WarRoom Battleground EP 979: Finnish Politician Cites Romans 1 — And Is Convicted Under “War Crimes And Crimes Against Humanity”
Stephen K. Bannon and Frank Walker analyze the U.S. Supreme Court's 8-to-1 ruling protecting conversion therapy bans as free speech, contrasting it with Finland's conviction of parliamentarian Paivi Rasanen for citing Romans 1:24-27 under "War Crimes." They examine the removal of Carrie Prejean Boller from the President's Commission on Religious Liberty by Dan Patrick and Utah's new law mandating Bible passages as historical documents. Finally, they discuss Australian data showing Generation Z shifting toward traditional gender roles and male financial responsibility, highlighting a global cultural divergence between American legal protections and European secular enforcement. [Automatically generated summary]
Hanwell here at the helm on Steve Bannon's War Room.
There was a massive victory in the Supreme Court this week, and I'm going to discuss it now.
With Frank Walker, you might have heard some of these issues.
Uh, states, various states, 23 in total, have in their own legislatures blocked the ability of Christian pastors and Christian parents to offer therapies of various kinds to their kids, uh, to reinforce the strength of the biological gender.
And these things are loosely called conversion therapies.
And as I was saying, 23 or so states now have laws prohibiting this.
The Supreme Court, I think it was yesterday, overturned a law in Colorado precisely on this point.
And that will now have repercussions for the other 23, the other 22 states as well.
And the issue basically.
Came down to whether these therapies were free speech and therefore protected by the First Amendment or health care, in which case it was something the states can legislate on.
And in a very strong vote in the Supreme Court, 8 to 1, the Supreme Court said that it's a free speech.
Issue Frank Walker.
Um, tell me, tell me, break this down for me because I think this is going to have massive repercussions now, right across and those other 22 states.
Exactly what the issue was here, and who was the one justice, associate justice, who was in the minority on this?
And we've been enduring this conversion therapy ban.
Uh, thing for a long time.
In fact, there was a good Catholic group called Courage, which used to kind of do this kind of thing, but they've been neutered because of these laws.
And in Colorado, they had a law against it in a liberal Colorado, and the court struck it down.
They didn't just strike it down by a majority, they struck it down eight to one.
Only Tangie Brown was the only person who disagreed with it, which I think is fascinating.
It's on the speech grounds, which is not, I mean, you would think that speech would have to do with something that was broadcast or public speech or something.
You know, originally when they had freedom of speech, they didn't think of all these things in the time of their constitution.
But it touches on health care, which they call therapy, psychological therapy, health care.
It also touches on, which isn't really mentioned.
Much in the case, except for the person involved, the counselor, that it's a religious issue.
And religious issues touch upon morality.
And how are you supposed to have law and justice without morality?
So it's fascinating, all those things.
And it's also fascinating that it was eight to one against it.
If the courts were so against it, if the Supreme Court is so against this, why do we have to endure it for such a long time?
And I think it speaks to the changing times that we're in, because in ruling against this, In the name of free speech, they're also saying that you can't prevent pro gay free speech or pro gay counseling or therapy.
Jenny from your show sent us an article a week ago or so.
It was fascinating.
Leo Varadkar from the former prime minister of Ireland was saying that he felt society was getting squeezed between Putin and Trump.
And if you look at the way Russia handles these kinds of speech issues, they permit People to have gay lifestyles, but you're not allowed to propagandize about it.
You're not allowed to convince young people to follow it, which is, if you look at the United States, I mean, the number of gay young people have exploded in the last 10 years or 20 years or so.
So this touches on a lot of different things, but I think it's like it's kind of preventing future problems.
And that's why you have some liberal justices have supported on the Supreme Court.
I have to say that as I'm sort of following these various surveys as they come out, the number of kids.
Um, who are identifying as LGBTQ, um, it's actually falling.
The last one I saw was about three or four months ago.
The actual figures are coming down now, so it suggests some kind of high watermark has already been reached.
Just to indicate here, as you were saying, the two varying viewpoints, um, on behalf of the Christian therapist.
Her argument was basically that counselors walking alongside young people shouldn't be limited to promoting state approved goals like gender transition, which often lead to harmful drugs and surgeries.
And in the opposite camp, you had Colorado saying that the state says that the measure simply bars using therapy to try to convert LGBTQ people to heterosexuality or to traditional gender expectations.
And as you were saying, the majority opinion, as written by Neil Gorsuch, came down and said quite firmly, including two of the progressive justices, Sotomayor and Kagan, unusually, I think, that they said, no, no, this is absolutely a free speech issue.
Well, the left is upset and they're saying, well, you're not allowed to change someone's identity.
And the counselor says, I'm just practicing my religion.
But in reality, gay sex is something that you do.
It's not something that you are.
Just because you have that sort of inclination, it doesn't mean that you're stuck that way.
I think most people that have gay inclinations are really kind of bisexual.
It is healthy and it is good therapy to teach people restraint and discipline and to guide them to family life.
Just because you have a gay inclination, it doesn't mean that you're.
You have to like do every single gay outlet that you can imagine.
That's not healthy.
That's not therapy.
And then I think that that's something they've been limited from doing.
And they should be able to have a right to do that because.
People that have that live gay lifestyles are transsexual lifestyles.
You know, they're as you can see in the press, they can be sometimes the greater numbers of massacres, murders.
They say that if you if somebody tries to convince you not to have gay feelings, that they're causing you to commit suicide.
Well, suicide is something that you do to yourself, you're the one who's guilty of it.
But the suicides and the pathological and the dysfunctional kinds of things are much higher if people that live with you know not in normal family lifestyles and people don't embrace the.
The gender that they are, and they reject the opposite sex.
It's just there's all sorts of what you would call therapeutic issues that are involved.
And it's just and religious and morality issues and teaching people to live a more of a happy and a healthy lifestyle.
And that kind of all of that talk, everything I just said to you has been repressed, has been illegal.
And it's a wonderful thing to see it changing.
And these kinds of things are happening in the courts, people in the morality part of the media, in the faithful, Religious and Catholic part of the media.
I think that they're forgetting that in all of this, all of these attacks, these never Trump attacks on different issues are affecting the midterms.
And if the midterms, when they come around in six months from now or whenever, we're going to lose this kind of momentum and these kinds of things at the courts.
This is what's happening, I think, in the faithful, Catholic, and Christian community with all of this lobbying against Trump.
And it certainly is a result of Trump and the nominations he'd made to the Supreme Court in his first term, right?
I know sometimes the court goes against the administration, but this is a very clear indication of exactly the sort of thing.
Because this councillor, Kaylee Childs, who was being supported by the Alliance for Defending Freedom, was also very much being supported by the administration as well.
So this is an indication, I think, of something that MAGA had wanted to see.
Uh, when they elected President Trump and President Trump via his nominations to the Supreme Court, very much delivering on that agenda.
Um, what are you looking at in terms of the Supreme Court and anything coming up that you have your eye on at Canon 212 to see how the Supreme Court's going to go on?
Well, I haven't had a chance to look at it today, but I know that Trump was going to be visiting, actually be in the court listening to arguments over birthright citizenship, which is very important to the Catholic bishops.
I know that.
And really has a big chunk of his move to try to control the overflowing borders, which affects the vote, which is really a pro life issue in many ways.
So they're dealing with that today.
And I'm not sure, I think it's unprecedented that he actually went to the court.
And so if it does rule against them, I suppose that he's going to go and pursue a political path against it.
I think Trump has had a lot of influence on the courts now, even though, you know, in his second term, not only did he have these ones that he's appointed, but he has an effective team.
And for one reason or another, he's able to have a lot of effect on the courts.
I mean, it's amazing to see that they're so in favor of this, you know, when the court is really not.
You know, is really not this much on the right as it came out.
So I think Trump, even in the second term, and there are some people who may retire who are very good.
On the court, and he will have to reappoint them next time.
This kind of the whole world will change if the midterms don't go Trump's way.
I mean, that'll be the end of a lot of momentum.
And I know what's happening in all of these wars looks really, really difficult, and the news is really terrible against it.
But he's moving against globalists and globalist centers of power.
You know, and when you see Iran, you see the economy, you see oil, you see the control of the price of oil.
There's other layers to what's happening, and he's really squeezing Europe.
And as we'll learn about today, Europe is a totally different situation.
It's still like Biden land, it's still Kamala land in Europe.
And he's putting the squeeze on them economically and in NATO militarily.
And those things will be good for Europe in the long run if Trump can continue to apply pressure like he already has in the United States.
For me, come back to you later on in the show, the difference between.
Europe and the United States.
Thanks in part to tip the hat once again to the president's nominations to the Supreme Court.
Absolutely astonishing news coming out of Finland.
And I think it really does illustrate, and also good news coming out of the states of Utah.
I think that sort of just illustrates the difference when it comes to Holy Scripture in both the difference between America and the EU.
We're going to come back to that with you, Frank, in about a quarter of an hour's time.
So please stand by.
And also, of course, when you come back, We're going to be staying on the theme of the alliance for defending freedom because they're also involved in the Finnish case as well.
Before we go to Joseph, think about this.
In 2006, if you'd spent $20,000 and bought gold at spot price, you'd have bought yourself around 33 ounces.
If you'd have held on to those 33 ounces and sold them today, again at spot price, 20 years later, you'll find that.
What you bought for $20,000, you would be selling for $165,000.
That's why smart Americans are diversifying a portion of their savings into precious metals.
And that's why you need to consider buying gold from our friends at Birch Gold Group.
For thousands of years, gold has been a store of wealth.
And today, it's a crucial part of any balanced strategy.
Even better, Birch Gold can help you convert an existing IRA or 401k into A tax sheltered retirement account in gold.
Joseph, you were in the States, I think, last week for CPAC.
There's a story, I don't know if you were discussing this with anyone there, because it's certainly been quite topical on my getter feed.
But.
Carrie Prejean Boller, who was on the President's Commission on Religious Liberty, was kicked off.
The commission by its chairman because, in her words, she was kicked off because of an anti Catholic prejudice on behalf of Texas's Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick.
And she appealed on social media to Bishop Robert Barron, or as we call him on the war room, Robert Barron.
For sustenance, for some political support.
Let's just say that political support wasn't forthcoming.
How did he respond to her plea when she appealed to her fellow Catholic and bishop, who himself is very prominent on social media?
How did he respond and what reasons did he give for declining to help?
I mean, Bishop Barron, first and foremost, is known for, let's say, trying to make things better than they seem very often.
Of course, the famous case being there's hopefully nobody in hell.
But among many other things, he tends to be overly diplomatic when it comes to issues of religious liberty.
And in this case, called Carrie absurd for claiming that there was any anti Catholic sentiment on the Religious Liberty Commission board, which You know, whether or not it's true is not the way to treat one of the faithful who's reaching out to you for more support.
And the public nature of he did it to me signified that there was something deeper going on, which is that he just simply doesn't want to give opinions that might be considered political and weight.
And, you know, I think that this is part of a deeper kind of problem, which really is not being addressed enough, which is, you know, how strong is too strong when it comes to standing up for your faith?
You know, if that was a person of another faith, Let's say a Muslim or a member of the Jewish community speaking out against what they perceive to be anti Semitic or Islamophobic tropes.
I don't think a Catholic bishop like Barron would be speaking out with the same vociferous anger, self righteous anger, and pomposity.
So, look, it's a complicated topic.
And I think that, as usual, Bishop Barron has managed to get on the wrong side of his pastoral duty.
So we've got like about seven minutes before we go to the break.
So that sort of limits how much we can go into this.
But I, you know, we don't have time to cover this very fully.
I'm certainly not in detail, but pertinent to the story is the fact that when on the hearing that was, I think, the last one earlier in March, March 16th, Carrie Prejean Boller was.
Indicating at this meeting, she was indicating the presence of Zionism on the 9th of February.
And she said, I'm a Catholic and Catholics do not embrace Zionism, just so you know.
And I think that's somewhat relevant here to.
And again, relevant because she directly criticized the Reverend Paula White on this very point in a previous post.
I sort of think that she might have had more success if she had said that she wasn't kicked off in her appeal to Bishop Barron.
And as I say, she's made this point elsewhere.
I don't know how easy or successful she's going to find it, saying she was kicked off the Presidential Commission on Religious Liberty because she's Catholic.
I think it's probably, as she said elsewhere, more on the Zionist issue.
Uh, and when she says, I am a Catholic and Catholics do not embrace Zionism, here Joseph Robertson, I just want to put something to you, which is I think this is a pretty good litmus test for the difference between conciliar Catholics and traditional Catholics.
Um, because whereas I would say that the conciliar Catholic Church, which for our sort of evangelical audience, is basically the churches that you would find.
In your parish on any street.
The conciliate Catholic Church, broadly, I would say, is in practice Zionist, whereas the traditional Catholic Church is not.
And the other thing I would have to run past you is in Bishop Barron's statement, which I think confuses the elements here, because he says, Barron says that he, The bishop says he fully subscribes to the Catholic position on Zionism, which includes unequivocal opposition to anti Semitism.
I think what he's trying to do here is suggest, and this is where I would like to intervene and say absolutely not.
While certainly some people are coming at anti Zionism from an anti Semitic point of view, you can't say that all anti Zionists are coming at that.
Are anti Semites.
I think that's the thing I would criticize as implications for being.
Yeah, well, look, it's a very complicated topic, but I think the easiest and most succinct way of approaching it is to talk about the terms that we're using.
I think the problem is that Zionism has become a broad capture term for many different things on both sides of the argument.
I think what Carrie and others maybe are taking up and sat more than anything is whether or not their own national interests are being put first.
First and foremost, that's the argument that they'll be making that perhaps one particular lobby is more powerful than others when it comes to matters of geopolitical interest.
And secondly, whether or not some members perhaps of the board are subscribing to a particular theology of dispensationalism, which is essentially the evangelical Christian belief that the Jewish state in its current form and the Jewish religion is still the chosen people of God.
Now, the Catholic faith would contend that the new church, the new Israel, is the Catholic Church itself as opposed to the religion of Judaism.
Unfortunately, these more nuanced points don't come through when the debate is simply Zionism versus anti Zionism, because Zionism in its original form essentially meant a belief in the creation of the state of Israel and then started to take on all kinds of other connotations in America more than it does in the Middle East, ironically.
And so, while a Catholic doesn't have to be opposed to the existence of the State of Israel or indeed the protection of the Jewish people, and certainly that would be anti Semitic to do so, it's perfectly credible to be able to challenge positions both of national interest.
And of theology.
After all, we all have completely different beliefs in the three major Abrahamic religions.
It's not at all a point of consensus that we all believe the same thing.
And so, free and fair debate on those topics is absolutely essential to a democratic society.
And so, I think the real issue that I'm seeing, particularly in America right now, is this absolute black and white in the debate.
You're either anti Semitic or you're not.
You're either pro Israel or you're not.
And I think actually the positions we should be taking are a lot more nuanced, particularly as Catholics.
I think it's a very sensible point, and it's always worth illustrating here that the Catholic Church gives wide leeway on political decisions under the classification of prudential issues, which leaves it up to each believer or each person of goodwill to determine what they're in their own conscience and their information, what the best way of arriving at the common good is.
It is worth pointing out that the hearing itself.
The one on February the 9th was a meeting on anti Semitism.
So I think, you know, I think given that, I think there is legitimate leeway for Carrie to have brought up the issue of Zionism and indeed anti Zionism on both those points and to have done so in that context.
I find it quite difficult to see how Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick could have said that she'd hijacked the meeting.
But I think on this kind of thing, people are going to look at that from different points of view, Joseph, according to where they're coming from.
Just give me 30 seconds.
As I say, you were in the States.
Was this issue, it's been lighting up my social media.
I didn't hear mentioned specifically to Carrie's case, but I know that there were many conversations over the different movement, particularly on the MAGA side, between the more pro-Dionists.
Action and what I would call the America First faction.
And of course, that was clear there as it has been at every conference for the last really.
There still seemed to be a point of contention among the base, and it seems to me that it's going to continue long into the future.
Well, I think back in 1962, the U.S. Supreme Court did prohibit states having the right to impose compulsory Bible reading in class.
But they left some wiggle room to say that you could study the Bible if it was.
For historical purposes in context.
And that is the leeway that the state of Utah is employing.
And last week, the new bill signed into law by Governor. Spencer Cox has done exactly that.
It's requiring public schools to cover specific passages, labeling the Bible as a historic document.
Frank Walker, there are two stories on scripture, I think, that make an interesting juxtaposition as one contrasts the difference between the United States and continental Europe.
Let's just spend just a few minutes on this because I think it's a fascinating.
Development in America.
What's going on in Utah?
And then we'll talk about the diametric opposite in godless Finland.
It's not a court case, but it's amazing because all it is is simply a law that's going to include Bible passages to some extent in a historical discussion of the history of the United States and the founding of the United States.
And that is a huge, big, Difference because apparently, since this case you mentioned 1963, where they said you can't, you know, quote, have prayers or Bible quotes at the beginning of class or something, nobody in school has ever made anybody have to read anything from the Bible at all.
And so now doing it is a huge, big difference.
And even though they're not required to decide on which verses they are for two or three more years, they're going to just use it to teach history.
And I think that that's interesting and it's also necessary because.
Religion, all kinds of religion, particularly Christian forms of religion, have been so decimated in the United States, even here, that people don't understand the context of quotes in the Declaration of Independence, for example.
They don't know what these things mean.
They don't know what divine providence means that's referenced in there.
And so they need to have a little bit of background, just the smallest bit.
It's not like they're, I mean, this is where Mormonism is centered.
It's not like they're trying to teach Mormonism.
They're not trying to teach any religion, Christian religion, just using.
Some quotes to get some context because it's absolutely necessary because nobody will even understand it.
And but uh, that's progress that they're making there, and it's definitely progress.
Um, and as you were saying, that the Utah State Board of Education now has a couple of years, I think up until 2029, to decide which texts they want to have included in the curriculum.
What the uh, I have it here, the uh, what the Supreme Court said back in '63 no state law.
Or, the school board may require that passages from the Bible be read or that the Lord's Prayer be recited in the public schools of a state at the beginning of each school day.
The American culture historically has been very religious, very religious.
And they would have never thought to have these sorts of restrictions back in the 1800s before things became so corrupted.
They had these McGuffey readers, and all they were were quotes from the scripture and teachings of morality.
They recognized that, you know, how do you separate religion from morality?
And how do you instruct children?
Without putting morality in the context of everything that they're learning.
And it's really ridiculous.
And it shows you that, you know, we don't want to talk about communism to have an enforced secular state where every single word of religion must be erased from everybody's mind.
But we've been living it anyway, you know.
We, in fact, we live it so strongly that we can't even, you know, and this is something that people, like you said, with the Ten Commandments, they recognize that in this time when we have a White House that's supportive of this, this is a time where they can move for these things and move in the courts.
But the people are going to be supportive of this.
That's why it's becoming law all over the place.
If you let it democratically become the way it is, people support it.
People, just like with the conversion therapy, people don't want to live unhappy, lonely lifestyles.
Anyone who will live religious, disciplined lifestyles, like you're seeing young people all over the world, are returning back to religion.
It was somewhat like this back in, before you were born in the 80s, it was somewhat like this then.
So you can see how movements and people will change over time.
But it's natural, it's very natural.
And it's just, A little bit back to the way America actually really is.
That kind of thread of America turning back to the way it really is is all throughout the way the government is in the United States right now.
It's a big push and it still has so much further to go.
Public school itself was a German idea from the 1800s.
I'm not sure it's such a good idea if it means that you can't even teach children right from wrong.
It's incredible.
So, more laws like this, and I hope that they're coming.
Frank Walker, I'm still dazzled by if I didn't hear you incorrectly that you suggested that the 1980s was before I was born.
That's cheered me up a lot.
So now let's go from the sublime to the ridiculous and talk about the Finnish Supreme Court ruling, which convicted an actual parliamentarian, not even some Joe Schmo, an actual sitting member of parliament, Paivi Rasanen.
Because of her publication of a pamphlet which cited Romans 1 24 to 27.
Incredibly, this was the third hearing on this because they dropped charges in the lower two stages of court.
And as is the case here in continental Europe, whereas in England or America, basically only if you're the defendant.
Would you appeal having lost a case?
Here in continental Europe, the prosecution can appeal if a defendant is acquitted.
It sounds weird, but that's what's happened here in Finland.
So, this parliamentarian, she was acquitted at the first two stages.
The Court of Appeal then overturned the lower two courts and found her guilty under, of all things, a section of the Finnish criminal code titled War Crimes.
And crimes against humanity for, um, hence, hence, when I said we're going from the sublime to the ridiculous, for her quotation of Romans 1 24.
Tell us about this, uh, and what it, you know, just give me two minutes.
It seems to me that if, uh, if you have two civilizational structures here, the United States and Europe, and one of them is so antithetical towards its own founding religion, that that civilization being under attack from a number of different sides cannot be long for this world.
Frank, just give me your quick reading on the Finnish development, especially how it contrasts to what's going on in America right now.
Well, for one thing, when it finally got to the high court, that's when it lost the justice.
And in the United States, the lower courts are seen to be worse these days, and the real justice can happen at the Supreme Court.
This woman is a brilliant woman, a parliamentarian, but before that, she was a hospital doc, she was a physician, and she's a Lutheran, and she's making a case for heterosexual lifestyles, which is the same thing.
It's not something that you are, it's something that you do, you have an inclination for, and then you follow up on.
And she's against most of the Lutheran church in there.
And I would say most of, of course, the Catholic bishops.
So she's able to wryly support even against her own church, but still get people that are part of Lutheran religion to support her.
She's gotten a lot of support from the United States.
But, you know, amazingly, she's lost, you know, they lost the case on her tweets and they lost the case on other elements of what she did on a radio show.
But a 22 year old pamphlet is what gets her convicted way at the end of the game.
I mean, this is, I've been reporting, I've been writing about this for years and linking to it at Canton.
Way at the end on this 22 year old pamphlet, you know, if they went back 50 years, they would, everybody in the, on either side of the pond would be in jail.
You know, they, how can they, how can they find her guilty of something from, if you think back 22 years, it was a completely different, you know, they, they didn't crush, like you mentioned, they didn't crush the whole society at that point.
This is all a new society that they're overlaying over it, over us.
And she got a lot of support from the United States, you know, people like Marco Rubio.
The religious freedom commission that you were just talking about, a lot of people have been backing her all this time.
So you can see.
Remember when JD Vance went to Europe and he castigated them on censorship?
And this shows you the difference.
And hopefully, the squeeze that's happening with Europe, with NATO, with the financial squeeze, with the economic and the oil squeeze, things will start to turn.
And I think they kind of are turning a little bit.
When you see the EU has just come out with a new deportation laws.
That never would have happened before.
And that people have started to side more on the conservatives with what they call the far right, the AFD, that were illegal parties that they called Nazis.
So things are starting to change in Europe, but you can see the big difference between the United States and Europe when it comes to religious freedom and taking away their culture.
Yeah, I do want to point out that it's the Alliance Defending Freedom again coming in and defending her so well on this.
It's a great story.
And I know you have been following it on Canon 212.
And it's something that I think we'll come back to as well.
I think because of the import that it has for the rest of continental Europe and increasing hostility towards Holy Scripture.
And it is worth pointing out, because you mentioned this 22 year old pamphlet, it is worth pointing out that the police had not received in 22 years a single complaint about it.
This was a prosecution built on thin air.
Frank, stay with us.
We'll come back to you just in five minutes.
And do the socials.
Just very quickly, what if you had the brightest mind in the war room delivering critical financial research every month?
War room listeners know Jim Rickards as our wise man, former CIA, Pentagon, and White House advisor with an unmatched grasp of geopolitics and capital markets.
What you should do is get his latest book, Money GPT, which exposes how AI is setting the stage for financial chaos.
And right now, warm war room members do get a free copy of Money GPT when they sign up for strategic intelligence, Jim's flagship financial newsletter.
Before we go to Joseph Robertson, we have just, and it's entirely gratuitous because it's only barely, I can barely justify doing this, but let's just have 30 seconds, 45 seconds to set Joseph up of Waylon Jennings and Willie Nilsson.
unidentified
Now, boys ain't easy to love and they're harder to hold.
They'd rather give you a song than diamonds or gold.
Long star bell buckles and old faded Levi's, and each night begins a new day.
And if you don't understand him and he don't die young, you'll probably just ride away.
Mamas, don't let your babies grow up to be cowboys.
Don't let them pick guitars and climb them old trucks.
Mummers, don't let your babies grow up to be cowboys.
Why was I playing that other than the fact that I think Waylon Jennings is an absolute brilliant singer, as is, of course, Willie Nelson?
Survey in Australia here, which has found that 65% of Gen X think that things are better if men do paid work and women do care.
Not sure if that high figure now, 65%, is due to the fact.
That Gen Z is increasingly conservative, or if this is simply because they're sort of talking to Australian chaps.
Joseph, you've got the headline statistics here.
I tell you, the one that particularly came out to me was that, hence I thought of that track there, was that more than 40% of parents in Australia reported fathers thinking that boys shouldn't be taught domestic skills such as sewing and cleaning.
To which I would say, sort of, fathers don't let your sons grow up to be sowers, unless, of course, you want their first act to be as adults, young adults, introducing you to their new boyfriend.
Joseph, tell me about what's going on here in Generation Z.
I think the easiest way to summarize is I tend to find memes containing a lot of truth.
The world is here, healing, nature is healing.
That's essentially what's happening.
And of course, these things go inside, don't they?
So, you know, we've seen a generation without much attachment to any kind of responsibility.
And now we're seeing a generation that is re embracing responsibility.
I think it goes beyond just traditional masculine and feminine roles.
This is all about responsibility and about men reclaiming their position as caretakers, as providers within a natural environment.
And it's interesting to compare this, I think, to what happened in Scandinavia, where, of course, They got as close as they thought was humanly possible to making options entirely open for women to go into STEM industries.
And instead of choosing science, they went back to the creative arts and men.
Went predominantly into science industries instead.
And I think this is what happens when you give a free and fair choice to society, people revert to what they are born to do and in their natural gender roles.
That's not to say there won't be outliers and that we shouldn't cater for the possibility of women being able to rejoin the workplace where necessary, as they have done so successfully in Hungary, as an example, where, of course, they have pretty much, I think it's three children over, they have a lifetime 0% tax.
From that point, if they decide to return to the workplace.
But this is all about what happens in those formative young adult years.
And one thing I will say is we were out in CPAC, as you mentioned already last week, announcing British CPAC, which is coming to the UK in July this year.
And one thing I noticed was the amount of young men immediately coming up to me as soon as that was announced, talking about bringing back more traditional kind of masculinity and whether or not there was going to be.
I don't know.
There were words like crusades flung around, which perhaps I'm not allowed to promote.
But there was certainly a revival of that traditional, young, vibrant masculinity that I noticed.
This is in America, of course.
I can't say the same just yet for the UK, but we're working on it.
I think Liz Truss is quite closely involved in that.
Let me just throw out to you a quick, a couple of these two headline statistics of what's going on in Gen Z, because it is absolutely astonishing.
The survey found, and they spoke, I think, to 8,000 or so parents 72% of Gen Z fathers in Australia think that a father's sole responsibility is to provide financially for his children.
72%.
And that contrasts to 57% for Gen X, which I am.
That's 72% compared to 57%.
And you mentioned the key word there of responsibility here, of what this absolutely is.
And it also found that 65% of Gen X think that things are better if men do paid work and women do care work compared to 45% of Gen X. Huge change going on in Gen Z.
And that's something that we do follow both on the Friday, the Wednesday and Friday show.
That's all we have time for, folks.
Joseph, I know you've had connection problems, but why don't you?
And so we have your Twitter screen up now, but why don't you just quickly mention that and your R Types?
On Substack, where people can go to keep up with your writing and analysis?
Yeah, I think we have had some connection issues today.
Folks, thanks very much for sticking with us.
We'll be back with Frank and hopefully Joseph next Wednesday.
So all we've got time for, Steve, we'll be back in the chair at 10 a.m. tomorrow, and I'll be back here probably, hopefully, God willing, next Wednesday.
Thanks to Will and Spencer at Denver Real America's Voice.