Honey Badger Radio

Where's the True Feminism? | HBR Talk 318

For the last two weeks, we’ve been reading through the Declaration of Sentiments from the Seneca Falls Convention, looking for that “about equality” vibe feminists keep telling us we should be getting from their work. So far, the document has only been a puerile, whiny, vitriolic mockery of the Declaration of Independence. We’ve trudged through similarly toxic writing by feminists and been told it’s not representative of their movement, but if the manifesto of the suffragettes isn’t representative, what is? Tonight, we’ll continue our examination and maybe start looking into the anti-suffragette movement as well. No True Feminism™ detected so far. We’re still not holding our breath.

Duration:: 2h 7m
Broadcast on:: 20 Jul 2024
Audio Format:: mp3

Our title today is, uh, HBR Talk 318, Where's the True Feminism? And I started my spiel that I usually run, you know, through and give everybody an explanation of how to support us and where to support us. So, I have muted and unmuted, and it looks like you're getting my sound now, but let me know because, uh, if, um, you didn't get my sound, and you're getting it now, that, that fixed the problem. But if you're not getting it now, I should be hearing from people that, you know, there's silence again. Like, there goes the sound, you know, and stuff like that. That way, I will know if you can hear me talking about, um, yeah, okay, they hear two people now, good, good, good. All right, so, what Lauren was responding to was me pointing out that things have changed for me, and I've always said, um, the reason that I get paid to do this, because people are challenging, you know, "Why should you get paid to do this? Why should you get paid to do this?" Well, in the past, it's been so that I could use some conveniences to, to give myself the time to do this job in regard to my, uh, my personal life, um, so that I don't have to do things that you normally do in your personal life that take time, right? Because I, I usually dedicate between, between 10 and 30 hours a week to this, depending on research. Lately, it's been a lot more because of what I've been researching, and, you know, it's, it's mostly just trying to remember what I learned when I was, I, I did my further reading outside of history class in school, because they really didn't teach much about this, and I wanted to know, um, and then trying to track down things on the internet that, that, um, contain that information, because a lot of, I mean, when I was in, in school, it was all in the library, you didn't go, there was no Google when I was in school. Um, the internet was, you directly dial up somebody else's computer, and, uh, you, you, you converse back and forth on, um, bulletin boards or use net and stuff like that. Uh, there was no, there was no worldwide web, um, because I'm old, right? So, there's that, but, uh, in a Biden administration, in a Biden economy, it's changed. You know, I, I get paid to do this because if I didn't get paid to do this, I would have to be working a lot of overtime that, uh, would pretty much take up all of the time that I have to do this. So, literally, I, I'm getting paid to do a job that I'm doing as a second job instead of doing more work at the job I'm at, or picking up a different second job. And, and if I, if I wasn't the case, I would be, uh, I would not be able to do HVR talk. There would be somebody else may be doing it, but it wouldn't be me. Um, so there you go. Just, just for the record. So, I talked about feedthebadger.com, um, because, you know, we always start with that. But I want to point out, we've seen individual after individual bumped from Patreon, kicked off of Patreon for politically incorrect speech. And, uh, yes, Stinky, I am a Gen Xer. Um, 53 right now. So, like boomers are in their 70s and 80s. So that's, they're, uh, but, but 53 is pretty old compared to anybody that existed during the time that, you know, or that was born during the time that, that internet already existed. Right, it's, they're, their whole lives are ahead of them. About half my life is still left, hopefully. If I'm lucky. Um, maybe, maybe a third. But, uh, in any case, yeah, I was pointing out the importance of feedthebadger.com because, as I always say, it's the most stable way to help us out. You, uh, you run the risk with Patreon that at some point in the future for being politically incorrect because we're fucking politically incorrect. We're going to get bumped to. Like, that is the risk. If you want to be able to support us, you're much more likely to not lose that capability all of a sudden if you use feedthebadger.com. And like I said, the social media, um, tip jar system that we, we rely on a lot. That's all, um, that's all just as fragile. And as a result, we created feedthebadger.com/justthetip. So there you go. Uh, but Lauren, you had started to say something else. Yes. And I would like to add that, you know, it's, it's a shame that channels like this are even necessary. Right? Because in, in a right side of the world, which we should be living, things like this would be handled by a competent government, which I know we don't have right now. I don't know how competent governments can be when they are just, you know, filled with octogenarians who, uh, you know, seem to have speech impediments. But anyway, this channel shouldn't be necessary. This discussion shouldn't be necessary if the world was operating as it should. But we don't live in that world. We live in a world where this discussion, the, the equal treatment of all human beings, not just women, is, is, you know, something that we could have, but we can't do that because of the way things are. So we exist for a reason. And, you know, for those of us, for those of you who support us, we thank you, heartily, we really do from the bottom of our hearts. Um, and, you know, for those who are still wondering why we're here, well, why are you here? Yeah, you know, if it's a good question. So that's all I had to say. Yeah. And I, I'm doing this because I feel like it's important for people to understand the history behind the issues. Um, so, you know, and I hope other people understand why I think it's important. Because we're being told that men owe women deference in terms of human rights issues and inequality issues. And, and the reason that men supposedly owe women deference is because men oppressed women throughout history, even though women are totally equally capable as men. And, and there's no reason why women shouldn't have been able to rise up at any point in time and put a stop to that. That for centuries men oppressed women until compassion for women was invented in the 20th century, right? Um, that, that seems to be our narrative that we're, we're stuck with from feminists. But history shows a different picture and it's, it's vital in the fight against infringements on men's human rights to understand that even that lousy excuse, which is a lousy excuse. These people in history did this bad thing. Therefore, for the rest of the future, people who have demographic in common with them must be punished is, is a stupid argument all around for every demographic. But it's not true either. If it's a lie, the argument is moot. Doesn't matter whether it's stupid or not. It's false. False comes before stupid. That's what I wanted to prove with the, with this history. So, hence the research, hence the hours put in, hence all of the work being done. And I'm going to turn this into a video as well. The, the timeline and the highlights of what we've been discussing, the basic information, because I really do feel like this is important information for people to understand when they're talking about voting rights and so on. And Tom, how does it feel to have lived through attempted assassinations of three presidents, one of which obviously was successful? Because that, that has to be surreal. Tom, Tom just mentioned in a Packard excellence just mentioned in the chat. I came in when all the Kennedys were alive. I remember both assassinations. Yeah, so he's seen a presidential assassination. He's seen another assassination of a high ranking official. He's seen an attempt, the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan back in the day. And he's seen, you know, the, the recent assassination attempt, which I'm going to bring up to in my spiel before we get into this. So, this is this guy who's seen what? Like, I can't imagine, like seeing it, it, it hit me the other day that Gen X has seen to a ridiculous attempted assassinations. But the boomers that are still alive can remember three. And all three of them have one thing in common, by the way. They weren't all Republicans. They weren't all Democrats. And, you know, it wasn't that they were all president. It was that they were all attacking the political establishment in various ways. Now, obviously the guy that attempted to assassinate Reagan was mentally ill and said he was trying to impress a starlet who didn't, who wasn't depressed. But, yeah, like someone who should be listened to. I imagine quite a bit of history there to, to understand. But, but yeah, and the situation we're probably going to hear about a mental illness coming up. And my prediction on that is based on the fact that the guy's parents called the cops to report him missing on a Saturday after he was not home for a few hours. And most people don't do that unless the individual is disabled in some way or another and shouldn't be out alone on their own. So there's something screwy about that. And I'm my suspicion just from, because of how my, my regular profession is, would be that they're, it's going to come out. This guy had a diagnosis that made it worrisome if he was unsupervised. But, which is also consistent, by the way, with a lot of other incidents. Yeah, and there's, there's absolutely no coincidence at all that both of his parents were mental health professionals. Yeah. No, no, which is there. I mean, just imagine growing up in a household like that, where both of your parents are trying to cycle analyze you every minute of the day when you're just trying to live a normal world. What, what teenage life is normal, right? You know, nobody feels like their life is normal as a teenager. You always feel awkward and, you know, out of place. Imagine just having both of your parents with a, like a late, because he was the only child as well. Well, no, no, he had a sister. I believe he has a system. But anyway, just living in that kind of household would probably drive anyone insane. Now, I'm not saying that that's the reason that this happened. I have my own beliefs about what transpired. And it's also possible that they went into that because they had had had reasons. We'll just say in their family, like, it's, you never know the situation. And, but they would be in a best, a great position to articulate the symptoms if they're, if their kids needed mental health treatment to other professionals for diagnosis diagnosis. Because you don't, if you, even as a doctor, you don't treat your own family necessarily, you, you seek confirmation from other professionals before you take any action. Because you can be biased. But, but yeah, it's, it's quite possible, you know, that they, they saw something in, in him and went, you know, we got to, we got to get some help for our kid and that kind of thing. So it's, again, this just speculation, but that's, that would make that call make sense really fast. So, but yeah, all three, all three situations were a, a president or presidential candidate who had been a president who was challenging the establishment or threatening to challenge the establishment. And I mean, we've seen that quite a bit here. Not that Trump isn't economic establishment, because I think he is, like he's a big business, right? But it's still, there's, there's something that the establishment is scared of and you've seen them go after him, like an immune system going after a virus. So it's, it's really interesting seeing the pattern. Somebody challenges the establishment too much. The establishment tries to kill them. And we don't, we don't necessarily know how, you know, like how connected it is. But we do know that the rhetoric that, that we've heard over, over the last ten years in regard to, to this challenge to the establishment has been a contributing factor. And it was in the Reagan situation too. There's a reason why the shooter thought that Jodie Foster would be impressed because he thought that, that it was normal to hate Reagan and that it would be impressive if he was the guy that took him out. Right. So, yeah, there's, there's not a rational denial that rhetoric plays a role in this. Kennedy was controversial too. People don't realize that. A lot of people think he was universally loved. Nope. He was controversial. There were people that were afraid of him because he was challenging the establishment. So, yeah, I'm still in the same position I was before. I don't like everything about Trump. I don't hate everything about Trump. Therefore, both sides accuse me of some sort of derangement syndrome. And, and I'm still going to vote for him. There you go. But then in the case, yeah, so all of that goes back to the thing about social media platforms, which I was also going to point out today before we get started. I will remind everybody, and we do have the same risk involved in our social media platforms. Like I've been locked and, and throttled and shadow banned and, and, I don't know, thrown in the old Pacific Sea multiple times on social media for saying things that later turned out to be 100% true. Right. Last night is a, is an interesting example of why it's important. So, I'm going to harken back really, really quick to the whole QAnon thing. When that guy came onto the scene on Twitter, I looked at his posts and I'm like, that guy is melodramatic as hell. That's not how somebody of the type of profession he was claiming to be would, would talk in public. Like, I know some people who did jobs like that. He was, he was claiming, I think, to be a Navy Seal or there's a few other types of profession in the military where when somebody starts talking about threats to, to the security of your community, they're not melodramatic. They're very matter of fact. They, they, they will tell you the same way that your manager at a gas station will say there's, there's fecal matter on the floor in the, in the restroom that needs to be cleaned up, go get a mop and clean it up. Right. That's, that's exactly how they talk. There's, there's this, this is the situation. This is what needs to be done. Do it. And, and there is no, like they don't, they don't talk about praying for the situation or if they do, they say it very briefly. None of this super, super melodramatic crap that I was seeing. So I, I called it at the time. I was like, yeah, this guy's false flag. Something's wrong with, with this. This is not a real individual doing this kind of job that, that is a secret source of what's going on in the government. This is somebody trying to troll everybody for a reason. And I think, you know, personally that it's to make right wingers look stupid and gullible. And I got locked for 12 hours and made to delete that post. And later on, you know, when it turned out that the guy was trolling people and his achievement was that he made a lot of right wingers look stupid and gullible. I had nothing to point back to to say, I told you so. Guys should have listened to me. Right, that was, that was, you know, a mistake. I should have, should have documented. Right, I should have filmed. I can use, actually use OBS to do that. I should have documented my deletion and saved it. But instead, I mean, I was stuck not being able to say I told you so, which for a woman is like, you know, not being able to breathe. So, but in the meantime, I've watched this kind of stuff happen over and over again, where somebody comes out. Information is made public that is controversial, questionable, or show something is seriously wrong, something's going on that needs attention paid to it. And some account will show up and start spouting conspiracy theories that are just believable enough that a lot of people won't look dig, you know, look into them, check the facts. And they'll start repeating them. And that happened last night. I watched it happen in real time. This guy discovered actually a lot of people told him about, and I'm not, I'm not a finance person, so I'm not sure I fully am going to explain this correctly. But a discovered that an investment company made a suspiciously convenient move the day before the attack on Trump. And that suspiciously convenient move would have either saved them a lot of money or made them a lot of money. If all of a sudden something associated with Trump got devalued a lot by an event, right? And that was that was kind of weird. And then they they undid the thing that they did. They basically deleted it or removed it. And that that's kind of weird. Right? That's one of those things you go, wow, that's that's interesting. But there isn't really a conclusion specifically from that because that's not enough information to draw a conclusion on. Well, then another account immediately began posting these unverified claims about a previous administration's possible involvement. And the only thing that he supported it with was more claims. And people were running with that narrative right away. Oh, this was done by this was done by Bush and Cheney. This was Bush and Cheney made this happen and I'm looking at it. And as I'm reading the guy's posts, what he said would have made sense except there were some things that stood out that were kind of weird. And it was it was starting to look like the the conspiracy wall with the little, you know, cards and images and strings and all that stuff, right? It's starting to look like that meme. And people were replying to him going, this isn't true. And then there's nothing to back it up. And I started looking. So I started researching it. And lo and behold, the first thing that came up was one of the connections that he drew required. Mary Cheney, I think her name is to be married to a guy who started a company in Cincinnati years ago. Who isn't associated with the company he's supposed to be associated with in order for this connection to be real. The company doesn't exist anymore and isn't associated with the company that made this suspiciously convenient move. And Mary Cheney is married to a woman. So I started posting everything I found like this is this part of the story is not true. And I like that's that that bothered me that people were repeating that without questioning it. So I went through and everybody I could find that was prominent that was repeating it without checking it. I replied to them and immediately got pushed back. Oh, you're so gullible to believe all of that stuff instead of this claim that doesn't have any verifying information behind it. So I waited. I thought, you know what, I'm gonna get I'm gonna get locked again for publishing this for posting this, but I didn't. But that doesn't necessarily mean that it can't happen later. The guy deleted his posts. I wasn't expecting that. I should have, but I believe they are unless they've been removed on archive.is it didn't finish loading before I had to stop and start doing tasks at work. So, but in any case, you know, I replied to this this guy a storyteller and to the people that I could reply to and tried to, you know, stem the tide of that because it's it's possible the guy was just a troll looking for attention. You know, it's possible the guy was just being a dipshit, but it's also possible that once again, you had a professional troll there trying to make right wingers look stupid and gullible. Okay, so somebody in the chat knows, I think who I'm talking about here because somebody was saying a guy went ballistic. Okay, no brother brother with had problems. Okay, that makes sense. People, people who want to believe these things will go nuts on you for skepticism. When it's really important to track this stuff down and make sure that it's true if you're going to make a big allegation like that because the allegation that being was being made was that to former federal officials, a president and a vice president had conspired to to capitalize on the the possible assassination of a presidential candidate. That's that's a hell of an accusation. And I mean, I'm not a huge fan of Bush or Cheney, but if that's not true, then people shouldn't say it. It's not part of the story. It's not part of the situation. And we should be responding to what's true. And, you know, it is true that that like the company that made the suspiciously convenient move put an explanation up on their website for having made that move. So that confirms that they did that. It doesn't explain away any suspicions and it doesn't confirm any suspicions. That's just a like one of those things you sort of draw a line under it and you're like, okay, this, we don't forget this, but we don't understand it yet. So we'll have to wait for more information to come out that can explain it. And it's possible that their explanation is valid, but we'll put a line under that too because it's possible that that's just CYA, right? So no conclusions there. But in the meantime, the fact that, you know, I was kind of paranoid last night about I'm going to get it locked for this. It made me realize how important it is to have the Honey Badger Brigade blog. And for you guys to pay attention to the Honey Badger Brigade blog and be aware and alert that we have that platform that we're on rumble that, you know, I may not use truth social much. I don't think I post on it for the last probably several months, but I'm on it. And if I lost my ability to post on Twitter, you can bet anything that Twitter thought was controversial enough to keep me from posting X, whatever, I would start putting that up on Truth Social right away because it hit a nerve. And I would want it to be available for people to see even if it's not on that platform, even if it's on a different platform. And so it's very important for us to be on multiple platforms and to have platforms where we can trust that we're not just going to be silenced by some idiot on a trust and safety council. So that's something that I wanted to point out about having the blog and it's something that I wanted to get across about, you know, keep track of what's on the blog. Even though right now it's mostly just links to our shows and stuff, this is something that it's a necessary tool in case we get silenced in other places. And it's not that I expect necessarily that X is going to be a problem like that. It's just that I don't 100% trust that it won't be because Elon Musk is in charge there now, and he's telling everybody that's a free speech platform now. But I'm still throttled and shadow banned for saying men are human and human rights are not gendered now. So I don't know if you guys have anything to add. Not a lot. Okay. I think he want is to involve in his own forward trajectory to actually pay attention or give it damn about anything that happens on X. I do. I do too, because I mean that trust and safety council as far as I'm understanding is still in place and led by, you know, the unsavories, the literally wrongs. Right. So, you know, I think he's got Twitter or Exxon autopilot. He's not paying attention to this shit. And, you know, it's interesting to see who he does reply to, because he seems to be replying to a lot of people who are on the more conservative side because that's where he's politically leaning. You know, but there are issues that are brought up to him about the way that Twitter or I keep calling it Twitter. I can't call it X, X is just stupid. Sorry. But he doesn't really seem to respond to or care much about those things. Yeah. And in the middle of an election season, when we are so close to November. He he he again, like I said, he's got so much. He's got so many other things to care about. That's this is the last of his priorities, I would think, other than the fact that, you know, he's able to get on there and express himself freely. I think he does enjoy that bit of it, which of course wasn't, you know, like, it's his toy and he gets to play with it. Yeah. But as far as the day to day, you know, operations of the business goes, he's I think he is is just a little too far detached from that, because that's not his main focus. Right. You know, that is another reason why it's important for us to maintain alternative platforms, because, you know, we don't know, no matter what somebody's intentions are, no matter what somebody's promises are, no matter any of that. We don't know that any, I guess, mainstream thing is going to be a good place to talk. And you'll always be able to talk. You know, if I post something on the Honey Badger Brigade blog, right, say I write an article about something and I post it there, you can challenge everything in that argument. You can post links in the chat, you can argue, you can bring things up, you can say, I think you're an idiot, like, you can, you can even call me names, and that's not going to get deleted. As long as you don't say something that, you know, advocates for violence or something like that, where we could get, we aren't going to let anybody do that. Right. And it is fair, the closest to that line we've gotten is predicting that something will result in violence and expressing fear that something will result in violence, which we have a one post that does that. And turned out to be right shortly thereafter. So, you know, that kind of predicted the rioting that took place in the country and the response of people to that rioting that people started defending themselves and stuff. And, but it's not a statement of justification for any of it. And like that's as far as you can go with describing violence on the site, you can talk about it, you can postulate about it, you can predict, you know, this, this can result in that, and you can express concerns about it. But the one limit that we would have is if your content is illegal, or your comment, you know, contains this violence should happen statements, you know, or we're going to do this violence statements. Then those are going, going, bye bye. But everything else is pretty much fair game. Right. You can call me a motherfucking asshole, and I will leave your comment right there for everybody to see. You can even, you know, post a whole, we've had people post almost a whole freaking article in response in the comment sections, trying to take down things we've said. And it's fair to debate those things. It's really important. It's vital, in fact, because if we make a mistake and people run with it, it can destroy the movement. Any, any publication from the movement has that risk. So it's vital. But, but again, like that's just, I wanted to point that out because I happened last night, and it was something that really through me, that how fast people just adopted that narrative and just started running with it. Like, did you learn nothing from QAnon? Did you learn nothing from finding out that that guy actually was a false flag? And that bothers the hell out of me. So I think people should confirm serious allegations before they actually start repeating them. And if you can't confirm it, challenge it. Because if you can't confirm it, it's probably not true. But anyway, let's get to the Rat Killing. Here we have, we stopped at the church, I think. I got, I don't know if you guys are watching the, in the, yeah, it says to watching. Good. Okay. So we stopped at the subordinate position in the church, I'm pretty sure. Maybe the different code of morals, actually, because I think I remember reading that and, and a statement about Jehovah. I wish, I can't find a place to click to get rid of that stupid little box, trying not to have text selected. There we go. So, we're almost through here. He is endeavored in every way, she says, that he could destroy her confidence in her own powers to lessen her self-respect and to make her willing to lead a dependent and an abject life. Now, I, this, the reason that this comment, this, this part bothered me. It wasn't just because it wasn't true. You know, like, it's, it's blatantly not true. Men elevated women throughout history. Men pedestalized women throughout history. Goddess worship grew out of, I think, the reverence of both sexes for women's role in reproduction. I think if that was different, goddess worship would not have been a thing. But, so I think women have been always a little elevated, even if they're not put into political power. Right, and before English history, I think women kind of, there's, there's some evidence that women held very prominent positions in the, the pre-British civilizations. But, so men didn't endeavor to destroy women's confidence or less than their self-respect. And as far as the dependent and abject life, nobody knows for sure how the, the ideas of coverture started. Nobody knows for sure whose decision that was, that over time, women would be, become legally under the, the wing of their husband. There's probably some history that explains that. And I would bet it traces back to the history that we've talked about in regard to how kindness and tourism grew. And like how true kindness and tourism, where it's just about women and not about women's reproductive role, not about children, in other words, but just about women. How that grew, that came out of, remember, 13th century French aristocracy. So, just connecting that back to this, this statement was written by a woman of means, not a woman who worked as a, as a cook or a laundress in somebody's home, or in some business somewhere, but a woman who had money and had the resources to be out speaking and engaging in activism and had, had the ability to create an event for women to come to, to, to advocate for this. Right, not just some rando. So this, this woman of means who was using her husband's money and her own to do this is complaining. And, and by the way, the woman happens to, to have partnered with four women who are Quakers. And in, in a Quaker face, women could be preachers. In fact, one of the women involved in the foundation of the, the, the convention was a preacher. So this bullshit. And then we have now, in view of this entire disenfranchisement of one half of the people of the country, they finally get to the point. After all these complaints about men, we have just in the last two, they finally get to the point. In view, the unjust laws above mentioned and because women do feel themselves aggrieved, oppressed and fraudulently deprived of their most sacred rights, we insist that they have immediate admission to all the rights and privileges which belong to them as citizens of the United States. Notice she didn't say anything about responsibilities. You guys see any equality here? I'm sorry, was that on the menu? I thought it was all about women's games. I want please. Can I have rights and responsibilities? I'm glad she mentioned privileges. That's kind of interesting. The rights and privileges. Well, you know, even though she maybe mistakenly acknowledges that responsibility has come along with those rights, it doesn't mean that she actually has any intention on, you know, trying to preserve those rights on her behalf or the behalf of women. No, they just want that first nice fluffy bit where they get to do stuff and have stuff. Yeah, and have stuff. And well, actually, yes, and have stuff and not have to do stuff to have stuff. That's like women in a fucking nutshell. They want it. They want you to give it to them without them having to lift a fucking finger. And it's interesting because they fought for this, right? They advocated for this. They went around the campaign for this. But nowhere did they campaign to, if women are supposed to be equally responsible, at no point, did they ever suggest that that should extend to the responsibility for one's family. The husband would still be the head of the household. The husband would still have to pay all the bills. The husband would have to be the one that got treated as, you know, the at fault person in a divorce, even if the wife cheated, even if the wife abused him in other ways, because cheating is abuse, in my opinion. But yeah, she could have all the rights. He couldn't tell her what to do with her money. He couldn't administrate her money. He couldn't stop her from borrowing money on their home, if it's in both of their names, or on property that she owned, even if it was the property that their kids relied on as a place to live. But yeah, he would still have to pay all the bills. And if they got divorced, he would have to pay her alimony and child support. None of that was challenged by these women. None. The only thing that was challenged was any limitations on a woman's choices and behaviors. No limitations on a man's obligations, which were the reason for those limitations on women's choices. And then she goes on, in entering upon the great work before us, we anticipate no small amount of misconception, misrepresentation, and ridicule, but we shall use every instrumentality within our power to affect our object. We shall employ agents, circulate, tract, petition the state, and national legislatures, so you mean you're going to ask men for your voting rights? And endeavor to enlist the pulpit and the press on our behalf, so the people you just said hate women. We hope this convention will be followed by a series of conventions, it was, embracing every part of the country. Firmly relying upon the final triumph of the right and true, we do this day, affix our signatures to this declaration, and then the bunch of them signed it. So they predicted pushback and pushback there was. Of course, if you ask feminists, they will tell you that historically men opposed women's voting rights and kept women from getting the vote for decades after women started fighting for it. But is that true? We have some more to look at here. This report is called Never a Fight of Women Against Men. What textbooks don't say about women's suffrage? Okay, I'm in. So just to point out, the first thing that she did was, in that statement, was kind of poison the water, that we're going to get pushed back, people are going to make fun of us, we're going to have misconceptions. If you disagree with us, you're wrong. And then she admitted that they were going to have to appeal to men for their voting rights after she just spent the whole paper demonizing men. These guys are monsters! Let's go ask them for help. Yeah, how's that rake you stepped on? How's that feel? Seriously, so suffrage leader Alice Stone Blackwell wrote in 1914 that the struggle has never been a fight of women against men, but always a broad minded men and women on one side against narrow minded men and women on the other. See, she framed that. She couldn't gender it, so she made it out that the women on our side, the men and women on our side are smarter and wiser and more forward thinking. Mm-hmm. Oh, no, those are the guys. They're just dumb. A bunch of rednecks. Fly over states. Oh, wait, that's today. They're doing the same thing today, aren't they? Yeah, absolutely. Carrie Chapman, Cat, agreed. Almost said Carrie Chapman, chat. Agreed. Writing that the enemy of suffrage was not men, but resistance to change. Hey! Where have we been? They are not willing to become one with the Borg. Resistance to change. Okay, so sometimes it's good to be resistance to change. Like, you get on a jet to fly over from maybe the US to Europe or from Europe to the US, and as you're in the sky, you suddenly discover their smoke. There wasn't smoke before. That's changed. Something has changed, right? And then you hear this, boom! And you realize, oh shit, one of the engines just blew up. That is also change. Definitely not change that you want. You should be resistant to that change. Be like, no, I hope this doesn't happen. Even if there's nothing you can do about it, you'll be like, oh, you know, maybe I'll pray that this doesn't happen. You know, anything that you can reach for and grasp for to have that not happen while you're in a jet. I don't like that change, right? But just saying you're resistant to change is stupid. It's a stupid argument because some change can be bad. And if the only argument against your resistance to change is that, well, look at you, you're just resistant to change. You're resistant to that change. It's not the same as if you're on that jet. And the stewardess comes in and says, we're going to upgrade you from the seat you're in to first class because this leg on the bottom of the seat, we just figured out it's something wrong with it and we don't want anything to happen to you. But we don't have another seat. We're not going to charge you for first class. You just got to go sit in first class. Oh, no, poor me. I'm resistant. No, that's not going to happen. You're going to go sit in first class because you're not resistant to change, right? You're resistant to things that are bad for you and they might involve change. It's a fallacy to argue that you're just resistant to change because you don't like something that has issues. How many students are aware that suffragettes did not see the campaign as a fight of women against men? Like, I wonder, personally, you know, that's a good question. 15 widely used college textbooks on American history were examined and not one makes this clear. Not one. Nor do these textbooks include Susan B. Anthony's statements that women's suffrage laws probably never would have passed if it had been up to women to vote on them. And that men were actually more progressive about women's suffrage than women were, stated in 1902. That's particularly interesting to me, right? Why would so many men want women to vote if men, if misogyny was the way of the time? If men were pressing women because they thought women were inferior, why would they want women to vote? Well, I mean, to ask the question is to answer it, you know, and it's because it wasn't that way. You know, and it's just like what the sentence was asking before about how many college students were aware of it. You know, they're probably off doing their own thing, living their own life, not even thinking about it as most people are. You know, as charged politically as our society is right now, the number of people that just don't care or pay attention is sad. It's disturbing. It's astonishing. But, you know, it's just the reality of things. Most people aren't that tuned in. They've got their own shit going on, you know. But yeah, no, it's never been the case that men have wanted to keep women down. And there's nothing that we've ever looked at that has proven them in any way shape or form. It kind of makes you wonder, you know, the whole, the trope, the feminist trope of men wanting to keep women barefoot pregnant and in the kitchen. Like, if men really wanted that, then why did they push women to go to work and why did they push women to vote? Right. Because both of those efforts were led by men. Right. Both of those issues were led by men. It wasn't women going, "We desperately want to work. We desperately want out of the house. People make it out like that." Like feminist women, like the privileged wealthy feminist women in particular, they pushed it. But you didn't really necessarily see a lot of middle-class women pushing it. You didn't see a lot of poor women pushing it because they were already out of the house working. Right. They were already making money. They weren't making as much as their husbands, but they were making enough to at least keep their families heads above water financially. So women that cleaned other people's houses for a living, women that watched other people's kids for a living, women that did other people's laundry for a living. And in particular, you know, those women that did other people's laundry for a living, they were dirt poor. And they got injured on the regular. Some of them got really badly injured doing their work and still managed to live in poverty. I think their families barely had anything. So yeah, you kind of wonder why who really pushed women into the workplace? Who made that seem attractive to women who were not doing it out of necessity? Because I don't think it was women. The women who were already doing it would have given their ITs to get out of it. And the women who didn't have to and weren't wealthy and bored, who had a lot of stuff to do, who took care of their own kids and did their own laundry and their own cooking. They weren't pushing for it. They weren't trying to get out of the house. They could go places if they wanted to. They didn't have to go get a job. They were pretty happy about that, actually. It's the women who had somebody coming in to do their laundry, had governesses and nannies and so on to take care of their kids. They had Mary Poppins show up and take their kids on weird trips to magical places and didn't do their own cooking either, had a cook or went out to eat all the time because they were socialites. Those women pushed for women to get jobs, and those women pushed for women to get the vote. In fact, there were many sides to the issue, and each point of view had both male and female supporters, so it sounds a lot like politics today. There's not really any feminism has men and women involved. The men's rights movement has men and women involved. Anti-feminism has men and women involved. And conservatism, which is sort of a different facet, it's got some anti-feminism involved in it. They might think their men's rights activists. Some of them maybe understand the issues. Some of them will understand some of the issues, but they're not quite feminist. They're not quite MRAs and they're not quite anti-feminists, so they would be another facet, but there's men and women involved in that too. Every facet of the political spectrum has men and women involved. There's not anything that is just all men. Even the in-cell communication community about the in-cell population, the in-cell population might be all men. But the community that discusses it and treats it as a political issue, that has men and women on both sides too. This paper, he says, explores the paradox of why intelligent, progressive, capable women led the organized opposition to women's suffrage. It looks at some reasons for their opposition, the problem of the uninformed voter, the idea that civic-minded women had more power without the vote, and it suffragists many public relations problems. So we're going to look at, you know, this statement, again, Carrie Chapman Catt said, "The enemy of suffrage was not men, but resistance to change." And Alice Stone Blackwell wrote that, "Always broad-minded men and women on the side of suffrage against narrow-minded men and women on the other side." But the paper points out, "Intelligent, progressive, capable women led the organized opposition to women's suffrage." So this is going to be, I think this is going to be interesting. Finally, it explores the origin of the usual women versus men view of the suffrage struggle and suggests how, or suggests, change in how this phase of history is taught. So he starts with women's opposition to suffrage. Oh, yeah, Packard, excellent. Women's work injuries, not counting working women getting assaulted by their coworkers. So, you know, men and women have been, like, sexual harassment is a real thing. It's happened to both sexes in the workplace and everything, but it's interesting how, as soon as women started getting paid, awards for, in court, for complaining about it, the incidents went up significantly. And all of a sudden, there were women experiencing harassment, like, no, nobody's business. Something I'll probably have to look into in the future. How did making it something you could sue for and get big, big money instead of just get the employer held accountable, or the coworker held accountable when somebody engages in inappropriate behavior like that, regardless of the sex of the worker and regardless of the sex of the person who is harassing them. Like, that, that, that change, I think, encouraged a lot of false allegations, in my opinion. But, in any case, going on, women's opposition was an embarrassing problem that plagued the suffrage movement from the Seneca Falls Convention in 1848 to the ratification of the 19th Amendment in 1920. Despite one textbook's claim that the Seneca Falls Reformers spoke for all American women, they always do that, don't they? We speak for all women. And then, when you oppose them, well, we didn't mean you. Oh, yeah, Packard, I forgot. I wasn't even thinking about myself. Not I forgot that it happened, but I forgot to consider myself. Yeah, I was injured in the workplace in 2019 because a female colleague assaulted me. It wasn't sexual. It was pretty violent, actually, and it was over something stupid. Really, and I can't explain any further because it's a medical environment. But if you understood the facts, the situation, it would be embarrassing to consider what this woman did and why. It just, what can I compare it to? Hmm, I'll have to think about that. I'll explain if I can come up with a comparison that won't give away anybody's private medical information. So, anyway. Hmm. Elizabeth Cady Stanton spoke of the, whoops, I've moved that, spoke of the contempt from which, or with which women themselves regard the movement. It was met by scornful, the scornful curl of the lip and expression of ridicule and disgust. It sounds like feminism wasn't very popular when it started. Gee, I wonder why. Yeah, that's kind of interesting because we get told all the time that the feminist movement started because women, the population, all women everywhere, were just fed up when being oppressed by men. And yet, we're hearing that privileged Elizabeth Cady Stanton spoke of the contempt with which women themselves regard the movement, they're scornful and they're disgusted. Now, I wonder which women she was talking about. Women's support gradually increased nationwide. But even at the time of the final victory in 1920, suffrage leader Carrie Chapman-Cat estimated in a letter that only about a third of women supported suffrage. One-third opposed it and one-third didn't care. So, a third of women were completely indifferent to whether or not they voted, and feminists claim to speak for them, and a third of women opposed getting voting rights and feminists claim to speak for them too. And I would like to know how many women they polled when they made that. You know, when I came up with those numbers, one-third, one-third, one-third. Yeah, it might have been even more women that either opposed or were indifferent. Yeah, I would agree with that. Especially, just from the standpoint of a woman who has lived in modern times in a situation of economic distress, I wouldn't say our family was in an abject poverty because we always had food. But with both of us working and everything, our basic needs were met by our income. Right, but it was a lot of work bringing those resources in. We worked very hard for very little, both of us for years. And I wouldn't have had time to consider that, you know, a group of women was advocating in my family's name a bunch of stuff that was an attack on my husband. If it wasn't for the fact that we also had to help a friend's family over and over again, one friend after another, through legal battles where the system was attacking the husband or another family member that was a man or a boy on the basis of his sex because of feminist lobbied law. That's the only reason that I actually became aware of the systemic issues. Right, and like, imagine women back in these days, right, where you actually had, there was no McDonald's, right? You actually had to make your own food, you know, from scratch. From scratch, from scratch, you had the cook, you had the clean, you didn't have all these machines that did all that shit for you. There were no microwaves. And there was none of that. So women back in those days, their minds were occupied with the maintenance of the house, right? They didn't have time to give a damn about, you know, politics. That was in the natural order of things. I'm sorry, maybe that's in my view, in the natural order of things. The person who is providing the finance for the home, if that's both of you, then find that that is where, you know, the decisions about politics and how we're going to use this right that we have, or privilege or whatever. To vote, this is the direction that we're going to go in, because our family is eating very well right now, and we would like for this to, you know, prosper. So we don't want to vote for the guy that doesn't share our political values. You know, at best, it might have been a discussion over the dinner table. Yeah, you know, but it just women back then did not care. They didn't have the capacity to do that. I mean, and we say all of that. And this is on top of having to care for themselves as women. You know, yeah, they still had menstrual cycles every month. You know what I mean, which must have been horrific to deal with back in the days, but, you know, there was so much that women had to do because they had responsibilities. You know, yes. Yeah, back in that day, back in the day. All right. If your children got sick, you didn't, you might take them to a doctor, but even if you, even if you couldn't get a doctor, you know, or the doctor might come to your house. But they didn't go convalesce in the hospital unless they were dying. And even if they were dying sometimes, they didn't go convalesce in the hospital. You provided 24/7 care. You were the one sitting next to the bedside and spooning soup or water into their mouths if they couldn't drink and eat and changing compresses and trying to bring their fever to a safe level and so on. Like, that was, women just did that. And it was, it was normal. It wasn't adversity. It was normal. And on top of that, you know, you had, people don't understand how intricate housekeeping was 100 years ago. Even even 40 years ago, it was much more intricate than it is now because people buy boxed mixes for everything. People buy ready made food and put it on the table. People who don't do that are healthier. Right. If you go get, I still have to go get raw ingredients and cook because we're allergic to too many things in our household to go by. You have to read the list of ingredients on the side of the box for everything. If you want to get boxed food every day. You'd be amazed. Like, we, I can't even go to the grocery store and buy a pie. All right. Because in our house, we have a food allergy to sweet peas. And up until recently, I say recently, meaning the last four or five years, five or six years somewhere there, you could just go out and buy a pie and there would be, for the most part, you know, you just avoided stuff that had any of the spices. There are some spices we have food allergies to. Right. And they're not deadly food allergies. There's their, their, your body detects this in the stomach and goes, okay, no, and gives it back. So it's, it's, it's that kind of food allergy. Right. But P protein is now being put into baked goods for some unknown reason. Sweet P protein sounds like, you know, you're in. But I, and, and so we, we had a pie one day and our, you know, our, our food allergy person gave it back. And I'm like, what the hell? You know, so start, we start examining the pie. There's nothing wrong with it. It smelled fine. It looked fine. So we started reading the ingredients and we're like, what the fuck? Why is there sweet P protein? Why is there P protein in this? There is no need. I've made pies from scratch, like totally from scratch, not just buy pie filling at the store in a can and put it in a ready-made pie shell. But the raw ingredients for the pie shell make the pie, pie crust dough, cook the pie crust dough a little bit, cut up fruit, add seasonings and sugar and stuff and put it in that and cook it like that kind of from scratch. You don't need P protein. There is no part of the recipe that requires you to add that. No. Well, you know, there, there are, even now, because keto is the big craze, right? So there are products out on the market like keto tortillas, but you flip the package over and it's full of like wheat flour. It's not keto. It's not keto at all. But the only thing that they have on there that is keto is that it has stevia instead of regular cane sugar, which may or may not be okay. Yeah, but you know, we have a food sensitivity to stevia in our house too. It's not one. It's not an allergy. It doesn't like nobody gets hives or throws up or anything. But it tastes, it tastes really, really bitter. Like even the ones that are normally pretty decent, like the non stevia sensitivity person in our house can eat stevia and be like, yeah, that tastes fine to me. And the other person tastes it and it's like, Oh my God. You know, as lips get sucked into his face from how bitter it is, bitter beer face is nothing compared to bitter stevia face. You just, you guys have no idea. But yeah, women, women back in the day, like what my description of making a pie, they would have been completely like, Oh yeah, that's how you, that's, that's the only way to have a pie. You can't just go to the store and buy one. Maybe a baker, but that's expensive, right? And the same thing, they'd say the same thing about bread. The same thing about a pot roast. They'd say the same thing about if you were going to have sushi, you'd make your own sushi. You didn't go to some, you know, like you couldn't buy a sushi at the grocery store 10 years ago, five years ago, for the most part. Right. Right. You know, but, but 100 years ago, you could buy bread at the grocery store, but it was cheaper to make your own. You could buy a lot of things at the grocery store, but it was cheaper to make your own. You had your own garden out in the backyard. If you didn't live in an apartment, you grew some of your own food. Yeah. Right. Like that was, that was typical. It wasn't a luxury. It wasn't a thing people did because they were progressive and forward thinking. It was a thing people did because they were broke and hungry. So it was a necessity. Yeah. Absolutely. In fact, 100 years ago, 100 years ago, because of, oh, shit, the law, the 18th amendment, the temperance amendment, people were actually making their own alcohol too. Bathtub gin, which people, some people died from consuming because they accidentally made the wrong kind of alcohol and didn't realize it and, you know, drank poison basically. Yeah, that's like, you look up what, what happened with bathtub gin, that, that amendment, which, by the way, was lobbied for by women. And using one, people wonder why I went off the way I did the other night about repealing the fucking 19. Sorry if you weren't there for that. Sorry, you need to become a member of our discord channel if you would like to hear the aftershows, because that's where a lot of things get hot. But yeah, no, I am so seriously about that conversation. Maybe not repeal, maybe amended, right? I think it needs to be amended. But good luck. Yeah, sorry, go ahead. Yeah, the temperance movement actually happened before women got voting rights. Women could not vote when the 18th amendment was, was debated, circulated, written, you know, for, for all the states, you know, voted on by the states ratified and so on, and became law. Women were not able to vote, but they were the driving force behind its adoption. They were the driving force behind its ratification. And it was illegal to produce transport store transport and sell alcohol in the United States during that time. You know, after that, after that was passed. And if you want to see a depiction of making bathtub gin, watch the version of Little Orphan Annie that has Carol Burnett in it, should watch that anyway, because it's a great performance by Carol Burnett. But, I mean, everything she did was. So, but in any case, like that, and yes, Richard Beer, you nailed it right there. The power of nagging right there. Although the temperance movement was also violent, like Carrie Nation used to go into bars with an axe. This was not a little woman either. She was six feet tall, big, big woman. She just looked like a man in address. We'd go into, into bars and with an axe and just fuck people shit up. She broke things. She cut up tables. She destroyed the alcohol. She was really scary. And, and the women that, that ran with her were pretty scary too. So, so there was that, but there was a lot of, a lot of it was just about nagging. And, and yeah, they got that done. They didn't need to vote to get that done. It wasn't good for the country when they did it. It created the first, the first, basically the first drug dealers, the organized crime around being drug dealers, the drug being alcohol. And the networks that were created because of that made organized crime. It took organized crime from being a problem in New York to a nationwide problem. It could have been a problem that was quashed in New York, but instead it ended up being a problem that will never go away. Because as long as there are things that people want that are illegal to have, or that, that people need, that they can't use legal channels to get, there will be organized crime now. Thanks, women. You made the pathway for that. And feminists are going to be like, yeah, but, but organized crime is meant. No, there are men and women involved in organized crime. And the women that are involved are, are no less culpable. Right, both sexes are involved in that. But it was mainly women that nagged the country into outlawing alcohol. So, yeah, back in the day, if people wanted booze, they had to make their own booze, too. And, you know, when you cooked, it was entirely, entirely by scratch, or from scratch by hand. You hand-needed dough to make bread. You didn't have bread machines. Unless you ran a factory, you didn't have bread machines. You didn't have an electric stove and an electric oven. You had gas, if you were, if you were lucky. But you didn't have, you know, you didn't have, actually, in the 19th century, they may not even have done that. But, yeah, 100 years ago, they didn't have any of the conveniences that we have now. So, the women that were opposed to feminism, a lot of them might have been opposed to suffrage and feminist progressive ideas, because they were seeing how much more complicated and a stressful, difficult, and dangerous, it would make their lives. You know, yeah, they were cooking on wood stoves. A lot of people were cooking on wood stoves. And you didn't go buy a cake mix, right? You, you bought the ingredients for a cake, the scratch ingredients, you bought your flour, you bought your sugar, you bought your eggs, and you put milk in the cake, you didn't put water in the cake. Yeah, you bought your milk. If you didn't have a cow, if you didn't have chickens, you know, if you didn't grow your own wheat. And forget about oven temperatures, please, you stuck it in there and you checked every once in a while to make sure that it didn't burn, right? Yeah, there's no light. No, there was no set to 350 degrees. There was, you put the cake in to a gas oven. If you were really wealthy, I think they think it might have had them at that point. But you put it in wood stoves, you put it in over hot coals or hot, hot, hot, hot, not coals, but I can't think of the term wood chips that you had, that have been cut up, right? Or you put it in a pot, you put the pan in a pot that hung from a bar across your, your, the bottom of your chimney over your fireplace. Yes. So, and there's, and there's a reason that food that is cooked over an open flame, you know, with like wood chips or, or, you know, some kind of wood smoked flavor. It tastes so much better than just, you know, I haven't, like I have an electric stove, I deal with it, but you know, it's, it's just so much better. It, it, it's the taste better, in my opinion. You know, when you cook like that over an open flame, you know, it's, it's just more back to nature and the way things that we were done, you know, the things that, that we are kind of instinctively attracted to, you know, with our, our sensory and our taste buds and things like that. But, but by the, by the 20s, gas ranges were like, I'm looking at a report. This is on weebly so I don't know. But I'm looking at a report here that by the 1920s, this, this is local. Zanesville is close to, to hear where I am, but by the 1920s, it says even many hard pressed families got gas, had gas ranges in Zanesville, Ohio, where 70% of homes are in less than an amount considered comfortable 90% had a gas range. And it cites a source, Cohen, 1983, and page numbers and stuff. So there's, it's a research paper, but so natural gas, you know, they, they had that. But, and, and I don't think charcoal was the word I was looking for. I think it was just wood chips, wood chips, although they might have called it that. I don't know. But when I was talking about cooking over hot coals, I was talking about actual chunks of coal, like not processed. But yeah, I would say probably at least in cities. It was pretty common to have, you know, now the, the phrase now you're cooking with gas probably is about how much easier it was to have a consistent outcome in your cooking. When you food, when you got a gas range, instead of trying to cook over again, an oven that was like, that was also the heater for the household back in the day. Like you're, you didn't shut it off. You didn't put the fire out in the wintertime. You kept it going all the time. And in the summertime, you suffered when, when you cooked. Yeah. Do you remember, because I distinctly remember the jingle from an ad campaign about switching your house over to oil, or, or to gas, and it was oil heat and dinosaur oil heat and dinosaur. Do you remember that at all? I don't, I don't, but that sounds like, it sounds like something that would come out of the 1970s. Yeah. Yeah. And that's, well, at least in the 80s, because I remember that distinctly oil heat and dinosaur. Oh my God. Yeah. And it was just a ploy to get people to switch over to gas for heating their homes. And so my dad was a steam sitter. And so he always dealt with oil. We had oil tank in the house. Yeah. You know, and, you know, because he knew how to work on it, you know, he could fix it himself. He didn't have to go call someone to come and fix his, his place. You know, he did it himself. So, yeah, but that's just crazy that you mentioned that about the gas and stuff. Yeah. Yeah. And, and those were, there were households, there were whole households that were, that were heated before you had gas heat and before electricity existed. Every household that needed heat had a wood stove and like you call it a wood stove, but you could put, it was just basically an iron enclosed fireplace. And it would, my parents used to talk about remembering their grandparents house, having those. My dad used to go stay on his grandma's farm all the time. And, you know, my mom visited my grandfather's mother. My, my great grandfather, by the way, was murdered by the mafia. That's, that's a whole different story. He was, he was not a wise man. And he got himself into a very stupid situation. And, you know, he was, he was murdered by the mafia for doing something that, if you understand about their culture, you don't do. But in any case, the, the stove, my mom's first really serious injury was, she was told not to touch the wood stove because it was red, part of it was red. And she was, you know, defiant. You tell me what to do, I'm going to go touch that. And she learned that when somebody says don't touch that, there's probably a reason and she should listen. And that was, that was pretty much the same sort of, I got told that story after I stuck my foot in hot coals to see if they were still hot and got third degree burns on my foot. So, in any case, it was like, don't feel bad. I did the same thing in defiance of my grandmother. Because women are brilliant. We all do stupid shit like that, right? Don't you tell me what to do. You can't tell me what to do. Oh, why did you make me get hurt? Right, right. Oh, yeah, it's always someone else's fault when it can be. So there were when they write when he writes that the, they're talking about a third didn't care. I agree. I think that it's more than that. A third didn't even have time to think about it. Yeah, maybe half or more didn't care. And those that opposed it were people in that situation that didn't really have time to think about it, but somebody made them anyway. Somebody gave them a reason why they had no choice. They like, all right, we got to think about this. Fine. Don't do it. This is where we already got enough on our plate. Don't do this. And the suffragettes were like, well, we represent you anyway. Kind of kind of like what Jessica Valenti said to the public when women against feminism came out. Like, oh, you might you might oppose us, but we're going to we're going to fight for your rights anyway. You know, what rights? Well, feminism isn't fighting for any legal rights that men have that women don't, but they are fighting for the ability of mothers who divorce the father. They divorce the fathers of their children to then shut the father out of the child's life. Not really a right, but definitely something that feminists want women to be able to do. In her book, Women's Suffrage in Politics in 1923, Kat wrote, oh, Kat claimed the support of most of all women as suffragettes have been doing for decades. In her book, Women's Suffrage in Politics, 1923, she wrote that suffragists represented an unmistakable popular demand for a just cause. Unmistakable and just. So those are our characterization. Unmistakable popular demand demand, or whatever. I just, where are you getting this from? They're using weasel words neo weasel words. That's the thing. I'm making it a thing. Well, and the thing that really bothers me about the history here, like they're talking about this, like, women universally wanted to face all of the hardships that would come with gaining the rights. That they were fighting for. And they, like, there were a lot of women that looked at the situation, oh, you want the same rights as men? Okay, men are the shield between women and the entire legal system. So if we get the same rights as men, we're vulnerable to the entire legal system, right? If we fuck up, now we can go to jail, we can get fined, we can be sued. Like, this is a scary prospect if you know you're shielded and you can act with impunity and you're accustomed to that. You know, same thing with debt. Same thing with, especially if women had relied on their husbands to tell them what was okay in regard to spending. They didn't have to think about budgeting and they didn't have to think about any of that. They just said, I need this much for our household needs. And the husband would just do the work it took to get that money or point out that, hey, that's this percent of how much I bring in. They're discussing coal versus Coke in the chat, which Coke, yeah, because we have. Let me see if I can. Okay, let's see if I can find Coke, Coke was a, it wasn't, it wasn't cocaine and it wasn't Coca Cola. It was another substance that you burned in. I thought I could easily look up the process. It's made out of coal. Yeah, here we go. Here we go. Okay. That's an AI overview. That's, but it's probably, it's probably correct because I'm looking at the sources it drew on and only one of them. It looks sus and it's Wikipedia, but the other two are more, one of them is the National Coal Mining Museum. So I think that's pretty, yeah. But it's made by refining coal by heating coal or oil without air in a process called Coking that creates this porous substance that burns cleaner and better than like raw coal. Oh, that's neat. The Packard has a book that tells you how to refine it by Packard. That's valuable. You should hold on to that. Put it, put it in and one of those things, one of those plastic covers that you get for comic books and seal it and keep it. Don't let anything happen to that. Especially now because, you know, all the talk of an apocalypse and a collapse and everything, you might need it. But that knowledge would be very valuable. Very important to not lose it. But yeah, so going on, just to settle the coke thing. Yeah, no, they didn't burn cocaine. Why would people have a lot of energy there? It'd be like, well, they would think they did anyway. Just from personal experience being the sober person in the room around people that have been using drugs and alcohol. People who have used cocaine think that they are on fast forward, but they're not. Just they're not. In her book, oh, I read that part of my suffrage leader Abigail Scott, Dunway of Oregon. Similarly, clouded the issue of women's support. Oh, I left out. Kat didn't mention her observation that only a minority of women supported their own right to vote. So Abigail Scott, then clouded the issue of women's support, claiming that the silent majority of women wanted suffrage while also admitting that suffragists do not claim or even desire much numerical strength. So everywhere, the suffragist. I'm fucking with silent majority. If you're the fucking majority. Yeah. Okay, sorry that that just does not make any fucking sense to me because if that's the case, then number one, they're not silent. And if that's not the case, then where are you getting these fucking numbers from? It's annoying. It's annoying. And Derek, yes, Coke is used in making a steel. In fact, it's essential to the process. It's in order to get the level of heat that you need. It might still be, but it definitely, yeah, to make steel in a blast furnace anyway. So yeah, but yeah. So, and that's something like most most women probably wouldn't care about. But men put that together. Men did that. We have steel because men tried out things like that, experimented and tested and dealt with the oppressive heat. And I don't know what it's like in a plant that works with steel, but I was a security guard and a plant that did aluminum molding for car parts. And when you went into the area outside the room, where like there was a room where the molds were and the aluminum would be poured into molds and they would go through the process of curing or whatever. Outside of that room, it was super hot, like the kind of heat where if I went in there for very long, I would start having symptoms of heat sickness. So I was in there just long enough, there were some gadgets that I had to check to make sure the arm on the dial hadn't moved into the red zone and I had a number to call if it did. And if it moved into the yellow zone, I had to call that number actually, it had to be in the green zone and because they don't want something to explode, basically. And if it's in the red zone, you get the fuck out of there. But in any case, like that heat was bad and that wasn't the hottest place. I didn't have to go into the hottest part of the factory. So like there were men that worked in there. And it was just unbelievable how hot that was. But yeah, women, not very much, not so much. Packard says aluminum has a several hundred lower melting temperature than steel. That makes sense because aluminum is the softer, not as sturdy. So it would take more to melt steel, to make steel. But yeah, again, women wanting equality. And then us being able to talk about that at the same time, it's an interesting juxtaposition because there have always been men who have done those jobs because they need the amount of money that those jobs pay and those jobs pay more because of the hardship and the danger. Like heat sickness is something that can happen to anybody and it's really life-threatening, very dangerous. I experienced the border between heat exhaustion and heat stroke once. And ever since then, I've had a weakness to high levels of heat. And that was not even in an environment like that. I was in a kitchen. It was not even super hot in comparison. Like I've worked in hotter environments than that in the past. It's just that my employer didn't properly ventilate the kitchen at that location. But men do those jobs and men made those jobs that were so much more dangerous and so much harder to do and so much heavier and just did them. They just always did them. But yeah, it's an interesting juxtaposition with these women sort of whining for the same rights as men, knowing full well that they don't have to do the overwhelming majority of things that men do to keep society running. They don't face the things that men face that inform their voting. Albert Nader-Retro gave us $2 Canadian and said, "Suffer jet silent? Ha!" And that is absolutely fabulous. Meredith G. gave us $5 and said, "HBR, talk 318, honey for the badgers. I tip you because you're worth it. Thanks for the great conversation." And thank you, Meredith. And a better look, I don't have the chat open. There we go. In Brave. And somebody had asked, "Do we get anything from rumble rants?" We do, but Feed the Badger gives us everything and even rumble has to take a cut. Like, they can't make their money if they don't, right? But if you're going to tip us through something other than Feed the Badger, I genuinely would rather it be rumble than YouTube, personally. Although, I do see the YouTube super chats, and I will read them. Feed the Badger gives us the most rumble rants support a platform that isn't going to censor you or us or punish you or us for controversial speech. So there you go. I won't say anything about any other platform because I don't want to get in trouble. So, yeah, the statement that they don't need very many women to sign on to claim that they represent women is quite an interesting one. Feminists have done that the whole time. They have claimed the whole time that they have the support of the majority of women. And then when you show them evidence, like, there are surveys throughout history that say that women do not support the feminist movement. Some of them have said, you know, like, 18% of women do. There was one that said only 12% of women would call themselves feminist and supported the feminist movement, supported feminist organizations and stuff. I've seen ones that ask about specific feminist organizations where, like, women actually seem to hate those organizations en masse, and there aren't very many women who are members, and most women don't want to be involved. And they'll try to parlay 12% into a majority by saying things like, well, women, when they're surveyed about the issues, they believe in equality, they support equality, they just don't like feminism and don't want to call themselves feminists. So they are feminists because they don't understand what feminism is. That's the argument that we get all the time. And that argument is based on saying that feminism is about equality. But then when you go back and you look, you find out that feminism is about accusing men of oppressing women, hating on men, calling men monsters, and then demanding that men help women. You're a woman hating monster! Help us! But yeah, so for them to say, to have admitted, you know, we don't claim or even desire much numerical strength, that kind of is typical, right, of feminism? Nothing new there, nothing old there. It's just timeless. Everywhere that suffragettes carried on campaigns, other women organized to block their progress. This is, we're talking about the suffragettes again. This is back in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, right? The patriarchy, the so-called patriarchy, was women. Everywhere that suffragettes carried on campaigns, other women organized to block their progress. This is not to correct you, but to correct you, this is talking about suffragettes. That's suffragettes, yeah, yeah. Well, it's important because the suffragettes were more in your face violent, and the suffragettes passed out pamphlets and wrote articles and letters and contacted their politicians and asked politely. So there is a big difference there. Although the suffragettes in the United States were not so much violent as they were racist, the suffragettes in the UK were violent as fuck, they were terrorists. Yeah, absolutely 100%. And they actually, there's evidence that women in the UK would have gotten the vote sooner if it had not been for the violence of the suffragettes. There were legislators that desperately wanted to give women voting rights because they felt that they would have the support of women and it would enhance their power, but they couldn't because the suffragettes violence made it very politically incorrect at the time. It demonstrated that women were not rational enough to deserve voting rights. And of course, it gave a lot of credence to the women who were saying, "We don't want this, and we don't agree. We're not with them. We want our own table, thanks." Like, they were distancing themselves moving away, everybody else moving away from the suffragettes on the bench, you know, giving them the hairy eyeball and all that. And all of the zoomers and millennials are going, "What's that a reference to? I have no idea." And everybody that has Alice's restaurant, they were raised is going, "Oh, yeah." But, but yeah, this has been it throughout history. Women organized to block their progress. Women didn't agree with them. Women were not on board. If you're talking about from the blog, Derek, it depends on the wording and whether or not it involves describing an action, a planned action, intended action, or suggesting that an action should happen, versus saying that this thing is predictable that at some point, this is likely, and we should maybe curb some things that are going on in order to prevent it. That's okay to talk about. But yes, if you're advocating for something that is illegal or bad, that will definitely result in us saying, "No, you can't say that." Not on our platform anyway. You can get in trouble somewhere else. You don't have to take us with you. In 1869, Anthony and Stanton left the American Equal Rights Association to form the National Women's Suffrage Association. Well, wait a minute. And so feminism is not about equal rights. It's about women's suffrage. It's about women. They left the Equal Rights Association based in New York, feeling that the National Association was too radical on religion and divorce to represent most suffragists. Lucy Stone, William Lloyd Garrison and others organized the American Women's Suffrage Association. So we had NWSA and AWSA, based in Boston. Anti-suffrage women responded by forming the Massachusetts Association opposed to the further extension of suffrage to women. I don't even want to try to pronounce the, they didn't put a imprint to seize anything there. The New York State Association opposed to women's suffrage in many other state organizations. The anti-as as they were called, testified before legislatures, published articles and newsletters, this being a petition here, held public meetings and eventually debated the suffragists. So this petition, see if I can increase the size of this so I can actually read it. It's not a very good copy. And it's got the whole petition language, whereas, whereas this country is now engaged in the greatest war in history. That would have been World War I, I think. Yeah, World War I started by then. Whereas the advocates of the Federal Amendment, through urging it as a war measure, gosh darn it, that print is freaking tiny and light. Okay, I can't make out the letters that word through their President, Mrs. Cat, that its passage means a simultaneous campaign in states. It, good grief, I wonder if the, no, it doesn't. I can't tell if this is the one, they were afraid they would get drafted and I think that's what this is. This, that our country in this hour apparel should be spared the harassing of its public men and the distracting of its people from work for the war. That was one thing they were mad. What comment did you tag me in, Albert? This is, this is tough. I, okay. I see you tag, you hadn't tagged me, you are tagging me. All right, Albert Nader retro gave us five dollars. Canadian said here's a five, please read the comment. I tag you and I'll bet it was not letting you say it in the paid comment. Was it at Badger Live streams, Marylay tried to declare, do you delete the British PM? Yes, they, they tried to murder the British PM with a hatchet, but got Irish nationalist leader John Redmond instead because she threw like a girl. Oh God, I have something I have to do now. Do I know where it is? I have a video that I now have to show you guys. And my desktop is so messy. All right, let's see here. While I'm doing that, I'll show you in a minute. It's, it's not just throwing like a man or a woman. There is a specific way to throw an axe properly. And if you don't throw it right, because if you're throwing a baseball, for instance, you have, there's kind of a, yeah, they probably didn't like the word hatchet. There's kind of a different way to throw a baseball because you're, you're using your arm like almost like a, a trebuchet. But if you're throwing an axe and you throw it like that, it fucks up the way that it, because it's, it's balance is different. It has that handle and everything. And then the, the axe head is heavy and it's heavier than the handle. And if it's not a throwing axe, it'll mess it up too. So she just threw an axe that was a tool that, that would have fucked it up. And then on top of that, let's see if this is the right video. I think this is, this is the one filmed by my husband. I'm just going to really quick take a look and I'm going to put it in, it's on a different computer than I'm using, so I'm putting it into a discord chat and then downloading it from there. So this, just going to take a second. This is obviously in a controlled environment. So I don't think that, that it would be as easy to do under that circumstance. So this is not me saying like, whoa, anybody can do this because I don't think just anybody can, can do this. But let me see if I can put this in the window and download. Maybe. For some reason, it's really slow to load up. It's not even a big video, dammit, it's a couple of seconds. There we go, okay. And the sound is coming through, but the video's not showing, yay! That was awesome. That was my son's voice. Okay, so it's downloading it twice, but it's not actually playing a video. Really. Now I'm loading it a bunch of times, cancel. And that's not what I'm looking for. Oops, open that back up because that actually I wanted to. Sorry guys, this is going to take just a minute so I can illustrate. I'll do that and then I will finish the paragraph, if I can, and then we'll end it. But it's a point that I'm adamant on just for the plain and simple reason that I'm a bit of a nerd about knowing information. I guess, see if I can, that's not going to work. It won't even let me increase the size. Let me try it. There we go. It's a phone video, so it's not very big. And this is me. This is from a few years ago at a company called Wild Axe, and you can go in there and throw axes. You can go in there and throw knives. This was my third attempt, not my first attempt, so it's not like this was me being a natural or anything like that. But this is, if you want to actually hit a target, you can see I'm unsteady there, right? That was bad. But you cannot throw an axe like a baseball. You cannot. It has to be that straight, steady kind of throw. If you don't have exactly that form, you don't hit your target, and it can actually bounce off of something and come back and hit you. So, thank you, Senior Sticks, for being a third attempt, I'm pretty proud of it, I'm pretty pleased with it, because I thought there's, you know, I was going to suck the whole time. Because I have crappy depth perception, but so anybody that goes out into a public place and starts throwing axes at people is endangering everybody there. You know, unless it's something they're really practiced at, it wasn't just a stupid move and it wasn't just murderous, it was profoundly dangerous, and she threatened not just the PM, but everyone. And that's why she ended up accidentally killing a different person than she intended to, which, you know, it's bad enough to intend to kill somebody. But to then end up killing an innocent bystander, because you chose the hardest way to do that, and it turns out you sucked at it, like, that's just that much worse. That's just that much worse, you know. But yeah. So there you go, there's the bit about the axe throwing, and let me see if I can get back that article that I accidentally closed, because I want that up. This is our after show for today, so you guys know 69 things Donald Trump has said about women is the article will be going over in our patron only after show, so if you want to see us react and laugh about that. Oh, heck no, Packard, I would not. No, no, no, no, you guys don't understand. I got badly injured in that fight, and it was a fight in that I was trying to get away from her. I did not fight back. I did not use violence to retaliate against her for engaging in violence against me in that fight. That Packard is referring to, he says, "Your violent coworker is lucky you did not have your axe handy." And I know it's a joke, but I will say this. I didn't hit her back. I didn't do anything to cause any injury to her. At the time, I underestimated how much damage I was taking, so I didn't resort to violence to get away from her. I wasn't, I should have been more afraid than I was, but you have to understand that I have faced a higher level of violence than what she was engaging in in the past when I was younger and sturdier. And so what she did was bad and violent and it hurt me and it was cruel, but it didn't scare me. It would have been scary if I was not used to violence, but it wasn't because I am, if that makes sense, even though I haven't faced violence in a long time. And that's the other thing, it took me by surprise because of the environment I was in. It wasn't really expecting violence. There was a moment where it could have injured her very badly to put a stop to it. She didn't, she left her knees completely undefended, completely. And I was on my back, it was perfect position for a kick. And I couldn't bring myself to do that because again, I just, that's a permanent thing. And I would have to remember doing that for the rest of my life. I would have to remember all of my life that I made it so that somebody would never walk right again. And I couldn't bring myself to do that. If I thought my life was threatened, then I could. If I had understood the head injury that I had acquired at that moment, then I probably would have, but I wasn't really aware of how bad things were. So, yeah, this is, you just cannot engage in that level of violence. And it's, you know, it would have been funny 10 years ago to say that. But with all of what's going on today, it just, nope, I'm very wary of that kind of talk anymore because people don't have the space. Right now, for that humor. I want us to get back to a point where we can, but I'm not going to act like it's there today. Just because of what happened, you know, recently. So, anyway, I actually lost the other page too, didn't I? Alright. Wow, that's not actually, that's not even in my history. The page that I just accidentally closed isn't even showing up in my history. I can't get it back. Well, that's weird. I'll have to solve this next week. I'm sorry, guys, I didn't mean to close that. And it's not like when you, there's a keystroke for reopening tabs that you accidentally closed, and it's not working. And I looked in my history and that page isn't coming back. Like, it's just not there. That's weird. Let's see if I can, nope, it's not. I'll figure it out before next week. I must have really screwed something up here. I don't think that there's a, I must have really screwed up. Anyway, sorry, guys. So, I guess that's going to be the end of the show because my material is, I'm going to have to track down my material again. I'm sure I'll be able to just fine. I just don't want to waste time doing it at the end of a show. It's after nine, so. But in the meantime, like I said, I've plugged the after show. Yeah, 69. They had to do that on purpose. Albert, Albert Ritt, Nate, or Rethrow gave us $2, Canadian said 69, huh? And I'm 100% certain that somebody at that publication has a sense of humor. So, but if you want to be involved in our after shows, you want to be able to come in and comment and talk about the article and listen and stuff like that. Like I said, at the beginning of the show, the the platform is FeedTheBadger.com. And that is the most stable way to help us out. It's a good way to arrange your membership and join our Discord. The free part of our Discord is obviously you can be in it anyway, but the paid part of our Discord definitely you can find a way to to that on FeedTheBadger as well. So, so that's my recommendation. You want to get to to participate in sort of fun, making fun of people freaking out over things Donald Trump has said about women. Oh my God, the humanity. We will have our best fainting couch for this episode. And with that, I have read all of the super chats, all of the superchows, all of the rumble, but there wasn't any rumble rants. And so thanks to my two co-hosts for going through this. This material is infuriating, so it's kind of you almost need to have a kitten video viewing party afterward. So thanks for going through that with me. Thanks to the listeners for tolerating my history fetish and good night all. And thanks everybody who works in the background also to make HBR talk happen and good night all. When it comes to renting out your property, the uncertainty of finding reliable tenants can feel like a real guessing game. Responsible renter or perpetual party animal. Enter renter's warehouse. The pros who turn the uncertainty of finding great tenants into peace of mind. Renter's warehouse offers top-notch leasing and tenant placement services, ensuring you get trustworthy renters without the hassles and headaches. With no upfront fees, Renter's warehouse works for you, not the other way around. From marketing and showing your property to screening tenants and preparing the lease, their team of experts handles it all so you can sit back and watch the rent roll in. Renter's warehouse even warranties their tenants for up to 18 months at no extra cost. And if you need ongoing management, they've got you covered too, all for a flat monthly fee. Visit renterswearhouse.com to request a free rental price analysis that's renterswearhouse.com or call 303-974-9444 to speak to a rent estate advisor today. What's next? At Moss Adams, that question inspires us to help people and their businesses strategically define and claim their future. As one of America's leading accounting, consulting and wealth management firms, our collaborative approach creates solutions for your unique business needs. We leverage industry-focused insights with the collective technical resources of our firm to elevate your performance. Uncover opportunity and move upward at MossAtoms.com.