Hello you beauties. Get the free Reading List of my 100 favourite books here - chriswillx.com/books/ Here’s the timestamps: 00:00 Intro 00:17 Reactions to Louise’s Book 04:38 What’s Wrong with the Sexual Revolution? 11:15 Challenging the Idea of ‘Progress’ 21:01 Invention of the Pill 27:48 Dynamics of Modern Dating & Marriage 33:55 Explaining Sexual Disenchantment 43:08 The Argument for Celibacy Before Marriage 50:44 Why is Loveless Sex Empowering? 1:04:56 Louise’s Findings on Porn 1:16:09 Exploitation of the Sex Drive 1:25:37 How to Act Against the Sexual Revolution 1:30:58 Where to Find Louise
For a follow up for this I'd try & get an interview with the author's of 'Sex At Dawn' Christopher Ryan &/or Cacilda Jetha! Mostly because they adress the long term evolutionary biological historical sexuality from the dawn not just prior to the Agricultural revolution around 10,000BC.
In the video you claim that a "healthy" man is extremely jealous by nature and would not let other men sleep with his girlfriend/wife. But there are also cultures like in Tibet where women often have multiple spouses. The old tradition also has economic reasons and ensures the survival of the people there. Your opinion about this?
It doesn't matter what gender it is, I never really understood the whole casual relationships, friends with benefits, flings, booty calls, etc. They just don't make sense to me, like I am not built for that. All my relationships were serious. I never treated anyone as disposable. Shortest was 3 years. I got to know them, had many experiences with them. I have observed that most people who are into casual sex tend to be very depressed.
What you did makes no sense to me, you still had multiple sexual partners as if they are interchangeable and pretended that sex is not sexual reproduction, therefore purposefully ignoring what yourself and the other are... which is not "knowing them", it's purposefully pretending that the very thing that makes them a man or a woman is not there. You just wasted more time than the people who do it more quickly, why waste more time if it leads exactly to the same position?
@@TheKatjee91totally agree. The only difference is timeline - a woman (assuming it’s a woman) requires more time to get to know a man so her relationships tend to last “longer”. But she is still going through men and never settles.
I think the conversation needs to evolve to the point where, instead of justifying any and all behavior as "progress" and "freedom," there is a recognition that certain behaviors do not benefit most people no matter how "progressive" they seem.
I think its to evolve to a point where conservatives do SOMETHING to actually progress and the liberal minded need to learn to appropriately manage their liberalism. This because we repressed ourselves in an extreme and violent way or a long time and wouldn't budge. That creates exponential clawback. maybe something there for all of the partisan hacks wether they be woke or born again
@@tomwright9904 I would be fine letting them do them, if they would let others do what they want as well. Sadly, that is not the case. These people are everywhere in education, the news media and the government, which gives them control of the information people get and how children are taught in schools. They get to do them, and we are forced to play along lest we get labeled as "Nazis" for pointing out the negative aspects of this behavior, or simply not wanting to take part. Ive read articles posted by mainstream news organizations that blatantly said that NOT wanting to sleep with a trans person was transphobic. Basically saying that trans people are the only ones that get to choose who they fuck. Everybody else just has to shut up and do what they are told. How nice.
I find it interesting that society recognizes that it's *necessary* to "teach" people to "not catch feelings" -- because that very fact implies that we know that it's *unnatural* to avoid involving feelings. The fact that it has to be "overcome" is an evidence itself.
100%. The scary thing is that it's narcissistic people encouraging other people to become narcissistic. To narcissists, people are "objects" that only exist for gratification and narcissistic supply. It's disgusting.
feelings are a liability. Proper management of emotions is essential for mental health and performance reasons. Sexual gratification is only one of the fields. In a professional environment, you also cannot make decisions emotionally or let emotions dictate your interactions with other people. Think about an airline pilot, a professional scuba diver, a tank battalion commander.
@@svr5423 Certainly feelings can be a liability in certain situations, and being able to manage emotions is essential. But we're specifically talking about *intimate relationships*. It's unnatural to have an intimate relationship with someone, and not have feelings involved. That's a totally different situation from piloting a plane or commanding a military battalion.
I’ve listened to several interviews with this lovely woman. She is wonderful at explaining her points and ideas and has a very soothing voice. I think her studies and work really needs to be heard and studied everywhere.
@@voidsaverobShe clearly implied that consent was attained. Hence her use of the word "Work", and within the context of comparing it with the main job of the theoretical "sex worker". Your confusion adds to the argument that "sex work" isn't actually work.
@@sman14GTA bro listen to the intro again tf are you on about. "obtaining consent" around sex from your workplace subordinates is inappropriate and harassment. in no context does it excuse this type of behaviour to seek consent.
@@voidsaverob the consent for sex work, in her comparison, is automatically inherited from its comparison to the actual traditional work that the sex worker is doing where they are engaging with their manager. People go to work consensually, obviously. Sex work can be done consensually, obviously. But to put prostitution next to actual work with statements like "sex work is real work", AND to then have a problem with the manager basically asking for extra "professional expertise" highlights how stupid the statement is and the people who stand by that statement. If it was _actual work of equal value_ , the BJ just be billed as overtime!
explaining "red pill" to an elderly coworker, I told him it's a reference to the matrix where you take the red pill to get out of the comfortable and into reality. He replied, "And the blue one is viagra?"
Back in the days of the modern American housewife men were looked at as being horrible for cheating on their wives with their secretaries and such. The feminist movement came along and told women “hey you know that horrible thing that men regularly do by NOT being in control of themselves? why don’t we just make it OK by society standards for you to do the same thing?” Instead of calling men to a higher standard we lowered the standard for women. Great idea!
@@quakers200 How is her parodic quote not entirely accurate? (And, if you think parody is too much, just read her next sentence which encapsulates it perfectly in a completely descriptive way). Pointing out an instance of parody in an eloquent comment and ignoring the rest is a perfect example of avoiding to address the point being made.
This is interesting to watch since I was a stripper/pole dancer for over 7 years . Even though the barrier of sex /sexual acts was never crossed it did have very deep long lasting effects for me . Having to lie to myself everyday and pretend like I enjoyed dancing naked for men that were literally so gross to me did something deep down , even though I tried to separate my work brain to my ‘ real life’ brain . I can’t say I regret what I did because I did make good money and got myself in a good position now and I think I needed to learn this lesson ( I wouldn’t of seriously understood the talk we’re listening to now if I hadn’t of been through what I have ) but I would definitely not advise any young person to do what I did . It’s not a path for long term relationship health , I got lucky , 99% of my friends in that job didn’t get lucky .
@@airgin3000 I think she means that she was able to get out of it relatively unscathed and after building up a decent amount of money to be able to successfully move on. Most aren't so fortunate and end up in a downward spiral of drugs and sex work that they never get out of.
@@airgin3000 You still haven't wised up. Saying that the "men...were literally so gross" is devoid of compassion for them and for yourself. Do you imagine you were better than your audience? Why do you think they wound up there? Why did you?
@@hijodelaisla275 Dude she doesn't have to have compassion for men who would never give such a thing in return, her judgement of those men were not wrong and that's why she got lucky. Pay attention.
My first time as a man made me wish I had waited, it felt forced on my part. I also tried the casual game but everything felt like I was just using myself to pleasure the ladies, I was detached and it meant nothing and made me feel hollow and empty
as a guy who's never had a gf, but was just ditched by a "casual" partner before she had sex with me, this makes me realize that maybe it wasn't such a bad thing. I wanted something real but she just wanted to fool around without the commitment. It felt so sudden that she didn't want to be with me anymore when I thought we were having a good time together, and it hurt to have that opportunity of experiencing it taken away from me, really messed with my head. But I think I'm just realizing that she wasn't a very good person and I wouldn't wanna do that with someone like that anyway. I just hope that there is still someone out there for me, because with everything going on, and knowing what kind of guy I am, I gotta say it seems extremely unlikely.
"I also tried the casual game but everything felt like I was just using myself to pleasure the ladies" and thats your mistake. you dont to this to pleasure others, you do it because YOU enjoy it. if you arent enjoying it and you are doing it to please others it cannot work, meaning you will get no satisfaction from it. and satisfaction is the whole point of it to begin with. the question that i find interesting is: why do you rate pleasing others higher than yourself?
41:05 "They feel sexual disgust, they feel shame, they feel these deep painful emotions and the only person to blame sometimes is the man." Ladies and gentleman, welcome to feminism 101.
That's true...it is. And I'm not suprised if rape allegations will get higher because of it! I wish tho that our bodies were left out from ads and that the sexual objectification of us stopped on social media etc and porn stopped or at least you have to identify your self everytime on any pornsite as 18 at least. No children or youth should se that. It changes your view on men and sex. Social media kills and influencer are a sad business and dehumanising.
Yes, “World Ends Tomorrow - Women and Children most affected.” Men’s sites sum it up as, “Women want the advantages of being a man, the privileges of being a woman, and the responsibility of a child.” The whole idea is that women were oppressed by men while the reality is women and men were oppressed by a few powerful men. Women got the vote, but avoided the draft. Women got better educated and better jobs, but they still expect a mate to make more than they do. Women want equal pay for equal work, but avoid most of the difficult and dangerous work. Gradually, feminism is liberating ... men from women. Men have looked at the rules of the game and are deciding not to play. Turns out it is really men who need women like a fish needs a bicycle. I’m glad I was dating and got married in the 80s but now I worry for my boys. Don’t want to discourage them from marriage but not sure the obvious risk is worth the potential reward.
Yeah, it is not just sex though. Anything and everything that is challenging, even slightly, to a woman, is blamed on men. That is the drive of feminism always. Transfer all responsibility off women and onto men. All responsibility.
As a virgin waiting for marriage, I’m considered the weird one in society nowadays! But ironically I get so much respect from both men and women and many have told me they wish they did that or had waited.
Fellow virgin here. I get seen a weird or “religiously indoctrinated” for holding onto my virginity for dear life until marriage. I don’t want to engage into the try before you buy as the risk is too high for a boy to pump and dump me. My children will be better off with one father and I will not damage my health by engaging in anti contraceptive measures either. There is also the MGTOW movement going on where guys complain about girls devaluing themselves by having a high body count but the same guys also shy away from you if sex is not on the table from the get go. What a contradictory world we live in.
That’s not weird, almost like a jackpot for your future man ;) The less men women had the better (men prefer it and studies showed that relationships are stronger and longer)
A key takeaway from this conversation is that social norms exist for a reason. A society is a system, and for a system to function most efficiently it can’t get too bogged down with layers upon layers of complex, arbitrary, or confusing social rules. Gender “fluidity” and the introduction of multiple gender pronouns, and the expectation that we can no longer ever assume a person’s pronouns is a perfect example of this idea of bogging down a system with inefficiency. Social conventions have always been complex enough in the office and in the dating arena, but adding this new layer of rules that includes its own, enforced social penalties and punishments, should anyone violate them, is IMHO a really bad idea. There is a reason why the most popular and enduring games have simple sets of established rules. Imagine if it was decided that the rules of Chess were now fluid, and the types of moves each piece could make were arbitrary according to the whims of the players - “the King is now a Queen, sorry, deal with it!” It doesn’t require much imagination to see how that would destroy the game and result in total chaos on the board. It really seems that some people desperately want this sort of outcome for American society, and I think all of us should question and interrogate their true motives.
people are not chess pieces and society is not a chessboard. social change does not occur on a chessboard. the rules of chess have evolved for centuries, people have argued about every rule and it is played differently depending on where you are and what time period. comparing a single board game to society is inadequate because there have been other board games before and since chess. we routinely throw entire sets of rules out and create new ones or amend old rules. also, in chess, when any pawn reaches the other side of the board it can be turned into any other piece. on a whim. lol.
The point being made is a perfectly fair and valid one. Delving this far into the Chess analogy is essentially intentionally missing the point being made and is disingenuous, in my opinion. The writer of the comment clearly doesn’t believe chess and society map 1:1, it was just one example of many that could have been chosen to make a simple point.
@@ginaritchie451 I haven't played chess since I was in primary school, and the chess analogy was not the main point of my argument. That being said (and I looked this up), the basic rules about how the pieces can move on the board have been stable since the beginning of the 19th century, including your rule about pawns reaching the other side ("pawn promotion"). An example of the types of rules that have changed more recently (2013): "bringing a phone to the playing hall may lead to a loss, an illegal move will lose the game also in rapid chess, and two illegal moves lead to a loss in classical chess." There was a subtle modification to how pawn promotion must be executed, but not to the core concept "The act of promotion may be performed in various ways: the pawn does not have to be placed on the square of arrival, removing the pawn and putting the new piece on the square of promotion may occur in any order. If an opponent’s piece stands on the square of promotion, it must be captured." It should be obvious that these small rule changes are minor and not "revolutionary." The core rules of play on the board are stable, and no, we do not "routinely throw entire sets of rules out and create new ones" in chess (or in the legal system). Were we to do this, the game would lose all meaning, just like society would completely break down if all the rules were replaced too quickly. For an example of how disruptive it is when radicals and ideologues DO throw out well-established rules, one need only look at the impact of SCOTUS overturning Roe v. Wade. If you want to live in a stable and peaceful society, you should want and expect change to be gradual, and not be surprised at the backlash when people try to push through foundational changes at the most basic level of social interaction, such as what pronouns we’re allowed to "assume" in our schools and workplaces or who is allowed to enter a gendered bathroom with us, with severe social and professional penalties sometimes imposed for non-compliance. If your political position is "burn it all down," I hope you understand what that actually means IRL, and whether it's worth it.
@@RH_Factor You are absolutely right that the "chess" analogy was not my main point, but in my reply I doubled down on it since chess seems to be Gina's thing. The *real* point is that the human brain, on average, can only handle a certain level of social complexity before social relations break down. One example is the theory of Dunbar's Number - that each person can only manage about 150 social contacts in any meaningful way. My point about the whole "pronoun" thing is that it instantly adds an entirely new layer of unnecessary complexity to literally every social interaction outside the home. If our brain's processing power has to always be devoted to this new task, other more important priorities will have to be sacrificed, and that's bad for everyone.
@@filmjazz very interesting thread filmjazz. I appreciate the research you clearly did as a counter to Gina's point. Not a common occurrence in this platform. Wish you well.
This conversation made me very sad. I'm glad that people are finally talking about the wreckage that promiscuity has wrought. And really sad we had to learn the hard way. So many broken lives.
"sad we had to learn the hard way?!?!!" It was in the cards, it happened!!! why grovel and spit and moan that it happened that way???? PICK UP MOVE ON!
The sub context of this question had me thinking "maybe men dont naturally die before women" it seems like its on Men to basically do everything, especially when we know now womens educational prowess, maybe just maybe men worked themselves to death to provide the best lives they could for women and children. Which gave me another Eureka moment so I checked and what do you know... Gay men make more money, live longer and happier lives than apparently straight men, straight women and lesbiand women... It seems instead of saying as always "men need to do more and be better" It might actually be the cost of "earning" and maintaining a woman has always been too high.
I may have a band-aid solution. End involuntary child support. If women KNOW they will have to raise a child on their own unless they get a written agreement with the father, they are less likely to sleep around. Most sane women don't WANT to have an abortion or be a single mother.
@@aCycloneSteve Whenever this is proposed you need to understand society does not want to support your child NOR does society want to deal with the ramifications of a unsupported child. Child support was a conservative mans legislation not a liberal woman's. Understand conservative men believe (as they should logically) men are more responsible than women, benevolent sexism if you will.
I don't see her thesis. Again, what does she suggest we do with Incels, other than remove porn, prostitutes and sex robots? Because the money these guys won't spend on onlyfans or a blowjob machine they will spend on a gun.
@@steinsgate514 I did .. she thinks porn has benefits .. she's a feminist and doesn't even know it lol she probably likes voting and being a careerist. Who knows, just a hunch, but a good one based on what I watched. Talk is cheap, remember?
I think every young woman should listen to this video if they’re entering high school or college! I think educating young girls on this reality has historically fallen on mothers and the older women in the community, but I think it’s been lost as a cultural responsibility. I for one was never taught/warned about any of this and had to learn it the very hard way in my teens and early 20s. Spread the word!
It was women's job to teach this and always has been. As men we teach our sons how to behave and as women you teach your daughters how to behave. Women teach nurturing and men teach the truth of life.
Me too!! I didn’t know casual sex could cause me so much shame and sorrow. It was only depicted in the media as being fun and carefree (think Samantha from Sex in the city)
@@herelookinatu that is because of how men and women are built psychologically. Men are built more to run on an analytical system where as women run more on an emotions based system. This results in a nurturer and protector type system. Women are psychologically designed to be nurturers but when that nurturing capacity goes bad, it becomes the most insidious creature in existence. Men are psychologically designed to be protectors and when that goes bad men become violent creatures. The reason women don't teach the lessons of life is because of the factor that as a protector, you must constantly be aware of all threats at all times and so you pick up all things that allow you to survive, those are the lessons you teach. As a protector, you must distance your emotions from your survival. So that should answer your question.
@@alexrenee737 Well they better get over their fear. We are fresh out of patience. And we men are not going to sit here in the west and waste our younger years waiting for them to have an epiphany. Women have had decades to correct themselves and we are not going to wait anymore.
So glad I came of age in the 80s and early 90s. Been married to an amazing woman for 24 years now. Was 26 when I got married in 1998...definitely sowed my oats before marriage and figured out what I was looking for in a partner and she and I never take anything we have for granted. Listening to my single friends of all ages 22-50 talk about the horrors of dating these days....it sounds like mine field. I cannot even imagine dealing with all of that nonsense. I would rather pack a bag and go disappear into the mountains and live in a cabin and let society continue to lose its mind. The messages our "culture " pushes out sound like the ravings of a lunatic. Its no wonder men and women are all completely confused, misguided and there is such a huge disconnect between the two. Its truly sad. As one other person pointed out...men and women complement each other...its not a competition....yet by and large all of these movememts and media etc have driven such a massive wedge between men and women I honestly do not see how that gap will ever be closed. I truly feel for you decent single folks who are looking for a mate.
I agree. I believe society is dividing into more and more subgroups. I think that is the way it will go. The people who want to have casual sex and an abortion every other month can go off in their corner, and this growing segment of the population who rejects that idea will go off to ours.
Porn culture ruined (poisoned?) so many relational aspects. Very sad. We have a society of bitter, chronic masturbators and cynical, hairless porn star wannabes. It isn't healthy.
Well yes, the more socially conservative and religious are still having (mostly) stable marriages and lots of children. I am Catholic and have 3 kids. I have friends who are married with 6 kids, 9 kids and 8 kids and are grandmas in their 50s because their kids still marry in their mid 20s. I am concerned about all the poor kids growing up in chaotic homes and environments with no stability and absent parents. That has been happening in large numbers for two generations now.
You're reminding me of a friend of mine who recently got married. Obviously I want him to be happy, but I would be lying if I said I wasn't worried for him. His wife seems like she has a lot of red flags. They are both in the military and as he was driving me back to the airport I heard the wife call on speaker to complain about her boss and all the "white males" she has to work for. My buddy tried to joke about it since he is a white male, but there are so many more clues that she is miserable trying to "prove herself" to impossible feminist standards. This is even though it has lead to her needing back surgery because of all of the physical labor she takes on "to not feel worthless."
She's come to the proper conclusion based on reason. That's wonderful. I hope that one lesson she, and others, will take away from this is that morals, which bring one to the same conclusion, are also based on reason! People will dismiss moral arguments, out of hand, but they'll expect to be listened to, even celebrated, for coming to the exact same conclusions via their reason. Folks, live a moral life. You'll have a better time, overall.
Man, I am so happy I am in a happy marriage with a wonderful woman. I have been with her for 19 years. What worries us is the environment our children will have to live in. Social media induced craziness, narcissism and depression, transgenderism, the daring and sex landscape. It feels dangerous out there for teenagers and young adults.
Agreed. Also married 26 yrs. Our kids are young adults and teens. I think having a strong marriage is a huge gift to our children as we are living what the world says is impossible or even a miserable, bad thing. My 16 yr old son even watches shows with me and comments that he doesn't think certain characters have a "proper marriage" I think he means a healthy marriage. Such as Walt and his wife in Breaking Bad.
If it helps to know, as long as you give them a strong and stable environment, a nurturing Lee one at that, and not forced upon them, they will be unaffected by these outside influences. The transgender one though, that might be a bit hard. I was born before transgender was a word, yet I felt transgender in my early adolescence. This was because even though my parents taught me that your personality and your gender to different things and that me having ovaries didn’t make me have to like one thing or another, as I love lightning McQueen when I was a kid and love to play with toy cars and trains and love the justice league. Despite this, society is still society and when you go to the toy store there’s always a boys section and girls section, and that enough can send the wrong message to a child. Also if they were into kids that bully them and taught them for going against gender norms, that can affect it too. As long as you periodically assure them that being a boy or a girl is not a personality type and that they can be whatever they want to be and do whatever they want and they don’t need to change their whole entire gender identity for it, you should be good
Its amazing how people nowadays worry about kids going through social media induced narracism, depression and trangenderism and these are the same people that talk about the glory days of hold where people's greatest fears were child dying at a young age due to disease, waring tribes etc., just goes to show that we will always be snowflakes.
"So focused on a some-what imaginary enemy, that they cant actually interrogate the coherence of their actual views" talking about US-centric feminism is spot on.
You have men that can't get laid, and then you have men like me who deliberately decided to opt out of the entire process. For the early portion of my adult life I had difficulties with steady employment, which made my personal requirements for starting a family ( A stable income and my own house) quite trying. Meeting and sleeping with women was by and large not incredibly difficult. Finding a woman I actually wanted to keep however, was. I seemed to attract a particular type of crazy that was exceedingly unhealthy for my self and my family members. I was engaged twice, and left at the altar both times for insisting on traditional vows. After the second time, I decided to simply focus on myself. I was blessed enough to be able to assist in the raising of my sibling's children, and now have a stable life and my own home. While I'm willing to admit that I miss the companionship, and would most likely be happier with the right woman in my life, I am by and large content with what I have.
Profoundly refreshing. So, so grateful for this episode. Phew. There are still people who sincerely want to find an objective path for *everyone's* benefit. Whenever I hear people who have renounced taking sides etc - it's food for the soul. Also, I'm going to buy Louise Perry's book now. Sincere intention and courage deserve and need encouragement, as well as support. Bravo. 👏👏👏👏 🔥🔥🔥🔥 P.S Louise - please narrate the audiobook of your book. Speaking as a voice actor, I think only actors should narrate novels. I just went straight to Audible as I'd rather hear your narrate your book. Ah well! Will buy the Kindle version instead. You've got a good voice for it too, give it some consideration!
Chris, I've been following the 'Intellectual Darkweb' for years now, and you are absolutely 100% up there with Peterson, Vervaeke etc. in regard to how interesting the topics you are discussing are. For a Love Island lad from my part of England, the transformation you have undergone is also really inspiring. Any time a notification for a video notification for a new video pops up, you're always first on the list. Keep up the good work man, this was such an amazing conversation. Louise Perry is a gem too; such intellect and reflection upon her own paradigm of feminism.
45:00 A man getting his shit together used to be an incentive for sexual access secured in marriage. In this day and age, however, more and more men experience little to no sex after marriage. So it really is a lose-lose for them. In essence, modern marriage is truly the most expensive form of chastity. If a man wants sexual access, he should engage in long-term dating, but never get married. Long-term dating offers significantly more legal shelter from the (rather biased) family court system, as well.
Genuinely good point. Wives were once encouraged to make sure their husband's sexual needs were met. Now that's become another thing that's seen as absurd and old fashioned so the husband's desires just go ignored only they're now tied to one lady so can't go elsewhere without risk of being caught and losing everything in a divorce. I've never really understood the woman's perspective here. Is it really so hard to make sure your husband isn't desperate? Wasn't part of the deal to try and meet eachother's needs on eachother's terms? Obviously a man can't expect sex on demand just because he is married, but marriage granted sexual access to men in the past whereas today your sexual access decreases in most cases.
@@zeno2501 I honestly don't believe the majority of women have the capacity to understand the importance of sex to a male. For us, it's a curious mix of appetite, power, desire, and the amazing experience of a woman essentially saying, "You are worthy to partner with me and [possibly] bear my children." In a way that's difficult to put into words, it's an experience of acceptance and worthiness. Also, since sexual desire isn't as strong for most women, they don't see how terrible it is to deny it.
@@zeno2501 I can explain part of what happens to some women, although I can't say its everyone. Women need build up. Husbands stop DATING their wives. They already "got" her, so when they want some they just paw at her with no warning. Build. Sexual. Tension! Over a day! Don't forget how to FLIRT.
I don't like how he said that things like red pill are coping mechanisms for sexless men, or something like that. There are plenty of men of differing status who rail against the biased courts and who criticize women. These days any problem you have with women automatically means you're an incel. I think it has to do with what she said about women's intuition, that if you can't get a girl, then there must be something wrong with you, or you need to get your act together. I'm no catch myself but I've seen far better men than me get the exact same treatment, so I know the women's intuition thing is BS. There nothing wrong with saying that women can be just as bad as men.
I was born in 1950. I could sense something amiss with women’s liberation from the beginning. My mother had to go to work when I was about 8 years old due to my dad’s illness. Mother’s absence from the home was a personal tragedy to me. It had been such a joy to come home from school, smell something wonderful cooking in the kitchen and get a mother hug. Instead, after that, I found myself anxious at the end of the day, fearing that something would happen to her before she could arrive home from work. I have heard that women’s lib was dreamed up by someone in government who not only wanted to increase the tax base, but cause children to be forced into government sponsored educational situations at a much earlier age. Now it seems in some ways women have less choice than ever. Most have been forced into the workplace because now it takes two incomes to support most families. The other downfall is that most have been convinced by the culture that they have to submit to sexual sin before marriage if they want to be considered normal.Has anyone noticed, as a result, that there are far fewer love songs these days? They have been replaced by vulgar lyrics which often have nothing to do with actual love. It is a much colder world now than the one I knew in my early years.
Thanks to feminism your mother could work and support the family. I was born in 1962. My father cheated on my mother and finally divorced him. She also went back to work. Understanding life didn't have me wanting mommy to make dinner as I knew she had to work to be able to look after me.
@@wyleecoyotee4252 great for you, I guess you're a better and more enlightened person than I am and you are not foolish enough to be overly attached to your maternal unit. I missed my mother because the trauma of losing my father made me much more afraid of losing Mother, too. I knew the highway to the city where she worked was dangerous. I also knew that her boss was lecherous and her job hung by a thread. She was sad and stressed and she needed me as much as I needed her. Besides that my mother had vulnerable health. I think up to a certain point women's liberation was a good thing. People should get equal pay for equal performance. Every citizen should have the right to vote. But like any other good cause, it can be taken to an extreme. I've seen the changes in society since the 50s. Some are very good. Black people finally began getting the respect they deserve. On the other hand, many things began to suffer when most women did not have the option to stay home, as the economy changed in a way that most families these days require two incomes. Where at one time most old people had family assistance because someone was available to care for them. Pets did not have to stay isolated for full days at the time. Children were safer because someone was home when they came home from school. (I could go into detail about my own experience, but I won't.) It was not such a hurried, hectic world with everyone rushing to get to places on time.
@@wyleecoyotee4252 Erm, women worked before feminism. Women were bakers, housemaids, factory workers, shop owners, retail assistants, business owners, seamstresses, pub owners, barmaids, and much, much, more. At least know your history before making such a ridiculous statement.
@@peachesandcream8753 Women weren't allowed to own any property or businesses, or borrow money, not until after the 1950's. All they could get were low paying jobs and just get by. They did not have options to be educated towards lucrative jobs. You are the one who should check your history
I think it’s not just feminism, it’s extended lifespans and also living in the most peaceful time in history. Humans evolved with men dying in large numbers in war and women dying in large numbers giving birth. Society is still adjusting to these two major changes.
Good point. The average marriage length in history for those reasons was about a fifth of how long mine has lasted! We have few models for very long marriage.
@@sisiphas maybe there are more examples among royalty? You can’t blame women for being hypergamous because choose wrong and you’re a widow because your husband is a dead man walking and same goes for men wanting women who are young and healthy because choose wrong and you’re a widower because your wife is dead after the first baby if she can have a baby at all.
Yeah, but it is mostly to do with the contraceptive pill. 150 years ago, a fertile married woman would be more-or-less permanently pregnant from 16 to 40. By the time their youngest kid has become independent, they would have been approaching death.
The saddest part is, after a varying number of casual sex partners, woman will never be able to pairbond as well as with the first ones, the mechanism is broken. Also a big difference in men and women is that men can and will have sex with a girl they hate or are not even considering to date long term, goes without saying that trying to catch a man with sex is a bad strategy.
That’s a very black and white statement to make about all men in general. I, myself, along with a lot of other men I know don’t think like that, so making a generalised statement like that is quite naive.
Interesting that she points out how young girls are being taught to suppress their instincts for the sake of casual sex. I wonder if the same principle can be applied to motherhood. Motherhood and postpartum is so often talked about as some kind of prison. I'm sure it can feel that way and maybe it is for some, but it also can be something beautiful and fulfilling.
I think there are several problems here: one the hyper medicalization of pregnancy and childbirth. With most hospital facilities having a north or 30% surgical birth rate, it seems reasonable to have fears around the experience. The second is an elevation of self above all else, and the idea that fulfillment can be found in career. Lastly, there is a culture that seems almost childlike in mindset, well into adulthood.
@@OUpsychChick yes! That childlike mindset among adults you mention is something I’ve been noticing a lot lately. I used to be a school teacher and I feel like I am hearing so many grown folk struggling with the same adolescent issues that were common among my students.
"Traditional sexual norms existed to control both young women's and young men's sexuality," and "There's no conspiracy. No one is enforcing it. We're all responding to incentives as individuals" are two of my favorite statements that Perry made in this, that are maybe the opposite of typical feminism. All of traditional society wasn't set up to oppress women and benefit men, and there isn't a modern day patriarchal conspiracy, either. Doesn't mean that women weren't targeted for oppression in certain ways (and men in others). There are bigger forces at play, and men and women are mostly in it together. These are much more healthy, nuanced conversations to have.
Basically it results in the subjugation of lower class women, in an effort to “protect” against men. Instead of curtailing those responsible and holding them to a higher standard we lowered the bar for everyone.
Now i'm quiet a regular guy who expects equality in his relationships. My last relationship the woman I was with had a strong distaste for cleaning/cooking. Now im going to assume that most people operate in this way, You cook your partner washes the dishes and visa versa. This wasn't a very long relationship when I went to her house for the first time I wanted to celebrate and I cooked for her a pretty spectacular Shallot, bacon and thyme tatin and a Pecan and cinnamon bread for desert. The trouble started when I told her that I had to go to work pretty much after we finished our meals, now crazy me i kind of expected the person who was off work at the time to have the courtesy to wash the dishes. As I got up to leave she told me "hey, you forgot to wash the dishes" I replied sorry but i can't or I would be late for work. My god the look she gave me was utter contempt, she screamed at me about how women don't belong in the kitchen and how I was a mysoginistic sexist. I uh, left and never looked back. We were only seeing each other for like a week.
I loved this interview. I'm left inclined, socialist from a big feminist family. She synthesized what i was somehow intuiting. She is very intteligent with a really nuanced and complex review of the topic. Really lovely here intelligence.
Along with the expectations that women should be sexually aggressive and promiscuous, there is an expectation from men within marriages that their female partner’s sexual appetite should always match the men with no rise and fall around life event like pregnancy, childbirth, child rearing, breastfeeding, menopause etc which means women are left feeling inadequate when they have entirely natural and evolutionarily necessary patterns in libido. It has gotten to the point where women with a libido that doesn’t match their male partner’s are expected to pursue medication and treatment as though their is something medically wrong with them for not having male sexual behavior! It’s quite sickening.
Love the discussion about luxury beliefs and dismantling social norms around 1:19:00. That is SO true! For every social institution, it's the poor or marginalized who suffer the most. Removing all the guardrails only resulted in more dysfunction. In this context, this is the case with welfare associated with more out of wedlock births/absent fathers (decreased marriage rates) and abortion rates disproportionally higher among black women. Is it intentional sabotage of poor people or an unintended consequence? Either way, it's very obnoxious that people who don't suffer the consequences of these policies are the ones who trumpet them the loudest.
Excellent interview! Loved the quality of the research and pacing of the discussion. Wish everyone could be exposed to the basic truths about men/women differences in sexuality.
Women are doing great in the ways that don’t make them happy long term and in fact harm their long term interests. Congratulations. Way to go, girl. Crush the men you’re going to need later.
And don’t you dare tell them that, or they’ll bring up past ills that happened generations ago that they have never experienced. They think it’s just punishment for young boys of today to suffer for the sins of four generations past, while their cognitive dissidence allows them to forget that it’s their own sons who they’re speaking of…that deserve punishment
@@LuckysLair folks don’t seem to understand what happens when they punish the undeserving. On a completely unrelated note, what’s up with that 30% of men who haven’t had sex???
@@ChrisWillx ''Fatherhood became a social choice for men'' - Since when! We live in an age of child support where men are jailed when they can't pay. Men have no choice whatsoever I hope you aren't under any delusion that you are helping men
"You're not allowed to talk about any sort of feelings of disgust you might have..." And that's the issue. Liberalism and all of it's many flavors tells you to ignore all of your disgust impulses and responses to tolerate whatever is on the agenda to be tolerated, to the detriment of your own well-being and even that of society. We all need to get back in touch with that disgust response a little more, I think and stop repressing it.
Yes but also more due to the fact that 90% of divorces are indicated by women and it's a 50/50 split the marriage will last she'll get half of your stuff. Also with dating you can have consensual sex until a women decides she didn't want it even like 20 years later suddenly you're a r-pst.
Yes. A young western woman looking for a long-term mate will always choose the man with his own property. Why wouldn't they? Not being able to make it onto the property ladder is another thing that impacts men's relationship opportunity more than it impacts women's.
Sure, but I'm not gunna marry a masculine whore. That's where I draw the line, and that just happens to cross out a solid 75+% of women in my generation.
I think the reason why things appear so different now than they did a few decades ago is... Louise Perry wasn't around back then to see how things were. The main difference I see is that we're able to talk about sex more openly now, and people are less likely to lie about it. As Steinbeck pointed out about the 1930's, "Most of the babies of the period were conceived in Model T Fords and not a few were born in them." People had more knowledge about sex and the reproductive cycle back then than they did during the "sexual revolution" - as most Americans lived on farms and depended on it for their livelihood. Now that we're no longer associating sex with the nitty gritty of animal husbandry, we're able to talk about it over dinner.
Amazing interview! Ms Perry is very articulate. I’ve never thought about feminism/women and sex in this perspective and I learned a lot from her. I’ll def be on the lookout for her book, hope it’s on audible soon! (Does anyone else think she looks like Peggy from Capitan America??)
"You're so fit you should be on only fans" - This is a tragic state of a affairs that there is a guy out there who thinks at any level of consciousness that a women would take that as a compliment.
i recently read some dating "advice" that suggested it was best to focus on "tonality" in dates.... literally another way of saying "don't have a monotone". THAT was the advice? ffs....
@@laurendearnley9595 It’s honestly depressing. If you’d like to know the psychology behind it, it’s women whose value has only been boil to her perceived attractiveness. That being said, when her attractiveness and therefore her value as a human being is purely based off of how sexually alluring she is, if he was empowering to her when she’s told something like this. It’s honestly really sad.
Women carry all the risks of casual sex? What about STD's or men getting trapped into paying child support, or being told an incorrect age and then being guilty of statutory rape?
From evolutionary point of view (that is quite important), it was that way. What you describe is just result of modern social constructs from last, let's say 70 years, the problem with ugly STDs are only problem since one bacteria got from new world to Europe.
I agree with a lot of the ideas here. However, it's a non sequitur to say that if someone supports sex work as legitimate work, it's hypocritic to be displeased about being asked for a blowjob as part of one's job duties. One can support the ability of people to voluntarily choose sex work, while also thinking it's wrong to be sexually propositioned by a workplace superior in a job whose description has nothing to do with sex.
I’m old enough to have watched the world get worse and worse over the last 50 years. And that the root of the problem, in fact at the root of every single aspect of social failure is feminism. And I once supported it.
@@ishastrega6851 you make my point beautifully . Cognitive dissonance is feminism’s weapon of choice. Trouble is, the trans crazies have discovered it now they’re going to eat you alive. And I’m here for it.
@@ishastrega6851 Lol. Anything that forces accountability for one’s own actions, just blame the patriarchy.. No one takes you folks seriously anymore, you’ve been lied to. “It’s easier to fool people than it is to convince them they’ve been fooled ” - Mark Twain
Completely agree that this is and will continue to be a dominating story line. The ONS data about 50% of thirty year old females being childless. Suggests interesting times over the next decade as starting families will become ever more important. Especially given they are rejecting their peer group men as suitable mates.
The pendulum always swings back though. Sure, the men and women who are losers and follow the social programming, they are and will continue to suffer, because they keep doing as they are told. But on the plus side, losers breeding isn't good for society either. If they had children together, they would raise them badly, and create more losers. On the other hand, the men and women who are intelligent and can see through the social programming, are moving in different directions. The directions we used to move in instinctively, and they are doing well for themselves. So they will have children and likely raise them well, with the added bonus of teaching their kids not to listen to TV, movies, the MSM, politicians etc. It is a slow swing back, no doubt, but it is happening anyway. Intelligent people don't just learn from their own mistakes, they learn from other people's too.
Makes sense, at the family level or at the "federal" level those who block or massively restrict their kids access to "free to use" media will pass their culture on. Those who do not will have little influence in the future. 20 years will put children born today into the age block that advertisers care so much about and remove the ideas of the current childless.
@@LuisCarruthers Yep. It's western women who aren't having children. Muslim communities are still getting married, forming large families outside of government control, and pumping out huge numbers of kids and putting them through Islamic education. The UK is an Islamic country by 2100. Peter Hitchens has said he expects this.
What will happen is that they give in, and leave as soon as they have their kids. The divorce rate is 80% initiated by women, 90% if college educated, that's where that number comes from. A bunch of virgin men is about to get used for kids, divorced, put on child support, and won't see their kids. Women work, so they don't have to stay with someone with equal looks. Back on the market they can be intimate with hotter men that that don't even like them.
Enlightening content brilliantly delivered. Louise Perry congratulations on being such a force for good. Thank you Chris and the Modern Wisdom team for making such good content happen.
I'm from Brazil, recently, a 11 year old girl had an abortion of her 7 month pregnancy, the law considered her to have been raped since any sex is considered rape towards anyone under the age of 14. However, in this case, the girl had agreed to have sex with her 13 year old boyfriend. I think that's what happens when the culture becomes extremely sexualized
Would you say that Brazilian culture is sexualized?? From a western perspective, the stereotype is that Brazilian people are confident and comfortable about their sexuality and its reflected in the way they dress, party and date. I don't know, I'm ignorant on the Brazilian culture so I'm asking
@default yea I think we just need a healthy balance. Because sexual elements in media isn't necessarily a bad thing infact I thinks its good for society to be able to accept that but like anything this stuff can go to far
Regarding the points raised around 36:30. I've known people to get really offended at having to clean toilets in small businesses that don't have dedicated cleaning staff. Plenty of people were offended at having to clean up after themselves and plenty of others were even more offended having to clean up after their co-workers who made messes. "This isn't my job" being a common saying at the time. We all accept that janitorial work is work and that it needs to get done. So, it isn't hyperbolic to hold the opinion that sex workers are doing work AND that 'this isn't my job' is a valid stance to hold. If it's unreasonable to expect your coworker to clean your bathroom mess they had no part in and I think it's equally unreasonable to expect them to take care of your *other* biological need they weren't hired for either. Take care of it yourself or hire a dedicated worker. Perhaps sex workers will become a high-class janitors handling the biological tasks people don't see as part of their job description so they can focus on why they're actually there? Either way, it's not correct to call that hypocrisy.
@@Stanley_BabyMy point was that it's not hypocritical to say that sex work is work any more or less than janitorial work is work. Being in or out of a relationship is irrelevant to the main point.
Here’s my experience and opinion coming from a 3 world country where females stay home and male work. My grandparents are from a farm and it work great for them, even though my grandmother was a stay home mom she was always the head of the house. Very strong lady with a very strict attitude. Then here comes my mom generation, sadly she got married to my father, not a great provider, but my mother is to smart and ambitious. So she left my dad and became a working single mom and move to America. By her self not only she open a business, but also was able to buy property and build her own home. My father never till this day accomplish those things. My self now I’m a stay home wife and I’m honestly was not build to work in a corporate office as I’m kinda to “nice” and corporations world is build by very strong personalities. I like the ability to choose your own path, and wish both options where view as respectful. However i think that in the past you had to choice stay home mom and now you have to choice working women. How about a balance according to the personality of individual? Sadly in this type of world you need to make money no matter if you’re a female or male
I agree, I wish our economy allows people to have a choice instead of forcing everyone to work as a two parent household in order to afford to raise a family. Not every woman is happy with an career or climbing the corporate ladder. There are lots out there that would love to be homemakers and be there for their children and take care of their husband and family.
Agree. The whole “super woman” crap movement really screwed women over. They have to be beautiful, make high amounts of money, be wonderful moms all at the same time. Simply unrealistic. Being a good mom is a FT job all by itself.
You ask to balance according to personality and individual, yet you accuse your father of not being a great provider. Same with your mother who did not leave him the option which you naturally enjoy as a woman, but ditched him since he didnt deliver the goods so to speak. Then in a next sentence you say you yourself are not built for the environment that provides high income and are glad to have an option not to participate in it. I guess only women are allowed to have a choice.
The only issue with that is that a stay at home wife can still be just attractive as the working women. Where this becomes an issue is a man cannot be a stay at father and if so rarely(I do know few of them, but not personally). For example if I wanted to be a stay at home father, Id be judge to hell everyday by both men and women plus the divorce is higher for my case if my wife was the provider. Why can a woman have the choice of a stay at home mother but a man cannot? Answer: because we are not equal. Traditionally the man is he provider and even to this day women with higher earning careers are always dating across and up. Who pays for dates? Men, it can split, but women still expects men to at least offer like the traditional role. Whos going to financially take care of the children if the father is staying at home but the wife is pregnant and is off work? This is why there cannot be balance and if so, that depends on how strong the person is to filter what the world has to say or judge about that.
One thing people don't realize is that in many traditional countries, many middle eastern countries included, this is and has been the model. Just as women work for the family by creating the home, men work for the family by working hours on end to come home and put the money in his wife's lap and in his family's mouth.
I have conversations with people about celibacy, basically celibacy due to there's nothing appealing about having sex with people who are not present, or interested in me or being part of my life. That it's a waste of my time and energy and I feel deflated afterwards. This is a strong impulse. Good luck to everyone
Great interview. I absolutely agree we are slogging through the post sexual revolution, which has some upsides (more equality in the workplace) and many downsides (dating and sexual mores are a mess). The question I have is how long is it going to take to play itself out and we achieve some sort of balance based on a new set of accepted norms/standards. Or will it? Technology alone (and our love affair with it) is going to keep moving the goal posts (online porn today, sex bots and VR tomorrow) getting in the way of solving this issue. If social dynamics (from misplaced ideas of feminism, black pill/red/pill ideology, and culture wars) are lobbed on top of that, I can't see how we find our way out of this. In the West at least, the deck seems to be stacked against a solution. In Japan and some other Asian countries, we are seeing real harm to demographics and a generation of males checking out of the relationship market. We keep this up and we will see the same thing in the US and other parts of the industrialized world. That will have other knock on effects that go way beyond human sexuality.
Women in the workplace is a family and society killer. It also raises the hypergamic standards of women to upset the sexual market. (They all want top earners)Yes, they earn their own money but don't get to fulfill the things that bring them most contentment......building families. It has more cons than pros.
Such a wonderful interview. I am going to buy this book after listening to this. Also, the hilarious and ironic thing is that Chris is the definition of a Super Chad.
I feel like there needs to be a balance and we’re so close to realizing it. I refused to marry before sex because I wanted to experience everything with that person before I committed, sex is so important to me and I am so picky, but I was smart about it, I didn’t have sex with just anyone, only with those I truly believed I could marry, and yes that means I’ve had sex with more than one man but far from “casual sex” numbers. And it has left me with the man of my dreams in the bed and out of the bed and I have never been happier! People just need to have respect for others and themselves while being so cautious about others and their intentions ❤
Everytime the "body count" discussion pops up I want to scream that what you've said is all most men are really asking for and all anyone can really expect. Anyone who has always taken relationships seriously simply wants to find someone with the same values, who has also always taken relationships seriously. That doesn't have to mean zero other sexual partners, but it sure as hell also doesn't mean 157.
a non virgin is less than a virgin. a man who marries a non virgin is fooling himself. non virgins are for men who have no options. you bought into the feminist lie that having a gaping cooch is a good thing.
It is a class thing to some extent. Growing up poor/working class I observed sex as being a coping mechanism that is both affordable and very effective for dealing with daily hardship. The emotional hazard of casual sex is of no consequence, it is about just keeping it together for the next day. That is why poor/working class tend to have many more children that those "better off".
Lower class ppl also have less standards and values on average. Look at the marriage and parenting rates between upper middle and working class. You move up the class with maturity. Check the marshmallow test- its about delaying gratification. Jp wrote about this well.
Interesting! I agree. I wondered why I see so many lower class, borderline intellectually disabled people having so many kids around where I live in the blue collar Midwest
I think the percentage of women who can have dis-attached sex is massively underestimated. And the reason I say this is because of the sheer numbers of of women I've seen do it. Not with me, unfortunately. Now, my experience is from the late '80s to the late '90s when I was in the Navy, then working in the defense industry. I missed the '70s erra and the tolerance for fratinization in the workplace went to almost zero by Y2K but people have not evolved in that time. Women looking for "Divorcable men was so commonplace by the early '80s that it was often depicted in mainstream Hollywood. This notion of women getting more attached than men and being more loving than men is a myth. But no woman would have admitted that back then because the jig would be up. Well, the cat's out of the bag now and look where we are.
I've had lots of casual sex and had a great time in my 20s. But then I entered a monogamous relationship which is going strong after seven years. I then realized that casual sex is totally overrated. My partner, a man, was never into casual sex. He can't have sex with someone he doesn't love. I have come to realize that in fighting slut shaming and the sexual double standard (he's a stud, she's a slut), I was emulating the worst type of men. Not all men are like that. Promiscuity is for hopeless losers, regardless of sex.
@sabine serres-schertl It's so weird how women don't understand basic words. My statement was about women in general, you got in your feelings picturing yourself as the woman, and the general point of what I said completely went over your head. How is discussion with you possible when you can only project your feelings?
And women haven't even enter the work force fully (yet). All trades (ie, hard labor) is still done mostly by men (about 95%) . But of course I've heard no feminist complain about the lack of female construction workers... Says it all. But, as more men loose purpose and traditional masculinity, there will be less of us in the trades, and the trades will never become unnecessary...
@@Macheako They really pretend, that non males having such a massive pool of men to choose from, that they only accept the top few % *is as bad* as having nothing. This is beyond cope.
researchers consistently fail to address the magnitude of this issue. People ultimately need love and validation. When a man doesn't matter to a woman, when she doesn't gaze at him with a loving smile, tell him she wants him/needs him, that he matters to her. A lot of guys have never had that. This will cause disillusionment/isolation/soul sadness and mental health issues in men. No amount of material things, por* will be able to replace that. The problem in the west is 2 fold. Incels can't get a woman and the ones that do get one, end up in divorce/breaking up or being cheated on and losing more than the lady. So they swear off relationships and end up lonely all the same. (Mgtow) Both have the effect of creating lonely, angry, atomised ppl and broken society with plummeting birth rates. And can spell the end of that society. What are we seeing in the west now? Falling sperm counts, falling testosterone levels, births, marriage, and a rapidly ageing society, with catastrophic debt levels. White ppl used to have close family bonds but now they no longer keep ties with family and send old ppl to homes. Jobs for life are a thing of the past, from where they used to form friends. White ppl lost their matchmaking culture and used to marry form within their own tried and tested social circle. With all that now gone, internet dating and cold approaching/PUA random women that u know nothing about is the way. Which can be toxic.
@@kamrudkd Everything you wrote here is correct, but society doesn't care about it, because it cannot afford to care. Every man with 50 bucks can get laid. This is a fact. Why don't they? I mean all of them. Well, they don't want just meaningless sex. What's society's answer to that? They call them incels (= terrorist according to wikipedea). Men who don't want meaningless sex are being called incels and who ever tries to talk about it in public gets beaten over the head. Why? it's because if these men collectively find out, that most of them will die alone, they will simply stop *ANY* effort. Not just in attracting women, but any effort that is in society's favor. This is why men's issues are being contantly surpressed by dehuminizing them.
another amazing episode i just dont buy in to the whole "women dont want/like casual sex". if that was true, they would not constantly hook up with men who are obviously not interested in anything else.
Well, I think they are searching for something and are typically "regretful" after casual sex. A recent study, tho, found that women don't modify their behavior due to regret, so maybe it's a vicious circle or something.
I think for women it's often less about the sex itself and more about the thrill and the associated experiences. Women enjoy being chased and led by handsome risk-taking high status men. The sex follows from that, but for the man it was the end goal and for the woman the sex is part of a broader experience of being treated a certain way that makes them feel desirable and cared for. In other words, if a man could cut to the chase and skip everything leading up to the sex and just have the sex, then he would. For a woman, everything leading up to and the context surrounding the sex is the best part. Sure, they enjoy sex, but sex is framed differently in the male and female psyche. The male framing is one of seeking intense raw, physical sensation in the present, whereas women experience a more emotional and intimate energy and connection surrounding the whole event that is vulnerable and validating. Which explains why women's behaviour doesn't change to account for their sexual regret, because it isn't so much the sex they're seeking, it's the surrounding context. Women want context and stories (they love romantic comedies and dramas), so they will repeat the sex even though they regretted it last time if it means they get to experience that validation again.
humans always loved things tf are u on? and they always loved ppl close to them, i just love how ppl cant stop themselves from absolutely idealizing backwards ages where no one was free and totally demonize progression in society.
@@EmptyD0ll How do you know no one was free, infact your term "free", they were the most free, they could travel anywhere without permission passports or customs, there were little to no restrictions and the ultimate freedom earned them the ultimate consequence, if they failed they perished, all from their own actions. If that isn't ultimate freedom dont know what is. Ohh you like it right now, where you can do what you want and their is a hard back stop where its just limited to life in prison with 3 meals a day , a library and TV, instead of an agonizing DxxxH by starvation or flux from un-boiled water. BTW, traveling is only one minute example, there are far too many even for a 2500pg book.
What gives sex meaning is intimacy. We must obsess over creating, preserving and growing intimacy with our partners. Obsessions over abstinence and consent show us where sex goes wrong, and are utterly unhelpful in making it wonderful.
Just say feminism it was always bad from the start. In England they caused someone out of the country for trying to start a mens shelter. It did a number on the black community in the states.
Her name is Erin Pizzey. Her shelter was the first shelter for DV victims of any gender. Her theory about DV is that it is a learned behaviour and mostly reciprocal. Feminists do not like that opinion.
@@Vendzor never..... Because they got their so called Equality with the Right To Vote at 18......AND they completely dodged any requirements for a Draft.... So they got MORE than just equality ...AND THEY STILL MAD 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
There are a number of refuges for men in England. Local authorities have a duty to provide emergency housing for male victims of domestic violence (and their children) as well as female victims. It is illegal for them to discriminate.
47:00 - the most rigorous laws in the western world apply to a man's obligation to pay child support. No law is more strictly enforced. This being the case, Ms. Perry should explain what she means be 'acceptable abandonment,' since no man can abandon total financial responsibility.
There is a common repeated lie that the left spreads that guys who have money still in 2022 can somehow magically escape paying child support because, um, lawyers and magic juju. Much like with the abortion argument, you will find almost every feminist argument nowadays is based on pretending it is still 1932, not 2022.
@@bobross1829 It is literally impossible for a lower middle-class man or above to avoid the obligation of significant child support. In addition, men, largely, don't physically abandon the child. It is more often the case, by orders of magnitude, that the corrupt mother uses the perversely anti-dad court laws to force the man into absentia. He's left with no child contact, only the bill. Some abandonment.
@@murraymarshawn2175 As I said, I mostly agree and the entire argument is based on a trope that might have been "a little" true back pre-1990 before child support laws became very stringent, but is almost unheard of today except for maybe men who are incarcerated or very poor or with mental illnesses.
I 10000% disagree that humans aren’t “products”. Everyday humans are seen as products from the food they are fed (especially in the USA), to how big companies treat their employees, you’re disposable. Most humans don’t even see each other with any care. Most don’t know their neighbors, the Karen going to Starbucks doesn’t care about you spilling a drink and it having to take more time, all she cares about is her coffee, when she needs to get to work, and keeping her job/making money. Humans in this day and age, unless very close in relationship, don’t see each other with much value. Why do we think shootings have gone up in the USA? We don’t value each other anymore. Humans have become a product I think due to the size and bountiful amounts of options that are at our disposal.
I imagine monogamy is more successful at creating powerful societies, because unless your a king or a queen/ extremely wealthy it’s pretty difficult to create generational wealth if you have lots of kids with different women. Passing down the family legacy becomes a lot more difficult.
You only have to look at the differences in the number of sexual partners gay and lesbian individuals have to know that there is a complete disconnect in the way both sexes regard sex, gay men tend to have very high numbers of partners where as lesbians tend to gravitate toward relationships. The idea that both sexes view relationships and sex equally is a total nonsense. Men are wired completely different in this respect to women and the sooner society gets back to accepting that the better for everyone. The notion that promiscuity is only bad for women is not valid either. While men may think that having huge numbers of sexual partners would be great the reality of that lifestyle does not live up to the fantasy. Casual sex while physically stimulating does not involve the deep psychological intimacy necessary to be fulfilled on anything more than a superficial level, it essentially becomes something akin to a drug. I think women are more attuned to this but men also feel it eventually.
Thank you very much for the insightful podcast! I'm a woman in 40s and got experience with modern dating would after my divorce. I have been much interested in evolutionary phycology etc since my young days and knew the difference between men and women is "real" and big, but it's still difficult world to navigate in! I certainly appreciate that I didn't enter this dating jungle when I was young.. I have been enjoying my freedom since I don't necessarily need to hurry to get a new serious partner since I already have my wonderful child who I'm co-parenting with my ex and I'm financially doing okay. But I feel I've now tried it enough and really want a serious partner. Luckily I think I met one and it's going well so far 😊 I'm telling my teenage daughter that boys and girls are actually very different. I think I'll buy your book to pass this important insight to her! It's really important for young people!!! Thank you!
I'd love to know who it was at the heterodoxy conference that said "there are many ways to change the world. Few will make it better, many will make it worse." And maybe exactly how the speaker phrased it, because it's brilliantly succinct and distilled. There's another one in a similar vein attributed to one Sam Rayburn. "Any jackass can kick down a barn, but it takes a good carpenter to build one." Which I like, but the one you brought up captures what I've noticed a lot better. Somewhere along the line "we" (not me, I never had it) got the idea that "change is good" (probably promoted by people who would most benefit from the change being proposed). It's the heart of progressivism. It morphed into change being elevated to almost a summum bonum, change for its own sake is good. Perpetual revolution. I'm not wrong here, if you boil what we've seen of it down, that's the essence of it. A blank check to make any change one wants, as long as you coat it with a simplistic platitude. The response to the resistance inevitably turns to "oh, you're just afraid of change! Afraid of progress!" Yeah, well, buddy, progress implies a direction and there are an infinite number of directions to "progress". The vast majority of them will suck. Only a very few of them will improve things. And of course as soon as you bring the word "improve" into it, you're talking about a value judgement anyway, which most of today's progressives would rather not think too deeply about.
The sad thing is that now men who get their shit together, get married, and are hardworking and faithful get betrayed by their spouse. They are miserable because they did everything right and were punished for it and younger men see this and dont even try to be responsible because it is a high risk/work low reward situation.
Ahahahaha But make sure to mention at every point that your actually coming from the left, to let construction laborers know that you're not one of them.
well in women's case, they love secularism till 27-30, then just like magic... Means their convictions were never solid, therefore not really convictions at all, this also applies in reverse for women too.
What is the difference between a man working in manual labor jobs vs women working with there bodies? Some people argue that you use what god provides. Using what you have to get by or make a life with is nothing to be ashamed of but there is also nothing wrong with the alternative as well.
I'm chuckling in agreement with the bit about the washing machine being one of the most liberating things for women in history. I moved from Canada to Australia, where most places don't have clothes dryers (or the hookups for them), and it's much harder to afford a place with a dishwasher (or the space/hookups for one). So it's hand-washing dishes and line-drying clothes for me. And even just those two changes have made such a noticeable impact in my daily life (especially because I have health issues and not a ton of energy, plus my husband kind of sucks at doing the dishes). I just feel like such a bigger portion of my day and my energy is dedicated to doing these chores, and there's a lot less flexibility in doing them too (eg try keeping on top of laundry when it's cold and rains all week). I never thought I'd dream of having those two appliances to the degree I do. I can only imagine what it'd be like to be without things like vacuum cleaners or washing machines. It's no wonder women back in the day were expected to stay home all the time - keeping a house running is a lot of work, and all the more so if you don't have these modern conveniences lined up.
Am i the only one getting the " yeah women are making their own decisions and doing what they want and making their own mistakes, but its men's fault."
@@XTheSpartanX7 men tend to be the ones who walk away from relationships in general. “My father Went to buy some milk from the grocery store” didn’t start from nowhere. A lot of dead beats
On the sexual disenchantment and MeToo, I truly believe that at least 80% of the initial people (actually, lets be honest, women) were just women having put themselves in situations where they lost control of events where they sent all the right, or wrong, signals to a man who then responded to them. If you flirt with your boss, sure it might be the gentlemanly thing for him to limit himself to barely flirting back and not make a sexual advance, but he is receiving all the right signals that the woman is sexually interested in him and that she wants him to escalate things as has been the standard mating behavior for decades: Man demonstrates worth, women subtly indicate interest, man pursues woman, and woman either accepts or rejects. But in the workplace this added complication makes it harder for the underling, the woman in this case, to put on the brakes which then makes it harder for the man to spot when the advances are no longer desired, and we have refused to have the conversation what the rules for both roles should be. So we end up either with reports to HR that damages both parties careers or the woman feeling violated and the man feeling confused and unwanted. What is a man to do when culture tells him women want casual sex just as much as he does, and what are women to do when they are told they bear none of the responsibility in initiating if their boundaries ever gets pushed? It's no wonder men and women feel so separated when there is this massive lie sitting between them. Sorry about the rambling, the more I wrote the more associations came to mind.
Imo in an unequal power dynamic situation it is the responsibility of the party with more power to set clear boundaries and reject all advances. Sometimes someone (like a teacher) can seem attractive just by the virtue of having power over you, but even when both parties are consenting adults, responding to such feelings feels like an abuse of power to me. Personally i would never abuse my position of power like that. The idea that my underling might feel pressured and not be fully consenting is pretty disgusting. So I don't see your example being about men and women but rather about power dynamics. You could easily have the same problems being brought up with the genders reversed, if only sexist attitudes didn't condemn men for being in the victim role in regards to relationships, and therefore contribute to intimate partner violence against men going underreported. When the power dynamics are equal, it's not such a big deal. It is then easy to reject someone once they cross your boundaries and no one has to feel violated.
@@Desimere Okay, but how do you define who has more power? Where in the hierarchy do you place the power of youth, seduction and confidence versus financial and authority? I can promise you that the man getting seduced does not feel like he is in power. Power takes on many forms, most of them incredibly ill defined, but it's not so easy to judge who truly has the most power in any given situation unless you insist on a 2dimensional representation of the world. You say you would never abuse your power like that, but how can you know? Have you ever been in a position of authority over someone of the opposite sex and did they flirt with you?
If you are the boss and being flirted with, you should be the one to set those boundaries with the co-worker. That's your job as their boss. Sorry if you are also attracted to that person, but it is a conflict of interest. If there really is a genuine relationship brewing, that is discussed by both parties, then one, or both individuals need to find different jobs. I realize that people very often throw ethics out of the window when it comes to sex in the workplace and that is just silly to me. Grown adults should be able to figure that out without taking their careers.
@@RandomCarrot2806 Yes, i have been in that position, that's how i found out that the sentiment is disgusting to me. In fantasies it can be attractive, but in reality it feels wrong (even though it's still hot). Perhaps the fact that the power balance (in my favor) itself is hot for me is what brings it so clearly into my attention and makes me aware of it, whereas you say that a male superior might not even be aware that they are in a position of power. In those situations i would not take the other party's power as a younger handsome man into consideration, because it does not directly translate into safety/comfort with rejecting me. I do not have a problem with an unbalanced power in terms of attractiveness, money, age and whatnot, only with the type of power that can interfere with consent. Ofc money-based power can interfere with consent if one party is hard pressed to survive on their own and that's also when it goes into sus territory for me.
The suppression of one's instincts is the Abolition of Man as described by CS Lewis in his work of the same name. I recommend this work to anyone thinking about these issues in the strongest possible terms. As someone who reads 110+ books and 400+ essays per year, The Abolition of Man is easily a top ten for me, profound, concise, beautifully articulated 10/10, one of the most important works of the 20th century.
Yes, it’s a fantastic book! It doesn’t seem to be as well known as some of his others, but I keep seeing it pop up lately. Probably because it has a lot to offer this era.
For all that reading you didn’t really bring forth a compelling analysis of either this conversation or C.S. Lewis’ essay. You simply bragged about your reading-rate before presenting us with some descriptive language. What was the thesis of this book? How does that thesis relate to the video? You left me with questions but nothing answered. What the hell man- why you blue-balling Sophia here? Didn’t you hear she’s the eternal lover of knowledge?? The carnal book-dog *always* needs feeding, that stubborn old bitch- so snap to it and send us something that means more than a contrived attempt to score negligible social credit without *actually* contributing anything remotely informative or valuable in return! 😉
It’s so interesting to see nominally atheistic people seeking the truth and eventually formulating rationalistic arguments for Christian wisdom (albeit unintentionally).
Yes Christianity as a tool for socially enforcing monogamy worked well for a long time. But doing so by telling people that it's enforced by a magical sky daddy was it's weakness.
@@UnlistedAccount when people want to make a point or rebel, there is very little that can be done to stop them. The standards set by Christianity went against every desire that we were socially predisposed to. That was the battle. These new age atheist that are making these arguments will see how difficult it is that Christianity achieved what it did socially
@@UnlistedAccount Number 1. How do you know that’s not true? Please say the science since I study that a lot and it doesn’t point to there not being a god. Theoretical physics tells us there are 12 dimensions, the universe is 2d and flat and we are holograms. It’s all an illusion according to theoretical physics. This is what our best and brightest are saying. 2. Tell me, where in the bible did it say god is in the sky exactly? The heavens could be a higher vibrational realm rather than in the sky. We know these exist and can prove that by sending electrons there. I find it amazing how you seem to think you have it all figured out. In reality you have no idea what we are. Why there’s something as opposed to nothing. You’ve watched a BBC space documentary and they told you some bs in school and now you think you know. I can point you to a list of the highest IQ people in history and how many of them believed in a god force. How about Chris Langan with his 200IQ and his CTMU theory. Maybe look him up before throwing around your lazy, ill conceived non ideas of the nature of reality.
