All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 14, 2014 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin
03:18:51
#GamerGate Research into Academia
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey everyone, we're going to be doing a bit of a long-winded research stream now because I've got someone called Ben with me and he's got a particularly interesting tale to tell about how he came across this information.
And I think it's important that we all just go through it and have a look.
I've included a link in the description to a paste bin that we're going to be going through.
So if you want to go through it with us while we're doing it and if anything strikes you or something like that, jump out and say in the chat so we can investigate it and find out what's going on.
Because this is some crazy shit, frankly.
Ben, would you like to tell us what's going on?
Let me start off here.
Let me share my window with you.
So is my window up?
Can you guys see me?
I can see it, yeah.
Okay.
All right.
So let's just start off here.
So the reason why I found this information was because I stand up to pause upon the Zoe post, and a lot of it seemed really familiar.
It sort of struck me in a weird way, and I didn't quite understand what was going on.
And I started looking at the sort of stuff that was happening in my personal life and the stuff that I've experienced coming from the Pacific Northwest.
And it started making more and more sense.
And the deeper and deeper I dug, the more and more I found.
And until I reached this point where I could no longer just sit idly by, and I became a part of the Gamergate movement.
However, you know, I've been actually having issues with the fact that my house has gotten broken into.
I had gotten broken into by a member of Occupy Portland.
Now, I'm not saying it's related to Gamergate.
I don't know the reason why my house is broken into.
It could be because sometimes I like to do a Colbert-style trolling of the extreme liberals on matters of science that I find awfully ridiculous.
And you'd never suspect that liberals would hate science, but in fact, I was talking about how fluoride was actually great and not so bad as people seem to think.
And I think that genetically modified organisms have the ability to feed people and stop global warming.
And to a lot of people, this is like the worst thing they want to hear.
They don't want themselves being placed in front of a mirror.
I'm going to get this out of the way so that people know that I'm just not making stuff up.
But I have a police report from Portland, 1484066.
And so you can look it up if you want to.
I don't really care.
And I want to preface this by saying that it is really easy to get all riled up and to think that we need to do stuff to help our cause.
And what you have to remember is that you shouldn't always think about whether or not the ends justify the means.
Because usually the fact is that we are not means to other people's ends.
We are ends unto ourselves.
And what is commonly lost in the feminist and the postmodernism community is a sort of ethical relativism or consequentialism and treating people as means to an end and not as an ends and to themselves.
And that is the sort of guiding principles that I lead my life by.
If you care to understand it, his name is Immanuel Kant, and he discusses what is ethics in an existentialist sort of way.
Okay.
I think personally, I don't believe the means ever justify the ends.
Yeah, and I don't want you guys to harass anyone who happens to be mentioned here because it makes us look bad.
And how they operate is that they perceive themselves as victims.
Can you guys see this okay?
The diagram?
They perceive themselves as victims, and therefore they need a rescuer.
And then because of the fact that they feel that they've been victimized by the prosecutor or the persecutor, they excuse the actions of the rescuer.
I don't think we can see the actual screen.
I don't mean to interrupt.
Oh, okay.
So let me try this again.
I don't see it.
We just see Sargon.
Okay, sorry.
There we go.
There we go.
Now I want to preface this by saying do not use any of this as excuses to do something that you wouldn't normally morally do otherwise.
I'll stop you on that because I think everyone knows exactly what my position on this is from a few of my videos ago.
So I just want to say exactly that.
But yeah, no, I just want to reinforce that.
Guys, there's no need to contact these people.
They're not going to change their minds.
They're just going to use it as ammo.
We don't need to.
We just need to be aware of what they're fucking doing.
Yeah, exactly.
Right, okay.
So would you like to tell us your tale?
Okay.
So this whole thing started because I was, I'm still married, actually.
I'm married to a woman who has albinism, and both me and her have lived very difficult lives.
And we kind of got together because we believed that we were going to work for the common good of society and try to help those who've been disenfranchised or have been who are downtrodden and who need help.
I myself work on Oculus Rift technology for visually impaired people.
I mean, that's sort of, and, you know, self-driving vehicles, that's what I love to do.
And she does special education, right?
I made her go to therapy because she was trying to harm herself because the stress was too much.
And she ended up going to a therapy place that was ran by academic feminists who were basically gender shaming.
And, you know, me and I basically told her that this stuff is nonsense and it's foo-by.
And they convinced her that after our initial relationship of being on Skype and OKCupid for three months and me having gone to Ohio to meet her, that I raped her on that incident and used Stockholm syndrome to convince her to marry me.
And she was continually living with Stockholm Syndrome.
And things progressively got worse and worse as I tried to use facts and reason.
She would cover her ears, like put her fingers in her ears, and would refuse to look at science articles and would refuse to stop abusing drugs and alcohol and stuff.
How long did this go on for?
This happened for about a year of chaos in my life.
Jesus.
Yeah, and I tried to be calm and rational.
And mental illness is, in fact, kind of contagious in that sort of way.
So I didn't always do the right thing.
But I have a very strict sort of ethical code to myself.
So I really sort of maintained that sort of ethical code.
But at the same time, her and these groups have this agenda about stirring up shit.
And she would continually get stirred up.
And I tried to tolerate it as best I could.
I've got a question.
Did you ever meet this psychiatrist or whoever she was going to?
I went to one of their meetings.
The very first meeting where we were supposed to be part of the couples therapy because part of our marriage contract said that when you have problems, you go through couples therapy.
And the very first meeting I had, they basically, without even talking to me or getting my side of the story, they automatically had a treatment regimen.
And the treatment regimen was feminist family therapy.
And I read off, they have this thing called the Circle of Control.
And they asked you to read off the parts of the Circle of Control.
And one of them was really funny.
One of them was white privilege.
And I'm like, well, you have to be shitting me because my wife is albino.
So wouldn't she have more white privilege than I would?
Okay, now, hold on, Dennis.
Somebody in the psychiatric field myself, you're telling me that psychologists did a white privilege in feminism.
They legitimately told your wife that and you to the point where she would not, it fucked up your entire marriage.
Am I correct on that?
Yes, you are correct on that.
Okay, did you contact?
Now, I'm going to explain this to you.
Just like there's a board for nurses, there's a board for general doctors.
There's medical boards that have strict conducts on this.
A prime example is Stefan Molyneux.
His wife almost got her license remote just for talking about for defooing or shaming your family.
Just shaming.
That's it.
You realize that if you were to even give this to the board, all those people that supposedly were helping her, they would all be barred.
They would be disbanded and barred.
Some of them might be brought up on charges.
I'm not kidding now.
I want you to understand.
Did you contact the contract psychiatrist?
I mean, there's an entire board.
We have to go up front of them.
Every year I have to renew my license.
I have to go and calm down.
I know that you like to get excited.
I know you like to get excited.
Let me explain to you, because I understand you have these concerns.
There is a bill in Oregon called the Equal Rights Amendment.
And the Equal Rights Amendment is a strict no-discrimination law which says that you cannot treat people differently on the basis of gender and that the government cannot abridge your rights on the basis of gender.
And after this becomes law, I am going to use it to successfully try to get my wife deprogrammed, hopefully get to a real psychiatrist, real psychologist, because the hospital told her to get cognitive behavioral therapy.
And this was psychiatrists at the Oregon Health and Science University.
But because the lines for most of these therapists were so long, it was really difficult to find someone who was available, right?
The only people who had the funding were these people who would get Violence Against Women Act type funds and wouldn't really need the really expensive $150 an hour charges.
That's my answer to this question out of curiosity.
Like I said, you literally cannot do that.
Hang on, hang on, Paul.
Hang on, hang on.
So are you suggesting that the board that these people would report to would agree with what they're doing?
They've been licensed as an institution to train these people.
They run training seminars for these sort of ideas.
I have recorded on hidden video and camera, sorry, hitting sound, not camera.
I have on hidden sound them talking about their training methods about fighting white stream pedagogy, you know, gender shaming, you know, using a pyramid of privilege and coaching people on privilege.
They use operand conditioning.
Like, it is cultish.
My wife is now living with one of these therapists.
Jesus Christ.
Now, I have heard about that kind of stuff happening.
When you talk about the psychiatric field, in Florida, it's really difficult.
What you can do on your own, man, is you could go to your state government office, wherever it is.
Here in Florida, it's Tallahassee.
And you can, if you have that video, you can provide that as evidence.
If that doesn't work, you can go straight to the media with this kind of stuff.
I mean, literally, they cannot, they can't do that.
Like, there's some, there's massive, massive amounts of stuff that's going on there that should not be happening.
No one thinks that it reflects on your profession, mate.
No one does.
Again, what I plan on doing is waiting until the November 4th election, making public records requests, and then making a formal lawsuit in the circuit court to get rid of these people within the state of Oregon, because Oregon seems to be where a lot of it originates.
He's throwing it on you, Ben.
I've had something similar happen with a psychologist that worked with a patient of mine when I was doing therapist sessions with somebody I worked with for a year that ended up getting, I had to take her to court as well, and it ended up getting her debarred.
Yes, I know, Paul.
I'm very confident I know how to do this.
I don't have infinite resources.
That's the only problem.
But I very well know exactly everything I need to do.
I am very meticulous and methodical in that way.
I'm timing this more than anything else, isn't you, Ben?
To make sure it's the most impact.
Yes, I'm making sure that it's done in the right way.
So I appreciate your concerns, but I just wanted to explain what brought me here, and that's kind of what I was doing.
So, anyways, let's proceed with basically what I've discovered and why this is relevant to us.
This is my life.
I don't expect any of you guys to give a shit about my life.
This is my own thing.
But this is how I got here.
Now, let's look at what has been going on with the Internet at large.
And let's look at how this affects all of us.
So, let's start off.
This is called the Digital Ecologies Research Partnership.
Now, DERP is an alliance of platforms supporting the academic exploration of communities online for the betterment of the Internet at large.
It includes Reddit, Imager, FARC, Staff Exchange, and Twitch.
Launched in 2014, the Digital Ecologies Research Partnership is a joint initiative by an alliance of community websites to promote open, publicly accessible, and ethical academic inquiry into the vibrant social dynamics of the web.
DIRP seems to solve two problems in the academic research space.
First, it is difficult for academic researchers to easily obtain data for the work beyond the confines of largest social media platforms.
DERP is a single point of contact for researchers to get in touch with the relevant team members across a range of different community sites.
We envision that this will lower the friction to investigating these sites in more depth and broaden the scope of research happening within the academic community.
Second, it remains difficult to conduct good cross-platform analyses in academic research by bringing a number of community sites together under a single cooperative effort.
We intend to lower the friction of doing so as well as better enable the sites themselves to coordinate with one another on supporting researchers.
DIRP focuses on providing public data to academic researchers while facilitating an active online research community of fellows.
DIRP will only support research that respects user privacy, responsibly uses data, and meets IRB approval.
All research supported by DERP will be released and openly made publicly available.
Partner platforms may also have additional guidelines and privacy commitments that apply to the research they support.
So, on the face of it, they appear as if they are trying to just support ethical research.
Now, the first thing you should see here is that they're trying to say they protect user privacy, but we know, or some of the computer scientists in the room may know, that if you have multiple data points, you can de-anonymize a lot of this data simply by finding correlations.
It's not impossible to do.
It's not perfect either.
But the idea that this is going to be perfectly anonymous, I think is not really going to be the case.
And it doesn't really seem like it's that transparent because you can't really see what they're actually working on, but you can see the sort of people who are involved.
Now, there's a lot of people here.
You see Stanford, ASU, Georgia Tech, UC Berkeley, MIT, Lots of influential people in academia.
I would like to start by focusing, I think, on what I find to be the smoking gun, which is Katie Miltner and Whitney Phillips.
And hold on to your seats because this is where the ride starts.
Okay.
Before we get any further, can we just get a quick description of who these people actually are?
Because I've never heard of them before.
Well, these are academics with, you know.
The two you want to go into.
Just briefly, can we get an overview of who they are and what they do?
Well, I mean, I think I could start doing that now.
Okay.
So let me start off.
I want to show the context and then describe who they are.
And this is really the smoking gun.
So we have Anita Sarkeesian's webpage, right?
Let's go down and let's see here.
We have a QA about online harassment at a thing called the conference.
And you can see here that in fact, Katie Miltner, Anita Sarkeesian, and Lori Penny are all in the same room.
They're all co-authoring a paper about online harassment and what drives it and how it lowers visions.
So we automatically know that these people know each other.
And Katie Miltner is on the Derp Institute.
And Lori Penny is a, I believe, a writer for The Guardian.
Ah, yeah.
So you have to keep that in mind.
So now let's see here.
We want to find out about the conference.
The conference is called Media Evolution, the Conference 2013.
It occurred at Malmo, Sweden.
The conference brings the big societal questions to the table, asking how media and communications can contribute to building a better future.
Now, we'll look at some pictures, and let's see what's on the first page.
On the first page, we have the co-founder of Reddit, Alex O'Hanahan.
And right next to him is a picture of Lori Penny and Anita Sarkeesian.
So we know that Lori Penny, Anita Sarkeesian, and Alex O'Hanahan were together at the same place at the same time.
Now, we also know that Annexao Mina was also at the conference as well.
Anitao, I think, is the pronunciation for her.
Oh, Chao.
My bad.
I am not an expert.
I have a Chinese friend, they taught me.
I am not an expert linguist.
So we automatically know that there are members of these groups who at least know or have seen each other speak and talk about these sort of topics together.
Now, let's continue and see some other people.
Now, we have Nathan Mathias.
Nathan Mathias also seems to really like Anita Sarkeesian.
Now, this is important because now we grow the circle, there's more and more people.
Now, he is part of this group called the MIT Center for Civic Media.
Let's look at some of the stuff that he has written.
So, Nathan Mathias with Erhard Grafe wrote a paper called The Challenges for Personal Behavior Change in Research on Information Diversity.
And here he talks about being able to use recommendation engines and visualization of social media behavior, metrics on reading behavior, and social introductions to be able to demonstrate positive results for the metrics that they define.
And there are some questions about this, about the implications for future design.
So, what it shows here is that, you know, obviously the internet is kind of an echo chamber, and sometimes you want to break the echo chamber.
You want people to consider information that you want them to see, and how you might be able to go about doing this.
They're talking about how to control the narrative as such.
Yeah, if you want to push propaganda, you want to control the context for which the conversation begins or takes place, right?
And that is part of how you control the dialogue, control the narrative, right?
Now, you see here that we have another person as a part of this MIT Center for Media called Chris Peterson, and he writes a brief guide to user-generated censorship.
And what he talks about is how you don't actually need to have moderators be the ones who censor this sort of data.
You can have the crowd do that for you.
And he even goes into some metrics about this sort of stuff.
He's got some papers on it.
He talks about members of the anti-Ron Paul subreddit and how they were able to squelch the Ron Paul voices, and how they even used bots called Liberty Bot to downvote people who wanted to talk about Ron Paul.
And talks about the Dig Patriots and why user-generated censorship matters.
This is important kind of stuff.
Now, let's go on to, I think I might have missed one of them.
I think information diversity, then Matthias, let me make sure I got everything here.
Okay, so now let's go back to Katie Miltner and let's look at what they think about Internet censorship.
So Katie Miltner and Whitney Phillips, again, two other members of the DERP Initiative, or sorry, Institute, talk about William Shetner, Reddit, and the complications of free speech on the Internet.
Because free speech is a complication, mind you.
And there's lots of stuff here.
This is basically a transcribed conversation between the two of them.
What I find the funniest about this, and they talk about, you know, in other words, the argument that selective censorship can only lead us down the path of fascism often does little to little more than to lull everyone into a sense of complicity and therefore functions as preemptive self-censorship.
So the idea that she's presenting is that by opposing censorship, you are in essence self-censoring yourself.
She talks about how incendiary, unnecessary, completely unproductive buy all day just because it's free speech.
What she's talking about is basically opposing people who believe that you shouldn't censor the internet and how you shouldn't censor free speech because some of their stuff is bad.
And as many of you may know, Reddit has been getting some venture capital, and I've seen venture capitalists work.
They usually want some return on investment.
They're usually looking for a way to monetize.
And I'm sure many of them have thought to themselves, gee, this would be a lot better if only we could make this into a safe space.
And that's kind of what she's getting at to here: is that she says some people, ahem, white dudes, have to be, sorry, some people, ahem, white dudes, have to be willing to acknowledge that the free speech to which they so desperately cling actually costs quite a bit.
So again, these people do not really care about free speech.
And that's important because these are people who are on the DERP Institute.
These are people.
Just interrupt seconds.
Sorry about this.
So we're getting questions on Twitter that someone, Ice Griffin, has tweeted me something.
I'll retweet just so everyone can see it about the Derp Institute.
Apparently, that website was registered on June the 5th, 2014.
Does that appear as being unusual, or is that about what you'd expect?
I mean, that's what I'd expect.
I mean, you have to start something at some point, and it seems like the pot has been moving over.
I mean, that really wasn't very long ago.
I mean, is that, I mean, I'm not calling into question, I'm just confirming that this is it sounds legitimate.
Yeah, and the person who registered this website is known as Max Goodman, I think, and if memory service is correct.
And he is a Reddit employee, and some people in SRS believe that he's also a moderator of SRS, although I don't know whether or not that's true.
I don't know how they came to that conclusion, or it might just be simply them being funny and silly, as Reddit often is.
I have not been able to make that connection, so I would like to proceed with further, if you guys have any objections to that.
That's fine.
I just wanted to make sure that that didn't compromise any of the information or anything like that to make sure that, you know, I just want to make sure that we're all, you know, everything's above board and everyone's aware of what's going on.
So now we have Alice Dare, and Alice Dare, I looked at her Twitter, and on the top here, we'll see she says a really great piece on the online harassment of women in games in tech-based daily, worth reading, and she links to Polygon.
And just a little bit down, she says, oh, you know, Model View Culture on Surveillance and Academia, Surveilling Kids In and Out of Class, and Ethics of Digital Research.
So let's pop over to Model View Culture.
And let's start as my friend Internet Wrestler Cat likes to do by showing who these people are.
And this is almost like the Hollywood red carpet of intellectual feminists.
I don't know if we won't call them intellectual.
I just want to say of feminists.
And I think someone pointed out, God, who was it that someone pointed out the other day?
I don't know all these people.
Some of you guys may very well know.
Oh, up at the top, I believe it was, wasn't it?
Yeah, I forgot.
Go up to the top bit.
All the way.
Right up to the very top.
Okay.
All right.
Missing now.
We'll go through it in detail afterwards.
Actually, I think she might have disappeared, or maybe it's like a rearranging script or something.
You can give them different setup now and again.
Yeah, just pop yourself down a bit further.
I'm looking for a face rather than the name.
When I see her, I will.
I mean, I've seen Ash Dryden harass a person before on Twitter.
I mean, I've seen we had the top there, mate.
Go up the top.
Shan Lee something or other.
Shanley Kane?
Yeah.
That was a piece of it.
That was one of them.
Yeah.
And let's see.
We also had Sue Park and Adria Richards.
Brilliant.
Yeah, I mean, so this is kind of like the who's who of intellectual feminism.
I mean, is that like Adrian Brianna Wu's sister or something, you know?
Adria Richards.
Adria Richards was part of Donglegate, if I remember correctly.
Yep, that was her.
And Sue Park was like Cancel Colbert.
Yeah.
I'm not going to enact the labor of explaining myself to you.
Well, then.
Yeah, so let's.
Okay, so it's a hive of very nefarious characters.
Yeah, more or less.
High-profile assholes.
Yeah.
Yes.
Someone says to me, Matri, Matri Bries, but let's just not focus on them.
Let's focus on the topic at hand.
So we see here that they have an issue dedicated to surveillance this week, October 7th, 2014.
And there's lots of articles about this.
One is Big Brother is an Asshole, How Silicon Valley Learned to Love Surveillance, Social Networking as Peer Surveillance, Grooming Students for a Lifetime of Surveillance, Social Media Academic Surveillance, The Ethics of Digital Bodies, Feeling Some Kind of Way About Surveillance, Sex Work and Surveillance, How Everyone Watches Nobody Sees How Black Women Destruct Surveillance Theory.
So it's all about surveillance.
I mean they have other ones that are each issue is around a single topic and they have several issues.
This is the latest.
And let's look at the one about academic surveillance and the ethics of digital bodies.
And we see here that though certain academic areas and circles are fighting to decolonize academia and particularly digital research, ethical methodologies that constantly consider how projects must be created, credited, and used must be required practice for all academics.
On Friday, October 3rd at the University of Michigan, there was an entire conference devoted to data, social justice, and digital humanities.
In it, Moya Bailey delivered a talk on doing digital humanities justly, feminist ethics in social media research, in which she pushes back on the ideas of institutional review board paternalism and calls for research as a social justice act.
She also directs attention to the data center research for justice that has worked with communities for decades.
There are academic methodologies being theorized and practiced.
So the question is, why has it not become an academic standard across the board?
So she talks here about Twitter as a digital panopticon with a twist.
That means the panopticon, for those of you who don't know, means that it allows a system where everyone feels like they're being watched and they're all being surveilled.
But let's go on to look at what this data center research for justice is, because she seems to point out that it's rather important.
Now, I found this really quite funny.
Let's see here.
So students went out to work on the archives and came back that night with Teminista tattoos.
So this kind of seems like gang behavior to me.
It's kind of funny.
I don't really take it that seriously, but if you ever were to think about how people identify as a gang, this is how they do it.
Yeah, it's a very strange mentality.
But this is similar to Rebecca Watson and her angry vaginas thing.
Well, I don't know about the angry vagina thing.
Oh, yeah, it's just basically, if you can imagine somebody who's supposed to start do a lesson.
You're a teacher, mate.
You know, you're supposed to set shit out.
And her idea of a lesson is to get everybody to make sort of papilla-mâché vaginas.
Right.
This is the academic level we're talking about.
Yeah, okay.
Do you want to carry on, please, Ben?
Yeah.
So I'm going to highlight this.
There we go.
So DATA Center believes that research justice is achieved when marginalized communities are recognized as experts and reclaim, own and wield all forms of knowledge and information.
With strategic support, the knowledge and information generated by these communities can be used as political leverage to advance their own agendas for change.
In order for this to become reality, the community must have control over information and knowledge that impacts them.
Capacity and resources to produce their own information and knowledge.
Capacity and resources to use and wield all forms of its knowledge to effectively advance their agenda.
Equal access to information outside of the community, despite increasing commodification, privatization and hyperabundance of information.
And the capacity and resources to determine validity, credibility of information and knowledge and methods to create them on equal footing with other all other institutions in society.
Now I find that the privatization of information to be interesting, because I think that privacy would be a form of privatization.
But they say that they believe that transformation, transformative change, can only be achieved through powerful and strategic collaborations across geography, sectors and issue areas and such and welcome and appreciate engagement, dialogue and partnership through projects and initiatives.
Read more about research justice on the Research Justice blog.
Now I want to know who they're collaborating with, so let's look at some of their collaboratories and you see that they have, you know, the Campaign Research Toolkit, the MIT Civic FOR Civic Sorry, the MIT Center FOR Civic Media, OUR MAPS Toolkit, you know.
So they work with these people, you know they.
We've gone now full circle from talking about institutional research boards and how we can use social media for social justice and social activism and they have an entire you know method they use to how Nathan Matthews, you know how to party online.
You know having fun with collaborators on different content to create you know quality.
You know this is what they're doing, this is how they go.
So let's look at some of at the University OF Michigan, they had one of these talks.
Let's look at one of their talks about how to be a scholar now, digital public scholarship in a legacy bound academy, and so let's go through this.
Professors, we need you.
You know, and this the stingist, the stingiest, stinging dismissal of a point, is to say that that's academic.
In other words, to be a scholar is often to be irrelevant.
You know, North American social science is increasingly oriented outward and focus on pressing public problems.
You know, on intellectual activism, changing activism.
We want to change activism because we want the 99% in Facebook and we want how to change changing the scholar activist and it talks about the process that this has been going through and how, over time, blogs have started to erode at not really erode, but kind of mixing with academia and you can see it generates some very excellent, you know,
sort of visits and exposure that they wouldn't normally get in peer-reviewed research papers.
So you can see, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I just want to know.
So they, they basically took out the peer review, got together and kind of put out their own little two cents, but they're also affecting things like Reddit and stuff like that.
Is that I'm sorry?
I had to step away for a bit.
So I yeah Well, I'm sorry that you had a step away.
Kind of, sort of, and we're kind of going over that right now.
So there were some things that you might have missed.
So from tweet to blog post to peer-reviewed article, How to Be a Scholar Now.
And he talks about the changing digital media landscape.
And everything has to do with being fluid with both scholarship and digital technologies.
To illustrate what I mean by this, I describe a process behind a recent article of mine that started with a tweet at an academic conference, then became a blog post, then a series of blog posts, and was eventually an article in a peer-reviewed journal.
And here's an organization called Just Public 365, and they help facilitate this sort of thing.
Because what they want is a horizontally integrated model of scholarship plus journalism plus activism.
And you can see here that they kind of use the analytic methods of some of our data scientists to try to quantify what's happening.
They have media camp workshops on how to do this sort of stuff.
They want to basically talk about 1.3 million words of rioters' first-person accounts.
They're mining Twitter and mining your social media.
They're talking about the case for reparations.
I'm not sure if any of you guys know what that means.
And so now they're shitting on the traditional method of academic scholarship.
They're talking about the old, this was the only method for publishing.
We typed words on paper.
Technology had some problems.
This was cut and paste.
This is how we would go and find information.
This is how we look things up.
Many journals are booked, not open and accessible.
How many inches, I guess inches have changed over time.
I don't know if you guys knew that.
And now there's change ahead.
The expansion of digital technologies.
Why does digital matter?
Because publishing is changing.
People are saying that academic publishing is broken.
Now, I'm not sure if any of you guys have followed the science wars.
This is important because academic publishing is broken.
And the reason why it's broken isn't because of what they seem to think, which is that it's locked away in an ivory tower.
The reason why it's broken is because academia has become a platform where people can spew pseudoscience and intellectual garbage and pass it off as science.
I have experienced this in the GMO field.
Shitty studies get published that are garbage, right?
Actually, I like to stop and make an intersection.
So at the University of Oregon, there was a woman who wanted to do a study on rape on college campuses.
And she came up with this method.
She brought it to the attention of the Institutional Research Board, and they said no, because this study is plagued with biases.
And what she did was she reached out to the Twitter burst, and eventually she ended up at the White House meeting President Obama.
And wouldn't you know, she got the funding for her research, which was more or less just a web survey that was sent out on Twitter where people were asked to answer questions on the survey.
And it lacked any sort of control, had tons of biases, and then she went with this, and then it got published on the Oregonian with its exaggerated rape crises on public campuses narrative.
So this is what I consider to be the erosion of academic research away from what is facts and more about what is opinion, what is op-ed, what is, you know.
But this is a mobile thing, isn't it, really, more than anything else?
This person has sent their minions to basically harass these people into just allowing it to happen.
You know, hiding your research behind a paywall is immoral.
As a scientist, your job is to bring new knowledge into the world.
Hiding behind a journal paywall is unacceptable.
But what they don't realize is that the job of peer review, of having experts that can spend the time to look and pour over very complicated, nuanced information and to be able to evaluate it, is not free.
Someone has to pay the bills.
Someone needs to be able to bring food on the table, right?
But they don't care because the 21st century open connected public spirit worldly means that capitalism is bad.
Everything should be open.
And I don't disagree.
I love free software.
I'm part of open source.
And the fact is that, unfortunately, we don't live in a sort of society, the post-scarcity society, where communism is really an option.
And so I fight with that too: how can I maximize the utility of my software code so that most people can use them?
And how do I make money?
How do I keep the lights on?
Because I don't like to be greedy, but at the same time, I have to accept the fact that we live in a world of price signals and of reality and of scarcity.
So this is just Public 365.
These guys run training workshops on how to become a 21st-century scholar with presumably print, visual media, and shouting or tweeting or whatever this is.
So we see here introduction, you know, POOCs, participatory online, open online course, knowledge streams, open access, metrics that matter, partnership, social justice impressions, lessons learned, and then how to basically take what you've done and submit your papers to different journals and how to evaluate your stuff.
This is basically like the guidebook.
This is their playbook and how they get this stuff out.
Now, I'm not sure if you guys have ever heard of the Femmbot Collective, but here we see that the FemmeBot Collective is certainly part.
They have one of the largest groups, if not the largest group, after another feminist group, on this website about humanities, arts, science, and technology alliance in collaboratory.
And this is how they circulate a lot of their research to each other, and this is where the echo chamber gets amplified.
And you see here the Femmbot Collective, and they have all their members of the Femmbot Collective there, and you see Adrian Shaw is right up on the top of the list, as are other members of the Femmbot Collective, including one member of the Femmbot Collective, whose name is Whitney Phillips.
Whitney Phillips is on the FemmeBach Collective.
Just to interject, Mir Consalvo, the president of Diagra, is in there as well.
So this all comes back again, we come full circle to points we've seen before.
You know, the Femmbot Collective.
You know, and the FemmeBach Collective is really about being able to push an agenda.
They're the ones who push this rape, this rape crisis, this rape culture narrative, all the way to the White House, despite the fact that rape levels have been falling for a very, very long time.
Violence has been falling for a very, very long time.
And now we have universities who are asking for, because now, recently in Oregon, universities are now no longer controlled by the state.
Now they're controlled by university boards.
Now they're asking to have private police forces on campus.
I mean, this is the kind of stuff that I think gets scary when people start talking about harassment.
Like, for instance, they said I was harassing people at XOXO.
I was not harassing people.
I was contradicting and satirizing people.
Because harassment is a criminal complaint, right?
And we all know that police often don't take a lot of discretion.
I've had a police officer describe it to me.
He says the only way that he can do his job is by having a short attention span, because that allows him to be able to go home at night and to decompress and be ready to go home the next day.
If he were to think too much into things, he would be stressed out all the time.
That's very legitimate.
I believe that to be the case.
I would have to disagree on that.
My father was a cop for 28 years, and that's not really how it works.
They have to go by what the code of the law goes.
They have to get there and they have to ask questions in the witnesses.
Sure, I'm sure.
But they also deal with a lot of shit all the time.
Yeah, they do, but that doesn't mean they go in with a short attention span to just roll over everything and ignore everything that's going around them.
I don't think he means that.
I think he means afterwards, once he's actually come out of this, he's trying to decompress and just be a normal human being for once instead of being an official.
Yeah, but they don't go in to work with a short attention span to do that.
No, he wasn't.
But they don't have the time to go.
If a bunch of people are going to accuse you, a mob is going to accuse you of harassment.
They're going to look and say, oh, well, there's 20 people who are accusing you of harassment.
I don't have the time to go look into this.
You know, a prime example is Ferguson, then, if that's the case, because that'd be the way it goes.
And I think they have plenty of time to handle accusations being thrown at them.
There is actually a very, very deep-seated problem with the police force in America.
I don't know about Canada, but I'm actually going to be doing quite a bit of a problem.
I know that, but I'm not saying that all comments.
Seriously, there have been lots of chief of police who have come out saying, look, there are a lot of police on our forces that really shouldn't be on our forces, but we can't get rid of them.
Right.
There are obviously good cops, and no one's questioning anything.
No one's questioning that.
I want to stress that this, I can completely believe that this is happening.
No, I'm not saying it's not happening.
I was just going on.
I know, I know, I know.
And I'm not trying to just tell you you're wrong, because you're not.
You are right.
There are lots of debts.
But I think there has been a case of kind of infiltration by the wrong personality types.
I think that's a good idea.
Well, the cops have wrong.
Let me moderate this for a second, okay?
So first of all, if you get too high of an IQ score, you are not eligible to be a police officer, okay?
Second thing is that my brother-in-law is also a detective for Tillamuck County.
So I get to hear about firsthand his stories about this sort of stuff.
And he does go through a lot.
I mean, every single day it is full of drama.
And I could not imagine having to deal with that much drama on a consistent basis.
And it kind of changes you over time, similar to how being in Iraq changes you over time.
You can have perfectly normal people who go in and go in thinking they have noble intentions.
And being exposed to it continually kind of calluses you to these sort of things.
And I'd like to play a YouTube video as to why I think this is kind of important stuff, because I think that this kind of accentuates the kind of what I think has been going on.
So I think I'm going to add two videos here.
And I'm sorry that they're short.
And they're trailers, so there's full documentaries about this stuff online.
And if you guys haven't seen this, this is kind of cultural stuff that has happened in the past that we should look to and be aware of because it may very well happen in the future.
Can you guys see the YouTube video?
Is that up?
Yeah, go for it, mate.
Yep.
Are we
playing?
Right, guys.
I don't, Troy's just let me know.
This isn't playing on the stream.
Yeah, we don't play it.
Oh, okay, so what do I got to do?
I'm sorry.
I don't think it's your fault.
I think it's we have to blame Sarge at this point.
Sorry, Sargon.
I think it's you.
I thought that was.
Can nobody hear that?
Shit.
No, we couldn't watch it all.
I mean, was it about a cops or was it about non-topic?
I'm sorry.
No, this is about.
Well, sorry, Ben, carry on.
Yeah, so what this is about, this is showing you how easily people are brought to believe in fascism as the answer to their problems.
And how this happens in schools.
And this is actually a video that is shown to all the children in Germany so they are aware of how easily a democratic society can fall into fascism.
Guys, what I'm going to do is I'm going to tweet a Wikipedia article called Third Wave.
I've actually read about this before a while ago, and it's terrifying stuff.
The movement grows.
That was the problem.
It lasted something like two or three days.
And on the first day, the teacher just told them exactly what was going on.
They were going to be part of this movement called The Third Wave.
They had certain special handshakes or something like that.
Little signals to show each other they were part of the same club.
And they weren't to talk, you know, they weren't to invite other people or anything like that.
But it was very popular because it gave them a feeling of inclusion and it made them feel special.
And this was also during the Vietnam War, and so people were feeling victimized by the Vietnam War.
And again, we have this situation where you have the people who feel like they're victims, you have the rescuer, and you have the victimizers, right?
And this is, again, like the same sort of model that we've seen in feminism.
And there's a short little video.
It's two and a half minutes.
I'd like you guys to see that.
And Sargon, do you have that queued up?
Is that ready?
Can I play that?
Well, I'll press play, but I thought that everyone could hear it.
Are you using the YouTube app, Sargon?
Yeah, I don't know why we're doing that.
Can you not?
It was coming out as blank.
That was the thing.
If you just go to the YouTube app on the chat, and that should actually just show the video, and then you can press play.
Okay, yeah, do that.
I thought I was playing for everyone else, too.
Here's the YouTube video.
Don't worry about the YouTube app.
Just stream it across just I don't know if I can use a screen share because I'm plugged in with like headphones and I think that the screen share uses like the microphone.
That's right.
That's right.
Yeah.
Can you okay, yeah, we'll get that back up.
Oh, so do you can someone look at the stream and see if they see the YouTube video?
Yes, I had Troy let me know how you were doing it before Sargon.
It wasn't really working out.
You might have to control me, I didn't think.
Are you guys okay?
So please figure this out somehow.
Sargon, look to the left-hand side where you've got the Hangouts.
Click on the YouTube app.
I've got that up at the moment.
Which video do you want me to play?
I have posted a video in the chat.
Do you see the last comment I made?
Right.
Right, lesson plan, yeah, just, they're in, no, no, they're not in there.
Right, okay, yeah.
This one's called Lesson Plan.
Do you want that one?
Yeah.
That's the one, yeah.
Is that working?
No, I don't see it.
You're not seeing it.
No, just give it a chance, mate.
It takes about 20 seconds to get through on the stream.
Okay. Thanks.
Nope.
Just not having it.
Why don't you just link the video on your chat and then just explain to us what's in the video?
It's in the small little description.
I think I'd have the easiest way to do that.
I'll tweet it and then people can watch it.
There we go.
I tweeted the Wikipedia article and basically what happens, I'll just give you a quick rundown from Wikipedia, right?
He starts to experiment with simple things such as proper seating and extensively drilling the students.
Then he proceeds to enforce strict classroom discipline by emerging as an authoritarian figure and dramatically improving the efficiency of the class.
The first day's session was closed with only a few rules intending to be a one-day experiment.
Students had to be sitting attention before the second bell and had to stand up to ask or answer questions and had to do it in three words or fewer.
And were required to preface each remark with Mr. Jones.
On the second day, he managed to melt his history class into a group with a supreme sense of discipline and community.
Jones based the name of his movement, The Third Wave, on the supposed fact that they were the third in a series of waves as the strongest or something.
An erroneous version of an actual sailing tradition that every ninth wave is the largest.
Jones made up a salute resembling that of the Nazi regime and ordered class members to salute each other even outside the class.
They all complied with this command.
On the third day, the experiment took on a life of its own, with the students all over the school joining in.
On the third day, the class expanded from the initial 30 students to 43 attendees.
All of the students showed drastic improvement in their academic skills and tremendous motivation.
All of the students were issued a member card, and each of them received a special assignment, like designing a third wave banner, stopping non-members from entering the class, or the like.
Jones instructed the students on how to initiate new members, and by the end of the day, the movement had over 200 participants.
Jones was surprised that some of the students started reporting to him when other members of the movement failed to abide by the rules.
On the fourth day, the fourth day of the experiment, Jones decided to terminate the movement because it was slipping out of his control.
The students became increasingly involved in the project, and their discipline and loyalty to the project was outstanding.
He announced that the participants in the movement that the movement was part of a nationwide movement and that on the next day, a presidential candidate of the third wave would publicly announce its existence.
Jones ordered students to attend a noon rally on Friday to witness the announcement.
On the fifth and last day, instead of a televised address from their leader, the students were presented with an empty channel.
After a few minutes of waiting, Jones announced that they've been part of an experiment in fascism, and they all willingly created a sense of superiority like German citizens had in the period of Nazi Germany.
He then played them a film about the Nazi regime to conclude the experiment.
I'm pretty sure we can all see just how terrifying that is.
Well, that's like the Stanford Prison Experiment, in a sense, as well.
I mean, it's that easy to flip a switch to anybody.
Yeah, it's about authoritarianism, really.
That's what we're talking about.
We're talking about people's willingness to do as they're told and not think for themselves.
Group think is it does fill the mind with a sense of belonging.
And of course, when you say to somebody, that particular group is messing with your mind, you're actually messing with the person's feelings at this point.
So they instantly feel harassed by the idea.
It's the cognitive dissonance thing that kicks in.
They feel upset that you're actually trying to deprogram them.
Absolutely.
I had that too.
I was trying to deprogram my wife.
I tried to use science and reason, and she would plug her ears and hum to herself rather than listen to facts and reason.
And it is really, really hard when you have a system of intellectual system built, and when someone tries to throw in new data, it causes a cognitive dissonance and it causes people to try to make sense of the disorder that's going on in their mind.
And it's really hard sometimes.
And what I think I'd like to describe is what we have learned from the Stanford prison experiment and from this is that people are vulnerable.
And I don't see the other side as evil or bad people.
I want to be like Jesus.
I want to love the sinners but hate the sin.
And what I see is it's almost like intellectual Ebola.
I mean, that's what I think we're fighting against.
And you don't cure intellectual Ebola by killing all the patients.
You do it by trying to cure the disease, not attacking the symptoms.
And there's one other video, and I guess since it probably doesn't work, maybe we can link it in chat.
It is by a man, his name is Adam Curtis, also for some reason from the great British Empire.
I'm not sure how they produced all these brilliant video.
And The Century of the Self talks about how the Freud family had some connections within the government around the same time that mass communications was built and how they were able to use mass communications in order to guide society who they thought was dangerous if left to their own devices and the results of that.
Adam Curtis has some other interesting videos.
I think one that is more relevant is called All Being Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace.
I've got to say, I've actually seen The Century of the Self, and it's a series, isn't it?
This?
It's a series, yes.
I've actually watched the whole series, and I really do suggest that people watch it.
I've tweeted Introduction to the Century of the Self.
I'll find all watch over by machines of love and grace as well, because it's um it's it it yeah it's terrifying frankly but it's important stuff and I think this is the stuff that we as a community need to be aware of.
I don't think that it is uh possible to just confine this to uh Gamergate.
Uh I don't think it's possible to stand up for yourself as just a gamer or indie game dev when you're standing in quicksand.
And that's what I feel is happening.
Definitely agree on that.
It is crazy, like you said, the stuff like that and the and all the kind of goes.
But like you said, it boils down to where it's all coming from and attacking the symptoms are not really what's going to really help in the sense.
And now it's just convincing people to focus on the right material.
And this is happening up and down the levels as well.
This isn't just happening to the gaming community.
This is happening to all levels of journalism.
It's happening to all levels, whether it's music, film, whatever.
These are very porous places where these people are able to sort of walk themselves in.
They've got friends of friends in these sort of places.
As far as Gamergate is concerned, this is what we're trying to stop.
I was saying that really we need to tend our own garden and actually get that sorted.
Once that's sorted, a lot of people in other gardens are going to be looking rather jealous at ours.
I mean, you would think that of all places, like the hard sciences would be safe and the technology industries would be safe.
But no, it is not the case.
Even in the hard sciences, there are feminist reinterpretations of gender dimorphisms.
We have people saying that Newton's Principia is a rape manual, you know.
This is the sort of stuff that we're coming against.
This is the mindset that we're actually talking about here.
Yeah.
And I don't think it's possible that this is going to be confined by just Gamergate.
There was a report that was to the United Nations on social justice.
I think I tweeted that to you at one point, King of Paul.
Yeah, I read it to me.
Yeah, I read it.
I retweeted it.
And basically it talks about how people who believe in the idea of moral virtue and of concrete facts in regular justice are not willing or desirable companions of social justice.
These two things are mutually incompatible.
It's all the way up to the UN at this point.
It's because they're saying that because if you try to study it in the same way, they use the ideology that feelings have to come first before everything else.
That your choices are dictated first by what you gravitate to and then from the factual knowledge.
So that facts and logical people could not gravitate to it because they do not adhere to the emotional side first of the consensus and to it.
That's why.
Actually, my doctor, the psychiatrist I work with, we talked about this for some time.
He wanted to come on the show.
And that was his statement to that particular thing when he actually tweeted that to me because we talked about that for some time.
And I was talking about third-wave feminism to him.
I mean, these academics literally talk about how science is a social construct and how there is privileged epistemology and privileged statistics.
I guess I don't want to get too jargon-y for people.
Right.
I think people know what we're talking about.
We're all quite along in the terms.
I understand all you guys understand.
I understand.
I think our audience does as well.
I think they're pretty worldly people generally.
Let's give them some credit.
Okay.
Well, I sometimes go too jargony on people and people don't know what that is.
They can wiki this shit.
It's all right, man.
Yeah, okay.
And so, yeah, I have a feeling this is part of a larger thing.
And I would not be here if it weren't for the fact that other places like family therapy have been infected by this, breaking families apart.
And it's deplorable, it's sickening.
And I decided that I finally want to do something about it.
I don't want to raise my kids in this sort of environment if I even get to have kids after this whole fiasco that's happened to me.
I wanted to be teen dad, teaching kids about science and all that sort of thing.
And now I don't know if that's really in the cards anymore.
You'll get that, Mate.
Yeah.
Okay.
Should we go back to the beginning then and start looking in detail at some of the crazy that they're talking about in academia?
So what do you want?
I think we're all quite familiar with the mindset.
What was the first link you had?
Not the DERP one, but the one after that.
Oh, well, the one right after that was the feminist frequency.
And then right for that, I had the conference.
Sorry, what was that?
Oh, we're talking about the model view culture.
I've got that up here, actually.
So I'm just going to share screens so everyone can see it.
Because this is the sort of thing that we need to be able to see exactly who's involved with all this.
I mean, the ethics of digital bodies, that's a very strange thing to be talking about.
I mean, what's everyone else's opinion on all of this?
Do you guys want to just give me some feedback on what you guys think?
Well, I've been wading in a little bit.
A lot of this is you can feel that it's looking at, say, if you have a look at that digit, you know, the what was it called?
The Dig Patriots.
I was just reading about that one, and they're going through the idea of mass censorship in the sense of getting a lot of people together to do that censorship for you.
Hey, Sargon, go to social networks as peer surveillance.
Okay.
Do you guys remember how the SS, or like in Germany, they would have informants?
And how even in this third wave thing, it relied on secret informants?
It's in probably 1984, in fact.
There's a possibility.
But the children are encouraged to inform on their parents to the party if they're doing something wrong.
And they do it willingly.
And the parents think is a great thing.
Didn't they have like a.
I'm sorry.
Didn't they have like the way the females did something with the teachers and the teachers did something with all the kids in kindergarten?
Like the six-year-olds and seven-year-olds, and they had them all stand up and read these letters that they wrote, and then they followed up by telling them if anybody questioned that to report back to them.
I mean, wasn't that something on a YouTube?
I remember watching a YouTube video specifically on that.
I've heard of it.
I wish I'd somebody find that.
I know somebody in chat's going to know exactly what I'm talking about.
There was some convention that they did.
They actually had their students reading the letters they had to write to their parents and stuff.
It's insane.
Yeah, this is basically brainwashing.
I mean, there's no other way to put it.
This is brainwashing of children.
Oh, I think we missed one important thing.
We missed the Digital Humanities Manifesto.
Right, okay.
Do you want to put a link in?
I'll get it up.
Yeah, do you remember that?
I think that was what you were particularly appalled by.
It could well be.
Have you got the Department of Erasio studies?
Yeah, yeah.
I don't like the sound of that.
I think it's a good thing that the internet never forgets.
No, a good question I think we could ask is: are these guys in any political power, like any congressmen, anything like that, or interns to congressmen, or advisors to any of the congressmen, or anything like that, or the president?
Anything anything out there that would really make this kind of insanely out there?
Well, I mean, I've been in politics before.
I've not only tried to get some legislature, sorry, some legislation passed for internet voting and such, but I ran as like a primary opponent for the State House of Representatives before.
And I've been in the political machine.
And one of the very, very first things that these people always do is they set up a system where there is always some sort of plausible deniability.
Someone's echoing.
I think that's Paul.
Nope, not me.
I can tell you I had my mic muted.
Oh, okay.
So, yeah, do you have the Digital Humanities Manifesto?
Oh, actually, I already gave it to you.
Do you have it, Sargon?
Hello, Sargon.
Sargon's muted himself here.
Hey, I think he's getting something real quick.
Yeah, hang on, sorry.
What was I looking for?
Sorry, what was it again that I'm looking for?
I sent you the Digital Humanities Manifesto in chat.
I've got it there.
Right.
Now, scroll down.
Let me find the right paragraph for you.
Just let everybody else know, we are quite new to this information ourselves.
Yeah, I haven't seen this yet.
Yeah, Sargon's had some time to sleep on this.
I've seen this over in my stream, but we've really had very difficult.
So it's on paragraph number 27 of the Digital Humanities Manifesto.
Right.
So here are some new departments for the Humanities Division.
The Department of Print Media Studies, Department of Discourse Analysis.
That's an interesting thing because the history of triangulation of knowledge, discourse, and power.
See, they're talking about basically feminist power structure analysis.
And click on the comment, Sargon.
You see where there's comments on the side?
What, the paragraphs?
The little thought bubbles where it says eight.
Oh, yeah, yeah, sorry.
Yeah, this is quite subversive sounding, actually.
Paying particular attention to discursive structures, knowledge making and the specific media forms in which knowledge is produced, disseminated, encountered, and valued.
That is controlling the narrative.
That is exactly how to control all the narrative.
Apparently, I can't just open the new window.
Yeah, I like my do you see how there's a comment bubble where it says eight below it?
Yeah, I've clicked it, don't I?
Okay, cool.
There it is.
I must hide it.
There we go.
Which comment exactly?
It's the top comment on.
No, I just don't think you can tab it.
I think you actually have to click on it.
Like JavaScript or something.
It's not popping up in the comments overview.
Isn't it?
Actually, I'm looking at the YouTube stream.
Hold on.
I can't see what's in that little tiny window.
Oh, there it is.
Yeah, I see it.
Yeah, the Department of Erasure Studies.
The purpose of this department is to develop models and criteria both for the cancellation of records and archives and for the selective strategic and smart conservation and archiving.
That's basically Winston Smith's job, wasn't it?
Indeed.
Yeah.
That's fucking terrifying.
That's not a good thing to me.
I can understand why I was trying to get your ear last night, Sargon.
You can.
You can.
I was shitting the bed, mate.
I should be looking for exactly while I'm here.
Oh, no, I was just.
This is one of the examples of what the digital humanities is about.
This is their manifesto.
Right, okay.
So, Department of Comparative Media Studies.
Purpose of the department will study sonic visual and tactile and immersive media through a comparative framework.
The department places divisioners the division of humanities departments by media form, departments of art, history, genius, college, film, etc.
Okay.
Look up the Department of Cultural Analytics.
Yeah.
The purpose of this department is to bring quantitative analysis from the math and sciences together with large-scale complex and social and cultural data sets.
So that, this here is their map.
This is how they understand things and how they understand what's going on.
This culture is how they're going to control it.
Digital cultural mapping.
The purpose of this department is to examine the junctions between space, time, information, and culture.
It brings geographic analyses together with historical methods, visual analysis, and the presentation of knowledge.
It also examines the culture and social impact of digital mapping technologies and the significance of these mapping technologies for understanding cultural phenomena.
I suppose that does the same sort of thing.
The cultural analytics or the conclusions they're going to draw from it.
Yeah.
So this is what we're kind of going up against.
But somebody also posted me the white privilege thing.com.
Yeah, that's what I was talking about, where the teachers had their students write letters about their parents to wipe out white privilege and how bad it is to be white.
And then they wanted the students to come back and tell the teachers exactly how their parents reacted to it and what happened.
And they openly, there's a YouTube video out there.com.
You've just that's exactly exactly what you're talking about.
I mean, they did that with students, like kindergarten kids and first graders.
It was fucking insane.
Yeah, actually, it's kind of funny.
You know that therapy.
So do you guys know about the feminist therapy people?
Well, they were having a training conference and they were passing out flyers for the white privilege conference at that event.
Jesus Christ.
You know, I just want my only worry in all this is like you said, if this gets to stuff like congressmen and stuff like that, where it starts affecting what the Congress votes on, at least in American society, or like you said, it's getting into the UN now.
I mean, that will fuck up so much stuff.
It will literally just cause the chaos.
Well, let's be honest, guys, this isn't necessarily, you know, we've got a lot of people who are freaking out on the YouTube right now, sort of like tinfoil had to go and all that sort of business.
What you've got to understand, what everyone needs to understand is this is not some major, ginormous sort of operation going on yet.
Right now it is actually a small group of people, maybe a thousand or so people, two thousand people at maximum.
And they are basically trying to bully and influence their way through right now.
Well, let's let's can I make a parallel for a second?
Sure.
Okay, so I'm sure by now all of us are quite aware of Ayn Rand, right?
Yeah.
Ayn Rand was at the time part of a small collective, and that collective included brilliant, brilliant people such as Alan Greenspan, you know, and others.
But Alan Greenspan became chairman of the Federal Reserve, you know, and he was directly influenced by the sort of things that were going on, which were admittingly bullshit.
But during the 80s we had people like Milton Friedman going on, Donnie Hugh, going on these media things to do publicity blitzes about economics.
And even though he was he had one debate in Iceland where he got his shit handed to him, but didn't stop him at all.
And when they asked him, where does your rhetoric end in your academia began?
There really wasn't a barrier between his ideology and his academic study.
And so this thing isn't, this kind of stuff isn't really new.
It doesn't really take a whole lot of people to guide the narrative.
You just need to show them for who they are to people.
Essentially, that's what we're doing here, guys.
So don't freak out.
Don't start thinking that you've got to sort of like start making a bunker.
This isn't quite that bad yet.
This is a media sort of thing.
This is how it's going to be played out.
They consider it a media war?
Yes.
This is, in essence, a media war as such.
And we've got a lot of people to sort of not necessarily to take down, but to really, you're never going to get them to understand what's going on here, but you can get the rest of the world to understand that they're talking shit.
That's really the thing.
You'll never win with these people.
They will never be satisfied.
Even if you placated them in this fashion and just did everything they wanted, they'd just find something new to get annoyed about.
I think I find that the easiest way to talk with people who are like this is to ask them questions that guide them to the sort of answers that you want them to find.
I found that to be a very good way of doing it.
I've also found that trying to show themselves in the mirror, like the worst thing that they want to see is the sort of stuff that they themselves believe.
And so by asking these sort of questions, you can kind of show them how they are wrong.
And it causes a sort of cognitive dissonance, like a sort of double think, and it exposes that.
If you can expose that, you might have an ability to do something.
I sort of put it in the way of steer them off to the left, and then off to the left again, and then off to the left again, and then off to the left again, and they end up right upside their own ass.
And at that point, they have no choice but to admit to that.
Yeah, precisely.
There's no point just battling at them.
It actually makes, I think that somebody did this study on this, isn't it?
That your sort of social justice warrior mentality, the more you battle against it, the harder they want to fight.
No, that is literally the case because the more you fight against them, the more they feel like they're victimized and the more they feel like they need to have their rescuer to save them.
They found their enemy.
And being like Jesus, we could probably learn a few things about how being good examples to the community and doing good things to even the people that you hate can a lot of times give you the moral high ground to have them listen to what you have to say.
Over to you, Sargon.
Sorry, yeah, I was actually just checking to see who these people featured on what is white privilege.
Who's Paula Rothenberg and who's Peggy McIntosh?
Paula Rothenberg, they're just insane feminists who are convinced that white privilege is the other side of racism.
Maybe it's John McIntosh's mom.
Well, I was actually just looking for the secret book.
It's the American feminist.
Yeah, I'm just wiking her now.
Yeah, yeah, she's a feminist and straight away.
First thing they say, I'll tell you what, almost every single passage, everything you see in magazines and stuff like that, just go to the writer, look at the author, find her on Wiki, and you'll say prominent feminist or prominent this, that, and the other, and feminist.
Just straight away.
Yeah, so these people are all pretty mental.
Right, okay, so let's go back to this sort of thing.
Yeah, let's go.
Can you go to the one that's entitled about peer.
Can you not see the screen share?
No, I can see it.
I can see it.
Right, okay.
Sorry, I was just checking.
So, yeah, social networking is peer surveillance.
Are we the greatest threat to our privacy online?
I mean, yes.
Yes, you fucking are.
But look at look go further and go down and you'll eventually see how they talk about it.
Hang on, just to give you the quick overview here.
As an outspoken queer woman, the internet is a terrifying place.
Can I trust myself, my friends, and my family not to inadvertently harm me through the information shared on social networks?
I don't know what kind of harm she expects to come to.
But yeah, sorry, go down to where?
These are precious flowers, my friend.
Keep scrolling down, you'll see another heading.
So there we go, as the panopticon, and there's other headings.
You'll see the topics I'll talk about.
And you can go back and visit the topics if you think that.
Social engineering.
Let's have a quick browse.
Because I want to take some time to actually explore some of this craziness, you know?
Let's look at the headings and then you'll see what we should dig into after you see the headings.
If you want to tuck in for a second, yeah, go for it.
Yeah, yeah, I just want to see how they think of things.
I've got one here if you want it.
White privilege.
One notable privilege that is seen to be an eye-opener is the phenomenon of flesh-coloured band-aids.
Band-aids are something pertaining to one's childhood since most everyone has associated with band-aids.
Flesh-coloured band-aids pertain to white people in general.
This is the level that we're talking about.
Oh my god, I feel so oppressed because my band-aid isn't black.
The thing is, what they're saying is true, you know, but this is a consequence of it being a majority white society.
Yeah.
It's not like anyone saying I hate black people.
And they probably sell black band-aids as well.
They're missing a trick if they're not.
Yeah, exactly.
You'd think the market economy would compensate for this, wouldn't you?
But I suspect plenty of African Americans couldn't give a damn.
They just want to make sure that they're band-aid over the top of it.
I don't know if they sit there looking at the pool table and think, I wish they'd reverse this.
I hate the fact this white ball's just controlling everything and we're the black one at the end.
It's bizarre.
So basically I want to know what her opinion of social networks is.
Easily automated analyzed patterns.
A few weeks' worth of data can give you an idea of when someone needs to work, what coffee shop they're at in the morning, and even what route they drive home.
I mean, this is all true, but who cares?
Or go down to where it says social engineering.
Yeah, why does she think she's so important?
So.
Well, it's the what allowed this to happen bit.
I think that's.
Knowing the risks, do we alter the way we act within these systems?
I'd argue that too few of us do, myself included.
Only after the information I put out used to hurt me did I realize how much exactly I'd shared and how difficult it was to get back.
I mean, how had she been hurt?
I don't.
Perhaps somebody had said something.
Yeah.
So how was I so easily fooled into living in the Panopticon?
Shared interwoven set of tenets between social networks and the people who use them to create a variety of subtle pressures.
Okay.
Okay, so it being free is definitely one of those things.
One identity to rule them all and a closed system to bind them.
Very clever.
So yeah, the cl yeah yeah, staking the same identity on each social media.
I'm sure we all do that.
And then public is default.
Yes, that's true.
That is exactly how these things work.
Share everything early and often.
Well, I guess if it's something you want your friends to see, shoot first, ask questions later.
Even knowing the dangers, we feel strangely safe at home on the internet.
They talk as if they're going to be stalked by serial killers or something.
We're all out there.
I just can't imagine who would give a fuck about this girl enough to find out her working patterns and where she goes and stuff from her social media.
Well, I could expect one or two, maybe slightly crazy sort of, you know, it's like when somebody says, well, violent video games or violent movies can make you violent.
And then they post, you know, they show that some violent person plays video games and has watched violent movies.
And they kind of say, you know, see?
And this is the same thing for these people.
For her, her idea of being attacked is someone saying nasty things about her on Twitter.
That's their level of attack.
That's what they consider a harassment.
The idea of somebody, you know, what I mean is that the idea of some nutter jumping into their car and driving thousands of miles to go and sort of, I don't know, what, throw shit at a window or basically, you know, harass her at a doorstep.
Well, I'm actually wondering if we're thinking about this wrong.
Maybe it isn't some nutter from thousands of miles away.
Maybe it's someone else from San Francisco or from, you know, wherever they particularly because they tend to congregate, don't they?
They seem to be in specific areas.
You know, San Francisco is a whole, absolute hole.
I keep seeing this sort of thing coming up from San Francisco, and it's just like, Jesus.
And Benjamin, where was all this?
It was Oregon, wasn't it?
Yeah, I live in Portland, Oregon.
Yeah, so, I mean, these people might not actually be having to go very far, especially if it's people in this sort of culture that are worried about this sort of hap thing happening.
I imagine that they are the ones who probably perpetrate this sort of thing when someone has crossed someone else.
Oh, well, actually, we should go into that.
That'd be a good thing to go into that.
Because I think that we think of it like, well, it's just going to be some guy on the other side of the world.
Who cares?
Because that's how we operate.
But I think they, if you'd like to carry on there, Ben.
Yeah, so let's go into a couple of examples.
And let me open up some tabs so I can show you guys what I'm referring to.
Yeah, I'll hide my screen.
Sorry.
So let's see here, let's see how does this work.
There we go.
Okay.
So this is kind of interesting.
So this is a woman who wrote about the previous XOXOFest.
And she talks about harassment and inclusivity at XOXO.
And she felt like she was, you know, given she was harassed.
And I don't really care about that.
I want to find the part where she says, as I'm writing this, I've just learned that an acquaintance of mine was arrested and ultimately exonerated for a domestic violence incident over the weekend.
A completely unproductive and angry fight erupted over this event.
He's a man in the tech community who actively works to make this section of the world more welcoming to women.
Though I don't know him very well, my heart is breaking for him.
And exoneration doesn't mean that he is totally innocent, but an arrest doesn't mean that he deserves the level of hatred he's getting towards or sorry, from people who were not involved.
He has posted on Twitter that he's scared.
Some of his defenders are denigrating the women who won't take the lack of formal criminal charges as evidence of his innocence.
Those women are coming from a place of fear and anger where they're always threatened and are always fighting.
In some cases, they are coming from their own trauma and experiences with not being believed or supported in a time of crisis.
And my heart breaks for them too.
And what this is, is basically there is a guy who was accused of who's a part of the techno-feminist community in Portland, who was accused of raping his girlfriend at the time.
It turns out that the allegations were false, and now he's suing her in district court.
And she admitted to the court that, in fact, the let me see, has there been any updates since I looked at last?
Yeah, so she's cleverly using the legal system to go in loops where she appeals and appeals and appeals.
But more or less, in the court documents, it shows that the allegations were false, and now he's trying to sue her for defamation.
She's arguing that she shouldn't be allowed to be sued for defamation.
It wasn't her who was committing the harassment or the defamation.
It was other people based upon publicly available news, and it didn't come from her.
And she tried to employ defense from the SLAP Act or something.
And the judge said no, and then she appealed it.
And I was seen appeals.
And we're getting the idea that there are people in the tech community in Portland getting kind of harassed by this.
Let's see.
Let's look.
I live a block away from where this happened.
This is the Drupal community.
Drupal is a content management system, which is the largest content management system on the Internet.
And at DrupalCon and Austin, I took on the mechanical bull.
I ended up losing miserably.
Not surprisingly, it was recorded and sent out to the world.
Because of my epic fail on the bull, one of my friends in Sweden, because he's Danish, afterwards called me on Twitter with the DupalCon hashtag and called me a quote pussy.
Other Drupal community members intervened and asked my friend to stop using that kind of language.
I saw this thread a couple of hours later the next morning and asked if we could keep the political correctness down a little bit as I saw it as private teasing over Twitter between two people.
I honestly felt this tweet was about me and my first thought was, wow, I don't have any problems with someone I know making fun of me and I can set it for myself.
What I was trying to defend was one of my friends right to make fun of me.
I did not understand the issue.
It was about using the word pussy and not about me personally.
That was a mistake not to remember the huge cultural differences that we have in the community and how we can use words that are hurtful to some, but don't even cross my mind when I talk.
And basically this guy got pushed off of the board of the Drupal Association simply for defending his friend's right to call him a pussy.
That doesn't surprise me at all.
I think it's very evident that what we're seeing here is the eventual flaws of their own system.
These guys are being falsely accused.
It doesn't matter though because presumption of innocence is not something they seem to care about.
And like you say, like they said, like the person said, it was all about their feelings.
It was all about their own prior experiences that they were projecting onto this guy.
Yeah, I mean, they care about their feelings, and it's kind of ironic because here we have the Equal Rights Amendment in Oregon, right?
And you'll see when you go down to the bottom here, Tomei calls herself a feminist.
Sorry, Carolyn Tomei, a Milwaukee Democrat who leads the committee that is overseeing the proposal, said that she won't allow the measure to move through her committee to reach the full house.
Tomei calls herself a feminist and said that she's pushing on an equal rights amendment in the federal level when it was a flashplay of national politics, but doesn't think a state amendment is needed.
So there's actually the differences between the two amendments.
One was basically we want equal rights as long as it benefits us and not when it doesn't.
And the Oregon one is strictly completely equal.
This bill is also being fought by the ACLU in Oregon.
Now, you'd always think that the ACLU would be the place that would support equal rights.
But in fact, no.
Because as you can see here, the American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon opposed it, which got opposition in a struggling word response from four former Oregon Supreme Court justices.
So even the people who claim that they want to protect your rights don't really think that your rights are worth protecting when it defies their narrative.
You know, there's more cases like this in Oregon.
This stuff is kind of crazy.
There was a guy who was in charge of a CEO of a place called Urban Airship.
Former girlfriend is suing him for $3.3 million over alleged assaults.
And yeah, it turns out that they had a grand jury.
The grand jury refused to indict him.
And now she's suing him.
And she's suing him because basically relationship drama.
He was fooling around with her.
His wife divorced him.
He continued to fool around.
And now she's upset about it.
Someone's leaking in.
Okay.
What was the thing that I saw the other night?
feminist, neo-Marxist paper.
Oh, yeah, I can show you that.
Yeah, please.
Yeah, so let me show you.
They have a feminist hacker space in Portland, and they call this the Conduct of Privilege.
What about that paper that was specifically titled?
Yeah.
Are you talking about the feminist neo-Marxist feminist thing?
Yeah, I really want to see that.
Yeah.
Let me find it for you.
So, as you can see here, this is a long paper, but this is the title of the paper.
I don't suppose you could forward that paper to me, could you?
You already have a zip file of all these papers, sir.
Sorry, I think I'm not.
This is what I mean.
I try to send this to people, but there's too much to go through for people about the ball.
Again, it's about the time of the idea rather than the information itself.
But yeah, sorry, let's go through this, and I'll dig that up on my own later.
So, you know, conduct of privilege.
They have a feminist hackerspace.
And the feminist hackerspace was literally talking about having a group to see here.
I can pull up this one as well.
So this feminist hacker space had a chat, which I was a part of, about wanting to get young people involved in their hackerspace.
Yeah, suitable meeting for younger dorks.
And they wanted to send them to this feminist hackerspace where they have, you know, talk about hackerspace culture.
And they talk about how programming, man-splaining, microaggressions, checking your privilege, all sorts of very nonsense sort of things.
Well, the microaggressions thing that I was looking at with that Anne Chow lady, and she's basically the fact that she's Chinese, somebody says to you, oh, are you very good at English or something like that?
And apparently that's enough.
She looks at it on an aggregate level, very similar to that business with the plaster.
So you've got all of these various sort of things that on aggregate overall will make someone feel oppressed.
Somebody's leaking again.
I think that's I don't know.
But yeah, it's really the principle when it comes to this of having the safe space when everyone is keeping themselves in check no matter what and making sure they never insult anyone, which is getting to the point, of course, where nobody says anything at all.
Yeah, and I mean, I made a complaint to the Secretary of State's office, and they didn't do anything about it.
And I think this is pretty damning.
They have it highlighted.
I don't highlight this.
They highlighted this.
You know, they don't have enough money to keep going.
They eventually had to close down because they ran out of money.
But they wanted to charge $160 for a permit desk and make sure that it turns off bros.
That's plainly illegal discrimination.
But when I made a complaint, nothing was done about it.
This new constitutional amendment, the government would have to do something about it.
They would not be allowed to abridge my rights by not doing anything about it.
And that's why there's a difference between what they have, which is you can't pass laws that recognize sex and you can't abridge a person's right based upon sex.
Those are two different legal standards.
Now, people getting kind of pushed out.
I like this one in particular because this is a guy in Portland who is making board games.
And he made a little story fly about it.
And you can see on the top, truth equals people plus talking minus emotions plus data.
And he titles this the New Jerusalem of Social Justice Warfare.
And this is basically him storifying some Twitter remarks that happened where somebody posted this and he's this is at UltraConf.
And he basically came up with an equation where he says that's kind of nonsense.
He's like, this is logic.
He tries to respond with logic.
And this is Ashley Dryden of that same model view culture.
She's like, oh my God, he's literally wearing a fedora.
That's it.
That's all it takes.
Obviously, this person doesn't need to be listened to because they wear a hat.
Yeah.
And then, like, this guy is like a Vulcan.
I swear to God.
Every single time they try to divert the conversation or make ad hominem or use some logical fallacy, he's just right on the ball.
And this sort of thing continues for days and days and days where he's arguing with these people like a champ.
I think this guy needs to be called bass dad because he's just so brilliant.
Like look at another one of his, you know, someone says party tip, men can embrace feminism without it making them less masculine.
And he responds, party tip, women can embrace feminism without becoming aggressive, harassing dicks.
And what literally happens next is hilarious.
Someone says that this is your response slash you found it suitable to share makes you a questionable choice as a chick tech.org workshop leader like Poe's law or something.
I don't understand how this is possible, like, and then, you know, this.
It really seems like a very, they seem to have methods of thought that are very rigid.
And they're very much based on labels and demographics.
And they seem to be very concerned about hierarchy.
I remember hearing, was it Ian Miles Chung or someone like that was saying how if you do something wrong, you lose your victim status.
And that was a bad thing because then you couldn't use your victim status to oppress other people with.
He didn't say it quite like that.
Or whoever said this didn't say it quite like that, but that was essentially what they had said.
And I was just sat in the right, just thinking, you you may as well be telling us you're using it as a weapon.
You know, you may as well do so.
Remember how I was talking about how they talked to little girls and stuff, right?
You know, here we have basically an interview with some of the girls talking about women in the media.
And these are, you know, young, young girls.
Impressionable.
Impressionable, yeah.
Yeah.
And Michelle interviewed five women and girls at DaVinci High School.
They range in age.
Some are teachers, while others are students.
And here are some questions and their answers.
How do you feel women are portrayed in the media?
Women are often sexualized in the media as sluts or slains, unrealistically an image put out there to look a certain way.
They are only shown if they have perfect bodies or faces rude and horrible.
How do you feel?
Oh man, I had to reload.
But basically, they're being trained to be little Anita Sarkeesians.
Crap.
And I think... You need to restart.
Yeah, I can't...
Ah, crap.
Just kill the app, mate, if you can.
Just pop it out of the app and then pop back in.
Okay.
Well, I'm going to have to probably.
Anyways, I don't want to sit on that too much because that's kind of just like shit talking.
But honestly, I mean, this is what you have to keep in mind is going on.
And this is what the Common Core is about.
The Common Core has a lot of stuff that talks about emotionality and appeals to emotionality.
And you cannot, at the same time, think about your internal emotional state.
You cannot at the same time be focused on your internal fears and desires.
You think about the external rational world.
That's not only a dichotomy, but it's also a neurological response.
When your thalamus activates, it deactivates your brain cortex, and you cease to be able to effectively reason.
And you may rationalize the things going on, but you're not really objective.
But this is the danger that a lot of people have.
I don't know if you've seen this where you've got a certain sort of feminist mentality where they're saying to guys, basically, you need to girl up a little.
You need to get in touch with your feminine side.
You need to be more feely, less thinky.
Don't hide your emotions.
Don't put them down.
And I always have to say to them, have you ever met an eight-year-old boy who's got his feelings going?
It's actually quite a destructive force.
This is why we teach boys to keep their feelings in check.
Because, of course, if they don't, they go hog wild and start hitting people and throwing things.
Girls, when they're emotional, they generally just sit there and cry and wait for sympathy to come along.
And if anything, it's quite the opposite, really.
Ladies, if you wish to have that sort of standing, then take your feelings, put them to the side, and think, right, let's discuss this rationally.
And this is sort of like a diametric opposite to that.
It's as though they want everyone to just feel.
I just realize that there is actually gender dimorphism in neurology.
And women, in fact, do have different levels of neurotransmitters, which kind of pudds them to an evolutionary adaption.
And it is a useful adaption because they need to be able to rear children resources for those children.
And they just naturally have lower levels of serotonin, more dopamine transports, and this is the way that things are.
And I'm not saying that, and a lot of them will say that you're just kids as being valid.
And it's not that they don't have their experiences and those experiences didn't happen or didn't exist, but it is the con and I brought this up in a previous chat.
I've had a terrible, terrible life.
I know many people have seen people in tin shacks and they make the most out of their life.
And you wouldn't think that these people in tin shacks, the fact is that they are happy.
You walk around on the earth with a chip on your shoulder, thinking about how terrible everything is.
That is a contagious mind of sex.
Everyone else around you upset.
And thinking of yourself is only going to bring destruction.
You could think about all the bad things that happened to me.
But ultimately, I think I am grateful and I'm blessed to be alive, to not be an African, to not be a cockroach on the bottom of someone's boot.
And as long as you are grateful for what you do have, you will never be sad and never be depressed.
I agree.
I agree.
Okay.
Well, since you've got it there, do you want to get us that cultural Marxism one that I was curious about?
Yeah, I mean, do you want to see some more of those things or what?
Yeah, I'm not going to see that one.
I suppose I'm going to reopen.
Yeah, let me find my zip file, and I'll try to get you that in a second, okay?
Yeah, I'm just going through it.
I just don't know which one it is.
Sorry that I overwhelmed you with these people's research documents.
There's a lot to go through.
So it might be called 08952833% to E.
Yeah.
You want me to screen share it?
Yeah, please, because I don't.
Yeah, there's no, I don't seem to have one in there called that.
Isn't that that Lewis and Clark zip that you sent me?
Yeah, it's just popped up.
The field of family therapy has experienced tremendously positive influences by criticism.
Critical theoreticians.
Yeah.
The field of family therapy has experienced tremendously positive influences by critical theoreticians, expanding the praxis to include multicultural perspectives as well as reflecting upon how race, sex, and other identities influence both clients and practitioners.
However, we have found there to be a significant lack of a similar interest in how social class and classism influence family therapy.
This is particularly distressing as we argue because of the overwhelming influence of one's social class and experience with classism has on their sense of self, his or her past and present experience with his or her individual and family well-being.
Further unchecked classist ideologies can negatively impact families via the practitioner as we contend through utilizing a feminist neo-Marxist ontology to critically reflect on how class and classism affects families and family practitioners with a good sense of rhetoric and ideology can be created to inspire deep systemic change.
Keywords classism, neo-Marxism, family therapy, social justice, Karl Marx, social class, socioeconomic class, and critical consciousness.
Just to sorry to be addicted, but I can't actually see that document.
I'll forward it to you, okay?
Let me give you a second.
Yeah, thanks very much.
There is a lot of interesting stuff in there all the same.
I can't remember off the top of my head what your email is.
I don't want to blare it.
No, sorry.
I'll send it to you, Anne.
It's public anyway, sorry.
Okay, yeah.
It's fine, it's fine.
Cool.
Here we go.
Sargon.
Okay, there you go.
I sent that off to you.
There we go.
See, I mean, they've got a document here called Decolonizing Academia, which I'm very interested in looking at.
Yeah, let me show you some stuff from Lewis and Clark Counseling Clinic.
So here we are, the Community Counseling Center Allies for Equity.
And there's about us.
And I forgot where the page is.
I think I sent it to you on Twitter.
They talk about social justice.
Is it filling the mental health gap?
Oh, yes.
Social justice through broad access to care.
And here they talk about how they essentially use social justice.
In addition to establishing a state-of-the-art training center, Lewis and Clark developed a community counseling center to put social justice principles into action.
Without action, social justice principles are abstractions, as Pidok Lewis and Clark is dedicated to action.
Social justice focuses is, oh, sorry, social justice focus is a draw for students such as Tana as a projective, as a prospective student.
She was interested in addictions work because of her experiences in the military.
When I learned about how dedicated Lewis and Clark is to incorporating social justice into teaching and practice, I was sold.
The new center helps share the load of low-cost Portland providers such as the William Temple House and Portland State's Community Counseling Clinic when necessary.
These programs refer to each other to find the best match between prospective clients, needs, and available services.
So yeah, I mean, here you are, you know, basically putting mental health in a cultural context.
You know, and they are basically teaching the social justice stuff to people, and it's kind of disgusting.
Let me see if I can find you the circle of control.
Remember, I don't know if I remember telling anybody about this, about the ideas.
When you're talking about social justice, what you're really talking about is a branch of feminism here.
This is a branch of third-wave feminism.
This is a derivative of what is called the Duluth model, which has already been discounted for its inability to predict or actually treat people.
And somebody just basically worked the Duluth model and tried to brand it as their own.
And that's essentially what went on.
What I was trying to point out is that there's the little F feminism and then there's the capital F feminism.
And the capital F feminism is indeed the institution of feminism itself.
And the fact that what they're trying to do essentially is put little sort of bits of themselves in every part of society that they possibly can.
Little chapters of it everywhere.
They're no longer defending women now.
They're defending black people.
They're defending disabled people.
Cis, non-cisgendered, whatever.
They're trying to get into every single nook and cranny of society in order to keep themselves relevant.
Yeah, in order to take over, that's the thing.
It's a power.
That's what they're at.
I think, well, it's like the Catholic Church.
It's also based on a fear of irrelevancy.
Yeah, yeah, probably.
Without a doubt.
But at the moment, I think they're actually trying to actually grab the power.
And they're doing a very good job.
There's a misandrist over here, definitely.
Oh, without a doubt.
I like DJ Scudmus, and I've just been like, hashtag tinfoil fedora.
You're damn right, mate.
This is some strange shit.
What are you looking for exactly, then?
They have this little diagram that I'm looking for.
It's called the Circle of Control.
And I find this to be the most interesting.
Oh, man.
Have you almost found it?
Or is it going to be a little wild?
It might be a little while, but I want to send you this, Sargon, in the meanwhile.
In the meantime, I'm just going to screen share my screen so we can have a look at this feminist Marxist thing.
Because I've been waiting to see this for fucking ages.
Here's another set of links for you.
I just added a chat where there's some YouTubes of them talking about their practice on YouTube in public.
Go ahead.
Okay, sorry.
Go ahead and Sargon.
You know, it's funny that you talk about feminist Marxism.
I really believe that if they ever were to get the real power that they want, I don't believe it'd be feminism, Marxism.
It'd be more of like fascism 2.0.
Yeah.
It'll be like the Soviet Union.
Bad things would happen.
I'm absolutely certain of it.
I'm actually quite scared of these people, to be honest.
I would be very scared of them.
Their ideologies are out there.
They're very open about it, which is the freaking experience here.
It's strange.
It's like they don't think they're doing anything wrong.
Well, and I saw it, right?
I'll say this for you, guys.
The idea of having us all in the idea of it, it's like equality for everybody, all that sort of business.
There's nothing wrong with that.
They're flying on those particular heels.
But they're looking at that as their final bit.
And they think, right, all we've got to do is just sort of like, you know, completely take over society.
It'll be fine.
Well, the problem I think is actually metrics.
Because they've got such magnificent methods of compiling data sets, they can look at everything and go, well, there's only 22% female developers.
And that can't be equal if it's not 50%.
And I think that that's really driving them on.
Well, there's a difference between equity and inequality.
You cannot treat everyone equally at the same time that you're forcing everyone to be equal.
Yeah.
They're concerned with parity rather than equality of opportunity, which is just wrong-headed.
And I think these data sets that they can compile, it makes them look at them and say, well, we need to get to the 50-50 or whatever they're looking for.
Well, most women are interested in the people.
Most women in gaming are mainly to do with the asset building sort of thing, whether it be programming, whether it be making models, sound, all that sort of business.
Not so many are actually interested in the leadership roles.
They're just happy doing whatever they love to do.
Well, I'm not sorry.
Most people aren't interested in leadership.
Most guys are.
Most men get into their research fields.
I worked in the research councils in Swindon, and they deal with all of the research that happens in the United Kingdom.
They fund it.
All the money is doled out by them.
And there were so many guys there who were just professors and they were interested in a subject like astronomy or something like that.
And they were just trying to help facilitate research into that area rather than actually adopt anything you could term a leadership role.
You know what I mean?
Can I screen share something real quick?
Oh, yeah, absolutely.
Hang on.
Let me just turn one off.
Go for it.
Okay, can you guys see this now?
Got it.
Okay.
So This is the first time I ever talked to these people.
Before they asked me any questions, they gave me this handout.
As well, please.
Because the writing is a bit small to read.
Okay, I'm sorry.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Could you forward it to me?
I can use it afterwards as well, please.
I'll forward that to you.
I'm using male privilege.
There you go.
There you go.
And you can see here they have listed racism, colonialism, imperialism, gender oppression, homophobia, heterosexism, and all of the examples that they have.
The only type of abuse that is considered abuse is stuff that says her in it.
So putting her down, calling her names, making her think that she's crazy, playing mind games, stonewalling.
I've met plenty of women who emotionally abuse people.
I have met plenty.
Jesus, good God.
Sorry.
Sorry.
So do you guys understand what the philosophical notion of privilege is all about?
Have any of you guys heard about the thing called Isaiah Berlin and Liberty?
Tell everyone.
Okay, so basically, this is how it works, right?
Privilege is, in their context, the absence of injustice, right?
And the original root word of privilege meant private law.
It meant some private law that only applied to you.
Like a magistrate would have privilege, right?
It's not meant to be some sort of intrinsic right that you have that you're not getting infringed upon.
And so what they're doing is they're transferring the idea of a civil right into a privilege that is unearned and so therefore can be taken away.
That is what the privilege theory is all about.
And here they're talking about power and control.
And they call this method, they call this the liberation-based healing.
So you've heard people like Ron Paul, Mao Seitong, they both talk about liberty, but they mean exactly opposite things at the same time.
And that's because they only talk about a subset of liberties, the same as these people are only talking about a subset of liberties.
When in fact, liberties are a very large object-set relationship.
They say X is free or not free from Y to do or not do or become or not become Z.
And that is what liberty really is.
And when you try to only focus on one, you use selection bias in your liberties.
You can appeal to show that you're being oppressed by other people.
And the power and control wheel is important for another reason.
The power and control wheel misses responsibility.
Now, let's say I have a cup, and my job is to clean the cup, and I have to clean the cup.
I'm responsible for the cup, but I have no power, no control over it, right?
And it's impossible.
You cannot have responsibility without some measure of power and control.
Furthermore, if a person feels like they have no power, no control, they can blame all their circumstances without having any responsibility onto the people that do have power and control.
It wasn't my fault that I think this way.
It is the fault of the people that have power and control over me.
That is the general idea.
The idea was that it was not her abusing alcohol and drugs that was the problem, because I was triggering her, and she was not responsible for those feelings because I had the power and control in the relationship.
And those drugs were her attempt to escape reality of oppression, that gendered oppression, the homophobia slash heterosexism of saying, no, you shouldn't go sleep with a neighbor lady.
I mean, right.
Okay, so This does play back to Alex Lifshitz's, you can't control how you feel.
And the thing is, what I'm seeing is continuous threads of thought obviously originating in places like this and filtering down to these young idiots who have just come out of university.
It's quite scary, really.
Oh, yeah, it is really quite scary.
Did you see those YouTube videos I posted in chat?
Which one?
Sorry?
There's two videos.
This is in chat.
There's two main people.
There's Teresa, and then there's this other woman, Alamita.
And Alamita's in the video here.
And if you ever pull up those two videos, you'll see where she talks about.
She talks about operationalizing people, actually, operationalizing therapists into social justice.
She talks about how the peer review system is oppressive and the ivory tower people and their evidence-based medicine is ridiculous.
Like this is the cool that they're drinking.
And I went to their conference and I recorded their conference.
And let me tell you, it is disgusting.
They talk about how normally there is supposed to be ethics and they disregard the ethical code.
They have different families that are their patients that go on outings and hang out together along with the therapists outside of the setting of their therapy.
And there were examples of them pushing out a husband, leaving this woman without only a single income, and they couldn't take care of their kids, and how the kids were told not to talk about it.
How they were putting people, they were coaching the kids.
They had this pyramid of privilege, and they had different steps.
And they would say, oh, well, Johnny, how much privilege do you think you have?
How much privilege do you think Sally has?
Now, how much privilege do you really have?
And they made a kid apologize, I think, to his parents or something for looking at pornography because pornography has men that have unrealistically large penises and objectify women.
And he was apologizing for looking at that sort of pornography.
I mean, this shit is crazy.
And then they talked about how in Australia they were trying to, they apparently just recently discovered that there are male victims of rape and sexual assault, and they don't know what to do about it.
And they're trying to use this feminist therapy on them, but the kids keep dropping out, and they can't keep them from dropping out.
And just previously, they were saying, oh, yeah, in traditional therapy models, when you're resisting it, that's because they're oppressing you.
But they didn't make the point.
They didn't make the jump to think that maybe they're oppressing these young boys, and maybe that's why they're resisting the treatment.
So they resort to paying the boys to go to treatment.
They resort to doing what?
Sorry?
In Australia, they resorted to paying young boys to go through feminist family therapy.
Jesus Christ.
Okay.
This is all pretty freaky shit.
Can you send that power control wheel, please, so I can use that later?
Because this is something that I'm probably going to have to spend quite a lot of time on.
But what I'm probably going to do, guys, is go through all this shit in the next week or so.
And I'll do smaller videos with concise information like I've been doing before to make sure that we get clear messages across out of what we're getting.
And I mean, I don't even know what conclusions we're going to have from all this, but it's quite shocking.
I mean, what's everyone else think?
Well, I'm sort of, I'm trying to keep sort of stepped back on this one.
Like I said, I'm not big on swallowing too many red pills.
As I say, This is a sort of like a cultural sort of aspect that's going on here.
This isn't necessarily like, you know, like I said, this isn't necessarily people sort of colluding together in a way.
It's more the fact that they have an agreed-upon sort of way of dealing with life and they're confirming that with people that sort of surround them.
It's very much like because I imagine that as soon as they meet each other, they start talking and I'm sure they all know who each other are.
They don't know each other, but they're familiar.
They go into a familiar setting and everyone talks and acts in the same way, same sort of language, and then suddenly they feel safe.
This is their safe space, and they're all on the same page.
They're all singing from the same song sheet.
And it's emotional worth behind this, of course.
They give themselves this emotional wealth because of this.
So when you're going up against these people, of course, that's what you're fighting.
You're not fighting the logic behind it, you're fighting the emotions that come behind it.
The personal investment as well.
I mean, they're all obviously incredibly personally invested in all this.
So Jesus.
My only thing is on all this is if you look at any type of movement, you know, you can look at Karl Marx and Marxism, how that was created, or Lenin and all that kind of stuff.
You know, we see all these people working together and they're all coming from the same thing.
And I would say there's probably about a thousand or two thousand, like you said, just off the rough rough estimate, you know.
I mean, who is it to really spur all this in the beginning?
I mean, there's got to be a catalyst in the end.
Like, we've gotten we're so down the hole right now that it, you know, I would say that there's got to be somebody who started this whole thing, like a manifesto, the original.
You know what I mean?
I don't think so.
I don't know.
It's a mindset.
It's a mindset.
If you can imagine, you've had this sort of thing happening in the 60s and 70s and 80s as well.
We can go back to, I think Ben was talking about it as well, even to the 1900s of very, very radicalized feminists.
Well, okay, I want to pull the stop because it's not about the 1900s and radical feminists.
There were certainly radical feminists that exist.
And there are people that look at Nazi Germany and say, oh, it was all Hitler.
And that whole point of the third wave was to show that it wasn't Hitler.
It was an environment that produces the sort of people that naturally gravitate towards each other and similar ideas.
I mean, it's almost like if we if both of us had pocket protectors in Fedora's, we ran into each other, we'd automatically know what's up.
Like, hey, you have a pocket protector in a fedora?
You're on my team.
I'm sure that's what I'm saying.
Yeah, no, I agree.
It's this kind of brainwashing factory.
It's feeling and they all can see it, yeah.
But I think Paul's actually probably got a point.
I don't think it's necessarily one person, but I suspect that all of the interweaving threads probably do have original progenitors.
They have to.
It's impossible that they don't.
I get it's a mindset, but the mindset doesn't create it until somebody puts it out there.
There's got to be somebody.
Like you said, you wouldn't be rushing for this much power as a movement.
And you used the Nazi Germany reference as a good example if there wasn't a mindset, it wasn't somebody who produced this in the beginning.
There's got to be some original writings to this where people are.
Well, Paul, Paul, who created capitalism?
Well, hang on, hang on.
That's different.
That's different.
What I mean is it's a sea that they're swimming in, it's a sea that they're swimming in.
Paul's saying, though, is that and what I mean, it's not just going to be one person who is responsible for this, but with the concept of, say, white privilege, there will be someone probably a long time ago now who wrote something that was fairly nebulous to what we're looking at now, but it would have been something along the lines of defining that privilege is in fact not having any problems.
Oh, I think it was just a Macintosh lady.
Well, yeah, exactly.
And then, but the thing is, this work has been built on by generations of crazy motherfuckers for the last like 30, 40 years, however long it's been.
Just various papers that they it.
You're absolutely.
You're absolutely right when you say it's a culture, because what it, what it is, is basically just um, it's a way of like it, just kind of layers, you know, and things that work or people like or respond to all just build up in these layers and they become accepted just by de facto until they do end up become codified by some guy's research paper, like Adrian Shaw, sort of thing, you know, does a research paper and then that is accepted by the community because they're all like, yes, that's exactly what I was trying to say, I just didn't really know how to say it.
And it's, it's all that sort of thing, it's, and and that's how these systems work.
I'm absolutely convinced that's how these systems work.
So Paul, I think you're right that they the, you know, the ideas do have progenitors, but it's not the progenitor really isn't that important.
It's more the course that has gone on to become what it is now.
Any time, it doesn't even matter who really did this.
I mean, it would be nice to know, but it it's not going to change anything.
You know, what we need to do is be able to show everyone exactly what the fuck is happening, because this, this is insane.
This is, this is the antithesis of what the Western world is built on, right?
Right, you know, I have some input on this topic and the way I see it is that we are kind of not evolutionarily yet adapted to the environment that we live in.
The human mind and the human body was not built for prolonged, continuous levels of low to moderate stress right also, we didn't.
Our progenitors did not have the sort of memories that we have, like the, the exact, the excellent symbolic reasoning and stuff like this.
And there are natural sort of cognitive biases that are read into us evolutionarily, like positive confirmation bias or all sorts of interesting biases.
And this is an aspect of that human nature where I'm sure these women had some oppression.
They have heard of oppression, and then they connect the dots like we do.
We form positive associations very easily, even if they're false, and then they kind of construct a universe out of this oppression system that they have heard about, seen and probably even experienced to some degree, and then they just take it way too far apart, I agree, and I think that they deliberately warp it.
And they deliberately warp it as a method of gaining control over others.
I think all of this is about control.
This is, this is a cultural power grab, and I think video games really are just the the fringe of what's been going on.
Obviously this has happened in academia and now that I mean in each Sarkeesian's XOXO, talk they they, they all talk about how the cult, the new culture, has come into gaming and it's like right okay, that is some creepy third wave shit.
So I mean, it's not so creepy Sargon, if you look at it this way look, they're trying.
If we look at anything, they've affected every aspect of you know, economics, social constructs, as you will, or now, gaming and all hobbies and forms are getting into everything right.
But it would make sense if you're trying to say, grab the power and re-change everything.
So, and and the way that their ideologies work, that mindset, as uh, as Robin put it, is uh, they have to have control of everything to produce the narrative that they want.
That it's the whole ideology of like.
We have to promote this no matter what, on every single front, and everybody must adhere to it.
It's not, you know, there's no time, find time for entertainment or any type of form without it being there.
It's, it's literally not just propagating things, but it's just, it's.
It's brainwashing in a sense.
You know yeah, it is the last thing, I think it is, and I think it's creepy as shit.
It explains why people like Ian Miles Chung will be like, oh, that was the old me, or that's something I don't, you know, that was, they very much distance themselves from their old people, old personas.
And I mean, there's this guy called Libertarian Socialist Rance.
And he's recently come out full social justice feminist.
And he used to be stridently anti-feminist, and he was funny as hell.
And now he's just, he's utterly ashamed.
And he's just, you know, the mental conditioning has just flipped a bunch of switches in his brain.
And now he doesn't think for himself.
He just toes the party line.
Use gamergating examples.
Use game gaming example.
Jim Sterling, two years ago, when we were reading the tweets that he was tweeting, to now, I mean, it's one fucking spectrum to another.
But we're talking about people who have their careers riding on both.
Yeah, I think Jim Sterling's an unwilling participant in all this.
Right.
Well, I think that's a good idea.
Talking about one spectrum to another, not his actual career.
Yeah.
But.
Okay.
Guys in chat, do you have any questions or do you want to make any requests or anything like that?
I'd like to know what you guys think.
Mostly about typing like the tinfoils off the chain.
Everybody was in like too much red pill for me to take.
I see him talking about Jews and the banks and the banks and media.
I mean, I was raised Orthodox Jewish, and I'm quite aware that the Jews also run around the chip on their shoulder, but it's the same sort of thing that this guy is demonstrating.
You know, he's attacking Jews and not the behavior.
You know, it's easy to attack people and then make people who are Jewish like me feel bad about it.
That's not what it is.
If you want to talk about banking corruption, talk about banking corruption, talk about Jews.
It's the people, not the institution.
We've got Steve Ham saying, who was the proposed base dad again?
If we can give him a reminder.
Oh, yeah.
So David Gallil, D-A-V-I-D-G-A-L-I-E-L.
Somebody wants to talk about the Jews?
Let's leave that one for now.
You can't just use terms like the Jews.
It would be like saying the whites are in control.
It's exactly what they're fucking doing.
You know, some of them will be Jewish, but that doesn't mean the Jews are doing anything.
The Jews aren't an organized group.
What they're talking about is Zionists.
They're not just talking about Jewish.
Some of Zionists were talking about stuff back in the 80s, like Ki Meet Communist Party or the Rothschilds and things like that, how they ripped off and owned England, all that kind of crazy.
That is what they're talking about.
They're just saying the Jews as a whole.
I got you.
Yeah, I mean, Zygmu Brzezinski is a fucking Zionist.
You don't have to be Jewish to be a Zionist.
Indeed, yes.
And that's the real difference, really, more than anything else.
I mean, if you want to see anyone who's anti-Zionist, go and ask an Orthodox Jew.
Yeah.
They protest that shit all the time, and people don't know because it doesn't get on TV because the Zionists are in control.
But that's a subject for another.
I'm just kidding when I say I don't know.
I'm just being a dick.
But yeah, okay.
So any questions about actually what's happening here?
It's going really fast.
The Frankfurt School.
Okay, I've seen that come up a bunch of times.
Who knows what about the Frankfurt School exactly?
I'm going to Google this shit while we're doing this.
And what's going on with Frankfurt School?
I think that's what does anyone know about the Frankfurt School?
I don't know what's going on there.
Is that the Frankfurt School of Economics or what?
I believe that.
Yeah, that's when Marx was.
I mean, I could go all day into economics.
The Wikipedia article is the Frankfurt School.
A school of neo-Marxist interdisciplinary social theory associated in part with the Institute of Social Research at the Goethe University of Frankfurt, Germany.
The school initially consisted of dissident Marxists who believed that some of Marxist followers had come to parrot a narrow selection of Marx's ideas, usually in defense of orthodox communist parties.
Whereas, meanwhile, many of these theorists believe that traditional Marxist theory could not adequately explain the turbulent and unexpected development of capitalist societies in the 20th century.
Critical of both capitalism and Soviet socialism, their writings pointed to the possibility of an alternative path to social development.
So, yeah, these are the cultural Marxists who want to change everything.
Yeah, these guys are the guys who came out of critical theory.
Negative dialectics, all that sort of thing.
I'm not an expert on this, so I really don't know, but it's obviously the sort of thing we're going to have to look into.
And just my mate just texted me saying, is this feed live?
He worked out how to do this the other day.
So yes, Gareth, it is live.
Sorry.
Hello, Gareth.
But yeah, so, I mean, when I was having that debate with Pixie Jenny, everyone was saying, oh, this is critical theory for you.
And it does seem to be the case.
Yeah, and they talk about critical consciousness a lot at the time.
And during this whole conference, they were using operand conditioning on the people, like operating, like switching between fear-mongering and then pacification using yoga and Native American rain dances and stuff like this.
Which is all very well and nice and everything like that.
It's actually quite therapeutic.
I mean, but it's like the Christian.
Consider the lily.
Well, that's not going to get you paid, mate.
You know, at some point or another, you've got to do something.
I don't understand.
You know, for me, more than anything else, does anyone even understand or know what the end game would be?
When would these people be saying, yep, we've made it, we've won.
We're here.
I don't see that at all.
Have you guys ever heard?
You're looking for an end.
There is no end.
No, no, no.
I actually know the end.
Have you guys ever heard of Rad Femme Hub?
No.
Nope.
Or have you ever heard of the Ancient Orange Files?
The Ancient Orange?
You mean the chemical?
No, at one time there was a forum called the Rad Femme Hub where the radical feminists would congregate.
A person infiltrated their group and took screen caps of all of their forum posts.
And it was called the Ancient Orange Files.
And there are some tinpots in that group, but they generally ascribe to the Scun Manifesto and talk about how we need to use eugenic technology, sort of like Gattaca, to remove the male gender from society, and we'll keep a breeding stock of them in concentration camps.
That's out there.
That's way out there in the spectrum.
I don't really want them to think that way.
No, no, no.
Yeah, no, this is the absolute lunatic fringe of it.
Yeah, that's the absolutely fringe.
That is like final solution feminists, as far as I'm concerned.
The Scun Manifesto.
Solution feminists.
I love that.
The thing is, I'm not sure that these people really.
Their end goal is for everyone to be like them.
That's what I think they're looking for.
Because once they've pacified the culture, as it were, the enemy culture, then that's what any culture wants, isn't it?
To spread itself.
But they've kind of weaponized culture.
They've actually given it a kind of self-awareness.
Like this third wave thing.
It's exactly like this third wave thing.
Where they're aware of people who aren't in the group, and those people are to be defeated, you know, in some way, not necessarily defeated, but They're not in the in-group, and that means that they're part of the out-group, which isn't good.
I think in a larger context, I've seen some history stuff about how things in England, how they were practicing eugenics in England, how they would basically make everyone so poor that everyone was basically criminals, and then shipping off the unwanted men to other parts of the world, like Australia and the United States.
And traditionally, in a society, if you're going to take over, right, the ones that are going to put up the most resistance are the men.
And that's just a fact of the matter.
And if you pacify men, you can pacify the society.
Working nice.
Was it Aristotle?
Yeah, I think it was Aristotle pointed out how women are very, very eager to go along with tyrannical regimes.
They're quite happy to do it.
And it was, and I'm not saying, oh, women, this, women, and that, but it was just something that he observed at the time that women often were complicit with tyrannical regimes.
And they'll follow the strongest guy.
That's the sort of Hareem thing.
I guess it must be, but it's quite scary.
And you're right.
You're absolutely right.
It's pacifying the menfolk.
They're the people who are actually concerned about, maybe it's something to do with patriarchy, but they're the ones concerned with their own individual liberties.
Actually, there's been a study shown on how men and women behave.
And you would always think that testosterone was going to make people more aggressive.
And what they've actually shown is that when they had women, that they were in the study cohort.
And when women thought they had testosterone, they acted like bigger dicks.
But when they actually had testosterone, they were actually more fair.
And this was one of the traditional partering studies like you do in a psychology experiment.
And so it goes to show you that men do really think about fairness quite a lot.
And when you put up game theory and psychology experiments with men and women, women don't like to play fair.
And men do think that fairness is important.
And women think that the context is important of the relationship, whereas men think about the system in general.
And it may just be a reflection of American society.
I mean, we are really the one of the most abnormal and atypical examples of all history and all humanity.
But unfortunately, this is what we study.
Actually, you're more typical than you realize.
That's the thing.
If you can imagine, most societies have gone through these sort of things, whereas America is somewhat of a young one compared to most.
But I would say that I think I remember talking to somebody who, was it you I was talking to you about it, Ben?
I'm not sure, about somebody who was going through the transgender thing, going from basically from male to female.
And when they actually started to get hormone therapy and stuff like that, they turned down, you know, turned from somebody who was quite sort of like, you know, passive to someone who was actually quite sort of a bit of an asshole just from the hormones themselves.
I mean, women are more emotional.
You know, I like to consider them as more artistic, whereas guys are more autistic.
Well, without using that, because that's kind of a broad overgeneralization.
I'd like to also let people know that there is nature and nurture involved.
It's not just one or the other.
Absolutely, yeah.
I mean, I'd like to be broad in my general strokes.
You know, it makes for more lines.
And then autism is not a single thing.
You know, my wife deals with autistic kids on a regular basis.
And you can't just slump at all autism.
Like, some people could say I'm autistic, but that's just because I'm more, more artistic, more autistic.
In other words, we generally sort of, if you're going to have a bias there, you're going to be sort of swaying guys in that direction, whereas ladies, you're going to swing them more towards an emotional argument.
Guys generally are sort of like willing to go with the more boring and the more humdrum sort of facts of the matter rather than actually how they feel about the situation.
Yeah, well, I agree.
But the autism card gets used a lot by feminists as a card.
But it's funny if they throw autism at you.
You can always claim ableism.
That's the thing, though, isn't it?
All of this is all incredibly self-contradictory and inherently self-defeating.
And ultimately, it's going to cause everything about culture and society, even their own ones, to end up turning in on itself because it's all so goddamn subjective.
I was going to say, it also pushes men to be more misogynistic.
Because if that's the sort of women that they meet, it is going to actually sort of affect the way a guy who's not necessarily sort of all there to think, you know, in this, oh, it's just a particular type of person.
When they meet too many, they're going to think women are like that.
Possibly.
It's possible.
But the thing is, I think in their ideal system, all the men will be on board with all of this.
They'll have been indoctrinated since childhood that this is the way things should be.
And I tell you what, I can't remember who said it, but they were like, give me the child until he's seven, I'll give you the man.
And that's that's true.
That is that is one of those eternal truths about human beings.
What you learn at the very earliest stages of your life stays with you to the end.
And that's why they're trying to get to the kids earlier, which is why they're trying to get kids.
And that's fucking, I find that really despicable.
Yeah, and the fact of the matter is, I actually do a lot of education, right?
So I have been working on education for a while because that's near and dear to me because I didn't get the same opportunities that everyone else did originally, but I worked really hard at it.
And as a male trying to be an educator, you get pushed out all the time.
Like you are dangerous to little children.
And it is just that.
I was a cub and a scout, an adventure scout, and a cub leader as well.
So if you can imagine that sort of pressure that comes on a guy, it wasn't so bad for us in the early 90s, but I can imagine a guy thinking, you know what, I really want to sort of like, you know, go into scouting and sort of help these kids and stuff like that.
They're going to have a lot of pressure on them.
You know?
Yeah, I found someone's chat, and I think it was really quite clever because I see this also.
You know, if you see a kid that's highly intelligent, and if it's a boy, it's an autistic kid.
If it's a girl, it's an artistic kid.
Yeah, in that sort of sense, yeah.
Yeah.
And that's what we see is that there's become a male gender gap in terms of educational outcomes.
Yeah.
And if you actually throw the statistics for the feminists to read, and you ask them, like, how could you possibly be the oppressed sex when you have higher levels of quality adjusted life years, you have more education, you have more consumer spending power, all abductive natures who actually have things better off.
And then when you actually look at the National Bureau of Economic Research, there's this nice little paper called The What is it called?
It's The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness.
And in the paper, they measure what makes men and women happy.
And they've shown that the women's movement has actually made women objectively and relatively less happy ever since the inception of third-wave feminism.
This is actually the sort of thing I've covered a lot on my channel.
Yeah, there's been a remarkable decline in how much women report how happy they are.
And it's literally started with women's liberation.
And it's because the women who started women's liberation were massively disturbed individuals.
I mean, Gloria Steinem, for example, is she was raised from a very young age.
I can't remember how young she was, nine or something, but she was raised alone by a single mother who was clinically insane.
And it's like, okay, well, I really don't want to hear what Gloria Steinem's theory on the world is because she's mental.
Her mother was mad and couldn't hold down a job and couldn't do anything in society, really.
And Gloria Steinem then blamed the whole rest of the world that this was the case.
This is all on a Wikipedia page.
This isn't any investigation that I've done.
It's on the Wikipedia page.
So instead of blaming her mother, who was the obvious cause of the problems, because she was mental, a mental alcoholic, and yeah, and then this is Gloria Steinem Rad Fen, who wants to see white men pushing around black babies and prams because she's mental.
I don't mean to cut in real quick.
I got to get out of here, guys.
I appreciate you having me on.
Good listening to this because I've just been quiet reading over everything that you have and just kind of going through it all.
It's just crazy.
So very much, Sargon and Robin and Ben.
Anybody else?
See you soon, mate.
Yeah, I was just going to point out to somebody called the anti-feminist.
I hate feminism.
Now, I have to point out that I don't think any of us are really against feminism as such.
It's the fact that really feminism itself has been usurped by people who are not really feminists, to be honest.
Listen, I don't hate feminists.
Even though they did terrible, terrible things to me, I don't hate them.
I have to be able to have love and compassion for everyone in the world.
What I dislike is what I feel is a mental pathology, right?
And I think that we need to cure the mental pathology, but not character, assassinate, or not hate the people that have it.
I mean, for any of you listening out there, guys, we're not hating these people.
We're trying to help them.
That's the issue, though.
I mean, how exactly do you think that helps going to work?
How do you think that's going to happen?
Well, for me, more than anything else, I mean, I don't know if you've met any unhappy women in your life.
But, you know, it's a long process.
And I think more than anything, you've got certain groups out there that have got themselves into sort of like a set where they're finding emotional wealth out of these particular groupings.
And it's the fact that a lot of people, it's not just women, everybody finds certain emotional wealth within their groupings.
I mean, the same thing for us with gaming.
One of the reasons why we've got this community in the first place is because we love to play games and we really like to play games with other people.
So we don't want that destroyed.
This is what we're fighting for in this particular case.
But for example, if you're in a feminist circle, you've got all these feminist friends and they're all telling you you're wonderful, it's very difficult for someone to turn around to say, you know all those people, they're lying to you.
And your unhappiness is down to the fact that these people are making you, well, happy.
It's difficult to sell, isn't it?
I mean, you've got these people who are telling you that the world outside is horrible, but inside our little sort of clique, everything's all lovely and nice.
Yeah, the problem is the absolute lack of critical thinking skills.
They are very, very authoritarian and they're very concerned with what has been written.
I mean, if you just listen to that MSNBC thing, Ginger Twatt was going on about how, what was it?
He was saying, he was saying how he's reading a lot of interesting stuff As if some higher power was giving him this.
They take everything with a very sort of religious band.
They talk as if they're talking like Muhammad has just come off the mountain and he's giving down dictates from God.
They don't say it like that, obviously.
But that's the impression I get from them.
And I find that very strange because they just seem to be looking who to believe.
How many people are believing this person?
Oh, that must be true.
And that bothers me.
That bothers me a lot.
Well, what I say is I've had these sort of talks before, and I've dealt with underprivileged youth, young black men, who are at risk.
And how we go about helping these kids lead a good, fulfilled life.
And we don't talk about their oppression.
All we talk about is giving them the power to help themselves and giving them that self-esteem to help themselves.
And you might eventually have to, if you have friends out there who are kind of going into this thing, you might want to consider having an intervention and saying, look, I care about you.
I want you to do well and I want to empower a better life for you.
And you have to do it through the perception of caring for these people.
And I want to hit back on a previous point about the progenitors of some of these ideas, ideals.
I'm not sure if any of you guys have ever heard of Anna Freud or John Money, but these are some of the people that kind of thought of these ideas and people ran with those ideas, even though after the fact we saw that their ideas were rubbish and actually led to more harm than good.
And it needs to be pointed out that the third wave feminism isn't actually making women happy.
And you need to get people to critically investigate what they themselves believe.
And that is one of the hardest things we can do.
I'd like to point out another aspect to this as well.
We've also got the marketing aspect.
There are plenty of women out there, and I could even name them, but I won't here.
But there's a certain aspect within feminism right now, is, of course, they've got this boogeyman to fight against the patriarchy.
And there's plenty of women out there.
I don't necessarily consider them feminists, really, but they're using feminism as a tool to promote themselves.
They can get more followers this way.
It's their way of actually doing it.
I mean, the same thing's happened to me.
I mean, I'm just some guy on the internet and I'm just producing a few streams and now I've got hundreds of followers suddenly.
And I'm just fighting against a particular force here.
And if you can imagine, that's great marketing for certain people to be able to get themselves sort of set up.
You know, there's magazines out there, there's websites and all kinds of things like that.
And if they say, yeah, I'm fighting the patriarchy, and they can go to their feminist mates and they'll get their feminist mates to sort of give us all this support and money.
And it's simple marketing.
That's another force that's involved here.
Well, on that point, I'd like to talk about how I think that we as a group could more effectively be able to allow a structure that people like myself that want to contribute can both be given the ability to contribute to positive forces as well as be able to have like the sort of peer review model that we have or have, you know, a community where people who feel safe to leak information for insiders will have that sense of anonymity.
and will be able to do so in such a safe manner.
And I think that what needs to happen is that we need-I'm not sure if you guys have ever heard of the Free Software Foundation or the Electronic Freedom Foundation, but I feel that having an organization like this would not only give us legal protections underneath the law, it would also give us the ability to have sort of a collaboration where people like Paul and Sargon are overwhelmed by the deluge of information and we can get people to make great pieces of work,
either video games or media or journal articles or studies, whatever it is, however you want to contribute, we can help facilitate those contributions.
And I think that this is kind of critical because, as you can see, there is what they have is basically a knowledge assembly line.
And I think the only way that we can really get this sort of our sort of ideas out there is to have a similar knowledge assembly line that is loosely sort of coordinated.
I'm not saying we want to have a Julian Assange.
I think we're pretty much there at the moment, Ben.
I mean, as I say, you were able to get your information out.
I don't necessarily think we need to, like I've said, my worry more than anything else is co-option.
So, in other words, you give people an avenue to infiltrate.
One of the things about this is we have no leaders.
Sargon isn't a leader.
I'm not a leader.
We're all I completely agree.
These people are very, very, very, very hierarchical and organized.
And the strength of Gamergate, the only way Gamergate can beat them is it doesn't fight that way.
That's not how Gamergate operates in any way, shape, or form.
That's why they've been proposing things like JMR, that game thing, where they want it to start getting organized so they can deal with that.
I mean, even if they don't necessarily co-opt it, it gives them angles of attack that they're used to because that's what they know.
At the moment, they're very poor thinkers.
They're very linear, rigid thinkers.
That's what I find.
And slow.
Yeah, that's the thing.
I mean, Dan Collin, I listen to his podcast all the time, and one of the things he says about a classical education is that it gives you an agile mind.
It gives you a pivot on which to turn when you need to look at things from a different perspective.
And these people seem absolutely incapable of looking at things from a different perspective.
They just cannot seem to empathize at all.
They can't put themselves in someone else's position and say, how would I feel if that were me?
Like Brianna Wu just tweeted some camera ladies just saying you're a fucking Aspie or something like that.
And it's just like, Brianna, would you appreciate someone doing that to you?
No, then why did you do it?
But again, she doesn't care because reality to her is subjective.
She's not the subject of that insult.
Therefore, it doesn't matter.
It doesn't mean anything.
It's only when it's coming at her.
Then it means something.
I see some people in chat, and I'm not sure how many people are aware of the Free Software Foundation or how some of these projects work.
But for instance, maybe you guys have heard of Oracle, right?
Oracle bought Sun Microsystems, which was great and open source software.
And as soon as they tried to assert their hegemonic control over the software projects, the whole community forked the entire code base and everyone left and just joined the non-corporate, non-controlled side.
And the point of having an organization like this is to have it governed in such a way that there is no single point of failure.
There is no single authority.
It is not about control.
It is about facilitation.
And when I say I need some help, can someone please look into this?
Because I can't quit my job and spend all this time doing it as I've been doing.
Or when Sargon can't take the time to look through all this stuff, it's you know, we have a difficult, we have a bottleneck.
And one other person made an important point is that a lot of these people have funding methods, right?
And so one of the ways that they do, they don't even need Kixer or Patreon.
They get money from the government, right, to go ahead and report these ideologies.
And all of us need to have food on the table and et cetera.
But having a 501c3 and having some sort of advocacy group like the Electronic Freedom Foundation or the Free Software Foundation allows us as a people to back individuals that might need some assistance because either they need some money for public records requests or whatever the need is.
And I understand that transparency is the best disinfectant.
I think any system that is made needs to be completely transparent.
Yeah.
I fully agree about the transparency.
And I think someone said this is a battle between individualism versus collectivism.
And they're absolutely right.
That is exactly what's going on here.
Everyone in Gamergate considers themselves to be an individual gamer.
They consider themselves to be a collective.
They consider themselves to be a homogenous culture.
The only thing in Gamergate that connects all of us is the fact that we're gamers.
That's the thing.
The label doesn't actually define us.
And I've seen so many of these articles that Diego had written about things like gamers consider their whole lives this identity.
And it's just like, no, they actually don't.
But being a gamer is an identity that they consider an important part of their life.
It's a reflection of one aspect of their personality.
Whereas in other aspects, they're conservatives, they're liberals, they're religious, they're atheists.
It's like playing golf.
Yeah, exactly.
It's just a hobby.
They're game enthusiasts.
It doesn't define them, but they are still game enthusiasts.
So it is part of what defines them, on the spectrum of things that define a person.
But these people seem to have packaged all of this up in a very narcissistic me, me, me, then we'll all be for me, you know, each individual be for themselves collectively.
It's very strange.
But yeah, I think individuality versus collectivism really is the problem.
And that's the strength of GameGate, because that means that a lot of individuals can all come to the same decision and say, hang on, these people are full of shit and they're causing a lot of damage in society at large.
I, as an individual, I'm not happy with that.
Thankfully, there are a lot of other individuals who are also not happy about that, so we can all talk to each other.
It doesn't require structures.
It doesn't require leaders.
It doesn't require anything.
An idea can be put out.
And the idea, if it's a good idea, other people need to adopt it.
Because they, as individuals, will look at it and say, hey, that's a good idea.
That's a great idea.
I agree with that.
And if a lot of people say, hey, no, that is a genuinely good idea, then it can be the sort of thing that Gamergate, just as a culture in itself, has been created by these people effectively.
It didn't exist before, really.
It can be adopted homogeneously in a sort of grassroots way rather than anything imposed from the top down, which is exactly what they're trying to do.
They're trying to create an army so they can defeat it.
Yeah, and everything about them, though, if you look at everything, I mean, Brianna, who was stupid MSNBC, I think this needs to be changed from the top down.
Of course you fucking do, you authoritarian.
You know, that's why you have no idea why Gamergate is happening at the moment.
But yeah, that's my little rant there.
I was pissed off.
Yeah, I mean, we're sort of sitting here.
You know, people call us a movement, but we're not actually moving.
We're just sitting on Twitter.
We're just emailing people and closing down a few websites.
And everyone's sort of like panicking, like, what's going on?
What's going on?
We say, don't mind us, we're just getting on with our own stuff.
We'll be done in a moment.
And they're like, well, we have to sort out this crisis.
There's a problem here.
It's like, well, not for long.
Can I make a point about collectives and about leaderless groups?
Please, I've seen, you know, I've been a part of Occupy when Occupy first started.
I was like, great, this is a fantastic idea.
Why don't we go get a ballot initiative so that we can change the laws so that the bankers and the corrupt people are no longer able to do their thing.
And over time, and there wasn't a whole lot of enthusiasm out of it, but over time, the movement got co-opted by either fluoride in the water or GMOs or whatever silly nonsense.
And I think what has been the example is that the California ideology tried to do leaderless collectives.
And there's been other groups that try to do leaders collectives, and they all kind of fall apart over a period of time.
And if you want to have a sustainable movement, it's not about having leaders, it's about having the infrastructure and having the guidance.
And I know that, for instance, anarchists go into a lot of the liberal social spaces and muck things up.
And everyone gets really mad at anarchists making them look bad.
And similarly, we've seen similar.
What do you expect?
Yeah, I mean, and you've seen similar things with people saying that, oh, Gamergate as a movement is attacking us.
Gamergate is bad.
So when we don't have a face of Gamergate, anyone can be Gamergate.
And you can use that as a rule to commit the universalist fallacy of saying that one person did this one thing so that everyone is painted with the same broad brush.
But it is a rather pithy point, if you see what I mean.
It may make sense to the person saying it, but to anybody listening to that, it's like, well, that was, like you say, a rather broad brush.
And anyone, you know, people think, thankfully, anyone looking at that and saying, oh, right, they're all this or they're all that, immediately is going to come up and say, oh, well, no, they can't all be like that.
I mean, people are individuals.
Everyone understands these principles.
I know they can't necessarily win on that argument.
That's what I mean.
I know that everyone believes this to be true, but at the same time, they commit the fallacy all the time.
Yeah, and that's the great thing.
That's the wonderful mistake that they keep making.
And it's all right, because it helps us highlight just the idiocy that's going on here.
A lot of these things that these people are coming out with, these attacks on us and stuff like that, are perfect.
They're actually good for us.
Because just like with that CNN business and the MSNBC, it's just making us new friends.
That's all it's doing.
They're bringing on all these nice people who don't like nasty people.
And they're coming in to see us and they're going to go, what the hell are you people doing here?
And we go, oh, we're doing this.
These people didn't inform you, did they?
Well, here's the information.
Off you go.
And ten minutes later, well, a couple of hours later, they'll be back sort of hashtagging Gamergate.
All they're doing is just throwing more fuel at the fire.
I think the important thing to remember is that Gamergate really is a bunch of thinking individuals who are not happy about the way they've been treated.
So this is the thing.
I don't agree with fighting the social justice warriors on their own terms.
I don't think we actually need to organize.
I think we can just have like, if someone suggests an initiative and it's a good initiative, then people will agree with it and they'll want to do it personally because they will see what the net benefits to hashtag Gamergate will be.
They don't necessarily have to have it dictated down to them.
It's up to every individual to make the decision that this is a good idea, I'm going to support this personally.
We've had this happen recently.
We've had this happen recently with Rogue, wasn't it?
We had near a split, really, between certain factions within the group.
There were some people saying this is terrible, this is awful, this is this, that, and the other.
And there were people that were coming right up behind it.
But there was plenty of us out there that are going to go, okay, that's in certain formats, that's a good idea.
I don't necessarily think it needs to be militaristic in its tone.
That's not going to help because these people are going to see it too.
You know, there was the favoring towards certain websites, which obviously has certain connotations to it that we didn't really want to push.
But all in all, it had a strategy, at least.
There was some sort of decent strategy there.
And, you know, it happened within us is that we had this factional argument going on.
You know, so when it comes down to it, this whole group here has little factions of its own as well.
Yeah, it does, of course.
But I think the important thing is to remember that just don't give them anything they want.
If they say anything, if they're like, oh, well, we want you to do this.
We want you to do the other.
We want you to do this.
I read history.
I think about grand strategy.
And I'm telling you, if they want something, deny them it.
Unless it's some sort of trap.
But I can't imagine that we're organized enough to enact some sort of cordine forks or anything like that.
So you need direction for that sort of thing.
So just refuse them.
If they're like, oh, well, can you...
I'm not saying don't talk to them.
I'm just saying, don't organise, don't do what they want you to do, to interact with them.
Have them interact with you on your terms.
Say, look, if you want to come on my web stream or something, we can come on and you can talk and you can use your critical theory and make me look like an ass, but I'm not going to do what you're asking me to do in any other way.
You're going to dance to my tune.
That's the thing.
You've got to be calling the shots.
Don't let them call the shots because, like someone in the chat said, it fucks them up.
They have no idea what to do if they're not in control.
They don't know how we think.
They don't know why we're doing what we're doing.
They've repeatedly demonstrated they haven't got a fucking clue.
And I think they know it too.
Oh, they know.
Yeah, it scares them.
They haven't got the confidence of their own conviction.
No, no, they don't know why this is happening and they don't know how to beat us.
Someone tweeted a Jezebel article at me, and it's perfect.
It's like Gamergate trolls aren't ethics crusaders, they're a hate group.
And it's like, if that were me, I would want to know my enemy.
That's the thing.
I want to have an accurate representation of my enemy.
And say that Gamergate's a hate group and convince yourself of it is an emotional judgment.
Oh, no, no, I don't need to even look into them.
They're a hate group.
I can just pick out a few things that I would consider hate and use this cherry-picked information to paint the picture of Gamergate that isn't accurate.
And then I'll attack this straw man that I've created and find that it doesn't defeat Gamergate.
In fact, look at the topsy stats.
Gamergate is reaching new heights.
It got like 70,000 tweets yesterday, which is the highest it's ever had per day.
It's just growing.
Yeah exactly, it's just getting, and with the mainstream media coverage, you know, the mainstream media coverage is going to, it's really, when King of Pol was on the stream and he was getting, everyone was getting pissed off and I was just like, guys, you don't seem to understand that they've handed us a great victory.
They are such fucking fools.
They will play into our hands by acting like misinformed bigots on national television.
That's beautiful.
That's why we asked for more.
We couldn't ask for more oblivious opponents.
That's the thing.
I mean, it's their bad propaganda.
That's what it is.
It's bad propaganda.
And also, what they're trying to do is, of course, is put off the tertiary glances.
That's really what that's aimed at.
It's like, oh, I don't really want to be involved in that.
Those people are obviously wrongins, judging from this particular passage.
I don't think it's necessarily building warriors so that they can go and attack us.
I think it's more to do with the fact that, oh, you don't want to associate yourself with such people.
I know that we're kind of going in circles, and I wanted to finish up a few things before I get out of here.
Go for it.
Because we're almost running on three hours.
So some time ago, I was trying to get an internet voting bill through legislature in Oregon.
And the reason why was because I felt that democracy needed to be more participatory in its nature.
I would really love to make it easier for people to be able to change the laws, but not just change them willy-nilly.
I think that there needs to be, for instance, the ability to discuss in Wiki about whatever proposals and be able to use citations and sources and things like this.
So I bought this domain a long time ago for this purpose.
I called it nerdparty.net.
And my hopes of getting internet voting in Oregon are probably shot because of the terrible way that IT was handled during the healthcare transformation over here.
But I would love to see if there was some sort of 501c3 formed that acted as both a haven for leakers and as a place where people who want to participate, where we can lower the barrier of entry of participation in producing stuff.
I don't know if you have 15 minutes or an hour.
It doesn't matter how much time you have.
You can contribute whatever you can, whatever you want.
And if other people like it, they can add to your contributions.
Very much in this idea of the open source model and the open governance model.
And I don't want to be an internet celebrity.
I don't have the time to be an internet celebrity.
I would rather build stuff.
I'd rather build robots and computer vision algorithms and games and stuff like this.
I don't really care to be on YouTube and having my life be on display commoditized as a spectacle for the rest of the world.
Sorry I had to go through it, Ben.
Yeah, I understand.
I'm doing my duty.
I feel duty-bound.
That's the kind of person I am.
That's why we're all here, mate.
But honestly, though, I do appreciate it because I wouldn't want to be telling my personal life on the internet like this either.
Yeah, I know.
And someone has to stand up, right?
But I think what I have done is I have an idea, and maybe I'll call this an experiment.
I have talked to the developer of NetHack, which is GPL licensed code.
It's a video game.
And he's done some excellent things on it.
And I forked his code, which is completely cool.
And I have renamed it SJW Hack.
Anyone else who's a programmer who wants to help me program SJW Hack, I got this idea after seeing Anita Sarkeesian buy these social justice clerics, social justice wizard buttons.
And the idea is that we have characters.
They choose men or male or female, and they can choose among like social justice paladin, you know, that sort of thing.
And they have to fight monsters.
And the monsters that they're fighting are various characters in the Gamergate world.
So, you know, Sargon could be a boss of a dungeon.
You know, Interstate could be a boss of a dungeon.
You know, that sort of thing.
Well, I look forward to seeing it when it's done.
I mean, otherwise, I'm working on Oculus Rift and augmented reality and computer vision stuff, like trying to make it so that you can overlay digital information over the physical world and also help people who have visual impairments be able to navigate without sight.
And maybe you guys heard about this Intel pulling their ads.
I noticed that their Real Sense Challenge ads are running, and I'm a part of that competition myself.
So I emailed them to ask them to please take it away on the basis of its discriminatory nature, and they did take it down.
And I'm sure there are other people who did, you know, very well probably bring this to their attention.
But it came to my attention after I was on the train home and I met one of these people, one of these SJWs, who was working in the PR department for Intel.
And she told me quite literally, point blank, that we will never have a civil society until we are free of men.
And I'm not sure if you're aware, but Intel also sacked their PR department as well.
So, you know, you guys.
Yeah, I heard about this, yeah, because the PR department had, by the looks of it, been infiltrated by a certain sort of rad femme group, and they just been the lot.
Yeah.
So they know about this.
Yeah, the Oregon techno-feminist community, more precisely.
Like, they can't code for shit, but they can sure peddle propaganda.
Okay, guys, I think we'll wrap it up there.
Thanks a lot for coming on.
I really appreciate having you both on to talk about all this.
And thanks, Benjamin, for coming forward with all this.
We wouldn't have all this information if it wasn't for you.
Thank you very much.
Yeah, no problem.
Take care, guys.
Yeah.
Thanks, Ben.
All right, bye.
Well.
Yeah, thanks to you as well for coming on.
It's been a very strange ride.
What can you say, isn't it, really?
Yeah.
Well, I tell you, this is very different from being in England, isn't it?
Yeah.
I mean, obviously I met this guy yesterday, we had, oh, hello Sergeant Schultz, we, Obviously, we had this guy on yesterday just sort of trying desperately to get hold of somebody to be able to display this information.
and I think he'd sort of done it.
Once he actually started laying this down, I mean, to be honest with you, Saigon, you know, as I said beforehand, it's sort of, I was trying my damnedest to try and keep feminism out of the Gamergate thing, but it seems to keep on insisting on that.
There's no, if it's...
There's no keeping out, is there?
Can you imagine any of this going on in an English public school?
Oh, I could.
Really?
Because I just think about when I was at school, it'd just be like, oh, you know, everyone hated that sort of shit.
Dude, how old are you?
35.
Yeah, you got any kids?
Not yet.
Mate, they're in schools right now.
They're banning people's lunch boxes and things like that because they've got too much chocolate in there or crisps and crap like that.
Okay, when we were kids, sort of thing, you know, the playground was just such a different place, apparently.
Oh, I got the shit kicked out of me in school.
You know, it's School of Hard Knots.
Can you hear me guys?
Yeah, hi, Sergeant Schultz.
Sergeant Schultz is a YouTuber who he's been following me since how many subscribers did I have when you joined my channel, basically?
Oh, I had about like 100 at most, and I've gotten finally to like 300 and something.
I'm really small.
I'm nothing.
Yeah, but you've been dropping it.
You've been commenting on my channel for quite some time on my videos.
Oh, I'd say at least a year.
Yeah, but you were back at one of my original 80 subscribers or so.
I watch all your videos, you know.
I still watch all your videos.
I'm in the education field, and so it's like I've feminism is a little too tainted in that area, especially with Common Core.
Well, I'm going to grab a cup of tea and probably a sandwich or something.
Would you like to tell people why you wanted to come on the stream quickly?
Oh, I was just going to say was that Common Core, it's most, actually most recently, Common Core has been adopted so significantly.
And in my...
Go into it.
Tell everyone what it's about because we may as well, since we've got people on this crazy 10-foot street.
You can talk to me about it while he goes and has a cup of tea.
Oh, no, but it is everything anti-intellectual that you could ever believe.
It was more surprising when I ran into it because it had just gotten passed through my state.
And the mathematics alone just boggle the mind.
It does not even make any rational sense.
And I was asking one of the teachers in the math department who pretty much saw this because he wasn't privy to this because he's an older gentleman.
And then when he saw it, it's like, this just fails in functioning once you move.
It fails to begin with, but it won't work in any form of advanced mathematics.
And with the, I'm more of a, I love history.
Am I going to be a history major?
And the history department, they've been pushing, at least in my university, and Common Core seems to be supporting this, is that a lot of the literature that you must read has to be have some form of feminist background, like gendered studies.
Most of my university books, they've been having problems.
The head of my history department's been fighting this, but he's been losing, is that all the history books now, they're trying to make sure if you're going to buy books or have books for the class, you're going to have to have the writer to have at least a credential in gender studies or I'm calling it feminism, feminist studies, because it makes more sense.
Yeah, they have to be a feminist in order to be considered overall.
If they're a man and they go, well, I'm not really a feminist.
Well, then you'll hung.
Exactly.
Well, it's their idea of peer review now.
Well, my mate says it's all right.
It's not even just that.
There's enough of them that say, I say it's all right, so it matters.
I just keep saying it until everyone gives up arguing.
Oh, yeah.
The classes I've taken, I swear to God, even stuff I thought was jokes, begun to go way beyond serious.
I think the most scariest one was in my history class.
The teacher agrees with the student saying, sexism and racism only exists in America.
And she was applauding the student, and I'm just sitting there going, what?
I really wish I was kidding.
I wish I could record this because it was just like I'm sitting there and everyone's clapping like seals.
And it just like, and this professor's tenured.
So, I mean, there's no way of removing it unless she does something really crazy.
I just want to, I can hear this while I'm making a cup of tea, and I've got myself on mute.
Are you serious, man?
Just, I can't.
I'm not saying you're lying or anything like that.
I'm just saying it's so goddamn hard to believe.
I know.
I was in the middle of class, and I just legitly stood up and walked right out because it's like, this is like a brick to the skull.
I'm like, what crack are you smoking?
How can sexism only exist in America?
Oh, what made it worse is everyone was agreeing in the class, and I'm just sitting there going, if I say anything, I'm going to be hung.
Okay, do you want to tell people everything you know about Common Core?
Be as complete as possible because Exnet Aristocrat did a video about this.
Common Core, the problem with it is with the Common Core, they are trying to spring on teachers, and they're only giving little bits and tidbits to the students, at least within the education department where I'm at.
But the reading requirements for students themselves, it does not make sense because where you'd expect classical literature, be it Shakespeare and whatnot, they're throwing that stuff right out the door.
And it just sounds crazy because it was I'm trying to think of one of the books that they were having a mandatory read.
I think it was, and this is for high school and early late grade school, like eighth graders, was, I think it's called Life in the Time of Butterflies.
And it's stuff that it doesn't matter anything more than, because the whole book was primarily about people in Cuba and trying to flee from Cash Road, but the whole thing was that they turned into lesbians and the teachers are supposed to, in the things, there's specific things you're supposed to talk about in Common Course.
And sex, sexuality, and gender is a prime, huge thing that they're trying to push.
The biggest one was having to teach sexual education, but it's not true, sex ed.
It's trying to think of the exact way they're phrasing it, but they try to label under sexual education, but it's pretty much you're teaching kids about homosexuality, what you do about it, what's a sexual positions.
And it sounds ludicrous.
And there was one of them that was talking about teaching kids how to use a strap-on.
It is.
And these are the things that it just, they don't even make a lick of sense in anything.
It's all seems all over the place.
Did you say how to use a strap-on?
Yes.
Yes.
What age are you talking about?
There was a push for a mandatory at fourth grade.
They want to do it younger.
What age is that?
Sorry, I'm English.
It's about eight.
Yeah.
Eight years old.
Strap-on lessons, yeah.
I thought it was a joke when I read it.
I'm like, is this a joke?
Is someone just yanking my chain here?
And it's like, no, this is serious.
It's like, this is going to help kids learn.
Like, learn fucking what?
Degenerates?
Jesus Christ.
There's nothing degenerate about a strap-on, but it is a bit weird for eight-year-olds.
That's all I'm saying.
Yeah, I think it's going to fuck up an eight-year-old knowing about any of this.
Yeah.
An eight-year-old really shouldn't know what an erect penis or any facsimile of is.
Jesus Christ.
Yeah, it's like, and if you speak out of Common Core, most of the people in the university, they put you on a list and kind of as a warning, like, don't let them stay in the education field.
Lock them out.
And I, oh, it is.
I did teach.
I could teach kids.
You don't need a degree to teach kids.
I personally feel it should be like a vocation, like being a plumber or electrician.
You need field experience, not just textbook smarts.
A piece of paper doesn't say you're smart, but these people seriously believe it does.
And oh, the whole article are gone.
I did a paper, and they're making forced feminist classes in the university, at least where I'm at.
And they have journals you have to go through, and they are starting to try and erase some journals, remove them, saying that they're not useful anymore.
Feminist enough.
Oh, yeah.
Yeah, it wasn't feminist enough because what it was is there's one on video games.
And it was talking about gender and sexuality.
And I first thought, oh, okay, I'm going to read this and see what craft it is.
It was pointing out games allow for the experimentation of the player individually.
And when I brought this up, last time I looked again, it wasn't there anymore.
Because it legitimately brought out, it studied about 500 men and women.
And they each asked them, how did you feel?
Why did you do things?
And it pointed out games allow for self-expression beyond just simple stress relief.
It was legitimately allowing a person, hey, if the game says to be a good guy, you could legitimately break that.
And there was no kind of what they would call social norm repercussions.
And those type of articles are trying to legitimately gut out of the journals in academia.
You know what I need?
I need a brandy.
Brandy Manhattan does sound nice.
I might head over to the hotel, actually, and maybe get a drink out of it.
I've got loads of people who are asking me to open up.
They're obviously feeling a bit dry this morning.
Wow.
Common Core is beyond insane.
Common Core is monstrous.
Sorry, I'm actually back now.
All of this stuff is just absurd.
Yeah, and one good thing is that every teacher I run across thinks I'm an 18-year-old whip beyond the ears, just got out of high school, and I'm laughing, looking.
I'm a buddy, I'm 30.
I've experienced more life than half the teachers because I'm older than most of them now.
It's like, fuck.
Oh, yeah, most of them, the Common Core is not teaching critical thinking.
It's the shit.
He just tweets me a link to it.
Holy shit.
Oh, did you see the math one?
Well, I don't know.
I found the sixth graders being taught how to use a dildo.
Yep.
Share that shit.
Share that shit.
I've got to see that.
Well, I've just tweeted it.
Holy shit.
I mean, it's completely different when you see a photograph of some sick woman mimicking doing the fucking dildos.
Whatever she's doing.
It's just like, and this is to 11 and 12 year olds.
Oh, my good God.
A sex toy lesson.
Yep.
My fucking.
Yeah, and you know what the funniest thing is?
Or the saddest thing actually more is that?
If you call out against this, you're considered a deviant.
Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.
You're a deviant if you call out against this.
God forbid.
You don't want kids to be fucking fucked up, man.
Sex education is important.
It is important.
But there is a level.
You know?
My God.
This is insane.
Yeah, it's like, I mean, pretty much you teach what happens, and then, hey, if you're going to do that, wear a rubber.
That's all.
Yeah.
Now we've got 11 to 12 year olds running around thinking, shall we use a strap on?
That's fine.
Well, you're a guy and I'm a guy, so it doesn't really matter, does it?
But it's the idea.
You're putting ideas in their fucking mind at 11 years old.
11 years old?
I was starting to notice girls, but I was still playing with my mates and stuff.
I still made Lego.
Jesus, what is wrong with these people?
It's just, oh, or the one with the transgendered stuff, you've got to call them purple penguins.
I did a video, and it's just like, I'm looking, I'm like, are you smoking some crack, dude?
I mean, are you taking off of breaking bad and doing meth?
Because it is.
It's like these kids just understand the basics of biology and their gender.
It's like, okay, I'm a boy because I got external plumbing, and you're a girl because I have internal plumbing.
And after that, they don't care until puberty hits, and they're like, oh, my God, I want to get in that.
Let me grab my strap on.
Some 12-year-old boys are going to get pegged.
But the worst one was that if you try to use video games to teach, you will get reprimanded severely like I did.
Because I used Assassin's Creed, but I didn't do any kills, but I was using the show, the period, the timeplace, how these distances were.
And the other one was Toy Soldier.
Apparently it's a hoax.
Someone's saying it's a hoax.
On what grounds does everyone think this is a hoax?
There are pictures of it.
It seems so absurd.
It should be a hoax, but.
Well, hang on, let's talk to the chat in a second.
Enquispy or something.
How do you know it's a fucking hoax, man?
Don't just sit there and say it's a hoax if you don't.
I mean, it doesn't look like a hoax.
Yeah, I'm seeing a woman on a desk with a strap on in front of a kid with, I would say.
It's about 10 or 11.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I don't, I mean, I've heard a lot of stuff about Common Core.
And if, Schultz, if you're saying that this is what they're doing, and then we've got some pictures here, I'm happy to believe this is what they're doing.
Frankly, I don't think that we're going to put anything past these fucking psychos anymore.
It's beyond belief.
I thought there was a joke, or I thought it was a hoax, too.
And I'm like, this can't be right.
I mean, this is so insane.
This is just beyond radical.
This is like someone who I'm thinking that maybe this is because this is written by Paul Joseph Watson.
Oh, is that that guy who said I got white privilege?
Prison Planet, dude.
Sorry, what was that?
Joseph Watson writes for, sorry, Paul Joseph Watson writes for Prison Planet.
He's part of the InfoWars crowd, you know, all that sort of business.
You know what we're talking about here, Sargon?
Alex Jones.
Yeah.
Conspiracy theorist.
Well, yeah.
Do you know what, Ryan?
I'm going to do a video on Alex Jones at some point because there was a bit of him just having a bit of a rant at the camera.
But it was an incredibly lucid two minutes.
And I think that everything he said in this two minutes was absolutely true.
And no one's going to like it.
But I think I can substantiate almost everything he said.
But the thing is, it was all very limited in scope.
It was very much like there is a cabal of people in the US government who are doing things to certain ends to achieve certain goals.
And that was all absolutely true.
There are definitely people like that who work in what could be termed a conspiracy.
Everyone's like, oh, conspiracy.
Conspiracy is just a fucking word, everyone.
These things happen.
Of course, people in positions of power organize without making it public to achieve ends.
Yeah, there wouldn't be a treachery law otherwise.
Exactly.
These things obviously happen.
It's ridiculous to suggest that they can't.
And the American government is the most powerful and manipulatable government on earth.
It's where you would want to have a conspiracy if you were trying to attain more power for yourself.
But anyway, I'm not really bothered about Alex Jones and InfoWars.
It was just like this two-minute bit where he was a bit lucid, but the rest of it is obviously crazy shit.
I do have dozens of its water filters now, though, so...
Yeah, and I don't necessarily think that Snopes is like, you know, the de facto sort of...
You know, everyone, you know, you could say, well, yeah, I think Wiki's the, you know, the arbiter of everything right and wrong.
And it's not true, is it?
None of this are.
You know, it's not a transitional Snopes.
Snopes is run by like a husband and wife team in some town in America who they just run the website and they just try and they do their own personal little investigations.
And I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, but I don't know how biased, you know, objective and just how good their research is.
They're not an authoritative source to me.
No.
Absolutely.
At the moment, of course, we have to take this on face value until there is other evidence to suggest otherwise.
I think someone's posted a Snopes article here to do with this.
Oh, actually, someone's posted.
I mean, I'm actually going to look at the Snopes thing because they might be right.
But Apparently, this was a substitute teacher who was then fired.
And it's like, okay, well, that's good.
I wonder.
But how did this substitute teacher get into the classroom with a fucking dildo?
Obviously, in the handbag.
Well, I'd like to make a point to let you guys know something that what should separate us from them is our ability to use practical rationalism, like Karl Popper talked about, in the examination of what we hear and see.
And not just blindly listen and believe to every single thing that someone sends us, regardless of whether or not it's from InfoWars or Snopes, rebutting Infowars or etc.
It's hard to there's really hard to say whether or not something is true or false unless you have primary documentation.
But the point that we can make is that the ideology itself is corrupt, whether or not a specific incident happened or not.
That's right.
No, I agree.
I mean, yeah, this is the thing.
The important thing is to always be aware that if you're wrong, then you just own it.
You admit, AI fucking.
Yeah, I was wrong.
I admit my mistake and I changed my position because of it.
That's the normal thing to do.
One thing on the games and stuff like that, I'm going to probably blow your mind.
I'm going to do a video on it later on, but there is something considered virtual rape now.
Oh, fuck off.
Oh, no, I'm not sure.
Sorry, but it was just because what it was, it was because GTA, someone modded it, so you'd be air humping a person and they're just calling it, oh, it's an atrocity, it's horrible.
Oh, God, I really wish the teacher didn't see it.
I saw an interview with, I think it was a Canadian policeman or inspector or something.
And the look in his face, you could see he was just like, Christ, why don't people just murder each other anymore?
How the fuck am I going to investigate cyber rape in Grand Theft Auto?
He's just like, how am I going to catch people?
You can tell just on his face, he's just looking at the chain of events that he's going to have to go down.
He's just like, why can't these people just go away?
Oh, yeah.
There was one cyber rape.
I'm not into it.
Stop playing the game.
I mean, I'm not quite sure.
You know, you're playing with Grand Theft Auto and you're expecting everyone to be nice to each other.
There was one with Day Z too that they had a person got quote-unquote raped.
It was pretty much teabagging.
I'm laughing like, this is a thing.
Day Z is a bunch of, can be turned into a bunch of cunts.
So I'm like, why the fuck do I want to play with those people?
Yeah.
Dude, I'm going to break out because I could do with a brandy.
I've got people whining at me to start my stream as well.
I'm an open house now.
I'm sort of like a walk-in center.
These people consider me a halfway house, it seems.
That's good, man.
That's good.
Do me a favor and tweet me a link to your channel and I'll retweet it.
So everyone can follow me there.
I'm going to call an end to this one because I'm knackered and stressed from all of this shit.
I know.
Too many red pills, man.
Too many red pills.
I was going to sit there and just go through these feminist Marxist things, but I think I'm going to have to, like, tomorrow or something like that, because there has just been some crazy shit.
I think I just need to go and recuperate probably play a bit of Mountain Blade maybe oh I hate you Mountain Blade you bastard you got me a ticket why?
You got me addicted to the Warsword mod.
It's amazing.
I'm going to upload my sort of modded version of the mod.
Because I've really.
I've started this new game.
I fucked up my old fucking game.
So I'm going to do a Let's Play of my new game because I have to.
I've created this dwarf new model army where it's very much sort of like pike and shot.
Well, I don't have any pikes, but I've got like guys with big shields and then lots and lots and lots of guys with good rifles.
And I've changed the guys with the rifles from being archers, which you can't manipulate the sort of, you know, they can't turn them into squares or wedges or anything like that.
I've made them the infantry so you can with the existing infantry.
So I just go for the shield wall option.
So my guys with the shields are all at the front, the actual infantry to hold the mic.
And then directly behind them are just a couple of ranks of guns.
And it's unbelievably powerful.
Unbelievably powerful.
I never really understood just how powerful the rifle was.
I mean, you know, you saw that Britain goes in with like 2,000 men and defeats 20,000 Afghans and that sort of thing.
Well, okay, well, you know, it doesn't tell you how it happened.
But I tell you, after watching this, I'm just watching these orc hordes, like 200 orcs, approaching my 70-odd riflemen.
And they're just going down.
It's crazy.
And yeah, and then they eventually, a couple of them do get to your lines, but by that point, there's fucking left.
But yeah, I need to go and social justice soak my brain, I think.
Let's get out of the stress there, guys.
Sargon, if you feel like you want to come in and have a drink with us later, pop yourself in, mate.
Just send me some sort of link.
Follow me on Twitter or anything.
I'll DM you something.
Yeah, man.
I've obviously just got to set it up first of all.
But yeah, you're welcome to pop in whenever you like, man.
Just shoot some shit with us.
Yeah, tweet me a link to your channel so people can just go to your channel and subscribe.
Okay, on the case, right now.
And I'll retweet it so that they'll be able to follow you on Twitter as well.
Sergeant Schultz, if you want to do the same, then I'm happy to do yours as well.
Sergeant Schultz, he does interesting videos because you guys can see he's from academia and these subjects aren't new to his videos.
It's just he's always got very low-key videos where he's talking over him playing a video game.
And I always kind of to be honest with you, I think that's a bit of a pain, mate, because I always get distracted by the games you're playing.
Yeah, I kind of have a.
I used to be a shy guy and I just thought, you know what?
Playing a game just calms my nerves down to a point that people laugh, are you fucking high?
But I mean.
But it's just like, I'm there just to relax.
Sarge, Sarg, both of you, lovely to meet you, chaps, and hope to speak to you soon.
Pleasure to meet you too.
I think there's going to be more to do with this, isn't there?
Oh, yeah.
Hope to do that.
I think that we're just starting to actually understand the true problem that we're having, aren't we?
At least in America, it's just that's all I can say for it.
It's yeah, I imagine it's probably creeping in over here, man.
Well, we'll beat this, guys.
We'll beat this because all you've got to do is laugh at it most of the time, and that's enough.
Yeah.
That's the great thing.
These people have no sense of humour.
That's the way beyond them.
They just can't deal with it.
Yeah.
All the love.
Mustache.
Yeah.
Thanks very much.
I'll talk to you all later.
And thanks to everyone for watching.
Really appreciate you staying with us for so long.
Much love to everybody out there.
Bye-bye.
Bye.
Yodox.
▲
Export Selection