Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin - Feminism and Men of Straw

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 19, 2013 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin

18:22

Feminism and Men of Straw

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello ladies, Andy!
	So for the past few days I've been rereading the comments you've left me over 700.
	I've been going through old YouTube videos of mine.
	I've been going through old YouTubes of TJ's and Feminist Frequency and Daniel Mr. Epsion.
	I've been going through tons of videos just to kind of review and maybe reflect upon why the internet gets so angry over these hotbun issues like feminism and video games and sexism in general.
	And so what's really interesting is that I found a collective of ideas, the same thought processes being spewed out and read, heard, listened to, and understood.
	I think it's pretty safe to assume you're about to start misrepresenting things wildly as feminists always seem to do.
	I've realized after watching a few of TJ's videos or watching his videos and even watching my own or Feminist Frequency or even Daniel's, I think we've all been lied to so much that we give into the conditioning in which we've become accustomed to.
	Have a cookie.
	That's what you're meant to do.
	We are all victims of conditioning.
	We from a very small age are forced to exist by our parents who choose to have us or by circumstances in which we are conceived.
	And then from then on we are conditioned to believe in a set of goals or rules.
	And as we grow older our minds start to function and grow and become one of their own and over time we can choose whether or not we take these original set of goals or rules and adapt them to our current state of existence or if we decide to make up our own.
	Apart from the fact that my mind has functioned for my whole life, I am very concerned that you think you know better than the untold millions of people who have come before you.
	The rules are not arbitrary.
	The rules are the rules because they work.
	Now I'm not saying they can't change, but I am saying if you think you can just throw them out wholesale and then make up your own, I hope you and Gaius Marius.
	Now for a lot of us, we're at that stage in our life, we're in our mid to late 20s, we've, you know, established some sort of ultimate goal for our lives, whether it be career-wise or romantic or whatever.
	It's nice to see that you've recognized that these two things are mutually exclusive.
	And so we've spent our time pursuing that.
	And in the process, we've learned a lot through experience and a lot through observation.
	And for those of you in my audience who are much younger, this is a good life lesson for you to observe those on YouTube who right now are in that stage of life, in their 20s and 30s, and who are spewing the things that they've been conditioned to believe.
	And you need to make decisions for your generation, you 12, 13, 14 year olds, if our generation is doing any better.
	As much as I trust the judgment of 12, 13, and 14 year olds, I think they are still children.
	I think they actually need to be taught.
	I also think these people look up to you.
	And you need to be aware of that.
	If you can't just talk to them like they're fully functioning, self-actualized adults because they are 12, 13, and 14 years old.
	There is nothing wrong with this, but the facts of life tell me from personal experience that at 12, 13 and 14 years old, I did not know enough about the world to make any kind of informed judgments.
	Because there are so many flaws in my generation.
	Yes, there are.
	And most of them are caused by feminists who do not want to accept reality.
	You look at people like Feminist Frequency or TJ the Amazing Atheist, two very extremes of a polar opposite view.
	I've watched quite a few of the amazing atheists videos and he just seems to me to be arguing for the middle ground.
	Now, if you are going to represent this as an extreme opposite of what you are arguing for, then that to me implies that you are arguing for extreme imbalance in the system.
	This is not any kind of equality.
	They both hold, obviously, one in extreme favor of feminism and one in extreme favor of male superiority.
	This is a straw man argument.
	The amazing atheist does not appear, from everything I have seen of him, to be in favor of male superiority.
	You are wrong.
	Not only that, you seem to be deliberately misrepresenting his position.
	This is intellectually dishonest.
	I love TJ and I personally communicate with him via text message and phone calls and stuff like that.
	So I, that's my relationship with him.
	I don't have a relationship with Anita.
	I don't know her.
	I've never spoken to her, never emailed her, never had any communication with her, never followed her on Twitter.
	I don't know anything about her except her videos.
	So my opinion automatically is biased.
	I came upon TJ and I ended up having somewhat of a friendship with TJ because I made a video response to him.
	And even though TJ and I said similar things on the internet, my video was heavily, heavily filled with hate and discrimination and thumbs down and, you know, names.
	I got name called like you're a slut or a hoe or an attention seeker.
	And TJ's video, though it did well, didn't get the same kind of criticism.
	I've noticed that the amazing atheist tends to use less logical fallacies in his arguments.
	I blame this on the patriarchy.
	And I think that you're attacked purely because you were a woman, and not because some stupid shit comes out of your mouth.
	I feel like...
	Maybe you should try thinking.
	I was discriminated against based off of my femalehood and based off the fact that I was wearing a bikini top at the time even though it was summer and I had a valid reason.
	These are all ad hominems and you can just ignore them.
	And even though it's no one's fucking business what I'm wearing.
	You say that, but it actually is.
	I'll tell you why too.
	Other people have to look at you.
	I know you might be thinking, oh, that's terrible, but calm down.
	The same rules apply to me.
	Now, I really like wearing my bright neon budgie smugglers around town.
	But you would not believe how judgmental people get about it.
	I mean, you would not believe it.
	I believe it.
	I think everyone else can believe it.
	You wouldn't.
	Nobody cares if you made that video when it was hot.
	What they care about is that you're a woman showing a large amount of flesh.
	To men, this is a distraction tactic.
	If you want to be treated the same as a man, why don't you try acting the same as a man?
	That means, in this case, if you're going to make a video of yourself for public display, wear a t-shirt.
	That's all.
	It's not a big deal.
	And it's going to prevent anyone making lewd comments about you because there would be no grounds for them to do so.
	But those are the small ways in which we are conditioned to discriminate against the gender or sex differences, and yet we do not allow them the freedom of exploration in their own gender or self-identification.
	No one's restricting that.
	It's more about when it's appropriate.
	If you're trying to have an intellectual debate, put some clothes on.
	Men know it's a distraction tactic.
	You know it's a distraction tactic.
	You know that men like looking at female forms.
	It's just the way they're biologically programmed.
	You're never going to make men not want to look at female flesh.
	So why don't you take that into consideration and wear a t-shirt?
	Meaning that if a man chose to wear in Seattle, I'll give you an example.
	Yesterday at work, which I have news about that, but that's a different video.
	At work yesterday, a man came up to the counter and he had a kilt on, and I don't know why, but it did something low inside my body.
	And I was like, that man is so attractive in a kilt.
	Cleanup on aisle four.
	Great.
	No one cares.
	Get to a point.
	And a co-worker of mine, who's a very much a man-must-be macho, was like, men shouldn't wear skirts, dude.
	That's for girls.
	And I'm like, bro, it's not a skirt.
	It's a fucking kilt.
	It's baller.
	It's fucking good.
	Fascinating.
	Tell me more about how baller it was.
	Something very attractive about a man that doesn't give a shit about stereotypes or any kind of American indoctrination.
	This is the important and salient point to remember.
	She likes him because he doesn't care.
	He is doing what he wants, regardless of the societal pressures on him.
	This is what a man does.
	She is attracted to him because he's a man.
	Keep in mind, kilt obviously don't originate from here.
	They have their own area of acception or place where they are accepted.
	So I thought that was really great that he was like just showing off his legs and rocking it and I thought that was wonderful.
	But that automatic reaction from a man's perspective to another man, he automatically deemed that man somewhat weak because he resembled clothing that is made for a woman.
	I think it was more that you were making a huge deal of it and his masculinity was being threatened by that.
	And so what that does is that's a two-part offensive line here.
	One, that man is offended that the other man is doing anything slightly female.
	No.
	That man was asserting his masculinity because you became a gushing teenager because you don't know what self-control is.
	And it made him insecure.
	You know, he was looking at this other guy, you were looking at this other guy, you were going on about how great this other guy was.
	And the gentleman you were with clearly thought, hmm, well, you know, I've got to do something.
	Which is a discrimination against females.
	No, it's not.
	It's nothing to do with females.
	You don't know what you're talking about.
	Maybe you should stop making assumptions about what men think since you are not a man.
	And then that man is discriminating against men for choosing to wear what they want and what they feel confident in.
	No, he was not.
	He was discriminating against that single man in particular because his mores disagree with the idea of a man wearing a skirt.
	It's a personal choice that he does not agree with.
	Did he go up to the man and say, wait, go and put some trousers on right now?
	Probably not.
	He probably just let it go.
	So those types of things, those little things that might seem like first world problems are actually little buds of weeds that are going to end up killing our gardens.
	They are first world problems.
	It really depends on what your end game is.
	Your end game seems to be the eradication of different opinions to yours.
	So I hope you fail because I think what you're doing is wrong.
	We need to decide what we want for society and if we want a community.
	It was funny, I was watching TED Talks and there was an individual who was talking about this idea of individuality and how we have to take that out of our minds, our mind sets.
	Is that true?
	Are we no longer really individuals so much as individuals affected by a community?
	Because we are in every sense living for a community.
	In the way that we decide to educate ourselves or get a job or pay taxes, those are all, no matter where you're from, no matter what part of the world you're living in, we all in some way, shape, or form have to conform to a community standard.
	What we have to decide as individuals is which community we wish to uplift and which community we want to give power to.
	If you want to give power to the Republicans, do that.
	Democrats, fine.
	Men, women, I don't care.
	I believe in a person's ability to defend those they wish to defend.
	But you have to understand that I would rather live in a world with honesty.
	I would rather live with Hitler saying, I want to kill the Jews than Hitler pretending he never wanted to kill the Jews.
	Because the dishonest behavior, I think, is more damaging.
	I would rather know with what I am faced with than that way I can handle what I'm faced with than living in a life of secrecy and pretending to be something we're not.
	Okay, this is very interesting because what you're saying is you don't want to live the noble life.
	And I'm all for that.
	However, I don't think we should elevate any group above the others.
	Sexism, feminism, racism, all these categories, all these titles that separate us as people can be taken away and we are still our ideas.
	And those ideas are given titles so others can better understand where we're coming from.
	Give ideas names so we don't have to constantly explain the whole idea every time we want to talk about it.
	I believe in fighting for female rights as well as male rights.
	I do not want this to be a video that's about like saying fuck you to the audience because that's not what it is.
	Because you're not just an audience.
	You're my fucking community.
	You're the people who have been amazing and instrumental in the way that I've developed the last four years.
	So don't think yourselves so hated or belittled just because I happen to fight for female rights.
	I do believe heavily in supporting lawyers that are strictly there to defend men's rights.
	My focus, my energy, my passion is in what I understand.
	I will always feel disconnected from men because you are conditioned differently.
	I think you find recent studies have shown what non-feminists have known since the dawn of time.
	Men and women are built differently.
	We have different brains.
	They operate in different ways.
	It's nothing to do with conditioning.
	How am I supposed to understand what it's like to feel stupid for wearing a dress?
	I love wearing a dress.
	Yes, that's a good point.
	How are you expected to know what it's like to be a man?
	Obviously, you're not, so stop making assumptions about what it is men think.
	You don't know.
	Though I will say that I know what it's like to feel stupid wanting to be a part of things that have been called the boys club.
	They're not called the boys club.
	They are boys' clubs.
	And they're boys' clubs for a reason.
	Because men do need spaces away from women.
	And you have no right to be there, just like I have no right to be in a woman's space.
	The whole thing about gender dynamics is that as soon as you introduce one into a group of the others, the whole dynamic of the group changes.
	No men want you playing Call of Duty.
	If you're going to turn up, play, be quiet and be about the game, then great.
	No one will care.
	If you come in and say, hi, I'm a woman, then it doesn't matter what you say after that.
	Get the fuck out.
	Your first foot forward was about yourself and not the game.
	You came in and were defining your personality online by your gender.
	That's not what that space is about.
	No one wants that there.
	No one is interested.
	They're there to shoot each other.
	If you aren't there to shoot people, exclusively to shoot people, get the fuck out.
	I will know what it's like to be discriminated against as a female on YouTube and don't think it's not there.
	There is a heavy set of females who are too afraid to be on a camera and to say things anti-the atheist community or anti-science community because they are afraid to be seen as feminists or as females who just understand females better.
	Why would the opposite of science and atheism be feminism?
	Why would you think people will naturally default to saying, oh, she's against science and she's against atheism, therefore she must be a feminist.
	I mean, I can only assume it's because feminists have made such a pig's dinner of their own ideology that nobody wants to be around them.
	You seem unscientific.
	You seem like you yourselves are trying to propagate a religion.
	No one wants that.
	I'm sick of the bullshit.
	We live in a very skewed society and that pollution, that corruption has made its way into the YouTube community and I- I agree.
	Feminism corrupts all things that it touches.
	I will not sit here and pretend that I am going to, you know, cater to my audience.
	You are a community of people and individuals and I'm not here to suck your dicks or lick your vaginas.
	I am here to state my business, to give my opinion, and you may, at your discretion, give your criticism, but for God's sake, wait a moment before you type the words and press send.
	Make sure what you're conveying to me isn't something you've been conditioned to believe and isn't something you really understand.
	While the irony of this statement is palpable, she's correct.
	It's exactly how you should think.
	It's a shame she can't apply that to herself.
	The point is, is that there are disadvantages to everyone, because we are all different.
	We need to decide what to do about that in a very constructive, positive way.
	And I still think Anita had valid points.
	Watch her videos.
	Don't just watch one, two, three, or four.
	Watch them, understand them, understand her perspective.
	And yes, even Hitler had some good points.
	The thing is, even if they have good points, they are so destructive as individuals, they cannot be included.
	I assume you're not aware that Anita Sarkeesian is a con artist.
	The man understood people better than anyone in history, in my opinion.
	That man can manipulate and control with passion and love and dedication.
	And we need that in better people who want better things for the world, not people who want to exterminate a race.
	I don't know what it's like to be a man, but I know what it's like to be a woman in a man's world.
	I literally don't think you can claim this is a man's world anymore.
	When men are committing suicide at up to 10 times the rate of women, and when higher education is 60% women, women have started to outearn men, I think we can safely say the system is not weighted in the favour of men.
	There's just no other way of looking at that.
	Have a great day.
	I hope to see you next video.
	You know what, you two?
	You've actually been the most pleasant feminist I've had to deal with so far.

▲