speaker 1: the former glory. So a lot of the a lot
Speaker 1: of the reddit posts rely on a couple of different studies, right,
Speaker 1: and one of these studies measured participants. A lot of
Speaker 1: what they're doing is a claiming to increase testosterone right
Speaker 1: right at the bat. The testosterone does have, as Long's
Speaker 1: armstrong can tell you some performance enhancing benefits, so yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, increasing your muscle growth, your your coverage from exercise,
Speaker 1: all those stuff. One of the studies measured participants testosterone
Speaker 1: levels at baseline before masturbation and then in ten minute
Speaker 1: intervals after masturbation, right, and then they were asked to
Speaker 1: abstain for three weeks, and they came back and they
Speaker 1: did the process again. Testosterone was higher in the baseline
Speaker 1: measurement at the end of the three weeks of abstinence, right,
Speaker 1: But the sample size was pretty small, and there's some
Speaker 1: theorizing that the boost was actually caused by the anticipated
Speaker 1: masturbation that they were about to do. At the second
Speaker 1: it was so ready to go, yeah, yeah, yeah, you're
Speaker 1: just ready to pop. After three weeks, the second study
Speaker 1: looked at a forty five percent entury, So after a
Speaker 1: few days seven days of abstinence, but even the study
Speaker 1: showed this was a temporary peak that returned to normal
Speaker 1: even with continuing abstinence. So there's there's just these two studies.
Speaker 1: They're pretty they happened a long time ago. Will post
Speaker 1: them all in the show notes if you guys want
Speaker 1: to read more about no fab science. But we should
Speaker 1: just point out that there is in fact a multitude
Speaker 1: of evidence this is a bad idea that having sex
Speaker 1: is actually good for you. Having sex will will trying
Speaker 1: not to ejaculate. It's probably not good for you, probably
Speaker 1: not good for your your relationship either. One would surmise
Speaker 1: there are in that whatever yeah yeah, yeah, yeah, Well
Speaker 1: if that's your thing, you do you do you. There
Speaker 1: was a study that investigated the motivation for semen retention
Speaker 1: among semen and retainers, and a lot of it it
Speaker 1: seemed like people were people who felt that like either
Speaker 1: sex or masturbation was unhealthy or wrong or sinful. And
Speaker 1: there is evidence to show that like feeling like guilty
Speaker 1: about yourself or like living with stress and self loathing,
Speaker 1: like that is bad for you, right, and that will
Speaker 1: reduce your test aftera level. There's also some evidence to
Speaker 1: suggest not ejaculating can give you prostate issues, which yes,
Speaker 1: um yeah, there's there's and this is like pretty debatable,
Speaker 1: like most things that people talk about in regards to
Speaker 1: coming and health, Like you can find some studies, like
Speaker 1: the studies on testosterone. Some of them are kind of sketchy. Anyway. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't think come or come either way. Um, you know,
Speaker 1: it's whatever. But if you do have a chance to
Speaker 1: fuck one of those Ali Baba robots, I recommend it out.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about come demons. Hell yeah, wait, okay, okay,
Speaker 1: hard hard pivot here from so okay, we we we
Speaker 1: are not going as far afield from the no fat
Speaker 1: people as as as as you would think. Okay, but
Speaker 1: all right, now, the year is twenty twenty. Everyone on
Speaker 1: Earth has collectively gone insane. Uh this is this is
Speaker 1: this is the summer. This is the summer twenty twenty.
Speaker 1: So this is the part of twenty twenty where fun
Speaker 1: stuff is happening. This is like late July, Garrison, that's
Speaker 1: when we met. So yeah, we're getting just incredibly poisoned. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: we share were it would be fun in like twenty years. Well, well,
Speaker 1: while life or death struggle for the sort of the
Speaker 1: life or death struggle for the fate of the United
Speaker 1: States and whether or not people are going to be
Speaker 1: conducing murdered by the cops is being waged in the streets. Uh,
Speaker 1: Donald Trump and Donald J. Trump Ronald Donald J. Trump. Wow,
Speaker 1: Donald Trump Junior. That one. That's that's that's the Trump
Speaker 1: A little drum here, Yeah, Trump Acts. We're you know,
Speaker 1: looking for look at looking for their there they're they're
Speaker 1: cure to COVID nineteen on Twitter. And Okay, so as
Speaker 1: we probably all remember, right, I think they found was hydroxy. Okay,
Speaker 1: so one of the first ones that they found before
Speaker 1: before I remact the this is this is before we
Speaker 1: found so much? Was it inside of them all along? Man? No?
Speaker 1: This is this is this is hydroxy florican the thing
Speaker 1: that was probable. I hope they weren't full of acord. No. No,
Speaker 1: well we'll get to that. Where there there's a The
Speaker 1: road is long, but it ends with cum demons. We
Speaker 1: first must walk the road. So the road here is
Speaker 1: Donald Donald Trump Junior post a tweet saying like this,
Speaker 1: saying this is necessary watching about this video from this
Speaker 1: doctor named doctor Stella Emanue. Now, okay, so who is
Speaker 1: this person. Um she she is part of a oh okay,
Speaker 1: I say part of she runs this thing called Firepower Ministries,
Speaker 1: which oh no, so you don't know, going great. Um
Speaker 1: she's also part of yeah, okay, cool, Yeah she she's
Speaker 1: also part of America's frontline doctors who are yeah, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I forgotten. Yeah, these dipshits, Oh my god. Okay, So
Speaker 1: this is this is very very very much in the
Speaker 1: same vein as architecture nine eleventh truth. They found a
Speaker 1: bunch of people who technically have medical degrees or like
Speaker 1: nurses who were like no, no, vaccines are bad and
Speaker 1: hydroxy chloric clean hydroctic chor clean is well, we'll chlorical
Speaker 1: covid cor qu that one. Yeah, it's it's it's been.
Speaker 1: It's been. It's been a long day. I I've slept
Speaker 1: for eight hours, but in like several distinct parts of
Speaker 1: the day that we're not continuous. It's been. Things are going,
Speaker 1: things are going corect. If you've taken some horse medicine fisk,
Speaker 1: quite possibly, I mean it's it's all like you could
Speaker 1: have gone worse. All all right, So so this this
Speaker 1: person's from the very sketchy doctors who are trying to
Speaker 1: sell like a bunch of random shit to to to
Speaker 1: cure COVID. And okay, so who actually is this person? Um?
Speaker 1: She is from Camera Roon and doctor Stella. An Emanuey
Speaker 1: was caught up in the unbelievably sort of like i
Speaker 1: mean right, like yes, objectively right wing, also very very
Speaker 1: weird wave of Pentecostalism and charismatic Christianity that's been sweeping
Speaker 1: across that part of Africa as part of sort of
Speaker 1: a you know, sort of like a very sort of
Speaker 1: long range of coordinated effort by by right wing Christian missionaries.
Speaker 1: So okay, so for for for people who don't know
Speaker 1: your Christianity very well, the Pentecostals and the charismatic Christians
Speaker 1: are like firmly in the very very weird camp of Christians.
Speaker 1: Like these are these are people who do faith healing. Um.
Speaker 1: One of the very common sort of Pentecostal things is
Speaker 1: this belief that like like you just you talk to God,
Speaker 1: like God's in your head and you just have conversations
Speaker 1: with Him. Now unfortunately for like all of us, and
Speaker 1: this is you know what a thing that is a
Speaker 1: non insignificant contributing factor to why the last I don't know,
Speaker 1: ten years have been so bat shit? Is that? Like
Speaker 1: the this originally was kind of an isolated Pentecostal thing
Speaker 1: and like the broader evangelicals were like no, no, no no,
Speaker 1: God only talks to me like your pastor, Like he's
Speaker 1: probably not like you're you're not like having a conversation
Speaker 1: in your head with but like change that's changed. Yeah,
Speaker 1: this ship has this ship has fucking taken over everywhere.
Speaker 1: It's really bad. Um. And these people believe a lot
Speaker 1: of very very weird stuff. So well do I mean? Okay, so,
Speaker 1: like you know, she she has like some of the
Speaker 1: sort of standard like really really hardline like David Ike shit,
Speaker 1: Like she believes that the world's being run by aliens
Speaker 1: and like reptiles, and like the vaccine has like alien
Speaker 1: DNA in it to like take over your dude. You know.
Speaker 1: This is like sort of kind of Facebook moments Alex Jones. Shit,
Speaker 1: yeah right, okay, but okay, I'm gonna read this quote
Speaker 1: from will Sumner. This is a quote from one of
Speaker 1: her for her sermons, they which is, demons are responsible
Speaker 1: for serious guy in ecological problems, and Manuel said we
Speaker 1: call them all kinds of names and Tremesius and Travisius.
Speaker 1: We call them molar pregnancies, we call them fibroids, we
Speaker 1: call them cysts. But most of them were evil deposits
Speaker 1: from spirit husband God. No, they are responsible for miscarriages, impotence,
Speaker 1: men that can't get it up. So all right, immediately
Speaker 1: we we have like we have there there are several
Speaker 1: kinds of cum demons here that we're dealing with. So
Speaker 1: there are like there, there's, there's, there's okay. So a
Speaker 1: lot of this is drawn from what is I a
Speaker 1: very like a JT. Whitely unbelievably dubious piece of theology.
Speaker 1: So when when when I was res musician, this right,
Speaker 1: I saw, I saw, I saw someone there there was
Speaker 1: there was like a religious scholar who was writing this.
Speaker 1: He was like, oh, I immediately recognized the theology of this.
Speaker 1: This is from this is from a Genesis six so okay.
Speaker 1: So I was like, okay, what what the fuck are
Speaker 1: they talking about? So I went back and I read
Speaker 1: genis Okay. So I went back and I read the Genesis,
Speaker 1: and I'm going to read the two this is this
Speaker 1: is from Genesis chapter six, verses one and two, and
Speaker 1: I am just going to read these two sentences, and
Speaker 1: I'm going to see if you two can produce cum
Speaker 1: demons from this, Okay, happy to do so. I mean
Speaker 1: I could produce cum demons from almost in anything that is.
Speaker 1: That is the power with the right machinery. You know what.
Speaker 1: I think we know exactly what the right machinery is. Look,
Speaker 1: we know that we can produce cum demons mechanically. Our
Speaker 1: challenge here is to produce them theologically. Okay, try I will,
Speaker 1: I will use all of my knowledge. We must, we
Speaker 1: must find a way to evacuate the past deference of
Speaker 1: the soul. Okay. So I'm using I'm using the King
Speaker 1: James translation, because that's the translation that all these psychos use,
Speaker 1: And it came to pass when men began to multiply
Speaker 1: on the face of the earth and daughters were born
Speaker 1: onto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters
Speaker 1: of and that they were fair, and they took them
Speaker 1: wives of all which they chose. Okay, So I I
Speaker 1: do know why they're I do know what what they
Speaker 1: are doing. So the sons of God those would be
Speaker 1: what like fallen angels that have been procreating with women. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so this this ties into like the book of Enoch stuff,
Speaker 1: which was made a little bit like after Genesis, but
Speaker 1: it kind of it like retconned a lot of like
Speaker 1: the creation story. So I can see where they're they're
Speaker 1: pulling come demons from, but it is it is a
Speaker 1: bit of a stretch. Yeah, they're kind you could say,
Speaker 1: come demons in the way that like God seemed. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you could see it. Yeah, it's that's it is a stretch. No, okay,
Speaker 1: my my, my, my analysis because I think I I
Speaker 1: I think they're pulling this out of their ass and
Speaker 1: I think they're pulling this out of theirs. It's also
Speaker 1: come demons. So yeah, they're like I I I I
Speaker 1: have It is well known for people who follow me
Speaker 1: on Twitter that I have an immense in powerful disrespect
Speaker 1: for theology. But what what what part of the sons
Speaker 1: of God? What? What? What part of that gets you
Speaker 1: to demons? And not? Like because again, isn't the whole
Speaker 1: point of Christianity that we are all God's children? Like,
Speaker 1: isn't is this not a thing that they tell you
Speaker 1: in every single fucking sort How do you read that
Speaker 1: and not think they're talking about people and immediately jump
Speaker 1: to come deemon? Like here's what's going on? I could
Speaker 1: I could explain this because this is the King's James version.
Speaker 1: So this was made in a post book of Enoch world.
Speaker 1: Around the around the alleged birth of Jesus, the Book
Speaker 1: of Enoch got very popular, um and this this introduced
Speaker 1: the idea of a fallen angel. The fallow fallen angel
Speaker 1: isn't really in the Bible at all, it's only it's
Speaker 1: only in like non biblical um Abrahamic texts. So this
Speaker 1: this idea then kind of got planted into a lot
Speaker 1: of like Catholic mythology as well. So when they're they're
Speaker 1: caused there they have a distinction between like the like
Speaker 1: the sons of like the sons of God versus is
Speaker 1: um what was the what was? I think they used
Speaker 1: to refer to the daughters the sons of the daughters
Speaker 1: of men exactly. So the daughters are human, where the
Speaker 1: the the sons are like came from God. So that
Speaker 1: is some type of fallen angel that has been cast
Speaker 1: down to earth. Like they are doing a specific thing.
Speaker 1: But it's it's it's it's a result of a whole
Speaker 1: bunch of like mistranslations and a whole bunch of various
Speaker 1: various like christian a Gnostic texts that that have been
Speaker 1: misinterpreted for thousands of years by the Catholic Church, and
Speaker 1: it creates a really weird theology that is indistinguishable from
Speaker 1: like Castle of India. So yeah, I blame I blamed
Speaker 1: Martin lud This is Martin Luther's fault, like the like
Speaker 1: there's things the thing would keep it in high latins
Speaker 1: can't understand this. This is this is, this is what
Speaker 1: Martin Luther. I'm specifically because okay, so this was already happened.
Speaker 1: The count the Church was already doing this right, but
Speaker 1: Martin Luther had a chance to fix this ship and
Speaker 1: he was like, do you know what I'm gonna do?
Speaker 1: Instead of that, I am going to you, I am
Speaker 1: going to turn against the peasant revolts and I'm going
Speaker 1: to do it. I'm going to bring about a level
Speaker 1: of anti Semitism that is going to allow me to
Speaker 1: outflank the Inquisition on the right. She could have been
Speaker 1: fixing this bullshit. No anti semitism. Whoo, I gotta keep
Speaker 1: my patron lords in power. He was German like, there's
Speaker 1: only so much you can ask, that's true. Yeah, well
Speaker 1: I'm happy that we can all go to sleep at
Speaker 1: night worrying about the sons of God and planting semen. Oh,
Speaker 1: there's also that that's that's come demon type type one, right,
Speaker 1: that is okay, so those are those are the demons
Speaker 1: that like they they have they have sex with women
Speaker 1: and they produce nephelim from or sometimes Also there's there's
Speaker 1: a lot of sort of conflicting sort of theological All
Speaker 1: that stuff comes from the Book of Enoch. All that
Speaker 1: stuff is non canon to the modern Bible, but it's
Speaker 1: where it's where it comes from. Fucking Council of Nicia. Okay.
Speaker 1: But there's also there's also a second there's also the
Speaker 1: second kind of cum demon, right, which is these are
Speaker 1: the these are well, okay, so succubine and incubi are
Speaker 1: based here we go. I knew it, I was down,
Speaker 1: it was counting down. Had faith. Yeah. The the other
Speaker 1: kind of of demon. So you have your incubi, right,
Speaker 1: who are another type of sex demon. The incubi fuck
Speaker 1: men so they can steal their semen and they're they're
Speaker 1: there there, you know, there's such difference are reasons that
Speaker 1: there there's another thing that she talks about, which is
Speaker 1: that um, there are witches who have like actual spirit
Speaker 1: sex with men in their sleep. And if you're like
Speaker 1: having a sex dream, it's because you're having actual spirit sex.
Speaker 1: Oh no, no, yeah, I mean like I like Bill Murray,
Speaker 1: I've I've experienced that. Oh no, that was Bill Murray. Sorry,
Speaker 1: my mistake. Oh wait, understandable, Yes, okay, Okay, the cloud
Speaker 1: the fog is clearing. I've I've had I've had sex
Speaker 1: with too many sex demons. It's it's a real issue. Okay.
Speaker 1: So so all right, So we have the sex demons
Speaker 1: who are like trying to pregnant you. We have the
Speaker 1: sex demans you're trying to steal your cump. We allo
Speaker 1: have the actually, we have the actual projecting projecting witches, right,
Speaker 1: and the actual projecting witches are trying to steal people's
Speaker 1: come as part of an Illuminati plot to create like
Speaker 1: an even more powerful witch. And the even more powerful
Speaker 1: witch is going to use gay marriage and children's toys
Speaker 1: to like destroy the fabric of Western civilization and thus
Speaker 1: bring about sort of general new world order, et cetera. Honestly,
Speaker 1: some of my witch meetings, Yeah, it is not as
Speaker 1: far from the backstory to Warhammer forty thousand as it
Speaker 1: should be. That's very sadly true. I didn't want Warhammer
Speaker 1: forty thousands coming to our come episode if I moneyed. No, no,
Speaker 1: it's I mean, look, there's a lot of people who
Speaker 1: are interested in both seem in Retention and Warhammer forty thousands.
Speaker 1: That's a tight venda ram yeah. Yeah, and they all
Speaker 1: play ultramarines. That was. That's pretty good Warhammer forty thousand
Speaker 1: joke for those of you who plays. I also learned
Speaker 1: a couple of days ago that I one of the
Speaker 1: many crimes of the Emperor of forty k was passing
Speaker 1: off and a Miri Bekara quote is his own. Oh yeah,
Speaker 1: that is. That was. That was a good bit. That
Speaker 1: was a really good bit. It's little pieces like that
Speaker 1: that let you know that Dan Abnett's pretty base. That
Speaker 1: was my favorite part of the book. So funny, that's like,
Speaker 1: that's literary cannon. I do have like three pages written
Speaker 1: on contest tanning. Okay, yeah, that's that's that's the end
Speaker 1: of the sum go off. Well, okay. I The one
Speaker 1: thing I'll add on is that one of the more
Speaker 1: funny modern versions of these if you go on the
Speaker 1: Beta Drill subreddit to the Recreational Penetral subreddit, you can
Speaker 1: find people who try to take enough Beta drill to
Speaker 1: have sex with the hat Man, which is another another
Speaker 1: form of trying to subve and shedow people. Maybe you
Speaker 1: have to you have to explain your terms for people here. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm not. The man is a tall, thin man wearing
Speaker 1: a hat who appears when you take hallucinogenic doses of
Speaker 1: Bena drill because you can't afford better drugs because you're seventeen. Yes,
Speaker 1: we're younger, and there people the hat Man. Some people
Speaker 1: find the hat Man extremely attractive or some of like
Speaker 1: the female Shadow People variants, and they try to they
Speaker 1: have I have read multiple reports of people explaining their
Speaker 1: sexual experiences of the Shadow People. Anyways, the President of
Speaker 1: the United States and his son were promoting this, so
Speaker 1: this is great. This website. By the way, absolute adventures
Speaker 1: on here. I'm just reading about how to use christ
Speaker 1: blood as a weapon. Amazing. Oh that's good. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: no problems here. Yeah. Do you know who won't steal
Speaker 1: your semen? Everybody? We can't promise that. I can. I
Speaker 1: can promise any advertiser on this show I've personally approved
Speaker 1: to make sure they will not come into your bedroom
Speaker 1: and steal your semen. Wow, how do you do? How's
Speaker 1: the approval process works? Out of interest, I cannot divulge
Speaker 1: private garrisons. We are We are going to close off
Speaker 1: by by talking about a sperm antestosterone um to two
Speaker 1: of our favorite topics for this episode. For some reason,
Speaker 1: about about a year ago, a trailer on Fox News
Speaker 1: dropped for a new batch of Tucker Carlson originals titled
Speaker 1: The End of Men. It opens with the text that reads,
Speaker 1: in the current year, the cycle continues once a society collapse,
Speaker 1: he said, You're in hard time as well. Hot iron
Speaker 1: sharpens iron, as they'd say, and those hard times inevitably
Speaker 1: produce men who are tough, men, who are resourceful, men
Speaker 1: who are strong enough to survive, and then they go
Speaker 1: on to re establish older and so the cycle begins again. Now,
Speaker 1: there's a few funny things about this video, from the
Speaker 1: ripped shirtless dudes milking cows, to wrestling each other and
Speaker 1: shooting bottles of canola oil. They're just at a undranche.
Speaker 1: They're just shooting like ten bottles of canola oil for
Speaker 1: some reason maybe, But the Mussolini's like they're into the
Speaker 1: Mussolini staff. He was by far the most bizarre. I
Speaker 1: suspect they're shooting the canola because it's like a seed
Speaker 1: oil thing. They think that like seeding thing, like sucking
Speaker 1: out your testa sterone. Anyway, it's something very silly, but
Speaker 1: by far the most bizarre thing in this trailer is
Speaker 1: a shot of a laked man with outstretched arms like
Speaker 1: Jesus on the Cross style, standing in front of a
Speaker 1: lake at dusk, with a white machine shining a glowing
Speaker 1: red light on his dick. What and again at the
Speaker 1: climax of the music from two thousand and one A
Speaker 1: Space Odyssey, Uh, there's this. There's this man facing balls
Speaker 1: first in front of this large red light at the
Speaker 1: end of this trailer. I it should never have been
Speaker 1: any cause on our podcast or on Fox News for
Speaker 1: anyone to say the line after the end of the
Speaker 1: climax of the music from two thousand and one A
Speaker 1: Space Odyssey. Oh, that's the thing we're objecting to from
Speaker 1: this episode. That's the light. Yeah, yeah, because it shouldn't
Speaker 1: a climax. It lost its power in that moment. It
Speaker 1: was considering both like the gas. That was a very
Speaker 1: good joke, Thank you. Thank you, thank you for seeing me, buddy. Yeah, So,
Speaker 1: considering both like the text at the beginning and then
Speaker 1: some of the narration that we just heard in the trailer,
Speaker 1: they're kind of doing this weird like calli Yuga thing, right,
Speaker 1: that is that it's a bit of a bit of
Speaker 1: what's going on here, because again you can listen to
Speaker 1: our episodes on Savitri Devi for a little more information
Speaker 1: about this. But it's like this weird right wing uh
Speaker 1: like quasi apocalyptic concept that evolved during an intermix between
Speaker 1: some of the early Nazis and some of the people
Speaker 1: who are currently behind the present leader of India. It's
Speaker 1: it's way too esoteric weird to get into, but it's
Speaker 1: one of the things that like the real Yeah, it's
Speaker 1: like it. Um, We're not going to get into it
Speaker 1: too much. But I think the previous news unsettling that
Speaker 1: it wound up adjacent to a Tucker Carlson episode because
Speaker 1: it's some like weird esoteric Nazi wizard shit. Yes um.
Speaker 1: And that previous November, Joe Rogan posted a Kali Yuga
Speaker 1: meme which went viral. It's it's about how hard times
Speaker 1: creates strong men, which create good times. Which lead to
Speaker 1: weak men, which create hard times. It's a fucking silly his, his, his.
Speaker 1: The the accompanying text on the Instagram post that that
Speaker 1: Rogan did said, civilizations move in predictable cycles. We are
Speaker 1: in the Kali Yuga, the age of conflict. All of
Speaker 1: the chaos we're seeing right now was predicted in Hinduism
Speaker 1: thousands of years ago. Rogan was probably just like parroting
Speaker 1: something that he heard from one of his many fashy
Speaker 1: or new age friends, which, considering Rogan's social circle, that
Speaker 1: could very well just be the same person. Yes, yeah,
Speaker 1: one of his fucking sparring buddies is either friends with
Speaker 1: the Nazi or just stumbled upon a fucking the wrong
Speaker 1: podcast and then told him that when they were smoking weed,
Speaker 1: And you know, yeah, that's I mean, that's honestly to
Speaker 1: It's problematic because of his platform, but that's how I learned.
Speaker 1: Everything about s O Tereca that I learned when I
Speaker 1: was in my twenties was some I was smoking wheat
Speaker 1: with some sketchy dude who was going places you shouldn't
Speaker 1: have been on the Internet. So a few months after
Speaker 1: Rogan posted this meme, we have Tucker Carlson making this
Speaker 1: whole mini series surrounding this hard Times creation strong men
Speaker 1: kind of trend. Uh. It's taken cues from the online manisphere,
Speaker 1: and Tucker posited that weak, unmanly men are leading to
Speaker 1: the collapse of civilization and a hardening of men is
Speaker 1: necessary to save it. According to According to Tucker, one
Speaker 1: of the one of the threats to manhood is a
Speaker 1: quote unquote total collapse in testosterone levels amongst men in
Speaker 1: recent years. And the solution goes beyond just your typical
Speaker 1: like anti soy crusading that Tucker has done in the past. Now,
Speaker 1: Tucker has turned to the cutting edge science of bromeopathic medicine,
Speaker 1: as advocated for by a quote unquote fitness professional named
Speaker 1: Andrew McGovern who touts that infrared light and testicle tanning
Speaker 1: is this day sex makeda for plummeting tea levels in men.
Speaker 1: So obviously half the viewers right now are like, what
Speaker 1: that's cutestical telling that's crazy, But my view is Okay,
Speaker 1: testosterone levels like crash and nobody says anything about it.
Speaker 1: That's crazy. So why is it crazy to seek solutions?
Speaker 1: It's not crazy to seek solutions. And I think um.
Speaker 1: I was recently exposed to a term called bromeopathy, and
Speaker 1: I think there's a lot of people out there right
Speaker 1: now that um are don't trust the mainstream information. This
Speaker 1: TV special is constantly referred to as a documentary, so
Speaker 1: surely you would expect Tucker to try and like interview scientists,
Speaker 1: or like anyone with expertise on this topic. Of course,
Speaker 1: not act not no ways. Andrew McGovern are our bromeopathic hero.
Speaker 1: Works as a personal trader at Lifetime Fitness in Columbus, Ohio.
Speaker 1: And he hasn't even been a trader for very long.
Speaker 1: About a decade ago, a good one. About a decade ago,
Speaker 1: he was the manager of an Abercrombie and Fitch store
Speaker 1: in Mama. Oh perfect, Yes you know, okay now descriptions
Speaker 1: from it looks at the Abercrombie and Fitch store. Wait,
Speaker 1: but in Miami. Hey, if you want to get trim,
Speaker 1: that's where you get trim. That is that type of dude.
Speaker 1: He's emerging here. As of twenties eventeen, he was the
Speaker 1: director of operations for Petland retail stores. You're getting funnier.
Speaker 1: This guy's resume is highly amusing. But Tucker being a
Speaker 1: competent journalist did not just interview one person. However, Kid
Speaker 1: Rock was brought on to be the sole voice of reasons.
Speaker 1: You laugh, But Kid Rock is the other person. I've
Speaker 1: gotten prescription drugs from so real Bastia. In the platonic
Speaker 1: cave of men stands Kid Rock and a guy from
Speaker 1: Apocrombie and Fitch. We must only be their shadows. Dude,
Speaker 1: stop testical tanning. Come on, I mean, yeah, I haven't
Speaker 1: heard anything, Bobby. I'm starting a punk rock band and
Speaker 1: it's called testicle tanning. That's the end of it. I mean,
Speaker 1: don't you think at this point, when so many of
Speaker 1: the therapies, the paths they've told us to take, have
Speaker 1: turned out to be dead ends that have really hurt people,
Speaker 1: why wouldn't open minded people seek new solutions. I don't
Speaker 1: know what the hell is going on in this world.
Speaker 1: I'm not even sure if I understood that question. But
Speaker 1: some days I just want to stop this planet let
Speaker 1: me off. Like kid Rock was not did not buy
Speaker 1: into testicle tanning the same way Tuckers seemed to. Oh God,
Speaker 1: is kid Rock gonna be the voice? That's what I said.
Speaker 1: I said he was brought up to be the sole
Speaker 1: voice of reason again. But we thought you were joking.
Speaker 1: Because it's kid Rock, you were joking. Believe you know,
Speaker 1: he is the only person Kid Rock stands with science.
Speaker 1: It is indeed sweet Home Alabama all summer long. Tucker
Speaker 1: was not the first person to advocate for testicular tanning
Speaker 1: as the solution to an allegedly problematic dip in testosterol levels.
Speaker 1: Dating back to twenty fifteen, you can find articles online
Speaker 1: such as quote former MLB player Gabe Kapler says men
Speaker 1: who want to get stronger should tan their testicles from
Speaker 1: Complex and quote I put a giant red light on
Speaker 1: my balls to triple white testosterone levels from a Men's
Speaker 1: Health twenty seventeen. Is that written by Ben Greenfield? Banny
Speaker 1: chuns because he normally pops up with these things, which
Speaker 1: which which one the Men's health one. Let me see
Speaker 1: the guy who injected to make it big. I have
Speaker 1: it in my show notes here. This was written by
Speaker 1: someone named Ben Greenfield. This baland has won games. So
Speaker 1: proud of you today, buddy, I'm so happy teams are
Speaker 1: you taking? Are you taking performance enhancing drugs for this podcast?
Speaker 1: Shad me rub it? I'm not. This is so funny.
Speaker 1: We have stepped into a gold minded contact with Ben Greenfield,
Speaker 1: the guy who injected his own dick with stemseelves to
Speaker 1: make it bigger. That's so funny. I urge you. I
Speaker 1: compel you. If you have any free time in your day,
Speaker 1: just google Ben Greenfield penis. There will be several articles.
Speaker 1: It's supposed to be rectible outlets. It will just fucking
Speaker 1: make you unwell. Well, that's that is great to hear.
Speaker 1: But despite not being the first person to talk about
Speaker 1: testicular tanning, Tucker was certainly the most impactful. After the
Speaker 1: airing of the End of Men. Testicular tanning showed a
Speaker 1: seven thousand increase in relative search interest on Google and
Speaker 1: thirty thirty five thousand increase in tweets on the topic. Now,
Speaker 1: surely some of these things or stuff like what if,
Speaker 1: like making fun of it, right, Yeah, but also a
Speaker 1: lot of it's also people who are just talking about
Speaker 1: it genuinely. Um to quote a study published in jmi R,
Speaker 1: a dermatology publication, quote, the promotion of testicular tanning generated
Speaker 1: significant public interest in an evidence lacking and potentially dangerous
Speaker 1: health trend. Dermatologists and other healthcare professionals should be aware
Speaker 1: of these new viral health trends to best consultations and
Speaker 1: combat health misinformation. So like, in terms of actual data,
Speaker 1: a twenty seventeen meta analysis of studies on sperm counts
Speaker 1: found that in North America, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand,
Speaker 1: men's sperm counts have declined by about fifty percent between
Speaker 1: nineteen seventy three and twenty eleven. Now, these results have
Speaker 1: not been enough to really cause broad concern unless you're
Speaker 1: like a right wing influencer for men, because there doesn't
Speaker 1: really seem to be an equal drop in testosterial levels
Speaker 1: up problems mankind has had on the not enough yes
Speaker 1: and and like compared to previous decades. There is this
Speaker 1: maybe like a twenty percent decrease in total testasterone levels
Speaker 1: amongst adolescent and young adult males, but that's highly fluctual
Speaker 1: and it's impacted heavily by diet. It's it's suspected that
Speaker 1: pollution environmental degradation are also suspected of being contributing factors,
Speaker 1: with plastics like highlight being known to interfere with the
Speaker 1: production of hormones like testosterone. But this this area of
Speaker 1: research is still heavily contested, but still that has not
Speaker 1: stopped fitness YouTubers and conservative influencers from tying this to
Speaker 1: like the soy boy feminization of men and drumming up
Speaker 1: panic to grow their social media followings, sell their supplements
Speaker 1: and advertise affiliate products. The Kreme de la creme of
Speaker 1: red lights for testicular tanning is the Jeve Light. A light.
Speaker 1: Juve is a light therapy panel company which ells these
Speaker 1: LEDs um They're they're like this, They're like this upscale
Speaker 1: wellness brand. Um. The smallest model they have costs over
Speaker 1: a thousand dollars, with the full body ones going for
Speaker 1: around ten grand. This is when you know it's a grift.
Speaker 1: If someone is telling you that they need to sell
Speaker 1: you sunlight, they are having a fucking laugh. Our friend
Speaker 1: Ben Greenfield advocates a quote that advocates that you spend
Speaker 1: the big bucks on Drew lest you quote fry your
Speaker 1: balls to a crisp with a cheap knockoff. You wouldn't
Speaker 1: want to do that, would you? Unwill Yeah, it seems
Speaker 1: like it's maybe a bad idea. I can teach you
Speaker 1: how to how to how to cook your balls safely.
Speaker 1: Without spending any money at all. Get a pair of
Speaker 1: double A batteries. Take them right out of your out
Speaker 1: of your your your your your remote control. You stick
Speaker 1: the active end in a bottle of water, and then
Speaker 1: you put your hand on your testicles and it'll complete
Speaker 1: the circuit and power your testicles up with electricity, which
Speaker 1: you can then ejaculate instead of come. They'll probably give
Speaker 1: you superpowers too, almost certainly, Garrison, legally, this is not
Speaker 1: a recommendation to do this. If you do this, that
Speaker 1: shit's not on us. Divolition, Please to not connect batteries.
Speaker 1: Dick to quote that JMIR study evaluating the public's interest
Speaker 1: into secular tanning quote. The interest in this topic may
Speaker 1: be partially explained by the men's attention and advertising men's
Speaker 1: sexual health and homeown replacement or homeown enhancing therapies receive
Speaker 1: in the US. Although subsequent media coverage largely disfavored to
Speaker 1: secular tanning due to lacking evidence and potential dangers, other
Speaker 1: health influencers came to defend and encourage the practice of
Speaker 1: testicular tanning, specifically by using UV light as an unquote.
Speaker 1: As an example, here is a clip from fitness YouTuber
Speaker 1: Elliott Hulsey's Strength Camp with one point seven million followers.
Speaker 1: Blast your balls with sunshine to increase testosterone. Now you
Speaker 1: can drop your draws and let your balls get kissed
Speaker 1: by the sun, or you can try one of these
Speaker 1: light panels to roast by nuts and be more manly.
Speaker 1: Nineteen thirty nine study suggests that UV light exposure to
Speaker 1: your testicles increases testosterone by two hundred percent. If you
Speaker 1: want to join me in this experiment, you can find
Speaker 1: one of these bad boys at cozyhealth dot com. Then
Speaker 1: just go to personal labs dot com, get your blood tested,
Speaker 1: get your testosterone. Then after eight to twelve weeks, check
Speaker 1: it again and find out if the nut rusting really works.
Speaker 1: So this whole idea goes back to this one nineteen
Speaker 1: thirty nine. Studies eighteen thirty nine. Yeah, yeah, yeah, get
Speaker 1: chience in nineteen thirty nine. Man, And if there's one
Speaker 1: thing I trust, it's science from nineteen thirty nine. Yep,
Speaker 1: got any comments on race in the study. So this
Speaker 1: study was published in the journal Endercnology, and it found
Speaker 1: that frequent UV irritation to the genitals increased urinary and drosterone,
Speaker 1: a metabolite of distasterone. Increases levels by nearly two hundred percent,
Speaker 1: quote unquote. Now you'll be shocked to learn that there
Speaker 1: may be problems with this study. Guess how many test
Speaker 1: subjects were included in this In this study, I'm going
Speaker 1: to be generous and say eight. So Mia says eight,
Speaker 1: James and Greenfield just one? One? You say one, Robert,
Speaker 1: how many? How many do you think are in the study? Geez?
Speaker 1: I think like seven was sacred to the Nazi, So
Speaker 1: I'm gonna say that five. A grand total of five
Speaker 1: people are in this study. Wow, I give too much credit.
Speaker 1: They had to pick the sacred discordion number bullshit. Three
Speaker 1: of them are fifty four years old and have manic
Speaker 1: depressive psychosis. The other two are twenty Honestly, not a
Speaker 1: bad representative sample for Tucker's audience. I was about to
Speaker 1: say the same thing. This is actually the other two
Speaker 1: or twenty eight and forty five and have a quote
Speaker 1: psychopathia with depressive features, which is very old old timey
Speaker 1: term everyone on Twitter, etc. Etc. But I think what
Speaker 1: what actually happened is I think they did this study
Speaker 1: at an asylum and just found people with depressive psychosis
Speaker 1: to do the study on it. It's just these five,
Speaker 1: these five random people. Um No, no individual graft results
Speaker 1: were produced. It only showed the quote unquote typical reaction.
Speaker 1: And there wasn't even a control group for the study.
Speaker 1: Not to mention, there's many problems with like measuring to
Speaker 1: stosterone in the first place, because it changes broadly day
Speaker 1: to day and by age, and it's very kind of unreliable.
Speaker 1: Um to quote the jmi R study again, quote Beyond
Speaker 1: this questionable study, research has shown that exposure to UV
Speaker 1: radiation may increase sex steroid hormone levels. However, these studies
Speaker 1: either do not include human participants or do you not
Speaker 1: specifically evaluate UV radiation exposure to the genitals. There is
Speaker 1: there is not a single other study since then that
Speaker 1: has done anything resembling like peer reviewed science. You know
Speaker 1: why why everybody go to go to go fund me,
Speaker 1: help cool Zone determine whether or not testical tanning works.
Speaker 1: And we'll get that control group. Well, okay, so what
Speaker 1: my mile question about this? Aren't aren't all these people
Speaker 1: getting fucking ball cancer? We are? We are, Okay, we
Speaker 1: are about to get to that, because yes, you may
Speaker 1: think that shining UFI lights on your bulls might have
Speaker 1: some long term problems. Yeah, it's great that long sound
Speaker 1: strans come back to the episode of gain. So Vice
Speaker 1: interviewed Seth Cohen, a urologist and the director of the
Speaker 1: Sexual Dysfunction Program at NYU lendin Health. Quote, I'm not
Speaker 1: aware of any science or data or any journal publications
Speaker 1: proving that red light therapy improves meltostosterone and quote we
Speaker 1: change recommendations on medical therapies based on a double blind,
Speaker 1: placebo controlled randomized trials, large studies with thousands of patients.
Speaker 1: That's where you'll find if there's any really statistical significance
Speaker 1: between red light therapy and a placebo Could these men
Speaker 1: who underwent red light therapy and came out and felt
Speaker 1: stronger and more manly? Could they Could that have been
Speaker 1: a placebo effect? Of course it could unquote so and
Speaker 1: as Mia mentioned, we have not really even gotten into
Speaker 1: the potential dangers yet. Close direct heat to your testicles
Speaker 1: actually damages sperm count on top of the risk of
Speaker 1: giving yourself ball cancer by blasting concentrated UV light on
Speaker 1: your genitals for twenty minutes a day, every day of
Speaker 1: the week, which is what is recommended to quote to
Speaker 1: quote that study one last time quote. Research shows that
Speaker 1: excessive exposure to UV radiation may lead to higher rates
Speaker 1: of genital tumor formation and decreased sperm counts, as spermo
Speaker 1: to genesis is temperature dependent. Thus, given the current obsession
Speaker 1: with optimizing male hormone levels, the high cost of Redleigh therapy,
Speaker 1: and misleading information labeling of testicular tanning by prominent influencers,
Speaker 1: there may be an increase in men exposing themselves to
Speaker 1: UV radiation and developing associated complications, right heroic, So guys,
Speaker 1: almost done here. But man, it's pretty it's pretty funny
Speaker 1: that all of the worst people you know are gonna
Speaker 1: get ball cancer. Ye don't stop him. Yeah, I you know,
Speaker 1: there was a period of time in my life when
Speaker 1: I had said where I will never wich cancer on anybody.
Speaker 1: But if you are deliberately exposing your testicles for the sun,
Speaker 1: to the sun and the hope of getting superpowers because
Speaker 1: of Nazi science, it's okay. It's it's okay, Like I'm
Speaker 1: not going to mourn that. To be fair, That thirty
Speaker 1: nine study was from the United States, so it could
Speaker 1: I'm talking about the other Nazi science. Oh yes, yeah, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: well yeah, um and I think I think of a
Speaker 1: part of this whole narrative of like the total collapse
Speaker 1: of men's distosterone levels, as as Tucker puts it, fucking
Speaker 1: wish Yeah, chasier. But I think this is more about
Speaker 1: men in power feeling that their position of assumed superiority
Speaker 1: is being threatened. Really, all of our quack science and
Speaker 1: conspiracy theory stories today all revolve around this, like subliminal
Speaker 1: dog whistle. It's no mistake that Tucker titled his program
Speaker 1: the End of Men. In all the stories we'recovering today,
Speaker 1: it is the fear of emasculation that is the hook
Speaker 1: used to drum up fear and anger about how liberal
Speaker 1: feminism is eroding manhood. It targets some of young men's
Speaker 1: sexual insecurities while promoting this like anti woke return to
Speaker 1: the old ways of rugged masculinity. Yeah, I might add,
Speaker 1: because I think you're missing one aspect of it. I
Speaker 1: think you're identifying what he's signaling to his listeners and
Speaker 1: what they get out of it. But I also think
Speaker 1: that what he and the other folks who are kind
Speaker 1: of in positions of power and influence in the right
Speaker 1: get out of this because they're not they don't believe this,
Speaker 1: they're not actually motivated by that. Now, what this is
Speaker 1: and what because because we do not know specifically why,
Speaker 1: like testosterone rates, maybe lower white sperm counts are definitely lower,
Speaker 1: but it likely has to do with a massive variety
Speaker 1: of industrial pollutants in the environment, and with the fact
Speaker 1: that industrial agriculture and the process nature of a lot
Speaker 1: of our foods is having a negative impact on all
Speaker 1: these things. Like it's it's consequences of capitalism, right, and
Speaker 1: because the consequences are getting increasingly hard to ignore, the
Speaker 1: thing that people like that need to do is find
Speaker 1: either a cure for them or another way to blame
Speaker 1: or another thing to blame them on. Right. And so
Speaker 1: if the aspect the things that are horribly unhealthy about
Speaker 1: these society that we have built is causing men to
Speaker 1: suffer consequences in their bodies, um, the thing to do
Speaker 1: on the right is to blame that shit on the
Speaker 1: liberals emasculating men. And the solution is whatever kind of
Speaker 1: shit we can sell you, right, Like, that's what's going
Speaker 1: on here, that's the motivation, and it happens outside of
Speaker 1: like man shit too, Like that's all the right has anymore.
Speaker 1: Like their their economic theories have been proven disastrously wrong.
Speaker 1: They have no actual ability to govern in a meaningful
Speaker 1: way other than by causing harm to people. So it's
Speaker 1: entirely about taking the consequences of the world that they
Speaker 1: advocate and blaming them on someone else and selling you
Speaker 1: snake oil to deal with it. Yeah, exactly, And so
Speaker 1: that is that. That is most of the of the
Speaker 1: testicular tanning fun that that I got into. We haven't
Speaker 1: covered all the things in twenty seventeen. We'll get back
Speaker 1: on this subject, but it is time for us to end.
Speaker 1: This is all right over an hour. So I want
Speaker 1: to leave you all, all of you, all of you beautiful. First,
Speaker 1: I want to thank all of our beautiful correspondence for
Speaker 1: their research. And I want to leave all of you
Speaker 1: with this simple piece of advice. If you feel like
Speaker 1: your testicles aren't getting enough solar radiation, simply purchase a
Speaker 1: glass cutter and an old microwave, cut a circular hole
Speaker 1: in the microwave, and you bag it while it's on.
Speaker 1: You'll be okay. That is our legally binding health advice.
Speaker 1: That's the end of the episode. Hello, Welcome to It
Speaker 1: could happen here We've got a bit of a bit
Speaker 1: of a downer of an episode here, but this is
Speaker 1: going to be part one of a two part series
Speaker 1: talking about the increasing war on transpeople that we've seen
Speaker 1: both on the horcle side and on the actual legislative side.
Speaker 1: UM with me today is mia Anna Margaret. How how
Speaker 1: are you doing on this fine day? It's it's been.
Speaker 1: It's been really fun frantically updating my part of the
Speaker 1: script because they're keep being fucking new bills that are
Speaker 1: like going through committee. So it's great having having a
Speaker 1: good time. I'm doing great. I'm not aware of anything
Speaker 1: that's wrong. I assume you all are here to tell
Speaker 1: me that everything's fine forever. Well, hopefully next episode we'll
Speaker 1: talk more about how we can, like, uh, I don't know,
Speaker 1: deal with this sort of thing. I most I it
Speaker 1: was my job to handle the bad part of the
Speaker 1: of this two part series, and it was the other
Speaker 1: people's job to handle the good part. So I don't
Speaker 1: know what they haven't planned for the next episode. Actually,
Speaker 1: all I all I did was watch hours and hours
Speaker 1: of people advocate for genocide and put together some of
Speaker 1: the worst bits that I feel like are still worth mentioning.
Speaker 1: It's probably worth noting that the two of us who
Speaker 1: are supposed to be writing about what we do about
Speaker 1: it both have swords over our shoulders. I can go
Speaker 1: grab a sword, if that is, If that is a
Speaker 1: core part of the advice, I think so okay. So
Speaker 1: I think whenever I put together episodes like these, I
Speaker 1: always try to be careful not to I don't just
Speaker 1: want to include people who are talking about why myself
Speaker 1: and others should die, like just like I don't want
Speaker 1: to include that unnecessarily because that's just kind of a bummer.
Speaker 1: But I think it is also important to actually hear
Speaker 1: and understand the types of rhetoric that they are trying
Speaker 1: to spread and they're trying to normalize, and be aware
Speaker 1: of what techniques and what rhetorical styles they are trying
Speaker 1: to employ. So I've condensed this down as much as
Speaker 1: I can. You will still hear a decent amount of
Speaker 1: pretty gross stuff. Um. I think I should have almost
Speaker 1: all of the machendering completely edited out. I should have
Speaker 1: a whole bunch of things not not included. But there
Speaker 1: will be a decent amount of rhetoric that that that
Speaker 1: you will hear from, just as as a heads up.
Speaker 1: That's what's going to be kind of part of this episode.
Speaker 1: A lot of this is going to be talking about
Speaker 1: hosts that are employed by the conservative news site ran
Speaker 1: by Ben Shapiro, The Daily Wire. They have really, really
Speaker 1: focused in an excruciating extent on antitrans like campaigning and
Speaker 1: activism for really the past year. It got this type
Speaker 1: of stuff got really bad last February, and it once
Speaker 1: again got really bad this February. It's no coincidence that
Speaker 1: this is also the start of the legislative cycle, that
Speaker 1: this is why they're doing this right now. It is.
Speaker 1: It is part of an attempt to actually affect the
Speaker 1: laws that the United States have around if trans people
Speaker 1: are allowed to exist. It is, it is. It is purposeful,
Speaker 1: So we may as well just get started here. We're
Speaker 1: going to start a little bit liked actually, so most
Speaker 1: of this will be documenting the types of rhetoric they
Speaker 1: were using in February to March, so the past like
Speaker 1: month and a half. In early February, Candice Owens on
Speaker 1: her Daily Wire show refer to transpeople as demonic while
Speaker 1: advocating for the total ban of transgender healthcare for all ages.
Speaker 1: The trans Lives Matter protesters decided to occupy the Oklahoma
Speaker 1: Capitol building to fight GOP bills that ban gender conforming
Speaker 1: surgery for people that are under the age of twenty one.
Speaker 1: So that, of course that should be banned. If you
Speaker 1: are in the age twenty one, you should not be Honestly,
Speaker 1: you should never be allowed by I would go a
Speaker 1: little further, Oklahoma, if you really want to do something,
Speaker 1: just ban it altogether. Yeah. I love that because they're
Speaker 1: always trying to be like, no, no, no, we're just
Speaker 1: here to protect the children, whereas we've known this entire
Speaker 1: time that they're trying to stop anyone from being trends. Yes,
Speaker 1: this is a pattern that will come up a lot
Speaker 1: in the research I've put together for this is how
Speaker 1: last year it was their very much trying to make
Speaker 1: it like, no, it's just about the kids. And then
Speaker 1: we were talking about how first they're going to try
Speaker 1: to limit it to eighteen years old, and they're gonna
Speaker 1: limit it to twenty one years old, and they're gonna
Speaker 1: limit it to twenty five years old. Then they're just
Speaker 1: going to ban it all together. And that is very
Speaker 1: clearly what they're doing. And they're they're now just saying
Speaker 1: the quiet part out loud. So good on us for
Speaker 1: calling that a year in advance, but now they're emboldened
Speaker 1: just to say it outright. So kind of Someone's refers
Speaker 1: to trans people as demonic later on a night clip.
Speaker 1: I'm not not including that bit because just today Michael
Speaker 1: Knowles on his Daily Wire show said that this so
Speaker 1: called transgenderism is demonic, the second second Daily Wire person
Speaker 1: to drum up this satanic panic shit. This is demonic stuff,
Speaker 1: really demonic stuff. And I made this point I got
Speaker 1: in trouble with our publicists over at Media Matters because
Speaker 1: I said that the attacks on man end's sexual nature
Speaker 1: and sexual difference in complimentarity are demonic, and they are.
Speaker 1: They go back throughout all of history, throughout some of
Speaker 1: the earliest depictions of demons, even one of the most
Speaker 1: prominent depictions of demons. It comes from an artist, Lafas Levy,
Speaker 1: who is an occultist, who did a depiction of Baphomet.
Speaker 1: If you just think what's a demon look like, you're
Speaker 1: probably thinking of this picture. Okay, okay, all right, that's
Speaker 1: not true. It's it's completely wrong. So this is this
Speaker 1: is really funny to be because for years now I've
Speaker 1: been trying to say that being trans is not demonic.
Speaker 1: It's very clearly alchemical. Please please get your occults terms right.
Speaker 1: Thousands of years of alchemical development has delivered onto me
Speaker 1: estradial valorate. It's it's very clearly alchemy. Um. But also
Speaker 1: it's just extremely funny to me that Noels tried to
Speaker 1: cite Levy, who's like, Baphomet isn't really a demon in
Speaker 1: Lovey's work, but like whatever, it's it's all it's extremely funny.
Speaker 1: He He goes on to talk about Solivate and and Coigila,
Speaker 1: which I've actually been planning to do an episode on
Speaker 1: for a while. But it's it's all extremely funny too.
Speaker 1: Is it worth describing that Bapphamet is the statue of
Speaker 1: the like hornheaded person with like Yes, often falsely falsely
Speaker 1: identified as the Satan or a demon, But yes, it's
Speaker 1: a very famous, very famous statue. Like if you think
Speaker 1: of like the statue of Satan, this is what bapha
Speaker 1: Bet actually is. Yeah, it's it's not Satan, but I
Speaker 1: mean the use of this like demonic rhetoric is a
Speaker 1: very is it's it's very basic, like a dehumanizing stuff.
Speaker 1: Trying to dehumanize trans people, um, while also pulling from
Speaker 1: like the remnants of the satanic panic that still exists
Speaker 1: in some conservatives minds. UM. Moving on to to a
Speaker 1: friend of the pod, Matt Walsh. UM. One of one
Speaker 1: of his recent main targets is actress Dylan mulvain. On
Speaker 1: February fourteenth, Matt went on a mindless rant while continuously
Speaker 1: miss gendering mulvaney and attacking her appearance, at one point
Speaker 1: referring to her as like doing a woman face minstrel
Speaker 1: show routine. Which a reaccording thing about this is that
Speaker 1: all in all of their rhetoric against transpeople, they also
Speaker 1: managed to be incredibly racist yep, and like not understanding
Speaker 1: what racism actually is, which I mean is not surprising
Speaker 1: considering there they work for the Daily Wire. I'm not
Speaker 1: going to actually include the clip of Matt Walsh there
Speaker 1: because it's it's just it's just miss gendering and like
Speaker 1: making fun of how someone looks for like a minute,
Speaker 1: and it's all very gross. Who is that actress? I
Speaker 1: just I live under a rock. Dylan Mulvaney. I think
Speaker 1: she does like Broadway stuff. She's like a New York
Speaker 1: person I've not, I've only i've wholly really heard of her.
Speaker 1: Based on Matt Walsh's continuing rants against this person, we
Speaker 1: can't have cross stressors in the theater a matchin. We'd
Speaker 1: have to I actually don't know. I literally don't know
Speaker 1: how far back you'd have to get to get to
Speaker 1: where people didn't play with gender on stage. I think
Speaker 1: it's impossible. Well, I think the further back you go,
Speaker 1: the worsting guests, because like things were like only men
Speaker 1: could be on stage, and it's like, well, okay, this
Speaker 1: is every Shakespeare Beforeance, etcetera, etcetera. In one of the
Speaker 1: more bizarre Daily Wire appearances in this um so on
Speaker 1: on February fifteenth, a young dad who called into the
Speaker 1: Daily Wire sports show Crane on Company talked about how
Speaker 1: dad's like him are going to cause dangerous problems if
Speaker 1: trans inclusivity continues. The hosts of the show agreed and
Speaker 1: said that violence will be an inevitable response to trans
Speaker 1: women playing sports, which one of you bar up. But
Speaker 1: somebody said something about dad being in the stand finding
Speaker 1: out that for the first time that somebody in the
Speaker 1: locker room was a male, and that they were just
Speaker 1: hanging it all out in front of their girls, how
Speaker 1: I rate they would get. My view is that, yeah,
Speaker 1: we're gonna have not just one irate dad, We're gonna
Speaker 1: have a lot of I rate dads. That's gonna content
Speaker 1: massive problem in the school system, and it's going to
Speaker 1: be very dangerous for everybody because people are gonna start
Speaker 1: taking in their own hands because they're seeing that other
Speaker 1: people are. That's exactly jungle rules, as we call it,
Speaker 1: jungle rules. Exactly at what point do we say, we've
Speaker 1: tried to talk this out and hash this out with you,
Speaker 1: you're not being reasonable. Those are part of my values.
Speaker 1: So it's not even us saying go in there and
Speaker 1: handle business. It's saying, I know what's gonna happen the
Speaker 1: minute that girl runs out of that locker room or
Speaker 1: a couple girls. Imagine if a twelve year old girl
Speaker 1: ran out of the locker room and said that to
Speaker 1: her doll mine, just to imagine that how or whatever.
Speaker 1: Men shouldn't be in women's locker room. But if a
Speaker 1: man that was straight walked into a women's locker room
Speaker 1: with a trench coat and just showed everything and started
Speaker 1: shaking like this and got beatn asleep everybody would be
Speaker 1: doing this, they'd be clapping, great job. But you let
Speaker 1: the same thing happen to somebody who says they think
Speaker 1: they're a woman in there and does the exact same thing,
Speaker 1: then it's no, it's a totally different situation. So while
Speaker 1: we're not advocating for it, I'm telling you what's going
Speaker 1: to happen because I live in the real world. I
Speaker 1: know what you would do for your daughter. Yep, that
Speaker 1: man does not live in the real world. No, And
Speaker 1: it's it's all like, it's this weird like trying to
Speaker 1: have some form of like of a of of like
Speaker 1: denial in their very clear advocating for violence and like
Speaker 1: advocating for the normalization of just assaulting people. I mean,
Speaker 1: I even feel like though this is like, this is
Speaker 1: like last year's anti trans rhetoric, you know, the like
Speaker 1: lowest hanging fruit was to come at us about sports,
Speaker 1: this issue that affects the tiniest percentage of people, you know. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and it's it's it's the it's the blending of the
Speaker 1: sports issue with like the locker room stuff. Yeah. Later
Speaker 1: on in the show, another caller admitted that he would
Speaker 1: assault trans woman, including his own children. And The Daily
Speaker 1: Wirehouse refused to push back on like any of this
Speaker 1: as this man just advocates child abuse. And I just
Speaker 1: wanted to say too, as a as a new father,
Speaker 1: I've got a new baby boy, uh, and I've got
Speaker 1: a two year old daughter, And not only would I
Speaker 1: want to beat somebody up for doing that to my daughter,
Speaker 1: but I would beat my son up if he ever
Speaker 1: thought about doing something like that in a women's locker room.
Speaker 1: It's just again, and I want to make sure and again,
Speaker 1: we live in the real world. We know what's gonna
Speaker 1: happen because we're not even advocating violence, like I said,
Speaker 1: We're telling you what's gonna happen. These are the fathers
Speaker 1: and the brothers and the uncles and the mamas are
Speaker 1: it's gonna get to a point where they're just gonna
Speaker 1: handle business like and it's just it is. It is
Speaker 1: what it is. We're trying to tell y'all this in
Speaker 1: the threat, this it's just a four warning. It is
Speaker 1: foreshadowing what's gonna happen. British are coming. Yeah, okay, but
Speaker 1: but the British is coming. Is a really, really funny
Speaker 1: thing for an American to say about this because he's wait,
Speaker 1: is he saying that they're the British they're trying to
Speaker 1: do like a Paul Revere sing oh oh oh. I
Speaker 1: thought they were trying to be like, we're gonna show
Speaker 1: up and we're going to handle business us. No, I
Speaker 1: think in the opposite. I'm sorry, we are we are
Speaker 1: warning that if this insanity continues, then people will start
Speaker 1: violently assaulting anyone who they suspect of being a man
Speaker 1: in a bathroom, which will also just lead to like
Speaker 1: people assaulting like a like a butch sis woman as well.
Speaker 1: Like no, I mean, it's like this has already been happening,
Speaker 1: like like one of my friends can't get changed at
Speaker 1: the local gym um even though they're assigned female at birth,
Speaker 1: because there's no safe place for them to do it
Speaker 1: because the way that they read, you know, like and
Speaker 1: I don't know whatever. I mean, that's just one example
Speaker 1: of the time my head, but it's just happening constantly.
Speaker 1: Suddenly we have gender police everywhere, and everyone is expected
Speaker 1: to perform masculinity and femininity and like weird sis normative
Speaker 1: ways saying that everyone knows. I'm sorry, I'm just no, no,
Speaker 1: but I think there's something important about this too, which
Speaker 1: is like, and anytime someone tries to say, like anytime
Speaker 1: someone starts talking about their real world, this is the
Speaker 1: way the world really works. Right, That's not an actual
Speaker 1: description of reality. It's an it's an aspirational thing, right.
Speaker 1: And the way that you make something real is through violence. Yes,
Speaker 1: And that's what all this stuff is absolutely and and
Speaker 1: specifically speaking of violence and child abuse. The next day,
Speaker 1: on February sixteenth, Candice Owens was discussing this, uh, this
Speaker 1: like trans kids TikTok video about his grandmother's transphobic reaction
Speaker 1: to him coming out. Um, and it's it's also it's
Speaker 1: it's just extremely grows. So these like these media people
Speaker 1: who are paid millions of dollars spend their days making
Speaker 1: fun of trans kids on TikTok like like random like
Speaker 1: random miners on TikTok. We are making videos about their experiences.
Speaker 1: And they then these these like these grifters and these
Speaker 1: content creators who work on the right, it's like blast
Speaker 1: these kids on their on their on their shows. They
Speaker 1: get like millions of millions of viewers. I mean, this
Speaker 1: is the entire lips of TikTok platform. But yours now
Speaker 1: seeing this across like almost every mainstream conservative influencer. So
Speaker 1: on top of Candice calling being trans a mental illness
Speaker 1: placed upon you by society, Candas Owns also said that
Speaker 1: if she had a trans grandchild, she would beat them
Speaker 1: with a cane. It is a cry for help, and
Speaker 1: your grandmother answered that cry for help by telling you
Speaker 1: that you are loved as you are and that you
Speaker 1: don't need to fall into this trap of insanity. You're
Speaker 1: the best grandma ever, by the way, because when I'm
Speaker 1: a grandma, I get any foolishness like that. I don't know.
Speaker 1: I want to be a sweet grandma, I really do.
Speaker 1: I want to be a sweet old lady. But I
Speaker 1: feel like I might be the kind hit somebody with
Speaker 1: a cane. I don't know, I'll be like, why you
Speaker 1: are not calling your Michaels. I feel like that will
Speaker 1: probably be me, but I will I would have prayed
Speaker 1: for you. You know the thing that I keep thinking
Speaker 1: about with this, with this Candas clip, with most of
Speaker 1: these clips, it's like they're just like laughing the whole
Speaker 1: time they're saying this stuff. Yep, Like it's just a
Speaker 1: joke to them, right, It's like, yeah, they believe it.
Speaker 1: But it's also it's just like a joke. It's just
Speaker 1: something they can sort of like casually talk about while
Speaker 1: like you know, fucking hanging out in their show or whatever.
Speaker 1: And absolutely, because I mean the primary goal for these
Speaker 1: people is is content creation, and yeah, they're making suffering
Speaker 1: content for for and as well as like normalizing this
Speaker 1: type of like violent response. Yeah. And and I think
Speaker 1: I think the sort of joking thing is is a
Speaker 1: big part of how the normalization works. Like I don't think,
Speaker 1: like I think it would be much harder to have
Speaker 1: someone just being incredibly serious going like yeah, I'm gonna
Speaker 1: like beat my child with a cane, right, like if
Speaker 1: but if if you do, when that's sort of like
Speaker 1: joking like matter of fact thing, it helps, It helps
Speaker 1: normalize it enormously. Yeah. No, absolutely, I'm just really sad
Speaker 1: thinking about the because acceptance by family, a family that
Speaker 1: doesn't necessarily understand, but that's willing to accept. It's like
Speaker 1: the thing that I think bolsters the spirits of young
Speaker 1: trans people or adult trans people more than anything else,
Speaker 1: you know. And I've been like reading a bunch of
Speaker 1: history about like trans people from one hundred years ago
Speaker 1: where their family are like, all right, well we don't
Speaker 1: get it, but what's your name now? Yeah, And like
Speaker 1: a hundred years ago, we we could have improved from there.
Speaker 1: And this is something that the Daily Wire definitely does
Speaker 1: continue to harp on across multiple hosts, even like the
Speaker 1: next video that we have here, Matt Matt Walsh is
Speaker 1: doing like this is the same thing they're they're talking
Speaker 1: about if they themselves had trans kids or trans grandkids,
Speaker 1: that they would continue to be as openly vitriolic and
Speaker 1: even violent against their own children. So this next clip
Speaker 1: came like a week after Matt Walsh's first unhinged rant
Speaker 1: attacking Dylan Muldaney. Walsh claimed that he wouldn't stop barking
Speaker 1: the vitriolic rhetoric if he had a trans kid, that
Speaker 1: in fact, he would quote rather be dead than discover
Speaker 1: he had a trans kid. A beautiful and innocent kid
Speaker 1: one day, seemingly out of nowhere, gets sucked into the
Speaker 1: gender call and is devoured by it. All of their
Speaker 1: innocence and light and beauty just drained out of them,
Speaker 1: replaced by this self cannibalizing madness. For a parent to
Speaker 1: see this happen to a child, it is a fate
Speaker 1: worse than death. I would rather be dead than have
Speaker 1: that happened to my kids, then die. We do argue
Speaker 1: with you. I'm not on the debate team. This is
Speaker 1: a mock trial. I keep thinking of whatever these things happened, Like,
Speaker 1: I keep thinking about Matt Christman's one good line, which
Speaker 1: is we should give to Christians what they want and
Speaker 1: crucify them, persecute, persecute all day, every day. So unfortunately,
Speaker 1: there was more to that clip than Walsh just threatening
Speaker 1: to kill himself using like a groomer and protect the
Speaker 1: children rhetoric that we saw go viral last year. Walsh
Speaker 1: promises that mean words are only the beginning. See, the
Speaker 1: thing that I most despise about Dylan Wilvni is that
Speaker 1: part of a movement which actively seeks to turn my
Speaker 1: children into Dylan Wolvni. That's why I'm entitled to my
Speaker 1: anger and to whatever language I use to convey it.
Speaker 1: I will say whatever I want to say, and I
Speaker 1: will be justified in saying it, because these people are
Speaker 1: after my kids and yours and everyone else's. And you're
Speaker 1: worried that I'm being a little rude, Well, you see,
Speaker 1: when it comes to my children, the children that I
Speaker 1: cherish more than my own life. If you think mean
Speaker 1: words go too far, then you would be very shocked
Speaker 1: to hear how far I would really go to protect them.
Speaker 1: Trust me, words are the least of it. I love this.
Speaker 1: I would do anything to protect my children, unless they're
Speaker 1: a gay, in which case I'm good, like off myself
Speaker 1: or something like yeah, just I mean, I mean, I
Speaker 1: don't know whatever. Already the legally actionable things have already
Speaker 1: been said. Hey, it's it's not my idea, it's only
Speaker 1: Matt Walsh's. This is his idea. You know. I do
Speaker 1: want to go back for a second to the early
Speaker 1: parts of this clip when he's talking about like, oh,
Speaker 1: like you have these like purean innocent children, and like
Speaker 1: the light goes out of him, like it's this thing
Speaker 1: that strikes you about that so much? Is like she's
Speaker 1: describing the process exactly in reverse, Like the thing that
Speaker 1: he's describing is what is like, this is what happens
Speaker 1: if you do transition a kid like by force, Like
Speaker 1: the thing that actually happens when a trans kid transitions
Speaker 1: is like you can you can literally see this in
Speaker 1: like like you can you can like literally see this
Speaker 1: in pictures of kids. It's like like you can wash
Speaker 1: the light come back to their eyes as a transition totally. No, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: it's you know, it's it's it's one of sort of
Speaker 1: like it's one of the most beautiful things about being
Speaker 1: trans It's like is experiencing that joy and experiencing like
Speaker 1: what it is to be yourself and then you get
Speaker 1: to watch this fucking dipshit like just literally just like
Speaker 1: taking the process as it actually happens, and then like
Speaker 1: lying and saying it's like literally like lying and saying
Speaker 1: that the thing that is making these people have this
Speaker 1: joy is the like the thing that's fucking killing them. No.
Speaker 1: Absolutely that that's something that's often overlooked when covering this
Speaker 1: sort of thing, is the like just the presence of
Speaker 1: trans joy and the trans joy that can be experienced
Speaker 1: when people are given access to the treatments that have
Speaker 1: been like known to be successful for decades now. It's
Speaker 1: also I mean, I don't know if you're intentionally going
Speaker 1: in an escalating sense. This is the first person that
Speaker 1: I'm looking at being like, oh, this man wants to
Speaker 1: kill me, you know I am I am going in
Speaker 1: an escalating Yeah, yeah, we escalate pretty far over the
Speaker 1: next First, I think let's let's have a bit of
Speaker 1: an ad break. Do you know who doesn't want to
Speaker 1: kill you? Fifty percent of the advertisers, at least at
Speaker 1: least fifty percent of the advertisers don't want you dead
Speaker 1: because instead they want your money. All right, we are back,
Speaker 1: as as previously stated, Like when when reporting on this
Speaker 1: topic before, we've always said that the limited focus on
Speaker 1: transgender miners was simply a form of rhetorical deception. Oh,
Speaker 1: somebody please think of the children. By conjuring concerns that
Speaker 1: have been like culturally ingrained in US around the protection
Speaker 1: of children, Anti transactivists have been introducing and a normalizing
Speaker 1: anti trans talking points that inevitably get used against trans
Speaker 1: people of all ages. Last year, Matt Walsh openly said
Speaker 1: that quote, it should be illegal for doctors to medically
Speaker 1: transition anyone of any age unquote. And as Margaret said,
Speaker 1: it seems like we were we were moving in a
Speaker 1: more escalating direction, but that that just so happens to
Speaker 1: corresponds as the month of February continued. So here's a
Speaker 1: clip from Daily Wire host Michael Knowles from the late
Speaker 1: February twenty twenty three. In order for women to have
Speaker 1: the right to have their own bathrooms, you have to
Speaker 1: ban transgenderism entirely. You can't just ban it for the kids.
Speaker 1: It's got to be entirely. In order for women to
Speaker 1: be able to have their own locker rooms at the gym,
Speaker 1: you have to ban transgenderism entirely. In order to protect
Speaker 1: businesses from having to participate in weird occult sexual rituals
Speaker 1: like the transgender transition, you have to ban transgenderism entirely.
Speaker 1: So that is just like straight up advocating for genocide, right, Like, yeah,
Speaker 1: there there is no difference between this term that the
Speaker 1: daily Wire people use, transgenderism and and currently existing transgender people.
Speaker 1: That that isn't you It's like saying, we have to
Speaker 1: eradicate judaism, Like what what is it? What do you
Speaker 1: mean by that? You obviously mean exterminating human beings and
Speaker 1: making it impossible for them to continue on? Like that
Speaker 1: is that? That is what genocide is? Yeah, and you
Speaker 1: can hear me like literally the next thing he says
Speaker 1: is like you know, he's talking about like like transition
Speaker 1: angas and the cult ritual or whatever the fuck it.
Speaker 1: It's like well, yeah, no, like like he's he's explicitly saying,
Speaker 1: like what what Yeah, what does banning transgenderism means? Does it? Never?
Speaker 1: Like confuse you all when you just have these moments
Speaker 1: where you're like, these people believe in sky Daddy. Like
Speaker 1: I'm not even anti religious, I'm not even an atheist.
Speaker 1: I don't know exactly what I am. But like when
Speaker 1: you hear people just being like God has willed me
Speaker 1: to do this murder or whatever, that this is what
Speaker 1: this person is saying, I'm just like they think of
Speaker 1: themselves as like holy warriors who have been chosen by
Speaker 1: God to eradicate this demonic plague that is infecting like humankind. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it would be like if all of the sudden they
Speaker 1: were like, and that's why Gandolf has told me that
Speaker 1: I must go on a quest. Like I'm just like,
Speaker 1: am I living in the same century as these people?
Speaker 1: Like again, not an atheist, but I'm just like you've
Speaker 1: decided that sky Daddy has told you to march off
Speaker 1: to murder, Like yeah, that doesn't even map to a
Speaker 1: fucking basic understanding even of religious anyway. Sorry, no, absolutely,
Speaker 1: And I mean this unfortunately continues to get worse Yeah.
Speaker 1: The very next day, Michael Knowles defended his eliminationis rhetoric
Speaker 1: in another unhinged rant about the like probably about two
Speaker 1: million trans people in the United States, saying that quote,
Speaker 1: there can't be a genocide of trans people because it's quote,
Speaker 1: not a legitimate category of being. They said that I
Speaker 1: was calling for the extermination of transgender people. They said
Speaker 1: I was calling for a genocide. I said, what, I
Speaker 1: must have missed that part of my show. When did
Speaker 1: I did? I say that? I don't one. I don't
Speaker 1: know how you could have a genocide of transgender people
Speaker 1: because genocide refers to genes, It refers to genetics, it
Speaker 1: refers to biology, and the point of those genderism is
Speaker 1: that it has nothing to do with biology. That's what
Speaker 1: the transgender activists say. They say, forget about biological sex.
Speaker 1: My gender expression doesn't have to have anything to do
Speaker 1: with my biological sex. Okay, well, then there can't be
Speaker 1: a genocide. It refers to genetics. But furthermore, nobody is
Speaker 1: calling to exterminate anybody, because the other problem with that
Speaker 1: statement is that transgender people is not a real ontological category.
Speaker 1: It's not a legitimate category of being. There are people
Speaker 1: who think that they're the wrong sex, but they're mistaken.
Speaker 1: They're laboring under a delusion, and so we need to
Speaker 1: correct that delusion. Okay, so that was that was a lot.
Speaker 1: I'm just clinging to my emotional support sword, Like, what
Speaker 1: what solution to preytel will you be employing to correct
Speaker 1: that's so called delusion? Maybe just like one one once,
Speaker 1: like a like one one of the last one, Yeah,
Speaker 1: a fal one. Not the penultimate solution, that's not his
Speaker 1: his thing. No one step further the the very the
Speaker 1: very last one. I can't think of a of a
Speaker 1: of a of another word for for for very last.
Speaker 1: But yeah, I also like, have these motherfucker's karrotyped themselves?
Speaker 1: No one has almost no one has been goddamn like
Speaker 1: the percentage of people who've seen what their genes are like,
Speaker 1: I don't know, whatever, sense it's nonsense. Yeah, the the
Speaker 1: science does not hold up to the like thing you
Speaker 1: learn in fourth grade that the you know, I don't
Speaker 1: know when they teach you xx and x y or whatever.
Speaker 1: But it's like, but like that's not science. That's not
Speaker 1: the current scientific understanding, and I think has never really
Speaker 1: been the scientific understanding. That part I'm not as certain
Speaker 1: about um no, I mean like it's and by saying
Speaker 1: like I'm not calling for genocide because the group I'm
Speaker 1: targeting aren't even a real group of people, They're not
Speaker 1: even literally it's literally the talking point of every single
Speaker 1: genocide or fascist ever in existence. So like like literally
Speaker 1: literally this is I can't I cannot find the person
Speaker 1: who was writing about this. I apologize immensely. But there
Speaker 1: when when when this clip was first circulating, there was
Speaker 1: a really interesting article about that was circulating about how
Speaker 1: like not a legitimate category is what like the word
Speaker 1: that gets translated as degenerate like that the Nazis used
Speaker 1: like actually means like like that's like non legitimate kind
Speaker 1: like like that very specifically is what the Nazis used
Speaker 1: as like you know, as as they're staying for we
Speaker 1: need to kill the Jews, right like that, that's that's
Speaker 1: that's very very specifically what they were doing now and
Speaker 1: and like genocide does not refer to genetics, it doesn't.
Speaker 1: And and and you know, you know you can you can
Speaker 1: look at like think because like these people are like
Speaker 1: just unfathomably fucking stupid, right like they they they look
Speaker 1: at genocide, right and they see the word gen and
Speaker 1: they go, this means gen No. But you know, and
Speaker 1: I think, I think something that is worth mentioning is that.
Speaker 1: So Raphael Lemkin is the guy who coins the term genocide, right, Um,
Speaker 1: the Lemkin Institute, which is the the like the lempicin Scitude,
Speaker 1: which is the institute from this guy that that does
Speaker 1: genoisde like does anti genocide prevention works specifically in the US.
Speaker 1: Was like there was now a risk of genocide against
Speaker 1: trans people. So, you know, the institute of the actual
Speaker 1: guy who made the term genocide versus a guy who
Speaker 1: thinks that gen means gene. It's like, it's just no,
Speaker 1: It's it's very obvious that that saying that transgender people
Speaker 1: are not a real ontological category is like he's doing
Speaker 1: He's literally is how you do the Nazis did That
Speaker 1: is how you do Nazi stuff. Like I'm under the
Speaker 1: impression of the whole thing with ontology is accepting that
Speaker 1: there's like multiple ontologies, Like it's clearly not an ontological
Speaker 1: concept in his ontological like his way of viewing the world.
Speaker 1: That's one of my problems, you know, I don't think
Speaker 1: he would pass a basic philosophy of course at college.
Speaker 1: You know, okay, I will say this, my my, my,
Speaker 1: my argument against against specifically against there being multiple legitimate
Speaker 1: ontologies is this is this these people's fucking ontology who
Speaker 1: like believe that, like these people, all these fucking freaks
Speaker 1: literally believe individually right, that there is no scientific explanation
Speaker 1: for lightning and that like every act of lightning is
Speaker 1: an individual act of God, that is not a legitimate ontology.
Speaker 1: Like fuck that shit. No, I I refuse, I refuse
Speaker 1: to do fucking to have to have to have there
Speaker 1: be fucking multiple valid ontological positions. I refuse for there
Speaker 1: to be valid worlds like no, there's something that are
Speaker 1: just wrong, and you have to be able to say
Speaker 1: that shit otherwise you get this fucking bullshit reality tunnels
Speaker 1: do do be funny like that? He later added quote
Speaker 1: transgenderism ultimately is a lie, It's a deception. It is
Speaker 1: a fraud. Fraud is not protected by the First Amendment.
Speaker 1: Fraud is not a category protected by the principles of
Speaker 1: a free speech. You have no right to fraud. But
Speaker 1: you know, here's the thing, I will I will agree
Speaker 1: with him. You have no right to fraud. Fraud is
Speaker 1: not protected by free speech. I really like have have
Speaker 1: a real fun time when we fucking come for you
Speaker 1: on those principles, like a show disappears a few days
Speaker 1: of A few days later, Noles once again invoked grooma
Speaker 1: rhetoric and openly called drag Queen's pedophiles and explicitly called
Speaker 1: on quote the heavy hand of the state to shut
Speaker 1: down to drag shows and arrest performers and parents. Why
Speaker 1: is he dressed like um mister Rogers in a Black
Speaker 1: Marre episode. He's just he's just mirror universe. Mister Rogers's
Speaker 1: like just telling you to hate your neighbor. You know,
Speaker 1: I don't know how you can watch this and not
Speaker 1: conclude that the performers are pedophiles. I don't use that
Speaker 1: word lightly. I know a lot of people on the
Speaker 1: right use that word. They fling it around, and they
Speaker 1: use it in precisely. I don't see how you can
Speaker 1: dance around in a thong or in a leather harness
Speaker 1: in front of babies and toddlers if you are not
Speaker 1: a pedophile. So I would bet if not the farm,
Speaker 1: I'd bet a lot of my money that that's the case,
Speaker 1: and that's being normalized. I don't see how these parents
Speaker 1: should be permitted to keep their children. They're abusing your children,
Speaker 1: are sexually abusing your children by taking them to these events.
Speaker 1: I don't see how whatever company is hosting this should
Speaker 1: be allowed to keep its doors open. All of this
Speaker 1: should be shut down by the heavy hand of the state.
Speaker 1: All of these people other than the children should be arrested,
Speaker 1: and some of them should face pretty severe consequences. Not
Speaker 1: great stuff. He did hedge his bets. He was like,
Speaker 1: you know, I'm actually not sure about this. That was
Speaker 1: my favorite part. I think it is. It is interesting
Speaker 1: that the whole heavy hand of the state line is
Speaker 1: is is an interesting, little little unique gem in their
Speaker 1: style of rhetoric whenever they explicitly call on the powers
Speaker 1: of the government to like do fascism. I think a
Speaker 1: lot of this type of rhetoric was leading up to
Speaker 1: Sea Pack in which happened in early March. During Seapack,
Speaker 1: anti trans rhetoric was a very central theme across There
Speaker 1: are many speakers. That's like the big right wing gathering
Speaker 1: where all the far right people get together and talk
Speaker 1: to an empty room. Well, Seapack is the Conservative political
Speaker 1: action conference. It is far right by the world's over
Speaker 1: to the window. But it's like a mainstream right wing
Speaker 1: convention in the United States. Cool. So the conference featured
Speaker 1: in a rave speakers, including prominent Republican politicians and policymakers,
Speaker 1: as well as people like Michael Knowles who are just
Speaker 1: like right wing pundits. The many many speeches had attacks
Speaker 1: against gender affirming healthcare, trans inclusive sports, and bathroom policies,
Speaker 1: as well as the you know, the typical groomer and
Speaker 1: and pedophelia stuff that we saw gets super popular last year. Um,
Speaker 1: as well as framing this word transgenderism as a radical ideology. Now,
Speaker 1: words like transgenderism and gender ideology are not actually terms
Speaker 1: that trans people use. These were terms invented by anti transactivists.
Speaker 1: I want to be very certific about this because I
Speaker 1: think I don't think people understand the term gender ideology
Speaker 1: was specifically invented by the Catholic Church, like as as
Speaker 1: as a thing to oppose this and also a sort
Speaker 1: of a way to oppose like gay marriage and like
Speaker 1: queerness in general. And they're all of the fucking all
Speaker 1: of the like shitty, like one of the one of
Speaker 1: those sort of like quote unquote like dark secrets in
Speaker 1: the fucking closet of all of the black people who
Speaker 1: claim to be radical feminists who are anti trans is.
Speaker 1: All of these people specifically worked with the back back
Speaker 1: this up was first being developed in like the late
Speaker 1: nineties and early two thousands. All these people worked with
Speaker 1: the Catholic Church specifically to make sure that I like
Speaker 1: that that that more sort of liked more gender inclusive
Speaker 1: like terminology and stuff like not on a terminology like
Speaker 1: more gender and preclusive programs and definitions of like of
Speaker 1: what gender is wouldn't be implemented at the un. So
Speaker 1: this this sort of like rad fem conservative Catholic alliance
Speaker 1: is very old, and most of the people who are
Speaker 1: in it will deny that that's what they were doing,
Speaker 1: but it is like, this is this is Catholic Church ship.
Speaker 1: The Pope literally had a rant about how gender ideology
Speaker 1: was colonialism like like a week ago, like and and
Speaker 1: and the Pope does the same demonic rhetoric as these people.
Speaker 1: And I mean, yeah, so I believe this terms him.
Speaker 1: It makes sense from him. That's his that's his thing,
Speaker 1: that's his literal job. Yeah, which immediately also it's like, sir,
Speaker 1: you are the pope, like, shut the fuck up about colonization, man, Like, yeah,
Speaker 1: you know from Latin America. That doesn't excuse you, like
Speaker 1: the Cash Church. The Catholic Church famously never never, never
Speaker 1: done colonization. Um. But yeah, these words were invented by
Speaker 1: anti transactivists to the humanized transgender people and frame being
Speaker 1: trans as itself this dangerous ideology or a mental illness
Speaker 1: in a need of curing m Seapack speakers consistently invoked
Speaker 1: like grooming and pedophilia stuff in their In their long
Speaker 1: anti LGBTQ hate rants, um Lauren Bobert claimed that educators
Speaker 1: attempting to groom children, echoing the libs of TikTok stuff
Speaker 1: that got popular in twenty twenty one and twenty twenty two.
Speaker 1: Tulsi Gabbard was at Seapack. She basically claimed at LGBTQ
Speaker 1: plus people were trying to gain acceptance for pedophiles by
Speaker 1: labeling them as minor attracted persons and allowing them to
Speaker 1: teach in schools. This is another conspiracy theory that Libs
Speaker 1: of TikTok has boosted for a long time. By the way,
Speaker 1: I want to hold a fucking greed share, which is
Speaker 1: that there were a lot of people who who like
Speaker 1: claimed to be leftist, who in like twenty eighteen, twenty nine,
Speaker 1: twenty and twenty were like telling all of us that
Speaker 1: Tulsi Gabbard was a leftists, like the only anti very
Speaker 1: clearly a fascist walk like she she she like, no,
Speaker 1: fuck off, you were wrong, Please admit you were wrong.
Speaker 1: Please be more careful about who you're going to fucking
Speaker 1: back so you don't end up backing this fucking like
Speaker 1: weird peto jacketing dipshit. But you know who you should back.
Speaker 1: Oh god, not yet, not yet almost almost okay, oh
Speaker 1: not almost almost time? Sorry, I have abot planned. Um
Speaker 1: Matt Gates spoke about an instant in Virginia which the
Speaker 1: right wing media sphere has spread disinformation about to falsely
Speaker 1: frame it as an instance of a transit student abusing
Speaker 1: inclusive bathroom policies to attack young girls. Just spreading all
Speaker 1: kinds of misinformation and disinformation from these right wing hate websites,
Speaker 1: that that is why they exist, is to prop by
Speaker 1: gate disinformation. Um Marjor Taylor Green target agenda from healthcare,
Speaker 1: praising her current reintroduction of the twenty twenty two protect
Speaker 1: Children's Innocence Act in the House, a bill which would
Speaker 1: make it a felony to provide a gender affirming care
Speaker 1: to miners. Green spread the lies and disinformation made popular
Speaker 1: by Matt Walsh that gender affirming healthcare designed to quote
Speaker 1: mutilate your kids and quote chemically castrate them. Stuff that
Speaker 1: we've debunked on the show before and many others have debunked.
Speaker 1: Trump gave a pretty pretty bad transphobic speech to close
Speaker 1: out the conference. On the one side, he said that
Speaker 1: he would keep men out of women's sports, but then
Speaker 1: closed out to see pack by saying, quote, he would
Speaker 1: revoke every Biden policy promoting the sexual mutilation and chemical
Speaker 1: castration of our youth, and I will ask Congress to
Speaker 1: send me a bill prohibiting child sexual mutilation in all
Speaker 1: fifty states unquote. I don't want to include Trump's stuff
Speaker 1: here because I find his voice to be slightly annoying. Anyway,
Speaker 1: Moving off, Donald Trump more annoying than Michael Knowles. Shocking
Speaker 1: so hard, challenge level almost impossible. Speaking of Michael Knowles,
Speaker 1: he gave a speeches Sepack where he advocated that transgenderism
Speaker 1: must be eradicated to thunderous applause. Now I'm going to
Speaker 1: play this whole clip here. Bear with me. There can
Speaker 1: be no middle way in dealing with transgenderism. It is
Speaker 1: all or nothing. If transgenderism is true, if men really
Speaker 1: can become women, then it's true for everybody of all ages.
Speaker 1: If transgenderism is false, as it is, if men really
Speaker 1: can't become women, as they cannot, then it's false for
Speaker 1: everybody too. And if it's false, then we should not
Speaker 1: indulge it, especially since that indulgence requires taking away the
Speaker 1: rights and customs of so many people. If it is false,
Speaker 1: then for the good of society, and especially for the
Speaker 1: good of the poor people who have fallen prey to
Speaker 1: this confusion, transgenderism must be eradicated from public life entirely,
Speaker 1: the whole preposterous ideology at every level. Pretty pretty bad stuff.
Speaker 1: Not great to hear a room full of people applaud
Speaker 1: someone who's very clearly talking about the eradication of an
Speaker 1: entire group of people. And I want to specifically point
Speaker 1: out the from public life thing, because that was something
Speaker 1: that you know, like back when the first bathroom bills
Speaker 1: were happening in twenty sixteen, right, you know, like people
Speaker 1: like trans people who were following this stuff. You know,
Speaker 1: the thing everyone said was they're trying to they're trying
Speaker 1: to erase trans people from public life, right, because that's
Speaker 1: that's what happens when you can't use a restroom in public, right,
Speaker 1: is like it limits your ability to just exist in
Speaker 1: the public sphere. And we've gotten to a point now
Speaker 1: where they can just fucking say what we you know,
Speaker 1: what we all knew they wanted from the beginning, and
Speaker 1: that's terrifying. I remember when I hit them the kind
Speaker 1: of uncanny valley space, like when I hit the space
Speaker 1: where I freaked people out, no matter what bathroom I used,
Speaker 1: you know, it's like a very conscious thing where I
Speaker 1: remember it because I pick which bathroom do you use
Speaker 1: based on safety, right, and and like depending on my presentation.
Speaker 1: It's it's wildly different depending on what kind of space
Speaker 1: I'm in, it's wildly different. I don't know, I just
Speaker 1: I just remember really consciously the first time I like
Speaker 1: just I picked the men's room and then got like
Speaker 1: double takes about why was I in there, and it's
Speaker 1: just like, oh, I like can't do anything anymore. Yeah,
Speaker 1: Like no, absolutely. After Nol's speech at Sepack, arguing for
Speaker 1: the eradication of transgenderism quote unquote. Daily Wire hosts, including
Speaker 1: Matt Walsh, defended him by saying, quote, we are in
Speaker 1: a war against the most deranged ideology ever invented by
Speaker 1: the human race. We are fighting to eradicate the ideogical
Speaker 1: equivalent of a parasitic infection. But is a term like
Speaker 1: eradicate over the top. Does it have a needlessly militant tone? No,
Speaker 1: definitely not. The tone may be militant, but not needlessly so.
Speaker 1: We are, after all, in a war, and lives are
Speaker 1: at stake. We are in a war against the most
Speaker 1: deranged ideology ever invented by the human race, plain and simple.
Speaker 1: We are fighting to eradicate the ideological equivalent of a
Speaker 1: parasitic infestation. And the parasite gender ideology seeks to not
Speaker 1: only brainwash a generation of children, not only degrade and
Speaker 1: appropriate womanhood, but also and manhood by the way, but also,
Speaker 1: and most fundamentally, it seeks to eat away at truth itself.
Speaker 1: This is coming from somebody who glibly refers to himself
Speaker 1: as a theocratic fascist, And in cases like this, when
Speaker 1: they tell you who they are, you should fuck believe them.
Speaker 1: Like the first bit of that clip is like pretty bad,
Speaker 1: very very clearly fascistic, Like it's it's checking all of
Speaker 1: the boxes. But then I'm going to continue on to
Speaker 1: the second part of this clip, and it is incredibly chilling.
Speaker 1: Can we point out about how his poor choice and
Speaker 1: plaid is also degrading too masculinity. Really, he is the
Speaker 1: greatest threat to masculine right now because of his plaid choice.
Speaker 1: Eradication of gender ideology. Total defeat is the only option
Speaker 1: because there's no compromise with it. There's no living side
Speaker 1: by side with it, there's no finding common ground. The
Speaker 1: gender ideologue wants to destroy your culture and your children.
Speaker 1: You will either rise up against it or lose everything
Speaker 1: to it. We're so fucked, it's so Nazzi, Like, yeah, quote,
Speaker 1: total defeat is the only option. The gender ideologue wants
Speaker 1: to destroy your culture and your children. Like that is
Speaker 1: less than a stones throw away from we must have
Speaker 1: secured the existence of our people in a future white children.
Speaker 1: It's right there. It's like, it's so it's so clear.
Speaker 1: I think there's like a tiny grain of truth in it,
Speaker 1: which is that like they are very very very close
Speaker 1: to like permanently losing the battle over whether the trans
Speaker 1: people could exist. And that's why they're doing this, right,
Speaker 1: because like the only like like like so support for
Speaker 1: trans people getting healthcare is like sixty is at like
Speaker 1: sixty percent, right, The only thing they have left is
Speaker 1: just straight up genocide because if they don't fucking kill
Speaker 1: us all now, right, and they don't right now act
Speaker 1: to make it impossible for future trans people to be trans, right,
Speaker 1: they are going to lose. And I will talk about
Speaker 1: this towards the end of the episode. This is kind
Speaker 1: of part of my thesis on this, and this is
Speaker 1: something that Michael Knowles himself actually admits. In one of
Speaker 1: Michael Knowles's first shows after Sepack, he suggests that eradicating
Speaker 1: transgenderism would be a simple matter of returning to the
Speaker 1: state of Affairs in twenty fifteen to eradicate transgender is
Speaker 1: from public life. And it's a good question. I'm glad
Speaker 1: people are talking about that. That was the point of
Speaker 1: my speech. What would it mean to eradicate the preposterous
Speaker 1: ideology of transgenderism from public life at every level? Put
Speaker 1: simply eradicating transgenderism from public life would mean behaving as
Speaker 1: American society did before, say twenty fifteen. Before Round twenty fifteen,
Speaker 1: we did not have any acceptance of transgenderism in public life. Also,
Speaker 1: in just like a grim moment of surality, in the
Speaker 1: middle of that clip, Knowles does an adder read for
Speaker 1: a company called Rabbit Air, which is an air purifier
Speaker 1: company who has an office in Pasadena, California. She's fu oh.
Speaker 1: Knowles goes on to blame Obama for leading this wave
Speaker 1: of trans end's acceptance in public life. Now, this whole
Speaker 1: twenty fifteen thing is very funny to me because in
Speaker 1: a lot of ways it was actually kind of easier
Speaker 1: to be trans and twenty fifteen what it is right now.
Speaker 1: But I and I think that this is mostly that
Speaker 1: like for conservatives, it's mostly that young trans people are
Speaker 1: simply more visible now, mostly due to things like TikTok.
Speaker 1: Like there's just there's a more visible presence of trans
Speaker 1: joy and trans people living, and that is angering conservatives.
Speaker 1: So they think it's is like some new recent thing.
Speaker 1: And because Michael Knowles did an ad break for Rabbit Air,
Speaker 1: who again has an office in Pasadena, California, I too,
Speaker 1: am going to do an ad break for our fine sponsors,
Speaker 1: all right, and we're back we are. We are almost done.
Speaker 1: I only have like one or two more clips to show.
Speaker 1: I like the ad for Rabbit Air that just played
Speaker 1: fuck off. So in Michael knowles case, I think he
Speaker 1: isn't even primary early against just like trans equality, he
Speaker 1: is against modernity. Now, when I say modernity, I'm not
Speaker 1: referring to like industrial civilization. It's many consequences for humans
Speaker 1: and the planet at large. Right wing antimodernism is very
Speaker 1: different than like anarchist ANTISTI of ideas. This idea of
Speaker 1: modernism isn't really tied to industrial developments. It's more linked
Speaker 1: to a psycho spiritual antagonism against modern social progress. It's
Speaker 1: more akin to the esoteric super fascist Julius Vola's idea
Speaker 1: of like revolt against the modern world and how liberalism
Speaker 1: is like a plague against moral society and causing maths degeneracy.
Speaker 1: Michael knowles own Twitter bio reads quote, I am completely
Speaker 1: opposed to the error of the modernists. Again, when these
Speaker 1: people tell tell you who they are, you have to
Speaker 1: believe them. Just this week, during a speech at the
Speaker 1: University of Buffalo, Knowles laid out a plan to attack
Speaker 1: quote the illogic of so called gay marriage, the rights
Speaker 1: to fornication, and the feminists who loosened divorce laws. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think it's I think it's worth pointing out here, right.
Speaker 1: I think I think the actual reason why twenty fifteen
Speaker 1: is the year that he picked out of his head
Speaker 1: is at twenty fifteen is the year that game that
Speaker 1: game marriage is legalized by the Supreme Court. Sure, so
Speaker 1: like that that like ninety nine percent chats that he
Speaker 1: means like twenty fifteen before game marriage is the thing
Speaker 1: that he wants to go back to. But here's here's
Speaker 1: a here's a clip of him talking about how conservatives
Speaker 1: have continued to lose the battleground at a whole bunch
Speaker 1: of topics, and how he's going to try to win
Speaker 1: them back. Now, even many conservatives accept so called gay marriage,
Speaker 1: and they have to. They have to accept gay marriage
Speaker 1: if they accept the illogic of the Sexual Revolution, which
Speaker 1: held that all sexual relations are fine and dandy so
Speaker 1: long as they're consensual. After the Sexual Revolution, the only
Speaker 1: test for sexual ethics became if it feels good, do it.
Speaker 1: For most of American history, nobody believed that too. For
Speaker 1: most of American history, there were all sorts of laws
Speaker 1: against certain sexual behaviors. There were famously laws against sodomy,
Speaker 1: but there were lots of other laws as well, laws
Speaker 1: against fornication, laws against adultery, laws against plenty of other
Speaker 1: destructive sexual behaviors. Those laws were on the books as
Speaker 1: recently as two thousand and three, when liberals on the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court discovered in the Constitution some sort of right
Speaker 1: to all of those things. He wants all these things
Speaker 1: to become illegal again, that is his political project. And
Speaker 1: to quote airy dren end quote, none of this is
Speaker 1: a theoretical exercise. After banning drag or gender if I
Speaker 1: may care for minors, the Tennessee House yesterday passed a
Speaker 1: bill that would allow local officials to refuse same sex, interfaith,
Speaker 1: or interracial marriages ute. Now. Last year we titled some
Speaker 1: of our episodes that cover this wave of anti trans
Speaker 1: attacks quote like the War on trans people unquote and
Speaker 1: even like considering the origin of this podcast, I am
Speaker 1: often hesitant to entertain fantasies of actual civil conflict in
Speaker 1: the United States, but in this case, like they are
Speaker 1: the ones who are killing us and trying to make
Speaker 1: our very existence illegal. It is them who has initiated
Speaker 1: this type of militant language. The last clip I have
Speaker 1: here is of Matt Walsh talking about just that we
Speaker 1: aren't even remotely done. Okay, this is honestly only the beginning.
Speaker 1: We've got a lot more in store for you. I
Speaker 1: promised you a year ago that we were going to
Speaker 1: war here, and I kept that promise. I'll keep this
Speaker 1: one too. There's much more to be done, that needs
Speaker 1: to be done, and we aim to do it. So
Speaker 1: the battle continues, whether you like it or not. The
Speaker 1: battle continues. So a few days ago, the Governor of
Speaker 1: Mississippi brought Matt Walsh to speak during an official press
Speaker 1: conference about the signing of House Bill one one two five,
Speaker 1: banning gender affirming healthcare for minors. The presidence of Matt
Speaker 1: Walsh at a State of Mississippi official press conference is
Speaker 1: a clear example of fascism being inserted into the governmental process. Um,
Speaker 1: and speaking of bills, I'm going to hand this over
Speaker 1: to Mia to now talk about some of the legislative stuff. Yay, yeah, wow,
Speaker 1: So this is going to be a long one, I'm sorry, folks. Yeah. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: the the list of ways in which they are trying
Speaker 1: to kill us as long. So yeah, this is this
Speaker 1: is the inevitable result of that. In one of the
Speaker 1: very early clips, right, I think I can't remember which
Speaker 1: one it was, one of the maybe it was Kennis
Speaker 1: Owen has talked about like our publicist at Media Matters, right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: And I think, you know, I think there is in
Speaker 1: a lot of cases, I think there's a lot of
Speaker 1: merit and not like covering this ship when it's tifically
Speaker 1: people like like very specific. You know Alex Jones does this, right, Well,
Speaker 1: he'll say something like specifically incredibly inflammatory is a way
Speaker 1: to start of get media attention to him. Yeah, But
Speaker 1: in this case, we can't fucking do that because all
Speaker 1: of the policy proposals that these people want are getting
Speaker 1: actually fucking implemented. So here here's from the Human Rights
Speaker 1: Campaign about how bad things have gotten. Less than two
Speaker 1: months into twenty twenty three, Human Rights Campaign is already
Speaker 1: tracking three hundred and forty anti LGBTQ bills that have
Speaker 1: been introduced in statehouses across the country. I think four hundred.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, it's this, Yeah, I was gonna get this.
Speaker 1: So those numbers are from early Those numbers are from
Speaker 1: early February, right or mid February now, yeah, it's something
Speaker 1: like over four hundred. It's really hard to get actual
Speaker 1: totals because there are so fucking many of them. One
Speaker 1: hundred and fifty of those would specifically restrict the rights
Speaker 1: of transgender people, the highest number of bills targeting transgender
Speaker 1: people in a single year to date. They also note,
Speaker 1: as everyone else does, every single successive year breaks the
Speaker 1: record for the most number of bills targeting people. Um. Yeah,
Speaker 1: those numbers are already out of date. And okay, So
Speaker 1: on the one hands, right there, there are there are
Speaker 1: real problems with projects that just track the raw number
Speaker 1: of bills, and you know, okay, on the one hands,
Speaker 1: the world like the raw numbers are I think a
Speaker 1: good way of actually getting people to sort of understand
Speaker 1: like the level of threat that is happening, like just
Speaker 1: sort of just sort of the raw magnitude of the threats.
Speaker 1: On the other hands, okay, it's kind of misleading in
Speaker 1: the sense that almost all these bills are going to
Speaker 1: fail because most of these most most and this is
Speaker 1: the incredible important thing here, most but not all, most
Speaker 1: of these bills are made by just random state lawmakers
Speaker 1: and no political backing. And this allows organizations you know,
Speaker 1: sort of like like a lot of the nonprofit groups
Speaker 1: who who work in these sort of legislative spaces to
Speaker 1: like claim credit for defeating like ninety percent of the bills,
Speaker 1: and it's like, well, no, like most of those, like
Speaker 1: almost none of them we're ever going to pass in
Speaker 1: the first place. And the second thing that it does
Speaker 1: is it puts this sort of cloud out, which makes
Speaker 1: it really really difficult. You know, if you're just being if,
Speaker 1: if you're if you're trying to follow right the sort
Speaker 1: of legislative process here, it gets very very hard because
Speaker 1: it's it's very difficult to sort out which bills have
Speaker 1: any chance of passing in which ones are just some
Speaker 1: random dipshit like first term like I don't know, some
Speaker 1: some some like first term lawmaker from like a part
Speaker 1: of Mississippi that is two lawmakers right like. But so my, my,
Speaker 1: my solution to this is we're going to run through
Speaker 1: the bills had ever already been passed. Um, I guess
Speaker 1: we should just start in Mississippi because we've sort of
Speaker 1: already talked about, Yeah, Governor Tate Reeves inviting that wallshing
Speaker 1: of a speech at the bill signing ceremony. So in Mississippi,
Speaker 1: a law was passed called the reap Act, which you know,
Speaker 1: that's that's great. It's a that's that that tells you
Speaker 1: exactly what they fucking I mean by this. This is
Speaker 1: a bill that bands and this this is a very
Speaker 1: very common pattern for bills. Um. It bans miners from
Speaker 1: getting hormones, from getting any kind of gender affirming surgery,
Speaker 1: and blocks anyone from getting puberty blockers. We've said this before,
Speaker 1: We'll say it again. All of this stuff is good.
Speaker 1: Kids should be able to get these things. Kids should
Speaker 1: be able to get these things easier. They they just
Speaker 1: unfathomably improve the lives of the child to get them.
Speaker 1: All of the data supports this notion. This has been
Speaker 1: normalized for literally decades. Yeah, and I mean puberty blockers
Speaker 1: in particular is one of the things that's become the
Speaker 1: focus of like, oh, it's not safe. It's like puberty
Speaker 1: blockers were the compromise position, right, And this is something
Speaker 1: that I think has been lost in a lot of
Speaker 1: debate about this, because you know, we've gotten to the
Speaker 1: point where everything is being banned, but puberty blockers, you know,
Speaker 1: we're a compromise position because you could give people puberty
Speaker 1: blockers without like actually giving trans kids to hormones that
Speaker 1: they need, and even that, you know, we're at a
Speaker 1: point where stare full on banning kids from getting them.
Speaker 1: This sucks, It's awful. It is killing trans kids. Um.
Speaker 1: Mississippi also has a band. One of the other things
Speaker 1: about this specific one and not not all the states
Speaker 1: are doing it do this, but the specific bill also
Speaker 1: bans state money from going to any institution that practices
Speaker 1: like does like gender form for minors. They also have
Speaker 1: an anti sports law, so you can, you know, you
Speaker 1: can see the sort of like how how the dominoes
Speaker 1: went down in terms of, like, I sorry, you can
Speaker 1: see how the dominoes fell down in terms of where
Speaker 1: it started and where it was going right for at
Speaker 1: first you get your anti bathroom long and then you
Speaker 1: you get your sort of like keep trans people out
Speaker 1: of sports, and then the yeah, yeah, so I will
Speaker 1: also has a band that's you know, but basically identical
Speaker 1: identical ban on hormone, gender firming surgery and puberty blockers.
Speaker 1: They also passed to build bands trans kids from using
Speaker 1: bathrooms and locker rooms according to their gender and elementary,
Speaker 1: middle and high schools and I want to talk a
Speaker 1: little bit about this, because this is going to lead
Speaker 1: to kids getting fucking raped, because it turns out if
Speaker 1: you force a trans girl into a men's locker room,
Speaker 1: things are going to go real fucking bad for them.
Speaker 1: They don't give a shit about this, right, They simply
Speaker 1: do not care. Um. But that's you know that that
Speaker 1: that's that that that's the actual substantive results. Um. I
Speaker 1: will also pass. I've seen it variously refers to as
Speaker 1: like I don't say trans or like I don't say
Speaker 1: LGBTQ plus bill. This is a bill that prohibits teachers
Speaker 1: who teach either from kindergarteners through sixth grade from teaching
Speaker 1: about transniss like at all. You can't teach about gender.
Speaker 1: You can't teach about like sex. You can't teach about
Speaker 1: you know, you can't teach about the fact that you can,
Speaker 1: in fact change your gender and it's good and cool. Um.
Speaker 1: The Human Rights Campaign says quote. This bill would also
Speaker 1: prohibit schools from providing to refer me accommodations for transgender
Speaker 1: students without parental consent, and would require school staff to
Speaker 1: out transgender students. Um. So I read this bill and
Speaker 1: it's not clear to me how it requires that. But
Speaker 1: that's what the lawyers are saying, and I'm not a lawyer,
Speaker 1: so it may or may not require that. This is
Speaker 1: another thing, very specifically, this isn't everything that that that's
Speaker 1: been happening in the sort of newer waves of these
Speaker 1: laws are laws that specifically require school counselors, teachers, and
Speaker 1: school staff to out their kids, like to out kids
Speaker 1: to their parents, which is unbelievably dangerous. Un in the
Speaker 1: last few years alone, there have been a bunch of
Speaker 1: trans people who are just killed by their parents. And
Speaker 1: you know, forcibly adding people is like you're you're you're
Speaker 1: exposing them to the risk of abuse, You're exposing them
Speaker 1: to the risk of unsafe housing environments. No, it's just
Speaker 1: a little soft whack by your grandma, I remember, just
Speaker 1: a little a little tap on the head. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I was gonna fucking beat you to death. So these
Speaker 1: bills in Iowa have been and passed by the House
Speaker 1: in the Senate and they're just like they're just like
Speaker 1: sitting on a desk winning for the government to sign them,
Speaker 1: and the governor's going to so yeah, that's that's the
Speaker 1: situation Iowa. In Arkansas, you have the hormone puberty blockers,
Speaker 1: gender firming surgery ban. The Arkansas one is on hold
Speaker 1: because you know, and this is a this is true
Speaker 1: for a couple of these, is that people have done
Speaker 1: legal challenges on it. And yeah, our Arkansas particulars had
Speaker 1: a huge legal fight. We still don't know how that's
Speaker 1: I mean, the legal fights are going on for like
Speaker 1: a year. We still haven't gotten ruling on it yet.
Speaker 1: They also have a ban on transgids competing in sports.
Speaker 1: Alabama made it a Class C felony punishable by up
Speaker 1: to a decade in prison. To give trench gender kids hormones,
Speaker 1: puberty blockers, gender affirming surgery. This was also interesting because
Speaker 1: it's the only built so most of these ones when
Speaker 1: they do when they say minors, right, it's until you're eighteen.
Speaker 1: You can't get it for whatever reason. Alabama. It also
Speaker 1: bans eighteen year olds from getting any of these things.
Speaker 1: You just have to be nineteen. Yeah. Part part of
Speaker 1: the bill, you know about hormone blockers, So okay, So
Speaker 1: specifically the part of the parts of this bill that
Speaker 1: are about hormones and hormone blockers are on hold pending
Speaker 1: sort of resolution to legal challenges, but the judge was like,
Speaker 1: fuck it, you can do the surgery band. So that sucks.
Speaker 1: Um Alabama also has bills that you know, have the
Speaker 1: whole trans kids in schools can't use the right bathroom
Speaker 1: and you know, teachers, counselors and other school officials have
Speaker 1: to out them. They also have another Dosa trans bill
Speaker 1: that does a very similar thing about bands teachers from
Speaker 1: talking about transit until fifth grade. I think a lot
Speaker 1: of these bills are written by like lobbying groups who
Speaker 1: just and paced the same thing and see a whole
Speaker 1: bunch of different states. I will say there are weird
Speaker 1: differences in them, like so you'll see like different completely
Speaker 1: scatter shot like definitions of what hormones are, or like
Speaker 1: like some somebody's bills trying to find what a woman is.
Speaker 1: And it's very funny because they have to like do
Speaker 1: all this weird stuff about like like clusters of like chromosomes,
Speaker 1: but also there's like chromosomal diseases, Like you can't do this,
Speaker 1: like a fuck off. It's it's so funny. We should
Speaker 1: also mention that, like there will be more reporting on
Speaker 1: this later. This bill. This episode is already too long,
Speaker 1: but there have been a bunch of emails released from
Speaker 1: a bunch of anti trans sort of organizers and fake
Speaker 1: scientists and stuff about how they've been coordinating all of this,
Speaker 1: and a lot of the experts that they use for
Speaker 1: testimony for all they show up to these capitals are
Speaker 1: like are exactly the same people. And the big guy
Speaker 1: they have saying that puberty blockers is unsafe like has
Speaker 1: never worked with a trans person in their life and
Speaker 1: has no fucking idea what they're talking about. So you know,
Speaker 1: this is this is this is fun Utah also bands
Speaker 1: also passed a band banning gender affirming surgeries, puberty blockers,
Speaker 1: and hormones. They also have a band I also have
Speaker 1: a bill forcing students and counselors to out their students
Speaker 1: to their families. Last year, you take Governor Spencer Cox
Speaker 1: was praised by the media for a symbolic veto of
Speaker 1: a bill that made it illegal for trans students to
Speaker 1: compete in sports. Cox signed this fucking bill, signed, signed,
Speaker 1: the one signed, the one that bands of gender affirming surgeries,
Speaker 1: beauty blockers, and hormones. Yeah. I think we talked about
Speaker 1: this last year. Yeah, I want to we had we
Speaker 1: talked about some Utah thing last Yeah, well we talked. Yeah,
Speaker 1: the thing we talked about was him vetoing that bill. Um,
Speaker 1: I want to read his thing for why why he packed?
Speaker 1: Why so he vetoed the bill that was less bad
Speaker 1: and signed the one that's worse. And I'm gonna read
Speaker 1: what he said about this quote. Well, we understand our
Speaker 1: words will be of little comfort to those who disagree
Speaker 1: with us. We sincerely hope that we can treat our
Speaker 1: transgender families with more love and respect as we work
Speaker 1: to better understand the science and consequences behind these procedures.
Speaker 1: Fuck off, Fuck all the way off. He's trying to
Speaker 1: avoid the Nurembug trials. Look As a as a neutral
Speaker 1: objective journalist, I'm obligated to inform me that Spencer Cox
Speaker 1: was a full time missionary from the Mormon Church, which
Speaker 1: is currently embroiled in a pedophilius gandal. Lefter is revealed
Speaker 1: to have systematically protected church members and members of the
Speaker 1: clergy who sexually abused children from church sanctions and legal repercussions.
Speaker 1: Under Utah law, clergy have the right of penitent privilege,
Speaker 1: which means they are not required to report child abuse
Speaker 1: to the authorities as long as the information is revealed
Speaker 1: during confession. Both the Mormon and Catholic churches, along with
Speaker 1: Jehovah's witnesses, have lobbied against all efforts have changed this law.
Speaker 1: Earlier this month, survivors of the Mormon Church rallied in
Speaker 1: support of a bill that would have ended penitent privilege.
Speaker 1: Governor Cox publicly announced his support for the bill being
Speaker 1: considered in the legislature, but did nothing to pressure legislators
Speaker 1: to vote for and as of time of recording, the
Speaker 1: bill is dead, leaving the church free to protect yet
Speaker 1: another route of pedophiles. Also, his name is Cox. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so South Dakota also, I did I could do this
Speaker 1: for every fucking governor on this list, and I decided
Speaker 1: I was going to do it once and not do
Speaker 1: it for all the rest of them, but fuck them.
Speaker 1: South Dakota has a sports bill. They also have a
Speaker 1: ban on puberty blockers, hormones, genderate firming surgery. Arizona has
Speaker 1: an anti bathroom bill. Tennessee has a sports ban. It
Speaker 1: has the basically identical ban on puberty blockers, hormones, and
Speaker 1: gender firming surgery, and it also has this. It also
Speaker 1: has what's been kind of a new innovation. I guess
Speaker 1: which is the anti they have an anti drag law. Yes,
Speaker 1: this is the one that's gotten the most amount attraction
Speaker 1: and has sparked some debate over how much of it
Speaker 1: can actually be applied against just trans people living their
Speaker 1: lives because it is tied to the state's pre existing
Speaker 1: obscenity laws. So there's been some debate about this. We will,
Speaker 1: we will. We will learn more about this as it
Speaker 1: starts being enforced by law enforcement and the court system. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I want to talk about it. It's not good. Like, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I want to talk about it a little bit more
Speaker 1: so the specific bill it makes it illegal for anyone
Speaker 1: to be underage and a drag show. And you know,
Speaker 1: it basically applies like the rules around the sex offender
Speaker 1: list for where you can have drag shows. So Governor
Speaker 1: William Brian Lee, who signed this bill did drag in
Speaker 1: high school, which I'm saying. No, I'm saying here not
Speaker 1: to point out the hypocrisy, like Governor Lee doesn't see
Speaker 1: anything any hypocrisy here, but to get across the fact
Speaker 1: the Republicans who want to do this stuff will still
Speaker 1: be able to. This bill will targeted a very very
Speaker 1: specific group of people. As Jules gil Peterson points out
Speaker 1: in your piece the left Hand to the Law, which
Speaker 1: people should go read, this is an attack on a
Speaker 1: very specific, precarious class of workers, many of whom are trans,
Speaker 1: some of whom aren't, who do drag performances. This is
Speaker 1: this is it's it's a very specific attempt to sort
Speaker 1: of like neutralize, Okay, it's targeting this very specific middle
Speaker 1: ground between sort of like being in the formal economy
Speaker 1: and do sex work. They're an enormous amount of trans
Speaker 1: people who do sex work. Drag shows provide a way
Speaker 1: to sort of like not exactly enter the middle class,
Speaker 1: but it provides a legal way for trans people to
Speaker 1: like have a job that's not fucking that and those
Speaker 1: and those workers are specifically the people being targeted by this. Weirdly,
Speaker 1: I don't know. The other thing that's unclear is, for example,
Speaker 1: like if a podcast does a live show where there's
Speaker 1: trans people, like, what will happen? We don't know. But
Speaker 1: the other thing I want to say about this, right
Speaker 1: is everyone's talking about this fucking drag bill. I have
Speaker 1: seen like basically zero discussion of the of the fact
Speaker 1: that they also past the same fucking ban on puberty blockers, tormones,
Speaker 1: and gender affirming surgery, which is way way more destructive
Speaker 1: and damaging. It's like but directly attacking. Yeah, so I
Speaker 1: think I want to push back about the like, yeah,
Speaker 1: like what you're talking about about, like what will happen
Speaker 1: if you do a live show? Like what will happen?
Speaker 1: Because to trans people who live in these states. The
Speaker 1: state I live in as a red state, well it's
Speaker 1: not supposed to be, but as a red state, and
Speaker 1: you know, is considering a drag bill and things like that.
Speaker 1: And I recognize that they're like aimed, they're targeted specifically
Speaker 1: at drag performances, but there's a fairly easy interpretation of
Speaker 1: a lot of these things that literally says I can't
Speaker 1: go to the grocery store. And that is how like
Speaker 1: a lot of trans people in Tennessee are viewing this
Speaker 1: right now. And so I don't think it's a disproportionate
Speaker 1: thing that the drag bill is something that a lot
Speaker 1: of people are focusing on. I mean, we all care
Speaker 1: also about the hormone issues or whatever, but the Tennessee
Speaker 1: passing the drag law that other states are considering is
Speaker 1: a new bad thing that could criminalize our very public existence. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that is part of the kind of discussion around this
Speaker 1: laws ties to the pre existing obscenity laws, and that
Speaker 1: will heavily depend on the discretion that law enforcement chooses
Speaker 1: to employ this law, and if it gets taken up
Speaker 1: to the court system, how the court's going to interpret
Speaker 1: this law. So it is like the vagueness is part
Speaker 1: of the point because that causes a lot of fear
Speaker 1: because you really just don't know what it all entails.
Speaker 1: And yeah, that's fucking weird because you don't know if
Speaker 1: you going to the store is going to be a
Speaker 1: felony or not, And how are you supposed to live
Speaker 1: like that? Yeah, and it I don't know. The sort
Speaker 1: of pervasive atmosphere of fear is definitely like part of
Speaker 1: the point of this, right, Like part of the way
Speaker 1: the sort of extermination campaign works is by forcing everyone
Speaker 1: to sort of live in fear of what they can
Speaker 1: and can't do, and also live in fear specifically of
Speaker 1: the police increasing the amount of violence that they're deploying. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, and all the stuff like we talked about,
Speaker 1: they're specifically targeting people's ability to exist in a public life,
Speaker 1: which is whenever you want to do a genocide, that's
Speaker 1: one of the things you do is you make people
Speaker 1: unable to exist in public life. This is literally what
Speaker 1: the Nazis did, right, Like you section them off into
Speaker 1: their own little communities where they cannot actually leave and
Speaker 1: enter into the outside world. Yep. So, so far as
Speaker 1: of writing this, there are seven states with bands on gender,
Speaker 1: firm and care for Youth. I was about to become
Speaker 1: number eight whenever the governor gets round as signing the bill.
Speaker 1: There are nineteen states that ban transathletes from competing. There
Speaker 1: are a number of states. Oh so other st forgot
Speaker 1: much So there's like literally while I was like, while
Speaker 1: I was like waiting to record this episode, there were
Speaker 1: a few things that happened in like the legislature. So
Speaker 1: in Florida, there was a bill that got just got
Speaker 1: out of committee that would ban LGBTQ books like in
Speaker 1: all libraries, not just sort of school libraries. So I
Speaker 1: don't know that that actually has a real chance of
Speaker 1: passing because it's Florida. There's a lot of movement right now.
Speaker 1: The situation is very very sort of fluid and bad. Yes, yeah,
Speaker 1: how I would say it it is, I think one
Speaker 1: closing note, I will save my kind of my ending
Speaker 1: thesis to start the next episode, just because we're going
Speaker 1: on so long here. But the last thing I will
Speaker 1: say is I be wary of social media accounts that
Speaker 1: depend on ramping up and spreading panic to grow their
Speaker 1: follower accounts. Typically news news aggregation accounts are not the
Speaker 1: best source of information because their existence is entirely dependent
Speaker 1: on causing panic. So like look into the things like
Speaker 1: beyond just a tweet, Like look into stuff before before
Speaker 1: you spread it, just as like a general rule of thumb.
Speaker 1: I'm not calling anybody out here in any way, I'm
Speaker 1: just saying it. It is a good practice to get into,
Speaker 1: especially when we're looking into stuff that is about our
Speaker 1: very existence being criminalized, and that can be very depressing
Speaker 1: and it can suck to be constantly bombarded with. So
Speaker 1: it's good to stayed to stuff that's going on in
Speaker 1: your own state. It's good to state connected to bills
Speaker 1: that have a decent trans of passing. But but be
Speaker 1: wary of of of of undo panic spreading just constantly, NonStop,
Speaker 1: because a big part of being trends needs to also
Speaker 1: be like finding joy in living Yeah, And I think
Speaker 1: I think the very last thing I want to say
Speaker 1: don't lead into this next episode is we're not fucking
Speaker 1: done yet. We are still here. We're going to continue
Speaker 1: to be here. We are going to kick these people's
Speaker 1: fucking shit in and we are going to fight them
Speaker 1: for every fucking inch and they are going to lose.
Speaker 1: And next episode is going to be us talking about
Speaker 1: how you can start doing that. Oh boy, welcome to
Speaker 1: It could happen here, and it sure do feel like
Speaker 1: it's happening, don't it. M thank for surviving that last long,
Speaker 1: excruciating episode full of basically just like a bunch of
Speaker 1: hate speech that we were trying to be like, Hey,
Speaker 1: doesn't this look like hate speech? This is bad. Maybe
Speaker 1: platforms like Spotify, YouTube other podcast hosting platforms that I
Speaker 1: am somehow forgetting the name of, but perhaps they shouldn't
Speaker 1: be hosting all of this Daily Wire content that is
Speaker 1: explicitly calling for genocide. Anyway, I think it is interesting
Speaker 1: what the Daily Wire is trying to do here because
Speaker 1: they obviously saw what is a woman? The documentary, the
Speaker 1: quote unquote documentary by Matt Walsh last year get incredible
Speaker 1: traction online and boost their subscription service. So now they're
Speaker 1: they're they're doubling dead on this because this is how
Speaker 1: they're gonna try to make content, and they are trying
Speaker 1: out as many rhetorical styles and arguments as possible just
Speaker 1: to see what sticks. Like it really feels like they're
Speaker 1: just doing like the shotgun method of like throwing every
Speaker 1: single possible reason that turns people are ikey up against
Speaker 1: the wall and seeing which one like catches on, like
Speaker 1: they're doing, they're doing a band and transgenderism entirely, what
Speaker 1: is a woman? Groomers? They can't be genocided because they
Speaker 1: don't exist. Attacking transgenderism as a cover for trans people. Right,
Speaker 1: So it's all these all these various various tactics, all
Speaker 1: these different rhetorical strategies, calling them demonic, it's it's it's
Speaker 1: it's very much trying to be like if we, if we,
Speaker 1: if we throw up as much stuff as possible attacking
Speaker 1: and demonizing trans people. Some of these trends will catch
Speaker 1: on online, right, some of these will will catch on,
Speaker 1: will be spread to legislators. Eventually something will stick. And
Speaker 1: that that is that is very much the tactic that
Speaker 1: they are trying to use. And I think this is
Speaker 1: a point I wanted to make last episode, but I
Speaker 1: think it's still it's it's it's useful to hear now
Speaker 1: kind of in retrospect everything all of the like extremism
Speaker 1: that you heard in in the last episode, all of
Speaker 1: these like very very fascist talking points. This is what
Speaker 1: conservatism is now, right, Like, this is the mainstream new right.
Speaker 1: Sure you can call it fascist because by definition it is,
Speaker 1: but sometimes that term fascist or fascism it carries with
Speaker 1: it this false sense of foreignness. It has like this,
Speaker 1: it has like this displacement in the time right. Most
Speaker 1: people view fascism as something that happens elsewhere or something
Speaker 1: that happened in the past. By by by just referring
Speaker 1: to this stuff as fascist, it creates a distance in
Speaker 1: people's minds. This this this like um exotic improbability. But
Speaker 1: this stuff is like the mainstream conservative platform that the
Speaker 1: up and coming leaders of the conservative movement are trying
Speaker 1: to normalize. That this was like the main talking point
Speaker 1: at CEPAC, which is like the biggest conservative convention in
Speaker 1: the entire country. It is this stuff is is what
Speaker 1: the conservative platform is now, and I think it is
Speaker 1: It is just as it's important to emphasize that this
Speaker 1: is what the modern conservative mainstream is, and it is
Speaker 1: it is. It is just as important to say that
Speaker 1: as it is to tie it and tie this rhetoric
Speaker 1: to the history of fascism, because the Overton window is
Speaker 1: certainly accelerating. Right, Like, this thing can both be heavily
Speaker 1: steeped in the history of fascist rhetoric and also be
Speaker 1: like the new up and coming version of the conservative
Speaker 1: right that the Daily Wire and its allies are trying
Speaker 1: to normalize. And I just think that is, that is
Speaker 1: something that I that I am trying to focus on
Speaker 1: a little bit more when I when I'm doing my
Speaker 1: writing and my research in these topics. Um is that
Speaker 1: we often will use terms like fascist because these things
Speaker 1: are are are pretty fascist, and I want to make
Speaker 1: sure that doesn't like create this false distance in people's
Speaker 1: in people's minds when they when they think about these bills,
Speaker 1: when they and when they think about this rhetoric. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and I and I think I think the way in
Speaker 1: which this is simply what the modern right is demands
Speaker 1: a different kind of response than a lot of what
Speaker 1: we've been seeing so far. Yeah, you can't simply try
Speaker 1: to catch them in their contradictions. You can't simply catch
Speaker 1: them in their hypocrisy. Every every tactic that liberals tried
Speaker 1: to use against Trump in the lead up to his election,
Speaker 1: and even Republicans try to use those tactics aren't going
Speaker 1: to be successful here because they weren't successful back then.
Speaker 1: Like you can't, you can't like outthink them in that
Speaker 1: in that way. Well, but the reason that you like
Speaker 1: when you when you call out, say the governor of
Speaker 1: Tennessee or lieutenant governor or whatever Tennessee for about his
Speaker 1: hypocrisy and how addressed and dragon stuff, it's not that.
Speaker 1: The thing that that does to defend it a little
Speaker 1: bit to that calling out is it doesn't make his supporters,
Speaker 1: It doesn't change his mind, It doesn't expose him as
Speaker 1: a hypocrite to his base, but it does expose him
Speaker 1: as a hypocrite to his enemies. UM, and I think
Speaker 1: it is worth understanding that are the people who have
Speaker 1: declared us their enemies. It's worth understanding that they are
Speaker 1: not like UM more worally consistent actors. You know, it
Speaker 1: is worth understanding that they don't believe the things they
Speaker 1: are saying. A lot of their base does. But so
Speaker 1: I actually do think that there is a point. Um,
Speaker 1: all of the shit talk on Trump or whatever. UM,
Speaker 1: I think might be part of how Trump didn't get
Speaker 1: elected again is because he as he got more and
Speaker 1: more defensive, he looked more and more ridiculous, not to
Speaker 1: his base, but to uh to the middle, which is
Speaker 1: basically the Democrats at this point. Yeah, it was able
Speaker 1: to recruit like a growing moderate oppositional force, which was
Speaker 1: what beat Trump. Trump was not beaten because people liked Biden.
Speaker 1: He was beaten because they didn't like Trump. And I
Speaker 1: think you are you are right in having that that
Speaker 1: is a point to focus on. Um. I think it's
Speaker 1: it's important to mention that like fascists do not believe
Speaker 1: in the absurdity of what they say, um, it is
Speaker 1: that that is not necessary to maintain fascism. Yeah, and
Speaker 1: I think I think so. The position we're at right
Speaker 1: now is a very very strange one for the left,
Speaker 1: which is that we're in a position where, you know,
Speaker 1: when when when the Republicans tried to run on this
Speaker 1: shit in in twenty twenty two, they got destroyed. Right,
Speaker 1: this is actually have mass popularity. This is what I
Speaker 1: wanted to talk about next I have this is this
Speaker 1: is the very last section I have written is on
Speaker 1: this topic, because yeah, this off putting focus on like
Speaker 1: a genocide and like the culture war stuff seemed to
Speaker 1: hurt conservatives in the last election cycle ended, and yet
Speaker 1: again there they are. They are still doubling down on it. Um.
Speaker 1: Voters in some of swing states were turned off by
Speaker 1: the focus on the regression of queer rights instead of
Speaker 1: like actually addressing material conditions. This strategy, though, is a
Speaker 1: core concept of the fascist project right. Instead of addressing
Speaker 1: material conditions under capitalism to improve people's lives, right wing
Speaker 1: populists will conjure up this culture war bilgie Man to
Speaker 1: blame all of like society's problems on and to to
Speaker 1: talk about the social war that is contributing to degeneracy.
Speaker 1: I also think that they're winning, unfortunately not winning in
Speaker 1: a broader sense, but in terms of um, yes, this
Speaker 1: is a very unpopular issue that they're doubling down on.
Speaker 1: But I think that, um, you know, I've I've seen
Speaker 1: studies where like a higher percentage of the US population
Speaker 1: supports anti trans stuff than did two years ago. It's
Speaker 1: still a minority thing to hate trans people, but it
Speaker 1: is a growing minority. Um. Yes, which is why, like
Speaker 1: we're talking about how in a lot of ways it's
Speaker 1: easier to be trans in twenty fifteen than it is now.
Speaker 1: Um And And kind of on that point, I'm going
Speaker 1: to play the very final clip of Michael Knowles. We
Speaker 1: will never have to hear his voice again, hopefully his
Speaker 1: annoying little voice. UM. But I'm I'm gonna play a
Speaker 1: bit of a longer clip from him. Um. And this
Speaker 1: is from his initial like band Transgenderism entire early rant.
Speaker 1: And I'm only going to play this because he actually
Speaker 1: makes a point that we ourselves have made before when
Speaker 1: discussing this topic. The conservative right is desperately trying to
Speaker 1: play catch up. Right, Us who believe in like liberation
Speaker 1: and freedom have been winning historically, and the rights getting
Speaker 1: very scared and desperate. So in response, they're introducing all
Speaker 1: of these bills, right, and they're accelerating these types of
Speaker 1: eliminationist rhetoric. But in this clip, Michael Knowles provides us
Speaker 1: with our pathway to victory. We cannot simply hold our
Speaker 1: ground on these issues. We have to keep pushing forward.
Speaker 1: Because as long as we keep going forward and get
Speaker 1: on the offense, the right will be stuck playing a
Speaker 1: catch up forever. And it reminds us of a truth
Speaker 1: and politics that Republicans all too often forget. You're either
Speaker 1: on offense or you're on defense. You're either making gains
Speaker 1: in the culture or you're losing ground in the culture.
Speaker 1: There's no standing still, there's no status quo, there's no neutrality.
Speaker 1: And what the Conservatives have screwed up on for at
Speaker 1: least fifty years now, probably more, is the Libs make
Speaker 1: some crazy aggressive play and then we try to dial
Speaker 1: it back by about five to ten percent, or worse,
Speaker 1: we try to slow it down by about five to
Speaker 1: ten percent. So the Libs attack the family through feminism,
Speaker 1: the fundamental political institution. They claim that men and women
Speaker 1: are basically the same. That takes the culture pretty far
Speaker 1: to the left. And then Conservatives try to try to
Speaker 1: inch it back a little bit, but not by the
Speaker 1: time they're even thinking about inching it back, the Libs
Speaker 1: push forward with the normalization of other sexual practices. They
Speaker 1: agree with this, and then by the time the Conservatives
Speaker 1: are trying to dial all that back, they've lurched much
Speaker 1: further to the left. They're trying to redefine marriage. Now
Speaker 1: they're saying redefine marriage. Well, I don't know. I guess
Speaker 1: we could come to some kind of terms with a
Speaker 1: civil union. And by the time you say that, they've
Speaker 1: lurched even further to the left. Now they're saying, actually,
Speaker 1: we've got transgenderism. She Now a man can become a woman,
Speaker 1: a man can become a woman. Okay, but but maybe
Speaker 1: we shouldn't do it till mind. By the time we
Speaker 1: say that, oh my gosh, we're now we're all the
Speaker 1: way off the screen because now they're trying to train
Speaker 1: as the kids. And there are many conservatives never were saying, Look,
Speaker 1: if you want, if you're a man and you want
Speaker 1: to put on address, that's fine, but just don't do
Speaker 1: it to children. Just don't make me pay for it. No,
Speaker 1: that is such an interesting little cliff. No, I mean
Speaker 1: it's funny because this is like kind of this is
Speaker 1: what I've been saying for a long time, since about
Speaker 1: twenty fifteen or so, like looking at the rise all
Speaker 1: this shit and you know, Trump and all that is
Speaker 1: that we were winning. Culturally, I hate the word culture
Speaker 1: war now means something different. It means arguing about guns
Speaker 1: or whatever. But like we were winning on a cultural
Speaker 1: front very dramatically, and like I would point to Stephen
Speaker 1: Universe as the evidence that we are winning, right, you know.
Speaker 1: And then they basically had to play to their strengths.
Speaker 1: And he's talking about He's like, look, the it's funny
Speaker 1: that so much this is happening on a cultural front
Speaker 1: because it is not a conservative strength. They have some
Speaker 1: cards in their hand when it comes to cultural stuff,
Speaker 1: you know, the antimidarity stuff when it does weird, anti semitic,
Speaker 1: you know, almost anti capitalism or whatever. That's like a
Speaker 1: strong card they like pulling out all the time. But
Speaker 1: conservatives overall are not very good at the cultural thing.
Speaker 1: But they're good at is politics and violence. And so
Speaker 1: they're playing to their immediate strengths as hard and fast
Speaker 1: as they can because they're on their back foot. Yeah, no,
Speaker 1: they are. They they're defaulting to advocating physical violence and
Speaker 1: enforcing their worldview with violence and advocate and doing stuff
Speaker 1: on like the political legislative front because they've realized just
Speaker 1: screaming about transpeople isn't enough. They have to actually start
Speaker 1: dedicating millions and millions and millions of dollars to pushing
Speaker 1: these through state legislative cycles, which is why The Daily
Speaker 1: Wire has su spent the past month and a half
Speaker 1: harping on this so hard as the legislative cycle for
Speaker 1: twenty twenty three is starting to like ramp up. Yeah,
Speaker 1: And I think there's another thing here, which is the
Speaker 1: sort of fundamental disparity, you know, the fact that they've
Speaker 1: chosen this front, right, there's a fundamental disparity in what
Speaker 1: they have to do versus what we have to do. Right,
Speaker 1: and and this this, this is a giant sort of
Speaker 1: shift in a way that I don't think has we
Speaker 1: don't I don't think the left really has much experience
Speaker 1: with right, which is like, the thing that is happening
Speaker 1: in the US right now is that we are the
Speaker 1: silent majority, Like this is this is true when when
Speaker 1: like consistently over and over again, when you when you
Speaker 1: look at polling on these issues, right, like just regular
Speaker 1: people are like, what the fuck are you guys doing? Right?
Speaker 1: The problem is that you know, we haven't those people
Speaker 1: haven't been mobilized. And you know, it doesn't matter if
Speaker 1: you're a majority as long as these sort of like
Speaker 1: you know, because because again, like who the actual majority
Speaker 1: is in the us or like who actually what what
Speaker 1: what actual regular people believe has very very little impact
Speaker 1: on the kinds of policies that are that are that
Speaker 1: are sort of enacted. But you know, but there's a
Speaker 1: second sort of issue here, right, which is the conservatives
Speaker 1: have like, because of the fact that we are, right now,
Speaker 1: the sort of silent majority that we have a kind
Speaker 1: of I guess you know, the gramsyan thing would be
Speaker 1: like hegemony, right, but like we have we have an
Speaker 1: advantage in just how average people behave. Right, they have
Speaker 1: to kill us, they have to fucking kill us. They
Speaker 1: have to make it illegal for us to exist, and
Speaker 1: they could do this right there, there is a there
Speaker 1: is a real there is a real possibility that they
Speaker 1: can win. Right. They are winning on this rent right now.
Speaker 1: This is this is what they are you know, in
Speaker 1: the places where they have power. This is what they
Speaker 1: are doing. All we really have to do is survive.
Speaker 1: Because if if we survive and we're able to stop them,
Speaker 1: you know, I mean, even if we don't get sort
Speaker 1: of like Argentina style, like we're gonna have like like
Speaker 1: hiring mandates for trans people, right, Like, even if we
Speaker 1: just hold the ground that we already have, we will
Speaker 1: win inevitably, right, like the sort of march of where
Speaker 1: of where the culture has been going will favor us.
Speaker 1: Trans people will be able to sort of exist in public.
Speaker 1: Trans people will be able to survive unless they kill
Speaker 1: us right now. And that's that's that's sort of that's
Speaker 1: the sort of the key thing that that Knowles has realized, right,
Speaker 1: is that this is the critical moments where either we
Speaker 1: win and we interns people get to continue our lives,
Speaker 1: or they kill us. I would argue that it's not
Speaker 1: just kill us. I think that even though we're listening
Speaker 1: to all this exterminationist rhetoric, I think that the odds
Speaker 1: are that most of these people don't actually envision a
Speaker 1: future where they're like rounding us up and putting us
Speaker 1: in camps and gassing us. I think that overall, it's
Speaker 1: a drive back into the closet. I actually I actually
Speaker 1: take them at their word that they want to destroy transgenderism,
Speaker 1: and if transgender people have to die along the way,
Speaker 1: that's on us. But if we, you know, put on
Speaker 1: appropriate clothing and shut the fuck up, like, I actually
Speaker 1: think that that would suit them just fine. So I
Speaker 1: actually think they have to kill transgenderism. I think that's
Speaker 1: true now, but I don't know how true that is
Speaker 1: as they keep actually having to implement there. They don't
Speaker 1: think being trans actually exists though, right like they they
Speaker 1: think it just is people doing these things. So as
Speaker 1: long as trans people are able to, for one, maybe
Speaker 1: even not even realize their trans to like repress that
Speaker 1: and just live their lives as if they were as
Speaker 1: this person, that that that is all that that that's
Speaker 1: what conservatives think trans people already are. And I think
Speaker 1: that that is a large part. That is a large
Speaker 1: large part of it is making us just not able
Speaker 1: to be trans in public life at all in any capacity.
Speaker 1: I think that's true, but I don't. I don't think
Speaker 1: they can. I don't think their political path allows them
Speaker 1: to maintain that position. Like I don't. I don't think
Speaker 1: they can, Like I like, you know what, one of
Speaker 1: one of the things that's happening with with right right
Speaker 1: now is they're they're they're they're doing those feedback right
Speaker 1: where they get you know, like like where where they're
Speaker 1: they're sort of media people right or are continuously radicalized
Speaker 1: by their base, and their base radicalizes them back. And
Speaker 1: I don't I don't think they can maintain an equlibrium
Speaker 1: position that doesn't involve like we have to hunt all
Speaker 1: these people down to make sure they don't go after
Speaker 1: our kids. Like I know, I don't don't think they're
Speaker 1: gonna I don't think they're doing that now. I don't
Speaker 1: think they're planning that now. But it's it's I don't
Speaker 1: know how they can keep up this cycle without eventually
Speaker 1: getting to something like that. Well it's worth, it's worth
Speaker 1: being prepared for that type of possibility. But the kind
Speaker 1: of thing that I feel like, really strongly about with
Speaker 1: all of this is to like really not like the
Speaker 1: sky is falling, but it's not falling the way that
Speaker 1: we sometimes say it is. And and when we say
Speaker 1: this guy is falling in a way that people look
Speaker 1: around they're like, oh, just know how this guy is
Speaker 1: falling to me, then people get like, well, actually, I
Speaker 1: think you all are being hyperbolic, right, yes, And and
Speaker 1: so I think that we do need to be really
Speaker 1: clear that they are open to the possibility of mass
Speaker 1: murdering us, and they are actively discussing individual acts of
Speaker 1: violence being very justified against us. But currently I believe
Speaker 1: the thing that they are trying to do is eradicate
Speaker 1: the concept of being trans as a thing you can
Speaker 1: do in American society. And of course, like there's a
Speaker 1: lot of people who believe in death before detransition, and
Speaker 1: all fucking power to I don't even know where I
Speaker 1: fall in all this shit. I'm not trying to. I
Speaker 1: literally don't want to opine about it because I don't
Speaker 1: want to give anyone. I don't want to tell anyone
Speaker 1: to do about that shit. Right, Everyone makes their own
Speaker 1: decisions about closeting not closeting based on their own positions,
Speaker 1: you know. But I think we do have to be
Speaker 1: like careful about it. And I think one of the
Speaker 1: reasons is because, from my point of view, they have
Speaker 1: picked trans people not because they care so much about us,
Speaker 1: but because we're a wedge issue. You know. We saw
Speaker 1: this in like actually I don't want to name them
Speaker 1: because I don't want to get or whatever, like different
Speaker 1: large coalitions of LGBT people were perfectly willing to drop
Speaker 1: the T twenty years ago if in order to get
Speaker 1: certain like equal rights ship passed. They just like straight
Speaker 1: up like trans people did all this fucking work organizing
Speaker 1: for this ship. As soon as it got to like
Speaker 1: higher up level in the government. They were like, oh,
Speaker 1: trans people, that's gonna be a problem. We're gonna take
Speaker 1: them off of their right and you know, and because
Speaker 1: we are a wedge issue, and we always have been,
Speaker 1: and I think the Nazis used us in a very
Speaker 1: similar way. But even within US, there's trans sorry, there's
Speaker 1: wedge issues within that. And so sports was the first
Speaker 1: wedge issue. I actually believe I was reading this earlier,
Speaker 1: but I wasn't reading it for this, so I didn't
Speaker 1: take notes. I believe that the majority of Americans do
Speaker 1: not believe that trans people should be able to compete
Speaker 1: in high school sports based on their preferred gender. I'm
Speaker 1: under the impression that is minority position to be trans
Speaker 1: supportive of trans athletes in school. And so that is
Speaker 1: the wedge issue that they used to open up this
Speaker 1: divide in order to then come at us. But we're
Speaker 1: still just a wedge issue. And one of the reasons
Speaker 1: I think it's so important for people to understand us
Speaker 1: as a wedge issue is so that people understand, like
Speaker 1: really clearly that they are not fucking stopping with us.
Speaker 1: You know, this is like absolutely about like you can
Speaker 1: hear it, and that guy talking because one of the
Speaker 1: other things he's talking about is he's talking about like
Speaker 1: women need to get back in the kitchen and be
Speaker 1: obedient to their husbands and shit. And one of the
Speaker 1: reasons that trans people scare them so much is because
Speaker 1: we like, like it's so funny because like largely, by
Speaker 1: and large, like trans men are left out of this
Speaker 1: discussion and trans women are seeing these like evil monsters
Speaker 1: or whatever. Right, but trans men are absolutely part of
Speaker 1: it because massive threat. Absolutely because it's stealing women from them.
Speaker 1: It is stealing their fucking wives that they want to have.
Speaker 1: They want to fucking own women, and like so they
Speaker 1: can't handle the idea of anyway whatever. I know a
Speaker 1: lot of a lot of the things they get so
Speaker 1: mad about is when they see a young transgai on
Speaker 1: TikTok and they're like, look, sorry, this is going to
Speaker 1: be like gross, but like, look at this potentially beautiful
Speaker 1: woman who's now been ruined, like just horrible, horrible, horrible, right,
Speaker 1: But that is but we have so many grown men,
Speaker 1: like thirsting over fourteen year old like a fab people
Speaker 1: who are who are deciding that hey, maybe I want
Speaker 1: to start HRT, maybe I want to use different pronouns
Speaker 1: maybe I want to have a binder and this They
Speaker 1: get so so mad at that. And I think a
Speaker 1: big part of not not simply I think, I think
Speaker 1: it is truly not enough just to hold our ground.
Speaker 1: We have to keep going forward. And a big part
Speaker 1: of that is having more intersectionality with transmasculine people. A
Speaker 1: big part of that is having a much much more
Speaker 1: of a focus on gender not nonconforming people and non
Speaker 1: binary people. Um. Because we have we have to keep
Speaker 1: pushing it forward. We cannot simply hold our ground on
Speaker 1: this because if if we simply hold our ground, they
Speaker 1: can pull out the rug from from under us. UM.
Speaker 1: So I think that is that is that is a
Speaker 1: massive part of this, and I think I do believe
Speaker 1: that we will win. I fundamentally do because if you
Speaker 1: look at if you look at like the rights of
Speaker 1: which young people zoomers and even the generation younger than zoobers,
Speaker 1: I do not know what they're called, um, but if
Speaker 1: you look at the amount of amount of us who
Speaker 1: are who who self identify us non binary, trans or
Speaker 1: gender nonconforming, it is so much bigger than any previous
Speaker 1: generation people. Once people experience a form of freedom, it
Speaker 1: is hard to take that freedom away. There are so
Speaker 1: many people who are entering their teens and are realizing
Speaker 1: they can be so much more free and they don't
Speaker 1: need to be limited to these weird, draconian like dualistic
Speaker 1: notions of gender. And that's amazing. If you look at
Speaker 1: a whole new wave of like actors and actresses and
Speaker 1: people in the entertainment industry, almost all of our non binary,
Speaker 1: like the person who plays Ellie in the in the
Speaker 1: Last of Us is transum. I believe they identify trans
Speaker 1: non binary or some of them of gender queer. But
Speaker 1: this sort of play Ellie like that too anyway, I
Speaker 1: just like absolutely, but this is something that that keeps happening.
Speaker 1: We are going to win this because there's so many
Speaker 1: of us and we know that it rules to exist
Speaker 1: like this, and we're not going to let them take
Speaker 1: it away. And I think that that is a big
Speaker 1: part of not only standing our ground, but continuing to
Speaker 1: move forward with the confidence that we will win in
Speaker 1: the long run. Yeah, and I think that we can.
Speaker 1: And I think that like a lot of the stuff,
Speaker 1: including myself, right, Um, I'm famously armed. I'm someone who
Speaker 1: you know, believes in self defense and in all of
Speaker 1: these things, right, Um, But I think that we always
Speaker 1: need to like focus on our strengths when it comes
Speaker 1: to being especially on the offense, right. And so when
Speaker 1: I think about like strategizing how do we win, the
Speaker 1: stuff that you're talking about about staying on the offensive
Speaker 1: makes so much sense. And I think that, to misquote
Speaker 1: the art of war, you attack your enemy where they
Speaker 1: are weak and you are strong, you know, and so like,
Speaker 1: and they are weak at cultural creation and I don't
Speaker 1: mean culture wars and culture war issues like art like creativity. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and so like we win because we say because our
Speaker 1: ideas are good, and when we express them, people are like,
Speaker 1: oh that sounds sick. I want to be free, right yeah. Um. Now,
Speaker 1: at the same time, we need to shore up our weaknesses.
Speaker 1: And I think our weaknesses at the moment are in
Speaker 1: the political sphere, which we're at on a back We're
Speaker 1: on the back foot right now because of all the
Speaker 1: I guess I don't track this stuff as much, but
Speaker 1: like all the judges and shit that got put in
Speaker 1: under Trump, and we are also not at our strongest.
Speaker 1: I'm not trying to call us weak here, but like
Speaker 1: far few of us, few of us are like weird
Speaker 1: gun nuts and like no, you know, militant strategy protect
Speaker 1: e type people. And I we've seen us shoring up
Speaker 1: that weakness and that rules. But I think it's always important.
Speaker 1: Maybe not always, maybe there would be a time when
Speaker 1: this would shift, But overall, I don't think that's our strength.
Speaker 1: That's not where we go on the offense. That is
Speaker 1: where we stay, like protecting ourselves. Yes, and no. DREG
Speaker 1: defense like DREG defense, square defense that has defense in
Speaker 1: the name, exactly, It is crucially important, exactly. It also
Speaker 1: terrifies the fascist right. The fact the fact that like
Speaker 1: like that one one hundred and forty pound twink can
Speaker 1: carry an AAR and defend a DREG show terrifies fascists.
Speaker 1: It utterly destroys their brains. You know. For sequalizations a
Speaker 1: hell of a thing. Sorry, buddy, The trigger pole is
Speaker 1: two and a half pounds. Yeah, you know what else
Speaker 1: is a four key force equalizer, the force of advertising
Speaker 1: and pole arms. As as long as we don't have
Speaker 1: an ad for a rabbit air who has an office
Speaker 1: in Pasadena, California, I'm fine. So I think if you've
Speaker 1: listened to the show a lot, they're they're One of
Speaker 1: the sort of sub themes of a lot of the
Speaker 1: writing that I do is thinking about what we owe
Speaker 1: the dead. And on the face of it, it's a
Speaker 1: sort of nonsensical question. Right, you can't have any kind
Speaker 1: of reciprocal relationship with someone who's dead, because well, you know,
Speaker 1: they're dead. And this question, this question of what we
Speaker 1: owe the dead is a question board of grief, of
Speaker 1: a kind of sort of raw and immaculate anguish that
Speaker 1: comes to the memory of people who are like you
Speaker 1: in every way except that you're here and they're not.
Speaker 1: And this was written, you know, this is written seven
Speaker 1: weeks ago. The people this is written for aren't even
Speaker 1: the same people that you know, that that that like
Speaker 1: that that is for now. Right, the question, in some
Speaker 1: sense becomes, what do we owe the people who have
Speaker 1: died and were thus denied to live, that denied the
Speaker 1: chance to live the lives that we do You know what,
Speaker 1: what do we owe them? What do we owe these
Speaker 1: people that we failed to keep alive? And this has
Speaker 1: an answer, this has this has a very very definite
Speaker 1: political answer. We owe them the destruction of the world
Speaker 1: that killed them. We owe them a future that we
Speaker 1: owe them the future that they should have had, and
Speaker 1: we owe them, we owe them a world where they
Speaker 1: never take another one of this another one of us. Again,
Speaker 1: the world is already fucking burning. It is time to
Speaker 1: start the counterfire now. One of one of the things
Speaker 1: that you that you will hear a lot, and this,
Speaker 1: this is, this has been, this has been one of
Speaker 1: the sort of dominant responses, for better or for worse,
Speaker 1: from how people are thinking about these laws is that
Speaker 1: these laws, you know, these anti trans laws are unconstitutional
Speaker 1: and that does not matter. That does not matter for shit,
Speaker 1: right like, oh, oh, our old friend the Constitution. Ha,
Speaker 1: Like I just, I just I need. I need everyone
Speaker 1: to understand that the ability of the Supreme Court to
Speaker 1: strike down a law is not in the Constitution. None
Speaker 1: of this ship matters. They're making all of it up.
Speaker 1: The only thing that actually matters is power. And to
Speaker 1: understand why the law is about power and you know,
Speaker 1: and and why legality is not actually a tool that
Speaker 1: we can rely on. I want to I want to
Speaker 1: tell the story. I'm not sure if I've told this
Speaker 1: story on on this on this podcast before, but I
Speaker 1: want to tell the story of the worst mistake I
Speaker 1: ever made as an activist. So the year is two thousand.
Speaker 1: In seventeen, Donald Trump's Executive Order one three seven six nine,
Speaker 1: locally known as the Muslim Ban, has prevented people from Iran,
Speaker 1: Iraq with whore they drop a rock, later Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria,
Speaker 1: and Yemen from entering the country. Now, almost immediately after
Speaker 1: the Muslim Ban is announced, um there is a spontaneous
Speaker 1: wave of airport occupations that sweeps the country. And these
Speaker 1: protests have two goals. Their immediate goal is to free
Speaker 1: the people who have been taking captive by immigration authorities
Speaker 1: before they can be deported, and the second goal is
Speaker 1: to end the Muslim band more broadly. This was this
Speaker 1: was actually my this was my first Irrell direct action.
Speaker 1: I you know, I remember I was in this train
Speaker 1: car on the Blue Line to O'Hare, which is our
Speaker 1: airport in Chicago. And you know, I'm on this train
Speaker 1: and it's packed and everyone is completely silent, and you know,
Speaker 1: everyone thinks people are going to get off, but as
Speaker 1: we get to this airport, lies that the entire train
Speaker 1: is completely full of protesters. Like everyone on there's a protester.
Speaker 1: And it goes on and on and on, and we
Speaker 1: get off the train, right and we're walking through the airport.
Speaker 1: And the way this airport is structured is there's like
Speaker 1: this overpass that you walk over where you can see
Speaker 1: the trains coming in and every single train is full
Speaker 1: of protesters. And the trains keep coming and they keep
Speaker 1: coming and they keep coming, and you know, every everyone
Speaker 1: and every time a train shows up, everyone starts cheering
Speaker 1: and it is like it is, you know, one of
Speaker 1: the most amazing things I've ever been a part of.
Speaker 1: And you know, and we we start moving and there
Speaker 1: are just you know, this is a fucking this is
Speaker 1: an airport, right, Like, this is one of the most
Speaker 1: heavily policed places in the world. There are not enough
Speaker 1: cops to stop us. And you know, they make this
Speaker 1: one token attempt to try to clear us, and they
Speaker 1: can't do it, and they pull back and now we
Speaker 1: are holding the airport, and we do it. We reat them,
Speaker 1: We win. The airport releases the detainees they've been they've
Speaker 1: been negotiating with the a CLU, the ASU have been
Speaker 1: trying to get me released. And the person from the
Speaker 1: person from the ASLU, like God, comes on the mic
Speaker 1: and announced that they've they've released everyone and everyone chairs,
Speaker 1: and then and then the person on the ALU personal
Speaker 1: and the mic says they're going to beat the Muslim
Speaker 1: band in court, and everyone goes home. It takes a
Speaker 1: few hours, but by the end of it, everyone goes home.
Speaker 1: And here's the thing. The ACLU several years later lost
Speaker 1: that case at the Dream Court. The Muslim band continued
Speaker 1: the entire fucking Trump administration. Right, it wasn't repealed until
Speaker 1: Biden took office. We could have stopped it there, right,
Speaker 1: we held that fucking airport. Airports across the country and
Speaker 1: fucking like dozens and dozens of states were being held
Speaker 1: by protesters, and we could have stopped them. But we didn't,
Speaker 1: and we didn't because we trusted the courts. Right we
Speaker 1: went home, we trusted the SLU, and they lost because again,
Speaker 1: the law is not about the law. The law is
Speaker 1: about power, and millions of people suffered the consequences of that.
Speaker 1: And this is what's going to happen if we if
Speaker 1: we leave this fight to the courts, either either we
Speaker 1: actually sort of like stand up and actually fight not
Speaker 1: in the courtroom, but in the streets, in schools, in
Speaker 1: salons and shop floors, in the places where we have
Speaker 1: power or we are going to die. That is my
Speaker 1: intro to this, which is that we cannot we literally like,
Speaker 1: if we try to leave this to the people who
Speaker 1: have been acting right now, right, if if we leave
Speaker 1: this electorialists, if we leave this to sort of legal institutions,
Speaker 1: and if we purely fight self defense battles, we are
Speaker 1: going to lose. Yeah. So the question from there is
Speaker 1: how do we hit them back? And the thing that
Speaker 1: I specifically wanted to talk about first is I wanted
Speaker 1: to talk about this thing called power mapping. Now, Okay,
Speaker 1: the moment, the moment you say that we're in map
Speaker 1: around leftists, people immediately start talking about how the map
Speaker 1: is not the terrain. And that's true, true, the map
Speaker 1: is not the terrain. They're different things, don't both are useful? Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: you still a map when your hiking, even though it's not. Actually,
Speaker 1: that's spash the maps. Spash the maps. Situation is practice
Speaker 1: walk around the city without a map, but mess up
Speaker 1: the maps. It sabotage the mass. Yeah, don't walk through
Speaker 1: the forest about a fucking map. Forest is dispassionate and
Speaker 1: cruel and will kill you. So all right, So what
Speaker 1: is power mapping? So there there is a normal version.
Speaker 1: There is a version of this that gets you know,
Speaker 1: it's it's part of sort of like what I guess
Speaker 1: you would call like the liberal version of organizer training
Speaker 1: one on one, which is this like pure NGEO thing,
Speaker 1: which is you know, I guess you could you could
Speaker 1: argue it's from like a lins like like from Salo
Speaker 1: Lynsky or whatever the fuck. Um And and this this
Speaker 1: version about it is this version is about finding and
Speaker 1: pressuring quote unquote stakeholders. This is almost completely useless to us.
Speaker 1: It's largely politically bankrupt and tactically it is simply not
Speaker 1: going to work. Right, Like, there is some value in
Speaker 1: mapping out which specific like legislators and which specific governors
Speaker 1: are going to like sign bills, right Yeah, but like okay,
Speaker 1: NGO style pressure campaigns are not going to stop this
Speaker 1: is this is simply not going to work. Um. And
Speaker 1: the strategies that people have been employing to sort of
Speaker 1: stop this, right which is you know, relying on our
Speaker 1: suffering and our pain and relying on medical expertise that
Speaker 1: that doesn't that doesn't work. It's weigh them a lack
Speaker 1: of diversity of tactics. Yeah, the only language people understand
Speaker 1: is power. So Okay, having said all this, we can
Speaker 1: strategically use other groups like NGOs or sympathetic lawmakers to
Speaker 1: do their own pressure campaigns. But that that that is
Speaker 1: not what I'm talking about here. We can leave. We
Speaker 1: can leave those people in their terrain they're paid to
Speaker 1: do it. Don't get sucked up into it. But you know,
Speaker 1: and I will say, like, okay, sometimes very strategically right,
Speaker 1: like you can you can show up to people's events
Speaker 1: and embarrass them because you know who they are and
Speaker 1: what they're doing, and that that that can be useful sometimes,
Speaker 1: like I I you know, I sci shame can be
Speaker 1: can be a useful tactics sometimes, yeah, like I know,
Speaker 1: I know people who've done union campaigns were like things
Speaker 1: have turned around when they like showed up to like
Speaker 1: some NGEO person's fund raiser and they're like, hey, you
Speaker 1: guys aren't paying us, and they're like everyone was like,
Speaker 1: oh my god, but you know what what what what?
Speaker 1: What are we? What are we actually doing here? And
Speaker 1: what what? What? What? What? What I'm specifically talking about
Speaker 1: is powermapping in the context of direct action and in
Speaker 1: the context a sort of offensive direct action and when
Speaker 1: when you're thinking about power mapping. Here there's two kinds
Speaker 1: of mappings that are useful. One is physical mapping, and
Speaker 1: this is something that people don't do enough. I don't
Speaker 1: know why they don't do this more. But first of
Speaker 1: one of one of the things that made the Hong
Speaker 1: Kong protest work is that Hong Kong had really really
Speaker 1: detailed maps, right they were you know, they they had
Speaker 1: apps for this that were very very detailed maps of
Speaker 1: Hong Kong city streets. They would map where the police swear,
Speaker 1: they would map where the police were moving to, they
Speaker 1: would map where protesters were and you know, obviously there
Speaker 1: are sort of security and tactical considerations to this, but
Speaker 1: if we know the terrain better than the police do,
Speaker 1: we can do a lot of things. This is this
Speaker 1: is something that people are successfully employing in the city
Speaker 1: of Atlanta, yep, yep. And anyway, I mean this, this, this,
Speaker 1: this is the thing where we have we actually do
Speaker 1: have an a legitimate advantage in in large cities, which
Speaker 1: is that like the cops who are in large cities
Speaker 1: are not from like those those cities, right you know,
Speaker 1: And and I think I think we squander this advantage
Speaker 1: a lot By just like like in fucking Chicago, there's
Speaker 1: this one plaza right like pretty close to Trump Tower
Speaker 1: where every single protest starts. And that's like it's in
Speaker 1: the middle of fucking downtown, So I guess people sort
Speaker 1: of know the way around there, but like I fuck nobody,
Speaker 1: like nobody lives there who doesn't make like fucking seven
Speaker 1: hundred thousand dollars a year, right, Like you're you're you're
Speaker 1: kind of squandering whatever tactical advantage you haven't. Also, you know,
Speaker 1: and and and another sort of another reason to do
Speaker 1: mapping and stuff is so you know, you can you
Speaker 1: can plan things out ahead of time, Right, you can
Speaker 1: plan out where your lines of retreat are. You can
Speaker 1: figure out where choke points are so you don't get kettled,
Speaker 1: a thing that like I swear to God, no one
Speaker 1: who arranges the protest in the US fucking ever does.
Speaker 1: Like I mean, I know some people do it, but
Speaker 1: like Jesus Christ, you can you can figure out on
Speaker 1: a map where you're gonna get kettled, Like you can
Speaker 1: do this, yeah, and you know, and you can do
Speaker 1: other things too with maps, right, you can you can
Speaker 1: figure out where the locations are of infrastructure that is
Speaker 1: particularly vulnerable, you can figure out what roads will will
Speaker 1: cause the maximum a matter of sort of economic damage
Speaker 1: if you shut them down, you can figure you know,
Speaker 1: you can figure out things like can you learn the
Speaker 1: police into places where they can't use their numbers very well? Right?
Speaker 1: Can you spread them out over one hundred different areas
Speaker 1: and neutralize their effectiveness? And this is a kind of
Speaker 1: These are the kind of terms that we need to
Speaker 1: be thinking thinking about in terms and when when when
Speaker 1: we're physically mapping and physically trying to understand an area,
Speaker 1: which is that we need to be thinking in very direct,
Speaker 1: tactical terms. We need to figure out what kind of
Speaker 1: places you know? And this also this also works defensively, right,
Speaker 1: we need to be figuring out you know, okay, so
Speaker 1: we have a drag show that's under attack, right, we
Speaker 1: need we need to figure out what kinds of places
Speaker 1: if people are attacking, we need to figure out how
Speaker 1: we can defend them. And we need to be thinking
Speaker 1: again not not just like showing up to a place
Speaker 1: and being like, okay, we're hearing these people across the street, right,
Speaker 1: like before that happens, and be like before a protest,
Speaker 1: stars before an actually starts. There needs to be like
Speaker 1: work put in to make sure that what we're that
Speaker 1: the actions that we're doing are effective, are as effective
Speaker 1: as possible, so that that's that. Yeah, that that that
Speaker 1: that that that's that's one part of this kind of
Speaker 1: mapping stuff. You know, if if if you if you
Speaker 1: want more sort of inspiration for this stuff. There's a
Speaker 1: bunch of uh, oh my god, I'm not forgetting the
Speaker 1: name of every book I puble should have actually written
Speaker 1: the books in here, but they're they're that you can
Speaker 1: some of the some of the Italian Autonomous will talk
Speaker 1: about this stuff and they have all of these like
Speaker 1: really wild sort of tactical stuff about like things you
Speaker 1: could do in a city, like you can mess up
Speaker 1: stop lights, you can like I don't know, like they
Speaker 1: they they did a lot of stuff and like moving
Speaker 1: signs around there. There's a lot of very weird things
Speaker 1: in a city that you can do that we don't
Speaker 1: think about because we've limited our tactical arsenal to like
Speaker 1: people show up at a place and yell yes, stand
Speaker 1: stand outside of a building and yell at a building.
Speaker 1: End of protests. Yeah, and that that doesn't work, Like
Speaker 1: we need to have tactics that are sort of like
Speaker 1: that are beyond that. I guess, I guess part of
Speaker 1: the reason that I'm I'm starting here is that I
Speaker 1: want people to like literally go back very much to
Speaker 1: square one of thinking about what our response needs to
Speaker 1: be before we start moving, because you know, like, and
Speaker 1: I'm not this this this is not a sort of
Speaker 1: criticism of the people who've been doing dract de fats,
Speaker 1: like they've been doing a great job, right, but our
Speaker 1: standard protest arsenal is not enough. It has not been working,
Speaker 1: and we need to reevaluate what we're doing. It needs
Speaker 1: to expand, and we need to see a better understanding
Speaker 1: of what diversity of tactics means. I also think that
Speaker 1: on this particular issue, until fairly recently, our primary threat
Speaker 1: vector was non state actors threatening physical violence, and so
Speaker 1: the community defense model is actually a very effective response
Speaker 1: to that threat and has been incredibly effective on numerous times.
Speaker 1: Now that we are looking at the threat coming from
Speaker 1: the state in terms of legislative legislative action and all
Speaker 1: that stuff, it does open up a lot more tactical possibility,
Speaker 1: like what you're talking about, and that's cool, and people
Speaker 1: should realize that. Yeah, No, I think you're right. We
Speaker 1: should go back and look from the ground up and
Speaker 1: like come to new conclusions, new ideas, And I think
Speaker 1: I think the the the the other thing of going
Speaker 1: back to sort of like basics, right, is going going
Speaker 1: back to the kinds of going going going back to
Speaker 1: changing how we think about the world around us so
Speaker 1: that we can actually so that we can more effectively
Speaker 1: take action. And the other kind of thing that we
Speaker 1: need to do is social mapping. It's figuring out the
Speaker 1: resources that we have, the resources that they have, where
Speaker 1: they are, how they function. And this is something that Margaret,
Speaker 1: you've you've talked about in your in your threat about this,
Speaker 1: which is very good. Yeah, but one of the things
Speaker 1: that we need to figure out very quickly is what
Speaker 1: skills do we have and what resources do we have?
Speaker 1: And you know this this expands into a lot of
Speaker 1: into a lot of different sort of fields, right um.
Speaker 1: You know, there's some of this is sort of territorial, right,
Speaker 1: Like it's about thinking about like what kinds like what's
Speaker 1: physically what spaces are safe for us and which ones aren't.
Speaker 1: How can we sort of leverage the spaces that we
Speaker 1: have that are safe and you know, maneuver in the
Speaker 1: ones that are how is this changing? There's also something
Speaker 1: that I I want to sort of think about here,
Speaker 1: which is this old this is old tradition. Do you do?
Speaker 1: You do? You know what workers inquiry is? I don't know? Okay,
Speaker 1: So this is this is a very old Marxist tradition.
Speaker 1: Um it means a lot of different things to a
Speaker 1: lot of different people, Like Marx was attempting. So the
Speaker 1: origin of this is Marx was trying to like send
Speaker 1: out surveys to like workers to figure out what their
Speaker 1: conditions were, and people over time took this into more
Speaker 1: interesting directions of you know, but it turns into a
Speaker 1: kind of like like a worker's ethnography of you know,
Speaker 1: workers sitting down and writing or doing interviews about just
Speaker 1: literally like what what their work day is, like, what
Speaker 1: the sort of like labor processes they're involved in are,
Speaker 1: How does how does that work? Like? Who? Like, how
Speaker 1: do their bosses work? How how are they being managed?
Speaker 1: How are they resisting them? And you know, and you
Speaker 1: you there there there are other things you can sort
Speaker 1: of use this for that are very useful to us,
Speaker 1: which is, for example, figuring out things like what does
Speaker 1: the what does your local economy depend on? What are
Speaker 1: the sort of important logistics lines in that local economy?
Speaker 1: You know, who is physically doing the labor that the
Speaker 1: economy depends on, who is doing the care labor, because
Speaker 1: that's another side of this that gets sort of brushed
Speaker 1: over a lot. But for example, this this, this is
Speaker 1: a large part of why teachers are enormously powerful because
Speaker 1: teachers are doing a shit ton of care labor that
Speaker 1: is is necessary for the necessary for the entire economy
Speaker 1: to function, but isn't really seen that way, right, And
Speaker 1: you know, and and you you you you can ask
Speaker 1: other questions like you know what what what? Like literally,
Speaker 1: what are the physical conditions under which you and the
Speaker 1: people around you are working? A lot of the stuff's
Speaker 1: come to you like person who works a job. Right, Um,
Speaker 1: there there is an advantage that we have as people
Speaker 1: who do this stuff, which is that we we will
Speaker 1: understand the terrain of our own workplace is better than
Speaker 1: the people who are sitting at the at the top
Speaker 1: of the power structure because we're on the bottom of it,
Speaker 1: right the people who are above us. And and this
Speaker 1: this is another thing that that's important about this kind
Speaker 1: of transphobia is that it's it's very much an elite thing.
Speaker 1: This is I think especially noticeable in the UK, where
Speaker 1: like you can literally track who is going to be
Speaker 1: a turf by like what kind of like elite schools
Speaker 1: they're going to. Okay, but but like literally like if
Speaker 1: someone goes to eat like you know, it's like who
Speaker 1: goes to eaton? Right, Like this is this is the thing.
Speaker 1: It tracks who the ruling class isn't who and who
Speaker 1: is a turf and who's not going to be a turf?
Speaker 1: Right and but this is this is also true in
Speaker 1: the US, where like I mean again, if you look
Speaker 1: at them media people who are pushing this, it's a
Speaker 1: bunch of people sitting on like an unbelievable amount of
Speaker 1: trust fund money and getting a bunch of sort of
Speaker 1: right wing billionaire money. Yes, my experience has been that
Speaker 1: since Trump's selection, the random folks around me have become
Speaker 1: substantially less favorable towards me. Um And I think anti
Speaker 1: and stuff is is popular across class. But I don't know,
Speaker 1: I think that's I think that's true, but I don't
Speaker 1: think it matters that much because like like the the
Speaker 1: the ordinary person in your neighborhood who has become transphobic,
Speaker 1: isn't the person who has the capacity to get these
Speaker 1: laws passed? Okay, that's fair. And and the things that
Speaker 1: they know are not the things that the actual people
Speaker 1: running these campaigns know. Yeah, okay. And and that that
Speaker 1: that that I think is what is sort of important
Speaker 1: about this, is that like legislatures, right, or like you know,
Speaker 1: the people who are funding who are funding these campaigns,
Speaker 1: the people who donate to these who donate literally literally
Speaker 1: donate to sort of political campaigns. Right. These people do
Speaker 1: not understand what our jobs are. They don't understand what
Speaker 1: we do, They don't understand how the economy works very well.
Speaker 1: What the version of reality that they can see is
Speaker 1: is a sort of bureaucratic image of it produced by
Speaker 1: their subordinates. And you know that there's a realm with that,
Speaker 1: which is that a lot of the time, right, the
Speaker 1: more powerful person is, the more likely it is that
Speaker 1: the version of reality that they're getting is the version
Speaker 1: of reality that is just being told to them by
Speaker 1: the people by the people below them. And you know,
Speaker 1: and this this means, like the more powerful the people
Speaker 1: we're dealing with, the less capacity they actually have to understand.
Speaker 1: Is this is true even with for organizations to have
Speaker 1: like an enormous amount of raw intelligence that you know,
Speaker 1: they're sort of spy and surveillance networks have assembled, right
Speaker 1: they're you know, they have all this information, but they
Speaker 1: don't understand and they're sort of buried in trying to
Speaker 1: like trying and often failing to sort through all of
Speaker 1: the information that they have. Yeah, and they try and
Speaker 1: map it to their world view. It's how you always
Speaker 1: end up with like we found the like I have
Speaker 1: a friend who is investigated as the leader of international anarchism,
Speaker 1: and it took them a really really long time before
Speaker 1: they were like, I don't think that's a thing. Yeah,
Speaker 1: well it's like they don't they don't understand how our
Speaker 1: networks work very well, because yeah, they have stuff like that.
Speaker 1: But but this is also true, especially like on the
Speaker 1: level of the workplace, right, Um, there is a bunch
Speaker 1: of stuff that we know that cannot be replicated by
Speaker 1: the people on the top of the org chart. And
Speaker 1: a lot of that stuff has to do with we
Speaker 1: know how to make things stop working in ways that
Speaker 1: they don't, okay, and and that that is that that
Speaker 1: that is very sort of useful information to have, because
Speaker 1: if you know how something works, you can make it
Speaker 1: stop working. And this is this is the sort of uh,
Speaker 1: you know, this is a lot of what the Marxist
Speaker 1: tradition sort of was, right, It was an attempt to understand,
Speaker 1: like what workers are doing. The distinction I would make
Speaker 1: is they were trying to figure out what workers are
Speaker 1: doing because they were trying to figure out how capitalism works.
Speaker 1: And I don't care about that enormously like that. That's
Speaker 1: that's that's not a thing that actually sort of like
Speaker 1: I don't know whatever I do, I don't I don't
Speaker 1: care about whatever esoteric value debates they were having. The
Speaker 1: decision I would make here is that, you know, the
Speaker 1: Marxist version of this has a tendency to collapse and
Speaker 1: dollar production into just like incredibly bitter and minute debates
Speaker 1: about Marxism. We are not trying to do that. The
Speaker 1: thing we're trying to do with our version of this
Speaker 1: is stop agendicide. Right. Our Our version of inquiry means
Speaker 1: attack and and when when when When I say when,
Speaker 1: when I'm talking about this kind of stuff, right, I'm
Speaker 1: talking about like you and finding the other people in
Speaker 1: your workplace who are supportive of this stuff. And you know,
Speaker 1: I mean literally just on like a very very basic level.
Speaker 1: And this is something that you get union organizing right.
Speaker 1: It's like just figuring out what the fuck they do,
Speaker 1: because like management doesn't know what you do, right, Like
Speaker 1: I I I have I have worked in a lot
Speaker 1: of of of places. I have talked to managers a lot.
Speaker 1: They have no fucking idea what what anyone is actually doing.
Speaker 1: And if if you if you can build up and
Speaker 1: this is this is you know, this is all going,
Speaker 1: this is all kind of abstract. But if if you
Speaker 1: can figure out how your workplace works, and you can
Speaker 1: figure out how the workplaces of the people around you work,
Speaker 1: and how how the workplaces that like actually genuinely matter
Speaker 1: to the people who are doing this stuff, you suddenly have.
Speaker 1: You suddenly have leverage that you normal that you know,
Speaker 1: a sort of like traditional like protest thing doesn't. And
Speaker 1: this means, for better or for worse, trying to get
Speaker 1: unions involved. Um, there are upsides and downsides here. The
Speaker 1: downside is that there just aren't there many unions and
Speaker 1: there aren't there many people in unions as I just
Speaker 1: have like a middling faith in them. Yeah, or working
Speaker 1: on it. I mean, yeah, I mean some of them,
Speaker 1: I'm sure good, and I want to challenge all of
Speaker 1: them too, and if they do, I will eat my shoe.
Speaker 1: Whatever they saying is um some yeah, I mean it's
Speaker 1: like they're not going to do unless they're forced you, right, well,
Speaker 1: depending on the I think some unions do. Now I'm
Speaker 1: like suddenly one eighteen, I mean, like talk shit on
Speaker 1: unions like that. Whatever anyway continues, So okay. So the
Speaker 1: thing part of the other reason that that I'm focusing
Speaker 1: specifically on unions and I'm specifically I'm focusing a lot
Speaker 1: and workplace organizing stuff is that, Okay, one of the
Speaker 1: inherent problems of trans organizing is that trans people are
Speaker 1: not a large enough minority to enter the most sort
Speaker 1: of like cynical, like numerically determinist accounts of who matters
Speaker 1: enough to support right like not not yet not right.
Speaker 1: But as as of right now, we're like maybe two
Speaker 1: percent of the population. Now change it is, it is grown.
Speaker 1: If the zuber numbers continue, we're gonna be We're gonna
Speaker 1: be quite quite the problem. I remember marching with my
Speaker 1: my first boyfriend and this this bashback March where we're
Speaker 1: chanting one in ten is not enough. Yeah, and it's
Speaker 1: just funny because it's like it works. There's more of
Speaker 1: us now, yeah. Yeah, And this is trands are really
Speaker 1: good at recruiting the LGBT, because literally, you can not
Speaker 1: think I'm cute and be heterosexual. There's no way of
Speaker 1: making that happen. True. No, this is like legit legitimately.
Speaker 1: One of the reasons that I figured out that I
Speaker 1: wasn't like a sistet straight dude was I was dating
Speaker 1: an un binary person, and I was like, shit, okay,
Speaker 1: something like it's, um, there are places where trans people
Speaker 1: are like enormously overrepresented, right and and and there are
Speaker 1: places where we exist in numbers enough that we actually
Speaker 1: statistically matter. And unions are one of those places because
Speaker 1: the people to people who are organizing unions, like trans
Speaker 1: people are so unbelievably fucking overrepresented in all of that stuff.
Speaker 1: And this is this is as much true of I mean, okay,
Speaker 1: so this this is true really, especially of any kind
Speaker 1: of sort of new unionism, like particularly things like grad
Speaker 1: student unions, right, but it's also true of like like
Speaker 1: all all of the fucking service sector unions that are
Speaker 1: getting organized and this has been true for like twenty years.
Speaker 1: All of the people ORGANI using that, whether they realize
Speaker 1: it or not, are trans. And you know, but this
Speaker 1: this means we actually have leverage there, right, because this
Speaker 1: is this is a part of the economy where if
Speaker 1: we stop doing our job, shit will actually fall apart, right,
Speaker 1: like you know, act actual sort of large scale union
Speaker 1: campaigns like cannot work without us. And that means that
Speaker 1: we actually we have the ability to pressure them into
Speaker 1: doing shit in a way that's not necessarily true. Another,
Speaker 1: and I'm talking here like specifically about like you the
Speaker 1: listener who is trans, which is like statistically, statistically like
Speaker 1: you the listener is not trans. If you are, congratulations, um,
Speaker 1: if you're not, I also suspect that they are slightly overrepresented.
Speaker 1: That definitely still probably not a majority, yes, I guess
Speaker 1: I like I also want to say that like, um,
Speaker 1: I mean, it's funny because the way to define sis
Speaker 1: allyship is literally as if you're willing to car yourself siss,
Speaker 1: you know, because it's not actually a slur, it's just
Speaker 1: a description. It's just a you know, like that the
Speaker 1: not trans word, right, and it's not bad at all. Yeah,
Speaker 1: And now that that's a battleground word. It's like pronouns
Speaker 1: and profile or whatever. You know. It's like it's actually
Speaker 1: fairly easy to make it clear where you stand on
Speaker 1: this kind of issue. And I I will say, I mean,
Speaker 1: obviously trans people will do a lot of this organizing,
Speaker 1: but I think that we have a lot, an awful
Speaker 1: lot of CIS people with us, And so you, the
Speaker 1: CIS listener, we also fucking love and respect you because
Speaker 1: if you've made it into an hour of us talking
Speaker 1: about how much this matter is, it clearly matters to
Speaker 1: you too, you know. Yeah, this is probably our like
Speaker 1: three or whatever the fuck and both episodes and soon
Speaker 1: you won't be allowed to wear pants if you're a
Speaker 1: fab So you know this is gonna hit everyone. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: and I think you know all of the stuff that
Speaker 1: I've been seeing right about you know. Like another part
Speaker 1: of this also is is literally just like a thing
Speaker 1: that you can do that is organizing that will help
Speaker 1: in this stuff is literally just talking to your friends, yeah,
Speaker 1: and being like, hey, here's my eight friends or whatever,
Speaker 1: here are things. How do you feel about this? You know,
Speaker 1: and then and then and then try and then you know,
Speaker 1: using using this kind of stuff using this kind of
Speaker 1: mapping stuff and you know, using using what you can
Speaker 1: learn about how you know this this this, this, this
Speaker 1: part of it has been kind of abstract, but I
Speaker 1: think intentionally so it's like we we we we are,
Speaker 1: we are in a place where we need to very
Speaker 1: rapidly build up capacity for a kind of movements that
Speaker 1: can actually do things. And I think this is this,
Speaker 1: this is sort of like the planning phase for that is. Yeah,
Speaker 1: but you know, like these these are things that are
Speaker 1: going down to be created very quickly. These were we
Speaker 1: are going to have to very quickly figure out you
Speaker 1: know what what what levers can be like pushed right.
Speaker 1: And one of the things about like the first bathroom
Speaker 1: bill in North Carolina, right, it didn't get repealed, but
Speaker 1: it got like amended to be slightly less bad. Yeah,
Speaker 1: And it got amended to be slightly less bad because
Speaker 1: the state it very quickly ran into trouble with a
Speaker 1: bunch of corporations who were like, you know, because an
Speaker 1: initial push that they were like we're like, Okay, we're
Speaker 1: gonna we're gonna pull out of events in this state.
Speaker 1: We're gonna pull out of like backing your giant, Like
Speaker 1: we're gonna pull out of having our giant like fucking
Speaker 1: sports tournaments here, We're gonna pull out of like advertising
Speaker 1: for like retails off and that. And that got them
Speaker 1: to sort of like run away very very quickly, right,
Speaker 1: And that's been the one big thing they've been actually
Speaker 1: scared of. And I think this is part of why
Speaker 1: they've been pushing this sort of like quote corporation like
Speaker 1: anti Disney stuff so hard. Is that like the kind
Speaker 1: of backlash that can very quickly get these people to
Speaker 1: flip is the kind of backlash that starts actually hurting.
Speaker 1: If these kinds of bills start hurting their bottom line,
Speaker 1: these a lot of these people will flip because a
Speaker 1: lot of a lot of even the legislators who are
Speaker 1: voting for this arn't as hardline as to sort of
Speaker 1: like daily wire people. And if their campaign funders are like, hey,
Speaker 1: you gotta fucking turn this around so the economy can
Speaker 1: go back to normal, like they they will flip on
Speaker 1: this stuff. Okay, this is what I was talking about,
Speaker 1: is about things that you can do to begin to
Speaker 1: mount pressure campaigns and mount direct actions. I also wanted
Speaker 1: to talk about sort of like just survival network stuff
Speaker 1: because that also was going to be a part of this.
Speaker 1: And yeah, Margaret, you had a lot of very very
Speaker 1: good stuff in a thread that you wrote about this. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I wrote a thread a week or so ago about
Speaker 1: all this stuff as I woke up and doom squirrelled
Speaker 1: for a while, and you know, and I was just
Speaker 1: thinking a lot back on the organizing that I know
Speaker 1: people are doing and stuff like that, and trying to
Speaker 1: put things together and and so some of it's just
Speaker 1: kind of like tips, right, And I want to say,
Speaker 1: like again, well again to the threat, not to something
Speaker 1: I've said here, Um, I think that we need to
Speaker 1: focus on what unites us and not what divides us.
Speaker 1: Right now. I think that this is not a time
Speaker 1: for public facing internal conflict. It is not a time
Speaker 1: for interpersonal conflict to be aired publicly. Not to say
Speaker 1: that interpersonal conflict doesn't matter, it doesn't matter. We need
Speaker 1: to you know. I believe mediation is actually one of
Speaker 1: the most important skills actually, frankly, literally, if you're listening
Speaker 1: and you have any mediation skills, I think it is
Speaker 1: the thing that the revolution needs more than anything else.
Speaker 1: Off the top of my head, but overall, basically, there's
Speaker 1: something that MC Soul said, I don't know if his
Speaker 1: own podcast might have been Twitter a long time ago.
Speaker 1: And it's really stuck in my head, which is that
Speaker 1: we need to focus on. We need to de escalate
Speaker 1: all conflict that isn't with the enemy, Which isn't to
Speaker 1: say that the conflict doesn't happen, is that we need
Speaker 1: to look how to de escalate it and bring it
Speaker 1: down in pressure. Except when it's with the enemy, like
Speaker 1: with someone who's trying to murder all the trans people
Speaker 1: or someone who's like a white nationalist or whatever, right,
Speaker 1: we are not looking to de escalate that conflict. We
Speaker 1: are probably looking to escalate that conflict. We are looking
Speaker 1: to make it very clear the way in which we
Speaker 1: are not that person. But and I'm as guilty this
Speaker 1: as anyone else. I have a lot of pet peeves
Speaker 1: that people who listen to my show are very aware of. Also,
Speaker 1: this fight will happen on multiple fronts, using multiple tactics.
Speaker 1: There's this magical phrase diversity of tactics, and we have
Speaker 1: to mean it. And diversity of tactics usually means like
Speaker 1: kind of like, no, you should support my tactic, like
Speaker 1: especially if you're like tactic is like riots or something.
Speaker 1: You know. You often say diversity of tactics, and what
Speaker 1: you really mean is like my shit rules and your
Speaker 1: shit sucks. We actually have to straight up mean it.
Speaker 1: We need to support the people who are focused in
Speaker 1: legislative action, even though it's not where we are strong.
Speaker 1: It is a place that needs to be shored up.
Speaker 1: We need to focus. We need to support the people
Speaker 1: who focus on community defense. We need to focus. We
Speaker 1: need to support the people who are doing illegal things.
Speaker 1: We need to support the people who are doing organizing
Speaker 1: in all kinds of different ways. And if build organizations
Speaker 1: that accept diversity of tactics and don't expect to have
Speaker 1: a sort of hegemony over the movement, we can create
Speaker 1: a very strong movement. Most of my personal infighting is
Speaker 1: with people who do want to have a Gemini over
Speaker 1: a movement, and so you get I fall into this
Speaker 1: like trap where I'm like, how do we fucking anyway whatever? Okay,
Speaker 1: other things that people can do if you are not
Speaker 1: visibility LGBT and you feel like it is safe to
Speaker 1: do so, or you feel like it is dangerous to
Speaker 1: do so, and you're willing to be a little bit
Speaker 1: fucking dangerous because we are in complicated fucking times, be
Speaker 1: publicly clear that you support lg LGTP, whatever us And
Speaker 1: like the day that I wrote yeah, support the queers,
Speaker 1: Like the day that I wrote this. I live in
Speaker 1: you know, I live in West Virginia. I go to
Speaker 1: Lows and you know I'm having a bad day. I'm like, fuck,
Speaker 1: I mean, like, you know, at what point is it
Speaker 1: going to be a crime for me to go to Lows? Right?
Speaker 1: And the like guy, just the fucking metal head guy
Speaker 1: who seemed kind of like super masculine metal guy tattoos
Speaker 1: and he had his fucking like trans ally support pin
Speaker 1: on And if we were in like a big major city,
Speaker 1: it might have almost seemed like cringey because it said
Speaker 1: like ally or whatever on it, right, And I'm fucking
Speaker 1: overworrying about what's cringe e. I'm like, no, thank you.
Speaker 1: I I went up and I thanked him, right, because
Speaker 1: it like fucking helped my day. And that kind of
Speaker 1: shit is going to matter because it is now actually
Speaker 1: a fairly dangerous thing in some places to be visibly
Speaker 1: in support of us, And I absolutely appreciate the people
Speaker 1: who are doing it. And another thing that we need
Speaker 1: to support this is the kind of thing that you've
Speaker 1: talked a little bit about is that, Okay, we need
Speaker 1: to have support networks. We need to have networks that
Speaker 1: are protecting trans people, families that are leaving environments. There's
Speaker 1: so many families that want to leave these states where
Speaker 1: their child is no longer safe will be or so
Speaker 1: detransition will not be allowed to transition. There are transparents
Speaker 1: in Florida who might be at risk of losing their children.
Speaker 1: All of these things, people are going to want to move.
Speaker 1: We need to support people materially who are trying to move.
Speaker 1: And there will be organizations that are doing this. If
Speaker 1: they don't exist yet, you can start them. And if
Speaker 1: you wait for them to start, that's also sometimes okay,
Speaker 1: if you're played is full, you can support those organizations
Speaker 1: in a lot of different ways. We can also support
Speaker 1: and not shame people who choose to live in red
Speaker 1: states as like, as a Red state transperson, I think
Speaker 1: about this a lot about like because like I'm not
Speaker 1: planning on moving right, you know, it helps that I'm
Speaker 1: an adult. I'm like settled whatever, Like my mental health
Speaker 1: is strong, you know, but I'm not planning on going anywhere.
Speaker 1: And that's why we can't give up these spaces, right.
Speaker 1: I think that one of the things I kind of
Speaker 1: mentioned earlier, but is that like we are not in
Speaker 1: normal times. We need to take this seriously. We also
Speaker 1: need to not assume that all this is a foregone conclusion.
Speaker 1: We need to not assume that this will go down
Speaker 1: like Nazi Germany. However, we need to be aware that
Speaker 1: it might, and we need everyone This is not a
Speaker 1: trans people thing, This isn't everyone thing. We need to
Speaker 1: think about what that actually means. You know, there's that
Speaker 1: cliche that is true right now that is like, if
Speaker 1: you want to know what you have been doing in
Speaker 1: Germany in nineteen thirty three, it's what you're doing right now.
Speaker 1: And that's true. This is a time for us to
Speaker 1: be the kind of person that we want to be.
Speaker 1: We are in dangerous and complicated times, and it is
Speaker 1: times that we need to be brave, and we need
Speaker 1: to be brave for each other. Bravery is not the
Speaker 1: absence of fear. Bravery is doing things despite fear. Bravery
Speaker 1: is the presence of courage, not the lack of awareness
Speaker 1: that things are scary and bad. Yes, and that's kind
Speaker 1: of like my main thing is I want us to
Speaker 1: not panic, right, not assume that we're going to lose,
Speaker 1: to realize that they are acting this way because they're
Speaker 1: on their back foot. This was always going to happen
Speaker 1: in the fact that in a way we kind of
Speaker 1: started this fight by like existing and like coming out
Speaker 1: of the closet and shit. But we basically were like, no,
Speaker 1: we're allowed to be here, and most people were like, yeah, okay,
Speaker 1: I guess that tracks. I guess you're allowed to be here.
Speaker 1: And then some small portion were like, these are demons
Speaker 1: from hell sent to rip the tits off of the children.
Speaker 1: I'd like to marry. The freaks like Matt Walsh are
Speaker 1: the ones who declared quote unquote war on trans people, right,
Speaker 1: because we were coming for their way of life, not
Speaker 1: their way of life in terms of like heterosexual marriage
Speaker 1: that gets to still exist, that's fine, like, but compulsory
Speaker 1: heterosexuality and compulsory sis sexuality is the thing that we
Speaker 1: are coming for. And their way of life is hegemony.
Speaker 1: Their way of life is being the only force of power.
Speaker 1: And so yeah, I guess the other stuff is that
Speaker 1: we just okay, what would you do in Nazi Germany?
Speaker 1: That's what you're doing right now, and you should think
Speaker 1: about what skills you have and how they apply to
Speaker 1: different things. And then the kind of final point to
Speaker 1: a lot of this is as a specific issue and
Speaker 1: it's a pet issue of mine, and that could be
Speaker 1: completely wrong. I have a lot of bias about this,
Speaker 1: but I would fucking love it if liberals would shut
Speaker 1: the fuck up about guns. Right now, it is very
Speaker 1: hard for me to find a state that is not
Speaker 1: either in the process of trying to tell me that
Speaker 1: I can't wear a dress, or find a state that
Speaker 1: is trying to tell me that I can't carry the
Speaker 1: means to protect myself from the violent bigots who want
Speaker 1: to kill me because I wear a dress. It is
Speaker 1: incredibly hard to find states that are not pushing in
Speaker 1: one of those directions or another, and it is embarrassing.
Speaker 1: It is embarrassing that this, of all times, is the
Speaker 1: time that liberals are focusing so hard on gun issues,
Speaker 1: which is a culture war bullshit thing for them. They
Speaker 1: don't fucking care. They didn't fucking care about abortion. They
Speaker 1: just want your fucking votes. And we are probably entering
Speaker 1: a very bad and hard time. However, we can do it.
Speaker 1: We have done it in the past, and my reading
Speaker 1: of history it basically is this cycle I kind of
Speaker 1: don't quite believe in, like a forward progress everything gets better,
Speaker 1: things ebb and flow. And however, we will survive this,
Speaker 1: not necessarily all of us as individuals. Probably probably there
Speaker 1: won't be like large numbers of killings as a result
Speaker 1: of this, but it is possible, right, But they it
Speaker 1: is impossible to stamp out homosexuality, It is impossible to
Speaker 1: stamp out transsexuality. We have always been here, we will
Speaker 1: always be here. And so yeah, to quote my final
Speaker 1: quote in that particular threat, I definitely went off threat.
Speaker 1: But um, we need to find each other. We need
Speaker 1: to stop fighting with each other about bullshit. We need
Speaker 1: to defend each other. We need to be brave. And
Speaker 1: then I will cite the anarchist's prayer, which is that
Speaker 1: I ask not to be safe for my enemies, but
Speaker 1: dangerous to them, because all right, this is what we're
Speaker 1: fucking doing, and like, we all want to be safe,
Speaker 1: but that's not something that we're guaranteed. What we are
Speaker 1: guaranteed is that we can choose how to handle the
Speaker 1: situation that we're in. And then almost done, almost done.
Speaker 1: You talked to earlier about what we owe the dead
Speaker 1: I really liked your way phrasing that. I really liked
Speaker 1: a lot of what you were talking about about all
Speaker 1: of that, and one thing that I think about we're
Speaker 1: talking about like the Catholic church and shit right, one
Speaker 1: thing that I owe the dead is I owe Sister Dominic,
Speaker 1: a Catholic nun, to not fucking go back into the
Speaker 1: closet because when my cousin came out as trans, this
Speaker 1: woman who is literally married to God, she died a
Speaker 1: couple of years ago, maybe ten years ago now, before
Speaker 1: I came out, but my cousin came out before me,
Speaker 1: because it's a contagion now because we were always fucking trans,
Speaker 1: and she was completely supportive, completely and immediately in my like,
Speaker 1: you know, and just this is a woman who dedicated
Speaker 1: her entire life too well to God and saw literally
Speaker 1: no problem. Was the most immediately accepting person immediately said
Speaker 1: you know, I bet she's always felt that way. And
Speaker 1: so I personally owe it to her to tell these
Speaker 1: Catholics to shut the fuck up, because fucking Jesus Is
Speaker 1: wife says, it's fine. Fuck you, That's what I got.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Margaret, Yeah, that was fantastic. Where where can
Speaker 1: people find you? And some of your other work across
Speaker 1: the across the web. Yeah, I just finished a four
Speaker 1: part series on Stonewall and the stuff that came before Stonewall,
Speaker 1: the riots that kind of brought us this movement, and
Speaker 1: how it was all different types of queers and even
Speaker 1: some hat people working together to bring us as far
Speaker 1: as we've gotten. And you can find that on my
Speaker 1: podcast Cool People Who Did Cool Stuff. It's with It
Speaker 1: Could Happen here host Sharine as my guest. And you
Speaker 1: can also find me talking about the end of the
Speaker 1: world on Live Like the World Is Dying as another
Speaker 1: podcast that I'm a co host of. And my most
Speaker 1: recent book is called Escape from Insel Island, and it
Speaker 1: is not nonfiction. It is not something about how people
Speaker 1: should get better. It's literally about someone with the shotgun
Speaker 1: who lands on an island full of insults and has
Speaker 1: to get out alive. Fantastic. Well, thank you for listening
Speaker 1: through all the way. If you are still here, hopefully,
Speaker 1: hopefully you've learned something interesting across these these these two
Speaker 1: pretty pretty heavy episodes. We will we will see you
Speaker 1: on the other side. Hey, We'll be back Monday with
Speaker 1: more episodes every week from now and totally heat death
Speaker 1: of the Universe. It could Happen here as a production
Speaker 1: of cool Zone Media. For more podcasts from cool Zone Media,
Speaker 1: visit our website cool zonemedia dot com or check us
Speaker 1: out on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you
Speaker 1: listen to podcasts. You can find sources for It could
Speaker 1: Happen Here, updated monthly at cool zonemedia dot com slash sources.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening.