Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 13, 2022 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:30:37

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #306

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Music Good afternoon and welcome to podcast episode 306 of the podcast of the Lotus Eaters.
	I'm your host, Harry, joined today by my guest, Carl.
	Hello!
	And today we're going to be covering some topics, including the anti-Pido statue action that was going on in London last night at the BBC headquarters.
	Women, you will get old, and men will lose interest, so maybe pick up the pace a bit.
	And also the secret origins of wokeness.
	But before we get into any of that, we've got a few announcements to make.
	First of all, we've got a new article from Hugo, who is, as always, very reliable in his articles, always very interesting.
	If you scroll down, I think we've got an audio track for our Silver Tier members, and it is on the pipe dream of small government.
	And I imagine this is going very much along the anarchist lines that Hugo likes so much.
	But you don't have to be an anarchist to observe that the only options, especially in Britain, that we have are really big government or just big government.
	It's the Labour or the Conservatives.
	Everyone is using the state.
	They've become aware that the state is essentially the most powerful entity around us and can be wielded for everything.
	Well, yes, obviously, opportunists will always take advantage of that and try and expand it when they're in power.
	Even people like Ronald Reagan back in the day was like, we need small government, and then just went on to expand the government even further.
	So, hence the pipe dream.
	If we move along, we've also got Carl's latest video, CRT explain number four, the Gramscian attack on liberal rights.
	Yeah, this is Kimberley Crenshaw explicitly invoking Gramsci to attack our civilisations.
	By changing our definition of what rights are.
	And she is specifically attacking Thomas Sowell in this, because Thomas Sowell has encountered her argument and said, yes, but that's essentially fascism.
	Why are you doing this?
	And she's like, well, because we can.
	I'll let you go and watch the video, which explains it, I think, fairly well.
	We need to cover some more soul on the website a bit more often, to be fair.
	We need to do a book club on it.
	I'm reading Discrimination and Disparities at the moment, if anyone wants to talk about that with me.
	I'll do that book club with you, man.
	Wonderful.
	I'm currently doing The Social Contract by Rousseau, so look forward to that.
	It'll make a nice contrast.
	There'll be like a breath of fresh air.
	Yeah, it's insufferable.
	And finally, we'd also just like to make everyone aware that we still have a career opportunity open for a software engineer and web developer.
	So if you're interested in that, contact us through the email address that's listed on the page and we'll get back to you.
	So, without any further ado, let's get into the news.
	It's time to look at the anti-pedos statue action that was going on in London last night.
	Contrasted with anti-fascist action, of course, because these are the people we would be Fighting against.
	They'd probably be on the statue's side in this case.
	Yeah.
	Probably.
	Yeah, yeah.
	So we got some news yesterday, as it was getting into the evening, talking from Andrew Doyle.
	A man has been vandalising the statue of Ariel and Prospero by Eric Gill at the BBC Broadcasting House.
	And then he was talking about how this was going to start to happen, because, of course, we have recently had a massive spate of people just getting off...
	With attacking, well, not attacking, but tearing down statues and desecrating monuments and just basically urinating all over our culture.
	Vandalising the Churchill statue.
	Yes.
	So, you might expect myself and Carl to maybe have a bit more of an angry reaction, but at the same time, this is kind of what people have been asking for.
	Slightly more sympathetic to the tear down the statue argument now, I'm afraid.
	Yes, especially given Eric Gill himself, who we'll get into.
	If you want to just play a little bit of the audio of this, John, just so we can see this man who evidently just got a ladder.
	Before we play it right, what is that statue?
	What is the deal with this statue of a man holding a naked boy above the BBC? Okay, well, in that case, to give it some context, the statue is of Prospero and Ariel, who are the two characters from Shakespeare's The Tempest, the last play that he wrote, I believe, before he ended up retiring, Prospero being a wizard, Ariel being a spirit.
	However...
	As far as I'm aware, in every adaptation that I've seen and the stage plays and images from the stage plays and even paintings of the events depicted in the story, Ariel is generally depicted as a grown man who, despite being naked in a spirit, has foliage and other such things covering their genitals, whereas this Eric Gill character seems to have just gone, naked child.
	Yeah, why not?
	Naked boy flashing the world.
	About, what, seven or eight years old, judging by the height of the boy?
	Yeah, looking like he's almost being restrained by a domineering older man as well.
	Really, um...
	Really interesting.
	Very artistic.
	Very artistic, doesn't it?
	Yeah, so very European-style artistic right there.
	Yes, indeed.
	Yeah, so if you want to play some of the audio here.
	Should have put the chisel.
	I think he did knock the penis off.
	He turned.
	He turned.
	Fair.
	Yeah, so if you couldn't hear that then, he just shouted, I think as more police arrived, more pedo protectors.
	Now, just to be clear, the police do have an obligation to protect the property that is the statue.
	Yes.
	As they did with the Colston statue, and failed to hold.
	They didn't, though.
	Yeah, well, they had an obligation to do it.
	They just didn't.
	Yes.
	And so, you know, they do still have that obligation, and I'm sure they will enforce it in this case, won't they?
	Yeah, well, definitely in this case.
	And another piece of context, of course, this statue has been on top of the front doors of the BBC headquarters since 1933, so this has been paid for with taxpayer money, I assume, BBC being a group who have been known to affiliate themselves, maybe, with a few questionable characters in the past, shall we say?
	They have a small history of nonce defence.
	Yeah, but he was up there long enough that I think he was up there for four hours in total.
	It started to get dark, so he was up there for a long while, just hacking away at it.
	I think he mainly just managed to take a little bit off of the knee and the foot.
	But if you just play this clip you can hear the crowds chanting at him as well Hey, Tommy Tommy!
	It's supposed to be the thing!
	Take down the BBC! Take down the BBC! Take down the BBC! Take down the BBC! Take down the BBC! Yeah, they're all just chanting, take down the BBC, as this man is still just hacking away at it.
	You may have noticed, if you were watching the video as well, that seems to have been scrawled on the leg of the statue, saying, I think it's the time to take it down was 1989, Which is relevant in a moment when we get into a little bit more of Eric Gill himself.
	If we move along as well, just the tragic end to this story.
	Not that I'm condoning anything.
	The tragic end was this man eventually got taken down off of the statue and has sadly been arrested, which we'll get into in a moment.
	But the reason, because...
	From where you may be sitting, his motives may be quite mysterious.
	Why did this man feel the need to get up and start assaulting a statue on the BBC headquarters building?
	It's an innocent statue of a man holding a naked boy.
	Yeah, I know.
	Why would that be offensive to anybody?
	Well, there's a...
	Pretty good reason for that.
	If we move along, we can see this Wikipedia page.
	I just want this to be on here, because this is actually a pretty decent Wikipedia page of Eric Gill that has his various crimes listed on it.
	We'll see how long that remains, so this will be a nice time capsule for it.
	But yeah, Eric Gill, the sculptor of that particular statue, was a communist paedophile.
	LAUGHTER Every time!
	Every single time!
	Every time!
	Yes, it has a nice description here.
	Arthur Eric Rotengill was an English sculptor, typeface designer and printmaker who was associated with the arts and crafts movement.
	Sounds inappropriately childish to me.
	Yeah, it does, doesn't it?
	Yeah, his artistic achievements have more recently been overshadowed by his history of sexually abusing his children.
	His religious views and subject matter contrast with his sexual behaviour, including his erotic art, as mentioned in his own diaries.
	His extramarital affairs and sexual abuse of his daughters, sister, and dog.
	So he literally abused everything around him?
	Yeah, he was a sexual degenerate, a sex pest, who just, like, he would see his dog going past, and just be like, well, open season!
	I guess it must have been.
	Yeah, so, a true degenerate of the very kind, and his diary, I believe, was actually released to the public...
	He died in 1940.
	I think his diary got wide release in 1989, which is why the person said, well, we all found out he was a massive pedo who abused his own children in 1989.
	Why is this still up here?
	And this isn't like an argument with Colston or anyone like that, whereby their other achievements for why they had the statue made of them could overshadow what people are protesting nowadays.
	This is a pedophile...
	Who admitted he was a paedophile in an era where paedophilia, like all eras should have, was widely condemned and it was a statue of a man seemingly restraining a naked child.
	There's a little bit of symbolism you could point to, perhaps.
	I mean, the thing is, I'm not terribly unsympathetic to the argument that, well, this guy was a slave trader.
	The money he donated to various philanthropic causes in Bristol was made through the slave trade, at least in part.
	Therefore, we would like his statue taken down.
	I'm not terribly unsympathetic to that as an argument.
	What I'm unsympathetic to is the mob tearing it down and then rolling it into the harbour.
	Yes.
	You don't get to do that, right?
	You know, if you want to take down a statue of something that is inappropriate in the modern era, okay, fine, you know, go in a museum, which I believe it is actually in a museum now.
	And so, you know, I don't condone this guy just climbing up there and smashing it.
	But again, like, there's a perfectly good moral argument to not have this guy's statue on the BBC, right?
	Yeah, let's not go celebrating the works of paedophiles.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, it's kind of reprehensible, or at least morally reprehensible.
	Yeah, at least if you care about morality.
	Yeah, well, these are lefties, so.
	Exactly.
	But the article, well, the Wikipedia page carries on, and it talks about his political beliefs.
	As a young man, Gil was a member of the Fabian Society.
	Shock.
	Big surprise, but later resigned.
	In the 1930s, Gill became a supporter of social credit.
	Later, he moved towards a socialist position.
	In 1934, Gill contributed art to an exhibition mounted by the Left Wing Artists International Association and defended the exhibition against accusations in the Catholic Herald that its art was anti-Christian.
	Which it doubtless was.
	Absolutely it was.
	Socialists have never been particularly big fans of religion.
	And then it goes on a bit more about his personal details.
	sexual abuse of his two eldest teenage daughters, incestuous relationships with his sisters, and sexual acts on his dog.
	This aspect of Gil's life was little known beyond his family and friends until the publication of the 1989 biography by Fiona McCarthy." Okay, so that's where the big news came from.
	An earlier biography by Robert Speight, published in 1966, mentioned none of it.
	Wow.
	Guess he didn't have access to his diaries.
	Gil's daughter Petra, who was alive at the time of the McCarthy biography, described her father as having endless curiosity about sex and that we just took it for granted, which is sadly pretty typical behaviour from a victim of abuse like that when they're a kid.
	They don't know any better.
	They don't know what the world is like outside of their little sphere.
	I never want my children to ever say something like that.
	What a horrible thing.
	It's absolutely disgusting.
	But they don't know that...
	They don't know it's wrong.
	It's always been part of their life.
	The rest of the world isn't like that.
	So yeah, had sex with his sisters and his dog.
	As I've mentioned, this man who was a pedophile makes a statue of a small naked child.
	Big surprise.
	And then if we move along, once again, just to confirm that the guy who did that, I think his name still hasn't been released to the public yet, has been arrested.
	So a man was arrested yesterday on suspicion of criminal damage after it was alleged that he took a hammer.
	Alleged.
	I mean, we've got video footage of it.
	I don't know why they're wording it like this.
	They have.
	Because he hasn't been through the trial, but we can see it.
	To an Eric Gill statue adorning the facade of the BBC's Broadcasting House, the main entrance to the BBC's headquarters is no longer Broadcasting House, but the incident raises questions about its security.
	It was pretty funny, though, that he literally just seems to have got a ladder and gone, well, I'm taking this into my own hands.
	Well, I mean, if they're going to take it into their own hands, they're going to deface the statue of Churchill, they're going to tear down various statues of people they don't like.
	Okay, well, you set the precedent, didn't you?
	Yeah.
	They carry on.
	The figures depicting Prospero and Ariel from Shakespeare's play The Tempest was installed in 1933, and the statues have been a source of controversy after it emerged that Gil abused his daughters, and it just goes on to explain a little bit more of that.
	But that's a good point that you bring up there, is there is the question of legality.
	Which is kind of dubious and up in the air at the moment, given recent precedents.
	But let's see what some of the mainstream media's responses to this, particularly some BBC employees.
	Katie Razzle, who is the news culture editor, put outside BBC right now as a man trying to smash up Eric Gill's statue, while another man livestreams talking about paedophiles.
	Gill's horrific crimes are well known.
	But is this the way?
	Oh, really, Katie?
	Is destroying statues a bad thing?
	Did you say that when they were defacing Winston Churchill and tearing down the Colston statue?
	I really doubt that she did somehow.
	And don't you know that England is a country that condones this sort of behaviour?
	Yeah, exactly.
	This apparently is the way, actually.
	Yeah, and if we move along again...
	I don't agree with it either, but you know...
	Yeah, we can see this man, who's another BBC employee, who is a...
	Cheyenne Sardarizadeh.
	Yeah, typical BBC employee.
	Yes.
	Who is a specialist on disinformation, conspiracy theorists, cult and extremism.
	Well, that is what they do at the BBC, yeah.
	Yes.
	Says, a man has taken a sledgehammer to the Eric Gill statue.
	It's not a sledgehammer, it's in one hand.
	It's just a hammer.
	The statue has been...
	Misinformation, here we go.
	An obsession for British QAnon, Save Our Children's Satanic Ritual Abuse, and other conspiracy groups for a very long time.
	Must have been because of the BBC's defence of Jimmy Savile.
	Honestly.
	That is actually unbelievable.
	It's not like the BBC doesn't have a track record at this point, sadly.
	And also, once again, note the very obvious lack of a mentioning of Eric Gill's former crimes in that one tweet.
	He is responding to someone who mentioned it, but in his own response to it, he's like, I'm just going to brush that over.
	QAnon conspiracy theory.
	They're just concerned about paedophiles molesting children.
	What, like Eric Gill?
	Yeah, I guess QAnon must have...
	I guess QAnon must have got hold of Gil's autobiography, his diary.
	Yeah, or they looked up his Wikipedia page.
	Yeah, evidently.
	So, once again, just trying to label and dismiss, associate it with QAnon to make him seem like a nutter, and then just move along.
	I mean, why else would you bring that up?
	Yeah.
	It's obvious.
	Oh, obviously.
	But yes, on the subject of the legality of it, it is a bit of a question, because we've had a few incidents in the past few years of people defiling and destroying statues that may have got a little more than a slap on the wrist.
	If we move along, we've got this article talking about a protester who tried to set the union flag alight on the cenotaph, avoiding prison time, avoiding jail.
	So this is from December 2020.
	Yep, I remember this when this happened.
	Yep, so the teenager who attempted to burn the Union flag during an anti-racism protest in London, and that's what really makes it okay, isn't it?
	If he did it on just a random Tuesday, then they'd be in trouble, but don't you understand I'm protesting for the cause of wholly anti-racism, has avoided a jail sentence.
	Astrophel Sang, typical British name, Who put these ideas in this lunatic child's head?
	Well, I would assume the Coventry University.
	Exactly.
	I went to Coventry University, although I did computer science, so we didn't get to...
	And you did it, what, like 20 years ago as well?
	Yeah, 20 years ago, yeah.
	So, you know, none of that sort of thing was happening then, but who knows what it's like now.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Judge Christopher Heyer instead today gave him a two-year conditional discharge and ordered him to pay £340 in court costs.
	So that was it.
	Basically got off with it.
	The worst that they did, and the only thing that I do quite like...
	Look at this comment, though.
	I'm at a loss as to understanding why you or anyone, in the course of a Black Lives Matter protest, would seek to target the Cenotaph.
	Because they don't know.
	They don't know anything about Black Lives Matter.
	They don't know why.
	I mean, it would be baffling if they didn't target symbols of Britishness.
	They view our entire civilization as a racist imperial project.
	Of course they're going to do that.
	You absolute goober.
	Like Christopher Hennier, right?
	This Hennier, however it's pronounced, this is a guy who just does not know anything about these things.
	You spend no time looking into it.
	Well, to be fair, there is one decent thing that the article mentions that this judge did, which was that he got a number of people who were not white English people to come out in front of this guy and read the stories of their own grandfathers and grandparents who died in the war and memorialised on the cenotaph and read some letters they received while they were at war and whatnot and just tell this person...
	Yeah, it wasn't just like...
	Yeah.
	That doesn't matter.
	That will have absolutely no impact on the Black Lives Matter narrative.
	Because as far as they're concerned, whiteness and white supremacy are what Britain is made of.
	And so those race traitors who are working with Britain are exactly that, race traitors.
	They're upholding the white supremacist power structure.
	That's just going to be their response.
	Sadly, you are right.
	Again, it's such a small brain take on Black Lives Matter.
	It's insufferable.
	You would hope that there would be a bit more to it, but that is basically it.
	You've been looking into CRT. Obviously, yeah.
	Yeah, so you're the expert on it at the moment.
	If we move along as well, there's the other more recent precedent that Callum and I covered last week of the Colston Four being cleared of all criminal damage.
	The four people who were accused of illegally removing a statue of Edward Colston have been cleared of criminal damage.
	Sage Willoughby, Ryan Graham, Milo Ponsford and Jake Scusi were charged after a monument to the 17th century slave trader was pulled down and thrown into Bristol's harbourside last June.
	It happened during a Black Lives Matter protest in the city.
	So once again, this man just decides to do it on a random Wednesday.
	He gets arrested.
	I doubt they're going to be anywhere near as lenient with him as they were with these people.
	But if we were going to be honest about the legal precedents that we've set, we're just going to have to say, well, I mean, you were doing it as a form of anti-pedophile action...
	You could make that argument.
	What they're saying with this is if you have a moral imperative that drives you to tear down or damage a statue, then you're justified in doing it and you get cleared of criminal damage.
	And so this guy had a moral imperative to tear down the gill statue.
	Why should he not be cleared of criminal damage as well?
	Yeah.
	Well, he wasn't doing it as part of a mob.
	So maybe that's the only argument.
	Yeah.
	He was a sole actor.
	Yeah, exactly.
	You weren't part of an angry mob, so you tearing down that statue wasn't justified.
	Yes, very naughty, off to prison with you.
	But that's essentially what the defence is going to have to be, though, isn't it?
	It's like, you're not part of our mob, and therefore, jail.
	Yep, and just to put a little bit of a cherry on the top of this, a very disgusting and mouldy, depressing cherry on top of this, there is the sad fact that, as we may have alluded to, Eric Gill is not the only example of crazy leftists abusing their own children.
	We also have, just to make everybody aware, people may be aware of this name, they may not, Marion Zimmer Bradley, an acclaimed and almost legendary in some circles science fiction writer, So she was a feminist who took the Arthurian stories and just flipped them.
	Put them through the feminist meat grind.
	Yeah, she took the female characters and decided to, what would it be like from their perspective?
	So, all very much for the cause.
	While noted for the feminist perspective in her writing, her reputation has been posthumously marred by multiple accusations of child sex abuse and rape by two of her own children, Mark and Moira Grayland, and for assisting her second husband, convicted pedophile Walter H. Breen to rape and abuse multiple other unrelated children.
	So, sadly, it seems to be a bit of a trend.
	I mean, leftists really do see children as sex toys, don't they?
	It appears so.
	That's literally what these people view them as.
	They don't see children as being sacred, and they don't see their innocence as being something that they have to protect.
	They view them as something that they can take advantage of.
	It's absolutely disgusting.
	And they have their own disgusting, scientifically-based reasons for doing so, which Carl and I will be covering sometime soon, sadly.
	We've got a podcast coming about this, and it's really insufferable.
	Yeah, it's really disgusting.
	But, yeah, that just puts that, like, disgusting cherry on top of that rotten cake.
	That's about all I've got for that one.
	Bloody hell.
	You're all welcome.
	Yeah, exactly, yeah.
	You're welcome, is Harry's, like, yeah.
	Because, I mean, like, you had to go through loads of this stuff recently.
	Yes, for my pedo article, and now I am the official pedo hunter in the office.
	Yes, not Hunter Supreme.
	But the thing is, I feel bad for you having to read all this stuff, because it's just gross.
	It does feel like forbidden knowledge.
	I can never get rid of it from my head now.
	I've opened Pandora's box and absorbed its contents.
	So yeah, go check out those podcasts and articles.
	Anyway, so ladies, I have some bad news for you, and you're going to have to accept that this is an immutable law of nature that even the world's most beautiful women come up against.
	You will grow old, and men will lose interest in you.
	I'm not going to sugarcoat this.
	This is a fact of life.
	It is inevitable.
	As Paulina Porizkova found out, and The Times published an article on, and I thought we'd go through it, because there's a lot here that younger ladies can learn from, and should learn from, from her experience.
	Because as they say, Paulina Porizkova was once the world's highest paid model.
	But as she hits her 50s, she says she is suddenly invisible.
	She's now 56 and leading a new wave of older women taking their place in the spotlight and on the catwalk and flaunting it on Instagram in her bikini.
	Growing old disgracefully.
	That's a cope.
	Grandma, put it away, please.
	We'll get to that, actually.
	She says, I am now completely invisible.
	I walk into a party, I try and flirt with guys, and they will just walk away from me mid-sentence to pursue someone 20 years younger.
	I'm very single.
	I'm dressed up.
	I've made an effort for nothing.
	She got divorced in 2018 and her ex-husband died the following year.
	So she is single.
	But look at the entitlement on show there.
	I got dressed up.
	I've made an effort.
	It's like, yeah, but you're also nearly 60.
	Everyone's constantly making an effort of some form that doesn't entitle anybody to anything.
	They're going after 36-year-old women, aren't they?
	Are they, really?
	Probably a bit younger than that.
	I mean, I can say that I'm sure she's looking fine for a 56-year-old woman, but when you're that old, beauty doesn't really have much to do with it if you're a young man out in the town.
	Well, that's the problem, isn't it?
	What man is going to be interested in dating a 56-year-old woman if he's not in his 50s or 60s himself?
	Yes.
	You know, that's the problem that she's having.
	Maybe you'll be able to find a lovely 90-year-old benefactor?
	Possibly.
	But the thing is, the problem she's running into is that she's no longer the desirable young woman that she once was, and she's having trouble adjusting to this new reality as an old woman.
	And she should be doing the things that old women do rather than posing in bikini pictures on Instagram.
	Again, don't get me wrong, if this was my wife at 56, I'd be very happy, but it's not like a dating prospect.
	Yeah, if you're on the dating scene and come across a 56-year-old woman, you just think, what went wrong?
	Exactly.
	And so she should be doing the things that older women should be doing, which is taking care of their children and grandchildren.
	I'm going to assume she has no children.
	No, she's got three children.
	Oh, really?
	Yes, who are in their late 20s, early 30s.
	Oh, God, Mum, please.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Can you even imagine?
	Oh, God, how embarrassing.
	But anyway, have some dignity, for Christ's sake.
	But the article continues.
	Some women say it kicks in at 40.
	Others, when they finally let themselves go grey.
	Virginia Woolf described the phenomenon in Mrs.
	Dalloway in 1925, aged 43.
	And in 2005, 47-year-old Kate Bush summed it up in How to Be Invisible with the lyrics, The actresses whose roles dry up, the widows who left off their guest list.
	Bar presence, network, social interactions diminished.
	The female invisibility cloak falls heaviest on those most used to being looked at.
	As well as, or instead of, listen to, and the time before it smothers you speeds up with every child you have.
	This is just inevitable.
	Yeah.
	This is every woman's future.
	You will get old and you will not be young and fertile, and men will not be staring at you in the street.
	It sounds pretty depressing, to be honest.
	Yes, but that's because they're not making preparations for that.
	Now, in previous eras, like your mother and grandmother have made preparations, and they know that their mothers and grandmothers will have warned them, look, your beauty is a short window of your life, and then for the rest of your life, which will be the longest part of your life, you will not have that beauty, so make your preparations accordingly.
	Get yourself a husband, get yourself a family, get these close family relations and community relations.
	For you to do, to help people, to be a part of their lives.
	Because it's not just going to be the unvarnished attention that men give you on the street when you're a young woman.
	This is what they're saying.
	And this is inevitable.
	There is no escaping this.
	Even, like I said, the most beautiful women in the world have this happen to them.
	So don't think you're exempt from it.
	So use your youth to lock all of this down, to get your ducks in a row before this aging process catches up with you.
	So Nancy Pachana, 56, Professor of Psychology at the University of Queensland and co-director of its Aging Mind Initiative, and I'm going to guess childless, It says, between 50 and 80, people report feeling 10 years younger than their chronological age, so you might easily feel 40, but it's as though you no longer exist.
	So you might be like, oh, I feel like I'm younger.
	Age is just a number.
	Well, yeah, exactly, which is a concerning statement in itself.
	But you might feel like you're only 40 when you're 50, but at the end of the day, people walking around can see you.
	Yeah.
	And they will make their own judgments.
	Qualitative data like, oh, I feel this way, doesn't change the reality of the matter.
	I feel 30.
	Well, yeah, you're 50, though.
	Exactly.
	It doesn't matter.
	Other people are looking at you and they can tell that you're not 30.
	It's a slow fade, she says.
	Like a boiled frog, you don't know until you're gone.
	It was around the same time my marriage fell apart.
	My husband was no longer interested in me and started looking around.
	I realised I was invisible to the population at large.
	It made me feel really terrible about myself.
	So it's not just about being good-looking when you're young.
	It's also about being the sort of person your husband loves.
	It's all about getting those emotional connections, like actually forming a bond, not just being a trophy wife.
	This, again, doesn't last.
	I do feel kind of bad, though, hearing that the husband was no longer interested, not knowing much more about the relationship beyond that.
	If it falls out of love, then it's pretty nasty.
	That's unfortunate, yeah.
	But again, a loving relationship is something you have to nourish.
	Both parties have to do that.
	You can't just expect him to be attracted to you in your 50s like he was when you were in your 20s.
	You have to work on yourself.
	If she was behaving like this during the relationship, I can understand how he might have lost a bit of interest there.
	So, be warned, ladies, is what I'm saying.
	They say, the only way to gain visibility in our society is to look younger.
	If you look your age, nobody will listen to you.
	And if you want to be heard, you can't look your age.
	And the thing is, that's not true, but it shows you the way that these people are looking at life.
	There are other ways to be recognised in society.
	Be interesting, be knowledgeable, be funny, be engaging.
	But she, this model, relied on being young and attractive.
	Stunningly beautiful, in fact.
	Oh, yeah.
	She didn't cultivate a personality.
	Those pictures of her from back in the 80s, she's looking great.
	Exactly.
	And the thing is, I was looking for this article that I read a few years ago about this actress at a film festival, like the Cannes Film Festival or something, right?
	And she was complaining how she had reached her 60s or something like that.
	And she was complaining how nobody, you know, when she was a young, beautiful woman, the entire room used to stop when she walked into it, you know, and there was this great deal of deference.
	But now that doesn't happen.
	That happens now to older actors like George Clooney because they have gravitas.
	They've cultivated this sense of importance.
	It's like, yeah, but you could have done the same thing.
	But you didn't because you didn't need to.
	Whereas a young man has to cultivate, like, a sense of gratitude because no one cares.
	It's the difference when some women will kind of, in acting circles, will accept what's going to happen when they get older and will graciously fall into the role of grandmother.
	Or look at, like, Helen Mirren.
	Well, Helen Mirren is a good example, but she's also a unique example because she was very well-desired when she was young, and she's quite notorious for still getting nude nowadays.
	Sure, but she's also interesting in interviews.
	She's cultivated a personality rather than just being an attractive woman.
	And so when she loses the youth and beauty, she's still a desirable person to talk to.
	Yes, and she's not above taking roles that depict her as something other than beautiful young woman.
	Exactly.
	Didn't she play the Queen?
	I think she might have played the Queen.
	I know, isn't she playing an old Jewish woman from the 1940s in a new film that's got her in trouble, of course?
	Yeah, of course.
	But the point is, she's accepted her age and is accepting and growing into those roles, rather than posting bikini shots on Instagram.
	Although, like you say, she still does stuff like that.
	But anyway, that's why Poroskova has taken to Instagram since her divorce and built up a base of almost 700,000 people.
	They comment on her bikini shots nudes, yes nudes, and no makeup selfies in their thousands.
	Although not always kindly.
	Who'd have thought the internet would attract negativity?
	My god!
	There are those, mostly men but not exclusively, who tell her to keep house and her clothes on instead.
	Lol.
	Not exclusively.
	That's doing a lot of heavy lifting, isn't it?
	That is.
	Yeah, so basically the internet's like, Granny, put your clothes back on and go look after you, grandchildren.
	She says, I started posting the same kind of pictures that have been taken of me since I was 15.
	I look good.
	I didn't realise it would be shocking for a 50-something woman to pose in those same bikinis from 30 years ago that still fit.
	It's okay to ogle someone who could be your daughter, but not mature women who know themselves and are most likely to be way better at sex.
	That's just not what people are looking for.
	It's just not the station in life that you have achieved.
	Getting 56 is not something that everyone does.
	And so you need to accept your role as a venerable elder now, not as an inexperienced, beautiful young woman, because you're not.
	And your life has to change.
	She says, do I feel sexier?
	Oh my god, yes.
	But what I am not anymore is feminine.
	I am not a fluttery, vulnerable creature.
	I am an active participant, an instigator.
	I know what I like and how I work.
	I like to have fun.
	I know what I'm doing.
	That really makes them run away.
	Then it's not working for you.
	It's incredible that she seems to actually be right on the money, on why it is that people aren't attracted to her anymore, and she's still going, but why?
	But aren't I entitled to them being attracted to me?
	This is weird for her, but I can only imagine the level of interest she's got from the opposite sex.
	Because being a regular looking guy, I haven't got that level of interest from the opposite sex.
	But she was the world's most highly paid supermodel.
	So it would have been wherever she went, men would have been turning their heads and stuff like this.
	You know, it's not like that when I go somewhere, women aren't just like, you know.
	So I don't know what it must have been like to have had that level of interest to just suddenly disappear.
	Yeah, that must be heartbreaking when you've based your entire existence around it.
	Exactly.
	But that's the point, and that's the lesson I think that other women should be learning, is that if this can happen to her, it will definitely happen to you.
	But anyway, she says, There's nothing you can do...
	You can't suddenly reformat society and have a social cause.
	Men aren't chatting me up in bars anymore because I'm 56.
	This is an injustice!
	I'm sorry you're not Benjamin Button and just reverse aging.
	That's not how it works.
	Everyone ages.
	Yeah, you can demand attention from men, but you're not going to get it.
	This is life.
	They carry on saying, Wow.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Wow.
	And she says, Well, that might be because people generally assume if you're a 56-year-old woman that if you're not with anyone, you've got someone waiting for you at home.
	And also because why would younger men be interested in a 56-year-old woman?
	There's that too.
	Well, the thing is, your beauty is tied to your fertility, which is tied to your youth.
	If you lose these things, you're no longer attractive to men.
	You're not going to get the kind of attention that you received when you were young and fertile.
	That's just the way that nature works, unfortunately, for you.
	She says, there are more older women in the public space, says one psychotherapist author Susie Orbach, 75.
	This has become a prerequisite.
	When we used to be able to ignore them, but sex is still the cell.
	Our voices are still there, but we are invisible physically.
	So, okay, but what value are you providing?
	Why would people want to pay attention to you?
	Normally, this would be your family and friends that would be paying attention to you.
	It was always older women engage in the social role, right?
	They're the ones who make sure local clubs are running and things like that, nurseries and things.
	All of the things that in a social setting people did because they were the ones most concerned about that.
	And that was the sort of social role they fell into.
	They weren't the providers and they weren't now attractive young women, so they had to do something.
	But what are these women doing?
	Being vain.
	Well, yeah, they're just going around going, why aren't you objectifying me?
	Exactly.
	And then when they were younger, they were probably walking around going, stop objectifying me.
	Yeah.
	And so why is this coming up now?
	Why is this a problem?
	Well, as the Times tell us, there are more people in the UK aged 50 to 54 than there are under four.
	And more than half of them are female.
	As in, most of them are female.
	I mean, that on its own is not a great statistic to hear.
	No, it's not.
	There's not that many kids in that case.
	I know, it's really concerning.
	In 2019, 20% of the UK population was over 65.
	So one in five people is over 65 in this country.
	That's mad, isn't it?
	And the number of people in this bracket has increased by 17% in 20 years.
	So again, nearly a fifth bigger.
	So we've just got a rapidly aging population.
	Oh yeah, and it's something they keep talking about.
	But for some reason, we never go out of our way to point out that young ladies, you need to have a family.
	We need to have a family or else our civilization is literally going to collapse.
	And when you're like, yeah, but I'll just hire someone to look after me.
	It's like, yeah, but you're assuming there will be a someone there.
	And if you didn't have the kids who then have grandkids, then no one's going to be there to look after you.
	And to be fair, young men, we also need to hammer home.
	You should be having families as well.
	Oh, absolutely.
	You need two to make a pair, you know?
	But I suspect that a lot of young men probably do want families.
	I don't think that's actually a very hard sell to young men.
	There's some people that I know of my generation who are just like, why would you ever want kids?
	And it's like, because it would bring some meaning to your life, maybe?
	Yeah.
	The dad's always the favourite with the kids as well.
	Yeah, that's the thing.
	Because you don't have to look after them all day.
	It's so much easier for you.
	Kids are great.
	Sorry, darling.
	But anyway, they say, in the same time, the rest of the population rose only 7%.
	The pattern here is here to stay.
	Our birth rate isn't high enough to counter the statistic skewing effect of greater longevity.
	And it's not just that our birth rate isn't high enough.
	It's not high enough to counter the death rate.
	I actually...
	Just before the podcast went live, I saw an article from, I think it was the Times as well, that suggested that by 2030, the death rate will have surpassed the birth rate, and so any population growth that happens in this country will be through immigration.
	Oh.
	So, there we go.
	Well, it's ideal for leftists, isn't it?
	Well, they love it, yeah, because they hate our country.
	But our female population is ageing and not reproducing, is what we take away from this.
	Now, old, lonely women aren't getting the attention that they used to and have begun demanding it because they don't know what to do.
	Again, ladies, don't let this be you.
	These aren't people who are happy in their lives because of the plans that they made.
	In the developed and developing world, says psychologist Nancy Pachana, people are living longer, with better lives and more active years.
	Are they better lives, though?
	Many older people say they've finally come to understand their true selves, yet we warehouse them in nursing homes and expect them to get dressed up at the same time, sit in the room and watch the same TV shows.
	In the coming decades, people, particularly women, are going to rebel.
	And nobody's going to care.
	Because you're going to be invisible.
	You're not going to have a husband who cares.
	You're not going to have children who cares.
	No one cares.
	Because our culture venerates youth.
	Something that you took advantage of in your youth.
	And it's interesting how this is only a problem now when you're getting older.
	Didn't complain about it then.
	It's just now.
	So, anyway, she carries on talking about this, saying, well look, as her ex-husband had said, she says, I was a trophy, but I didn't feel that way when I was with my husband.
	I felt so desired and loved, but when I lost his attention and his tenderness, his love, I realised that it might not have been the most healthy of relationships.
	When you're a treasured possession as opposed to a person who is loved, you don't get to grow older.
	You have to save the person they're obsessed with.
	It's like, well, maybe.
	I mean, I'm not going to comment on their relationship, of course.
	And she says, despite that, she didn't go down the surgery route.
	One Instagram post about facelifts, she says, well, just because you can doesn't mean you should.
	Instead, she posts selfies from the treatment chair where she has non-invasive plasma pen sessions, tightening ultrasound therapy and hydrafacials.
	So she's not doing, like, invasive surgery, but she's still doing all this stuff.
	Yeah, she's still doing something.
	Desperately to retain her youth.
	It's over.
	She used to box, apparently, but hip arthritis means that she no longer can.
	She's got arthritis.
	One of the other consequences of ageing, I suppose, right there.
	Yes.
	Because, sadly, you're not going to be as hip and flexible as when you were young, when you're in your mid-50s.
	That's just a fact of life.
	Yes.
	You have to accept that this is just what happens to a human being.
	These days, apparently, she concentrates on Pilates and professes to have abs for the first time.
	So, okay, but this seems like diminishing returns, doesn't it?
	Like, the more effort you put in, the less result you're going to get back.
	It's clinging to a beauty that is just never coming back.
	You've got to accept this.
	I respect staying in good health up until your later years.
	That's always a good thing.
	I'm not going to recommend people don't do that, but obviously you need to build some foundations for a deeper way to live.
	says is vanity she says oh i'm vain i don't look good under bright lights these days in fact light plays a big very big part in my life now and she gets her 28 year old son to basically bring her a ring light which throws a softening halo of her features while they have this chat i can't do an interview without it she says so does a 28 year old son just act as her butler in her house or What are you still doing in your mum's house, mate?
	But this is something that she needs to mature out of.
	That's the point.
	She says, We are in a society set up for women who look like little girls, which you took advantage of with your career all throughout your life until you lost your looks, right?
	We need a collective movement to fight ageism.
	But that requires a bending of the sisterhood, which just hasn't happened.
	It's not going to happen.
	It's just not going to happen.
	Because the younger women, why would they care?
	They're like you were 30 years ago.
	Why would they care?
	We're pushing the boulder up the hill, says Poros Gover.
	There's been an improvement in representation of everyone except older women, and it's because more of us are not offended.
	Instead of things that promise to erase our faces, we should be buying products advertised by women like ourselves.
	I'm sure the sales are just going to skyrocket.
	Goop sales explode!
	Yeah, and so this just appears to be a brute fact of nature.
	As OKCupid and their data have shown, people's revealed preferences show that women reach peak attractiveness at 20 years old.
	So, and the Cope from Bustle.com here was hilarious as well.
	Bustle.com, never heard of it.
	I'm sure, I'm sure.
	But they're not happy about this.
	They say, Women over the age of 20, OKCupid has finally pulled together a study which explains why men now find you physically repulsive.
	Handy!
	The study, which OKCupid co-founder Christian Rudder...
	Put out in his book, Dataclasm, who we are when we think no one's looking.
	He's talking about the revealed preferences of people who are messaging people on OkCupid.
	Reports show that while women on the site remain primarily attracted to men their own age as well up until their 40s, men stay attracted to 20-year-old women for pretty much their entire lives.
	If you can scroll down a bit, John, you can see the graphs.
	Go down a bit.
	Oh, I think I've seen this.
	So you can see women's age to dating preference It correlates until it gets to mid to late 40s when the women are in their mid to late 40s.
	So it's pretty standard.
	But if you go down a bit to the men, when they're in their mid-40s, well, 24 is all right.
	But 2020, 2020, 2020, 2021, 2020, 2020.
	I mean, the data is in.
	It says it all.
	The data is in.
	Right.
	And so this is something that they have to deal with.
	But I mean, they do have some points in here that aren't pure cope.
	So the important thing to note, they say, is that this reflects who's liking who, but not necessarily who they message.
	Because I'm sure a lot of 50-year-old guys don't just message 20-year-olds saying, do you want to go on?
	You'd be surprised.
	I would be surprised I don't use dating sites because I'm married.
	But more importantly, these surveys chart the desires of every kind of guy in OPA Cupid.
	So, yeah, there are going to be some men who don't want 20-year-olds for various reasons.
	That's true.
	But most importantly, one of the things that changes most about dating as you age is the qualities you desire.
	Though many of us consider hotness a primary priority when dating in our late teens as we get older, there generally comes a second to the kind of qualities to make a man someone you're able to spend the next 20 to 60 years around without constantly wanting to fake your own death.
	And men also are like this.
	Even Bustle are like, yeah, okay.
	You're not as hot as you were when you're 20, but you can build up a personality.
	Be the sort of person that men want to be around, that their husband might want to spend his time with.
	Be nice, be caring, be compassionate, be funny, be witty.
	Be someone who is pleasant if you can't be someone who is 20.
	I would also say, find someone, a man, who is not going to be entirely superficial with you.
	Yes, that too.
	So anyway, to summarise, ladies, this will happen to you.
	There's no escaping it.
	Prepare accordingly.
	Alright then, time to move on to the secret.
	I love these status and sexes.
	This is reality, you've got to deal with it.
	I've got the facts and figures right here.
	This is timeless, you can't escape this.
	I'm sorry.
	It is true, and it's just easily observable and people just want to put the blinders on and ignore it.
	Oh yeah, they can cope and pretend all they want, but it's just the case.
	But anyway, so it's time to move on to the secret origins of wokeness.
	Now, there is quite a bit of information I've got here.
	We've not got that much time, so I'll try and go through it as quickly as possible.
	We've got this article that came out just last week talking about a Hollywood consultant admitting Glee started the wokeness epidemic.
	I knew Hollywood would be responsible for this.
	I knew it.
	It was obvious from the start, but it may not have come in the way that you expected it to, shall we say.
	So, this article is very interesting, it's quite long, so I'll get through some of the important information.
	Where did cancel culture and won'tness come from?
	This is the question that consumes many conservative writers almost as much as the question of how to beat it, while others have pointed to the rise of post-modern critical theory in universities in the 80s, or to the political correctness waves of the 90s.
	I believe these explanations...
	Only tell part of the story and leave a very important question unanswered.
	Why now, and why this generation?
	See, that's a great point, because what they're describing there are the theoretical roots and the sort of political action of it, but why did it burst out into popular culture?
	The foundation had been laid, and this is going to try and explain to us why, as you say, it's exploded in this particular era.
	It is not possible to answer this question without talking about the influence of social media.
	Very important point, and specifically the social media used to propagate millennial fan culture, where social justice warriorism and cancel culture truly had their testing grounds.
	Personally, I devoted considerable space to the culture of Tumblr.
	That's Cesspit, the social media site that is equally responsible for the development of wokeness.
	In late September of 2017, a post appeared on Tumblr by a user calling herself 12Clara.
	Sounding like a combination between Jonathan Edwards and Enoch Powell by way of the girls' locker room, 12...
	quite good analogy there.
	12Clara issued the following jeremiad to her followers about certain events that took place in 2011.
	You'll have no idea.
	None of you understand the suffering we went through the hell.
	The endless war.
	You come in here and you try to start the discourse, but you don't know how we already made these mistakes.
	We already had the discourse, and it's done now.
	It's over.
	It's all over.
	And you should let it stay dead, but you won't, and that's why we all hate you.
	Okay.
	I know.
	Can I just say, I hate this overwrought style of writing that Tumblr seemed to have encouraged.
	It's absolute cancer.
	But, quite revealing of the mindset that these people are in.
	This person is like seven years down the line from Glee, and they're still talking like they're a distraught 13-year-old.
	Later on, 12 Clara said of the phenomenon, it's not history, it's blood.
	Reading this, I know.
	Alright, 12 Clara, calm down.
	Reading this, you might think 12 Clara was describing some horrible world historical event.
	A natural disaster, a plague, perhaps even a great mass outbreak of violence.
	You would be wrong.
	What she was actually describing was what it was like to spend time on Tumblr as a fan of the TV show Glee.
	This is the kind of attitudes that these people have towards the most throwaway pieces of media.
	Only throwaway to you, though.
	To these people, it was like Vietnam.
	Well, yeah, that's the thing that we'll get into, is exactly why that was.
	I never watched Glee.
	It's a singing and dancing show for teenage girls, right?
	That's what it looked like to me.
	That's why I avoided it.
	As a teenage boy, I was busy watching cool things.
	Like The Matrix and Fight Club.
	Yeah, exactly.
	My dad showed me Pulp Fiction at 12 and I was never the same.
	The above descriptions are of the so-called fan wars among fans of Glee in the early 2010s, written with the benefit of hindsight from a survivor.
	A survivor.
	But right there we see the immediate parallels we can see with typical socialist leftist culture where it's just one big civil war.
	It's an infight the whole time because nobody can agree on anything.
	We fought its wars until it was too late.
	Until it was nothing but a distorted picture of a parody of reality.
	A cracked mirror in which our souls were sucked and encased in glass.
	You asked for history.
	There's no history.
	Only rage and pain and regret.
	The image of Anonymous with a grey face and sunglasses telling you to kill yourself.
	Brutal, man.
	It's just a TV show.
	Come on.
	The thing is, no, no, I believe it.
	Because once you kind of step into a particular paradigm, which in this case is the paradigm of Glee is this or that, which is fighting, then I can see how it does become all-consuming.
	If that's all the, you know, you're constantly on your phone or on your laptop or whatever, that's all you're talking about.
	Yes, the only thing that's occupying your headspace.
	Exactly.
	And the only, like, other points of reference are the other people having this conversation.
	Yeah.
	You get off your phone and the only thing you're thinking about for the rest of the day is how to come back at that guy who just threw a massive dunk at you.
	And if you're a teenage girl and you have literally nothing else to think about, then I can see them getting quite emotionally bound up in this.
	Yeah, no, absolutely.
	And you can tell how emotionally bound up they are in it with this.
	The void could not consume anything more.
	And the posts on it now, the social justice discourse that is just giant piles of steaming, unsifted, unrefined S, I'll agree with you there, is from those who refused to learn from us.
	The history is here and it followed us and we can never escape it.
	Okay, that sounds like a curse.
	I know, it really does.
	That's an amazing, amazing way of describing what's happening and the people who have been cursed by it.
	Yeah.
	The author, Bill...
	What's his name?
	Just to give him some credit here, Bill Hurrell, goes on to describe the characters of the initial run of the series that these people got so caught up in.
	Right.
	No.
	Dads, Kurt Hummel, a flamingly gay and hilariously vicious male soprano who is frequently the object of bullying by the football team, Mercedes Jones, an obese black girl with oodles of stereotypical sass, Tina Cohen Chang, a stuttering and morose Asian goth girl whose distinguishing traits a stuttering and morose Asian goth girl whose distinguishing traits rapidly vanish as the series goes on, and Artie Abrams, a wheelchair-bound bespectacled
	So you can immediately see how, in terms of the casting, they're absolutely ticking every single box in the diversity quotas, which might give you a little hint as to why people...
	Well, there's not a single straight white man there, is there?
	I believe this description that I got here, there is a straight white man, but apparently he's the guy who fails at everything.
	Of course he is, yeah.
	Yeah.
	You have multiple Asian students, one black girl, a lesbian couple, a gay kid, a Jewish girl with gay parents, a disabled boy, a Jewish football player, and the lone straight white guy Finn, who just happens to also be the character who consistently makes the most mistakes.
	In other words, from a critical theory perspective, everyone except Finn in the show is oppressed and/or marginalized.
	Well Finn seems to be the absolute minority in this.
	There are, what, three black, three Jewish, loads of women, gays...
	Lesbians.
	But one straight white guy.
	But you're being normal about it, Carl.
	Well, I'm being mathematical about it.
	People on Tumblr are anything but normal.
	That's true.
	I'll tell you that.
	The absolute most consistent message that Glee drills into its viewers is that its protagonists are supposed to be at the bottom of the high school food chain.
	So there's the oppressed.
	They're all oppressed.
	Yeah.
	By the time the first New Directions class graduates, that's the name of the glee club, they are not only a decorated glee club, but most of their members are either members of the cheerleading squad or the football team, or have had romantic relationships with members of said squad slash team.
	In any real American high school, this would mark the New Directions as anything but social pariahs, and yet we are expected to believe they are marginalised because they like to sing.
	Right.
	Leftist indoctrination.
	is purely theoretical function of their identity markers, while the actual on-the-ground social reality they live in marks them as undoubted high school aristocracy.
	See, like I said, I'd never watched Glee, but I assumed it was about a high school aristocracy, of, like, the rich, cool kids who were doing musicals or whatever.
	Who can just burst out into song in the middle of the corridors.
	I assumed it was about the cool kids, not the oppressed kids.
	Well, supposedly, one of their big songs, one of the only original songs they did, was about how they're all a bunch of losers.
	It doesn't sound like they're a bunch of losers.
	No.
	But, once again, it mimics the dynamics of the way that you can have someone like Ibram X. Kendi say, I'm an oppressed, marginalized person, while raking up 45 grand for every tiny little Zoom session he does.
	Glee was propagandizing wokeness before anyone knew what wokeness was.
	I don't think this was self-conscious, the author says.
	In fact, I think the show was originally meant to be a lot more self-aware, as the first season carries an implicit disdain for its protagonist.
	Same here.
	Yes.
	That utterly vanishes in the second season, where characters return to the screen almost completely rewritten.
	So basically it sounds like the writers just ate up their own hype.
	They're just like, oh, everyone loves us.
	Well, we need to just give them more of everything they love instead of what maybe the original vision of the show was intended to be.
	I would assume that the show attracted an audience that's both far larger and far younger than its creators initially expected, and the company making it realised they could monetise it as a promotional vehicle for pop music and liberal social messaging far more easily than as a teenage black comedy with singing thrown in.
	The intersectional nature of the cast was almost certainly nothing more initially than a cynical play to make sure every potential customer who watched the show would have had their own glee character to relate to.
	Which is basically, once again, we can see how intersectionality is becoming a massive multi-million dollar business into and of itself.
	But also how they fail to understand that it's really not the look of the character that you relate to, it's their behaviour and personality.
	Well, not if you're a Tumblrite.
	Well, of course, yeah.
	And then he returns to 12 Clara's post.
	The Glee fandom is not history, it's blood.
	I still see it all over this website.
	The vague posts, the deactivated URLs.
	Where do you think the word problematic became popular?
	Where do you think the representational anger started?
	Glee was the hungry, gaping void that consumed us all.
	It said, watch us and find yourself.
	There is someone for everyone here.
	Santana is a lesbian, Kurt is gay, Britney's bisexual and Quinn.
	God knows what Quinn is, she's straight, but we have her say things like, you were singing to Finn and only Finn, right?
	I have no idea what that means.
	Yeah, and Artie's disabled.
	Mercedes is black and an outlet for body positivity.
	We are all oppressed by something, and we are different, and we are outcasts, and we are you.
	So this was inherently teaching people implicitly to view themselves as oppressed in some way.
	And outcasts.
	Yes.
	No matter how successful or popular you are in actual reality, you can still consider yourself as an oppressed class because of some aspect of your character that should be superficial.
	Just to pause very quickly, I'm really impressed at the lucidity with which this 12 Clara is posting.
	This is someone who is deeply, deeply invested in the lore of what has happened here.
	They clearly have a great deal of knowledge on what's happened and are totally resentful about all of this.
	They're the lone survivor from the lore coming back to gift us with their curse of knowledge.
	Yeah.
	We go back to the author.
	Moreover, according to her, the representational anger, i.e.
	the obsessive policing of how minority groups are portrayed in every form of media, also began with glee, which I think is pretty evident.
	Granted, this is one witness, but it is a witness who attracted an unprecedented 78,000 notes expressing agreement on Tumblr.
	I assume a note is a share, right?
	Yeah, and I assume that agreement on Tumblr is even rarer.
	LAUGHTER And lest you think I'm reading into it, Slate themselves did an interview with 12 Clara, whose real name is apparently Erin, where it turned out that since her time in the Glee fandom, she has become, what else, a consultant for the entertainment industry.
	Literally like the scarred veteran with an eye patch over their face.
	Yeah.
	You don't know me!
	You aren't there!
	Yeah, that seems pretty convincing proof of the existence of a pipeline from the dregs of Tumblr into Hollywood's boardroom.
	So every one of you, every single one of you who may be watching this, who back in the day just said, oh, it's just Tumblr, and never go further than Tumblr, now they're in charge of your entertainment.
	Now they're in charge of the media.
	How wrong you were.
	For shame.
	Now they're the ones literally persuading the bigwigs in the entertainment industry what to do?
	Yes.
	Great.
	No wonder everything is as it is right now.
	12 Clara then moves on to explaining with honestly and very impressive eloquence how Glee provoked all these things.
	Namely, it didn't just represent every individual group on screen, it weaponized that representation.
	Constantly enranged by the fact that their wish fulfillment wasn't being perfectly fulfilled on screen, and even more infuriated that other people had the goal to be okay with story decisions that felt like personal attacks, the Glee fandom transformed into a bellum, ominum, contra, omnes.
	Don't know what that means.
	To fight that war, more than a mere personal desire and preference would be necessary to achieve victory.
	These things would have to be intellectualized, and so the Glee fandom cast about and found critical theory.
	I think that means a war of all against all.
	Ah, that makes sense.
	I'm not a Latin speaker, though, so if I'm wrong...
	If there's any corrections in the comments, I'm sure you will let us know whether we said it or not.
	So they found critical theory and absorbed its narcissistic message that basically enabled you to cry racism, sexism, homophobia, etc.
	at anything because what they were really after was a way to demand that nothing ever happen on the show that didn't make them feel personally fulfilled.
	And now they've brought it into real life and nothing can happen in real life that doesn't make them feel personally fulfilled.
	Yeah.
	And we've got this last damning bit of evidence from 12 Clara.
	It was almost like the word problematic became the Bible of Glee.
	It was like this is your way to instantly prove somebody else wrong.
	Then people were instantly shut down.
	It was the be-all, end-all of an argument.
	I'm sure that most times anybody's ever used that word in history were probably during the days of Glee.
	It sort of infiltrated Tumblr vocabulary.
	When everybody left Glee and they went to their new fandoms, we all took that with us.
	Glee gave us all language to talk about the problems we were seeing in media that we may not have seen before, and probably, let's be honest, didn't exist.
	Yeah.
	I would say the sweet spot in age for Glee at that time was probably like 14 or 15 to early 20s.
	For a lot of people, this is the first time they were coming into contact with...
	And there's more to that particular article.
	If you want to go read it yourself, you can find the link.
	But I think that is rather damning in terms of evidence.
	That would kind of explain to me the age of everyone would be just about right for them to start making waves in social media outside of Tumblr as well.
	The foundations have been laid.
	All of a sudden, this massive infighting in the fandom explodes into the mainstream and they take it everywhere they go with them.
	And these people now are in their, what, late 20s to late 30s?
	Starting to make waves in the industry of their own, like 12 Clara apparently did, very interestingly.
	And we can see what this has led to.
	We've not got much time left yet.
	Should I carry on with this?
	Yeah, we'll just finish it.
	Okay, yeah, that's alright then.
	We can see how woke media has infected basically everything, and the consequences and results of that.
	There's a bit more to all of these, but I'll just sort of skip over them.
	So Jessica Chastain recently did an all-female, ultra-progressive film called The 355 that bombed in theatres.
	It was all about, let me see here, very tiny women beating down huge, gigantic men with no effort.
	Check.
	Stupid male characters who fall for simple sexual tricks employed by women.
	Check.
	Male security guard getting beaten up for doing his job just to spike the patriarchy?
	Check.
	Would you like to know the box office?
	Yeah.
	$4.3 million on a projected $75 million budget.
	Just a little smidge off from making that budget back.
	We can see other elements of wokeism within the media industry if we move along.
	This classic one from Lily Wachowski.
	If you scroll up, responding to Elon Musk saying, take the red pill.
	Ivanka Trump says, taken.
	Lily Wachowski, F the both of you.
	Acting like a petulant, spoiled child there, Lily.
	If we move along...
	The Wachowskis went on a few years ago to confirm that The Matrix was a trans allegory all along in one of the greatest pieces of active retconning I have ever seen in my life.
	Yeah, I love Keanu Reeves' response to this, so I had no idea.
	Yeah, I doubt they had any idea as well, Keanu.
	You weren't alone there.
	Yeah, so they're saying...
	I'm glad that it's gotten out of the way...
	I'm glad that it has gotten out that that was the original intention, Wachowski said.
	This was Lily again.
	Adding, the corporate world just wasn't ready for it.
	I love how meaningful these films are to trans people and the way that they come up to me and say these movies saved my life.
	I don't know how present transness was in the background of my brain as we were writing it, but it all came from the same sort of fire that I'm talking about.
	So once again, you've got another example of fans imprinting their own version of what's going on, maybe outside of the authorial intent.
	Same with J.K. Rowling suddenly declaring every character to be gay.
	Yes, and then getting cancelled off the back of it anyway.
	It didn't save you, did it, Joanne?
	These characters weren't gay, were they, J.K.? You weren't thinking about that at all while you were writing it, but now...
	Yep, and then as a result of everybody kind of knowing what was going to happen with the latest Matrix, I've not watched it, but if we move along, it bombed.
	Oh yeah, I've seen it.
	It bombed massively.
	I've got a video coming out on it, probably next week.
	Yes, which should be very interesting.
	I've not watched it, I don't know how woke it is.
	Can you give us a hint?
	It's kind of beyond woke.
	It's not...
	There's no point.
	Beyond the realm of woke.
	It's not a story, right?
	It's not a story.
	It's a puzzle that is to be unpacked.
	And so don't watch it as if it's like, you know, a piece of entertainment.
	What it is, is a cryptic message.
	And that's what I'm exploring in the video that I've done.
	Should be very interesting.
	But it made a miserable $12 million in its first opening weekend.
	And I think overall now it's made $104 million total.
	Yeah, it's about $100 million and it cost nearly $200 million to make.
	Yeah, on like $150 to $200 million budget.
	Let them rack up these L's, you know.
	Yep, exactly.
	So, go woke, get broke.
	As always, if we move along, this applies literally in terms of the CW, who anyone who's familiar with the CW will know that their shows are very woke nowadays.
	Yeah, it's a channel, isn't it?
	It's a TV channel, you're correct, owned by Warner Brothers and ViacomCBS, and they do shows like Batwoman, which I've not watched, but I have watched Mauler's excellent coverage of Batwoman, which is hilarious, you should go check that out.
	It had the famous trailer where Ruby Rose's Batwoman gets shown the Batman costume.
	It's a perfect suit!
	It will be when it fits a woman!
	Aww!
	Oh, it's beautiful.
	Oh, it's wonderful.
	That's flopped, and it's flopped so badly.
	All of the CW shows have flopped so badly, they're going out of business, and Warner Bros.
	and Viacom are selling them.
	That's hilarious.
	Who's going to buy that?
	We've got this failing network.
	Would you like to buy it?
	No.
	Maybe Mauler and the EFAP gang can get hold of it.
	Oh my god, can you imagine if they raised the money to buy it?
	That would be hilarious.
	Do you want us to do anything with Batwoman?
	No, just leave it the exact same.
	Please.
	Yeah, and then if we move along, everyone knows how Star Wars is going at the moment.
	Recently there has been the Book of Boba Fett series, which I don't know exactly how woke it is, but this guy, Timura Morrison, who was cast in the original prequel series as Jango Fett, the template for the clone army, has returned as Boba Fett.
	And you can see here, all these interviewers want to talk about is the fact that he's an indigenous actor.
	Indigenous to where?
	I think he's New Zealand, so he'd probably be like indigenous Maori, maybe.
	Yeah, sure, but like...
	But who cares?
	But this was surely made in California.
	Yeah, probably.
	Like, he's not indigenous to California.
	Oh, they're just generally indigenous.
	Well, does that mean that the French are indigenous as well, because they're indigenous to France?
	Yeah.
	There's a good point.
	The English indigenous, because we're indigenous to England.
	Everyone's indigenous to somewhere.
	Well, not necessarily.
	I mean, you know, you've got the colonists in America.
	Most Americans, yeah.
	So, like, we've got this indigenous thing, so anyone in the old world is indigenous, basically.
	But I think, how weird must that be for him, where 20 years ago he's cast as this really cool character in a Star Wars film, and no one cares about where he's from, and then it's 20 years later he's playing a different character and they all go, ah, so you're indigenous, tell me about that.
	Yeah.
	Maybe I just want to talk about Star Wars.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	That's why I'm here.
	And even if the show itself isn't woke, what happens when you have wokeness prevailing through the whole thing?
	You end up with people running these shows who don't care about anything to do with the franchises they may come from, and you end up with hideous, awful S like this.
	If you go to the next hit, this is a still.
	From the new Star Wars show, Book of Boba Fett.
	Is it?
	Yes.
	And this caption, there's not an ounce of Star Wars in this image, is absolutely right.
	Completely correct.
	I would not have known that was Star Wars if you didn't tell me that was Star Wars.
	Yep, everyone was shocked.
	I've seen everybody talking about it.
	What are they doing?
	For those of you listening, not watching, there's an image, presumably from Tatooine in Star Wars, where there's a bunch of, like, Mad Max-esque misfits standing around.
	Well, they look kind of like hipsters, to be honest.
	Yeah, hipster misfits standing around next to their hover scooters, which have excessive amounts of mirrors, like they're all a bunch of space mods or something.
	Yeah, they look like they're out of...
	Quadrophenia.
	Yeah, or Back to the Future or something.
	Yeah.
	Right?
	It's ridiculous.
	So you end up with people in charge who don't understand the soul and essence of the product and the franchise that they're trying to translate for a modern audience, and they'll just throw anything at the wall and just be like, well, it's got the name on it that you like, so eat up, dumbass!
	Yeah, yeah.
	And then I'd also like to give a shout-out, because Marvel has also been very, very bad for it recently.
	You should check out, if you scroll down, you can see the Critical Drinkers video on the Falcon and Winter Soldier, which I watched one episode of and switched it off, because I knew what was happening with it.
	Unbearably woke, you have scenes of people like Anthony Mackie's Falcon shouting at a US senator going, You need to do better, Senator!
	Okay, and also...
	I mean, that's obvious.
	When they're talking about him being given the shield by Captain America, Bucky, the Winter Soldier, says to Falcon, I never considered it what it meant, giving the shield to a black man.
	Oh my god.
	I'm pretty sure, just as a little...
	Just on the nose.
	Maybe an idea that maybe Captain America in the universe thought, ah, you're the best guy for the job and you're a friend of mine, and of course, you're American, here you go.
	But you're also black.
	Yes.
	Oh, no, I didn't realise!
	Oh, no!
	So, yeah, overall, that may be an idea of where this woke explosion came from in the past ten or so years, and also just a reminder to everywhere you see it, everywhere you go, reject woke media.
	And that's about that.
	Let's move on to the video comments.
	Yep.
	And here we go again.
	Now, our main female character, who isn't amazing honestly, but I make do with what I got, is Uraraka.
	Now, what's her main motivation, you ask?
	To be popular?
	To generically do the right thing?
	No.
	She wants to earn money so she can provide for her struggling parents.
	Now, I know your opinions on women focusing on their careers, Carl, but I think her having a selfless side to it is very wholesome, and it's better than most shows are going to give you.
	My Hero Academia, the darkest anime.
	Well, not that she's got a career.
	It sounds wholesome.
	There you go.
	Yeah, I know.
	Like I said, I'm not upset that my daughter's watching it, but I'm not really interested in it.
	What are you going to do if she takes the example and comes back with a job?
	I think she might actually have a poster on her wall of Attack on Titan.
	I know she hasn't watched it.
	Oh, she's just gone like, oh, looks cool.
	Yeah, yeah, exactly.
	So, you know, maybe I'll let her watch that.
	Fair play.
	Harry, fastly, is indeed a stupid word.
	In the way that you used it, the appropriate use of fastly is more fastly.
	Oh.
	Consider yourself schooled.
	Yeah, I should have said quickly, but...
	Yes, you should.
	Too late for that.
	Excellent.
	Yeah.
	That was wonderful.
	Thank you very much for that, base tape.
	Performing the Lord's work, as always.
	I'm glad you've been enjoying these collaborations, but I can't really take all the credit.
	Actually, most of the credit goes to oil because he comes up with these stupid ideas and then throws money at people until they do what he says.
	Also, big thanks to Jonathan Crowe because he's been doing the voiceovers.
	That guy really is a whore.
	He'll do anything for money.
	People hate themselves.
	This is getting incredibly meta.
	It's been meta for a while.
	Didn't even get paid to call myself a whore twice.
	That just makes you even more of a whore, John.
	You're doing it for free!
	Is that what whoring is?
	In a sense.
	Would you call a girl who goes out to the club and gives it out for free every night of the week?
	I wouldn't call her a whore.
	Whores take money.
	Would you call her a floozy?
	Yeah, a slut maybe.
	Whores take money.
	Okay, so we've figured it out.
	Scientifically, John, you're not a whore, but you are a slut.
	Okay.
	Howdy.
	Along with agreeing that anime is gay, I'm here to recommend some wholesome entertainment for people to watch instead.
	My name is Ill.
	It's a show about a scumbag who has a near-death experience after winning the lottery.
	He's recovering in hospital and sees a programme about karma on the telly.
	Gets a basic understanding and he decides to turn his life around for the better.
	It's packed full of good Petersonian wisdom about being a better person even if it's a harder thing to do.
	Remember, do good things, good things happen.
	Simple as.
	Excellent suggestion.
	I used to be obsessed with it when I was a kid.
	Maybe that's where some of my more wholesome tendencies might have originated from.
	So yeah, absolutely recommend everyone watch My Name is a...
	Have you seen, I think, Randy, his brother?
	Have you seen what he looks like in real life nowadays?
	He got hench.
	He dropped all of the weight.
	You see him all the way back in American History X, and he's Huge.
	And now he's huge just in a much better way.
	Really impressive stuff.
	Good for him.
	And Jason, whatever his name is, the guy who played Earl, is a Scientologist now, so...
	Yeah, Hollywood will do that, do you?
	Someone won that competition, didn't they?
	Yep.
	I grew two cop sizes after getting the Pfizer vaccine.
	And this is Miss Brakes.
	Dawn.
	Dawn.
	My favourite time for getting up.
	I was Miss Dairy Queen, you know.
	You still are in my book, darling.
	Disavow!
	She just threw that in at the end of a completely unrelated comment as well and John and I were just like, what?
	What?
	What do we say to that?
	Okay.
	Moving on then.
	Yep.
	Hey guys, follow up from the last question.
	I'm going to assume that you acknowledge the phenomenon because I'm recording these at the same time.
	A friend of mine who's quite well informed thinks that the phenomenon may be genetic, that there's no ability to transform someone who sees the truth in consensus to a person who sees truth in argument.
	If that's the case, then there is no point trying to convince a person like this with arguments.
	You will never succeed.
	The only thing that you can do is to replace their perceived consensus.
	What are your thoughts?
	Thanks.
	Completely possible.
	I mean, this is even a philosophical argument that's going on at the moment.
	It's like, okay, what does truth even mean?
	It's like, well, there's the argument that there's a convergence theory of truth, where it's like, truth is that upon which opinion is destined to converge.
	It's like, but is it?
	I don't agree with that.
	Truth is what corresponds to reality.
	And yeah, there are plenty of people who still think in that way.
	I mean, I mentioned EFAP, I've watched a number of times they've debated people on objective quality and metrics in film, and there have been people like Just Right who've basically just, they're like, okay, you like this film, but objectively it's not very good.
	And he's just like, well, you know, if one person disagrees with if it's objective or not, that doesn't make it objective anymore.
	That's not how it works.
	That's consensus.
	Yeah, exactly.
	There are some people who believe it's basically truth via democracy.
	Yeah, well, that's correct.
	And, again, how you feel about a piece of media doesn't change the fact that the piece of media has objective qualities.
	Like, Red Dwarf is a great example of this.
	Everything about Red Dwarf was clearly done in a shoestring budget.
	It looks like crap.
	I love Red Dwarf.
	Oh, it's hilarious.
	Exactly.
	Well, that's where you can separate different elements of it.
	The writing's great, but the production quality hasn't aged particularly well.
	Because they didn't have money, clearly.
	The BBC still doesn't have money.
	You can look at any Hollywood movie these days where they pour gold into it, and it's crap because the writing quality is terrible.
	But objectively, the graphics are much higher quality than previous graphics and previous series.
	Okay, that's true.
	There's still elements where it's like, no matter how much money you've poured into it, sometimes it can still look terrible.
	I saw the trailers of The Matrix Resurrections did not make the CGI look particularly impressive.
	And the thing is, I think that at this point, I'm kind of...
	There's something about CGI now that I just generally kind of loathe.
	Like, it just feels too easy.
	It's like, oh, we just computer modeled this amazing scene.
	It's like, okay, it's like telling me that you didn't do it, you know?
	Like, when it was all, like, things had to be physical and real, that's difficult to do.
	But when you've got absolute godlike power over the scene you're rendering, there's no particular impressive result that comes out of that.
	Like, I'm not impressed by the talent because, like, well, you just had godlike power and you've got algorithms to render it for you.
	So what?
	I do disagree on a certain level, because I do think there is still a lot of skill and craftsmanship that goes into that, because obviously they're employing legions of computer artists who are all, individually, I imagine, very good at what they're doing.
	Hang on, hang on.
	I agree with you that that is the case, but you've seen the software they're using now, right?
	So if they had to pixel-by-pixel paint it in or something like that, I'd agree.
	But no, it's not.
	It's all algorithmically figured out for them.
	Oh, okay.
	I wasn't aware of that.
	But either way, I do still think there is something very grounded about looking at a practical effect over a CGI effect, where no matter how good the CGI effect is, I can still tell.
	Because the human eye can just recognize it.
	Well, it's got no weight.
	It's not impressing on the world around it.
	Whereas a real thing obviously does.
	And so, as I said, you'll always be able to tell.
	Yeah, let's go on.
	I found a screenshot on Twitter of a poll that was on CTV. It was only up for a day or two before they took it down.
	78% of the people who participated in the poll voted no, saying they did not want Canada to have mandatory COVID vaccinations.
	So CTV memory hold the entire poll, so there's no record of it ever having happened.
	And so now if you click on the link that leads to the poll, it just brings you to the main page of their website.
	Good Morning Britain did the same thing.
	The media was testing the temperature.
	Ooh, can we put out the narrative that we should have mandatory COVID vaccines?
	And literally, over here it was 90% of the people said no, and all the comments were like, you're evil, you're evil, you're evil.
	And so they just deleted it.
	Yeah.
	Well, it's easier to do that than refute it, isn't it?
	Well, yeah, but why would they even be going down that road anyway?
	Hey guys, so we got some answers last week that no one is really talking about.
	According to Amendment 14, Section 3 of the US Constitution, anybody who's engaged in insurrection or supported those who have are not eligible to hold public office.
	And I think that's why we still have people in jail a year later charged with trespass.
	If they can get Trump or somebody like him to support them, then that makes them ineligible to stand for office.
	That's a good point.
	Don't they have to be charged with insurrection though?
	I don't know.
	I have recently bought a copy of the Federalist Papers, which I'm excited to go through, and it's got the Constitution at the back of it, so I would need to flick through to the 14th Amendment there.
	But if there isn't a stipulation that they have to be charged with it, if they just have to be implicated, that would be an interesting explanation for why they have held these people.
	That is a good theory, though.
	They're waiting for Trump to come out so Trump can't run again.
	Good point.
	So, in Canada, where universal healthcare is universal and for everyone, and everyone who pays their taxes is entitled to such things, the Quebec government has decided that putting on a tax for the unvaccinated is the best step forward in order to stop the spread of COVID-19.
	It's mad.
	I'm completely demoralized living in this country, you guys.
	Seriously, somebody just help us, please.
	The British are coming.
	Well, they need liberation from Florida.
	The British are coming, yes.
	But the thing is, you see this all the time.
	There was something before we started the podcast where some pundit was whining that their blood was boiling, that unvaccinated people got to occupied beds in the hospital because of COVID. It's like, well, why shouldn't they?
	They paid for it, the universal healthcare.
	Yeah.
	And did you see the interview that the guy who confronted Sajid Javid did on Good Morning Britain where they're just sort of like...
	Oh, not the interview, I saw the confrontation.
	Yeah, he got an interview on Good Morning Britain and he dropped some truth bombs where they were just like, well, you know, just being young, fit and healthy doesn't mean you're exempt from getting the vaccination.
	Plenty of people have died who are young, fit and healthy and he goes, well, I can't think of any.
	And they just immediately move on.
	No, they don't!
	Yeah, because they just don't.
	Yeah, yeah, why would they?
	Why would they?
	I mean, they do if they've been vaccinated.
	Well, probably.
	Well, this part doesn't go anywhere.
	Yeah, yeah, that's true, but we happen to have a premium podcast about this, in fact, so go watch that.
	But anyway, let's carry on.
	I've done a bit of joking around on the Sultans of Shadley that I should be the new Pope, because...
	While that might terrify some people, like, oh god, no, a weeb as a pope, think of this for a moment.
	If an SJW comes along and starts trying to subvert the religion, do you think my reaction is going to be, ah, yes, very fascinating, let's have a nice talk about this, or crusader-style Bible bashing, shut the f*** up, you infidel, it's wrong because God said so, there will be no gay marriage?
	I kind of wish that was the Pope's position, to be honest.
	Shut the F up, infidel.
	I would respect the Pope a lot more.
	No, the Pope's been saying a few based things recently.
	I mean, the bare minimum, the absolute bare minimum.
	Baby's first red pill, you know, but...
	Interestingly enough, I think Weeb Pope wouldn't be the strangest thing related to the Pope.
	I think the current Pope recorded an Italian prog rock album with an Italian prog rock band from the 70s back in 2015, so stranger things have happened.
	I mean, I'm not even against the wee Pope as long as he does something interesting.
	Yeah, and doesn't send video comments into you about it.
	Yeah.
	Alright gents, I thought comparison might be quite good because when it all kicked off we just shut our borders and then 11 weeks later we had no more curva cases and we just started having a party.
	But looking at everybody else around the world just seeing what was going on in our little bubble we just happily cracked on.
	Oh and motorbikes are back on this year so get coming over it's gonna be fun.
	Oh, my dad's going to be thrilled.
	Oh, yeah?
	Yeah, yeah, my dad loves the bikes, and he's been to the Isle of Man many times to see the bike racing over there, so he'll be thrilled to hear that.
	But also, absolute proof there that closing borders works.
	Today I would recommend a movie called The Last Supper.
	It's an old movie, and I think it's very interesting.
	And probably it couldn't have been made today.
	That's because it has a general message that conservatives are humans, and it's not good or right to kill them.
	What a radical message!
	Film says don't kill people.
	Shocking.
	Conservatives are humans, do not murder.
	Well, I don't know.
	I don't know, Hollywood disagrees nowadays.
	Wild.
	Wild.
	Very good.
	Fair getting above your head.
	I wouldn't say perfect form.
	No, I was going to say you're meant to keep your back a bit straighter, aren't you?
	A lot straighter, I would say.
	Very well done.
	I will just say, if your form is doing that when you're lifting that weight, you might want to take the weight down a bit first and build yourself up to it.
	Tony D and Little Joan with another legend of the pines.
	From the Lenny Lenape Indian comes the underwater panther, otherwise known as the Mishishipu.
	These creatures were part cougar and part dragon.
	They lived in deep water, and if you got too close, they would drag men and women to their deaths to drown.
	Love it.
	I love all these legends.
	Never stop sending the video comments in, please.
	They're great.
	Was that the last one?
	Corporate needs you to find the differences between this picture and this picture.
	No, anime's gay.
	That's what.
	You can quote me on that.
	Don't like it, it's foreign.
	Yeah, there we go.
	Which is weird because...
	There is something sacred about a human being.
	Right.
	Which is super weird because I don't generally hear people appeal to this from a non-religious standpoint.
	Okay.
	So I don't know how to wrap my mind around it.
	It's true...
	They're the same picture.
	Actually, and I'll talk about this another time, but they're not the same, and it is an argument.
	I did enjoy your discussion with Sitch and Adam when you were doing that.
	I thought it was good.
	At first I was kind of like, Carl, what are you doing?
	But then by the end you'd actually won me over, to be fair.
	That's because I'm right.
	You should have just gone science gay.
	Well, I thought they might not accept that.
	Well, fair.
	They are simple-minded.
	Howdy, Lotus Eaters.
	Hope you're doing well.
	My question is as follows.
	Do you have any tips on how to stop being a Coomer?
	I live in Canada and recently lost my job due to not being vaccinated.
	With all the newly acquired free time on my hands, I fell into old habits of excessive pot smoking and adult entertainment use.
	If things keep getting worse in Canada, I might make good use of my dual citizenship and move back to my home state of Florida.
	But before making such a huge change, I'd like to build myself back up first.
	Meditations by Marcus Aurelius was a really good wake-up call.
	I'd much appreciate any additional wisdom I can get.
	Thanks.
	The only, I think, sure way of any of that working, right?
	There are no tricks, there are no shortcuts or anything like that.
	The only way that any of that works is if you really want it.
	And you have to really want it more than you want to take drugs or watch porn or eat sugar or whatever it is.
	And that's, you know, for me, that's how I lost weight, you know, is I just really wanted it.
	And so that gives you the discipline to stick to the thing that you want.
	And you find doing the things you need to do to get to where you want to go, it becomes pleasurable.
	And you have to enjoy doing those things to get the results that you're looking for.
	And if you're tempted to fall back into old habits, it's because you don't truly want it.
	You just think you should want it.
	And you have to work on that.
	You have to think about how you're doing things and where you're going to get to and genuinely change your mind on the thing.
	Until eventually you will find things like drugs, particularly for me with sugar, I find sugar kind of disgusting.
	Over Christmas, I broke my diet and ate some Ferrero Roches because I used to love Ferrero Roches.
	And I was kind of disgusted with myself afterwards.
	I was genuinely annoyed at myself.
	A genuine feeling of disgust that I had allowed that to happen.
	And so I'm back on it now.
	I'm pissed off at myself.
	And that's the sort of mindset we've got to get to if you really want it to work and you want it to stick.
	Because otherwise you're always going to be backsliding.
	Because it's always going to be tempting.
	And you're going to have those moments of weak will and ill discipline where you'll end up going back to it.
	So, there we go.
	Yeah, I agree.
	I can't really put it any better.
	It's the only way I think it works.
	Yeah, it's all about the self-discipline and just wanting it.
	So, just to go through a few of the comments, I suppose.
	Yeah, I'll go through some.
	S.H. Silver, while it's always preferable to principled opposition to leftists, it's hard not to feel cathartic about those on side who use standards set by the left against them.
	One has to wonder, though, if it is worth being dragged down to their level to be permissive of a diversity of tactics.
	The thing is, this is a point that V always makes, is that, look, They're only ever going to learn when these things are applied to them.
	Until you force them to live by their own standards, they will never learn.
	And so this is why I'm just like, look, I don't think you should be doing these things.
	And I said, when the leftist started doing it, I said, that's wrong for this principle.
	But once that principle has been violated, oh no, the base red pillar is tearing down the pedo communist statue.
	I don't care.
	You made this rule.
	It's not my rule.
	I'm setting the rules.
	Then it won't be the same.
	It's not even just a moral principle now.
	It's literally legal precedent within the UK. It's like, well, we can do whatever we want to statues.
	So why are you arresting this man?
	Why aren't you just getting up and giving a high five and then going back down again?
	Good work, citizen.
	You made the rules.
	You've got to live or die by them now.
	But I think we're out of time.
	Yeah, I think that's about all we've got time for.
	So thank you very much for tuning in to this podcast.
	The Lotus Eaters will be broadcasting again tomorrow at 1pm on the 14th of January.
	Once again, thank you all for tuning in.
	Have a great afternoon.
	I've been Harry.
	This has been Carl.

▲