Thank you very much for your conversation. I am lucky enough to have been married to a lovely woman for over 50 years but view the prospects for my grandsons with pessimism so different from the optimism I had at their age. Thank you for speaking out about the pernicious effects of feminism. And to put words in your mouths, there is such a thing as toxic feminism and women have powers that aren’t widely acknowledged but which men know the effects of. Your balance is much to be admired.
@@rebeccapenders5050 lol. No worries, only after I replied to your comment did I notice some other comments reflecting that this video was originally uploaded with Mary Harrington’s name on it (which was fixed before I even got here). Kind of ironic and funny. Cheers!
I read le deuxième sex in french in a swiss college. At the time I found her book a tedious read, and that was before I found out about her complicated and unhealthy, abusive relationship with Jean Paul Sartre.
As part of my PhD hurdles, I read parts (my choice which) of de Beauvoir in French. In the French style of the time, she is not a bad writer. I could actually understand her a lot of the time. French has more potential for reflexive constructions than English. French writers love to take advantage of that. This reflects back on that and that reflects back on this. Which turned out to be part of the problem. After I sorted out the cleverness and reflexivity, I realized it was about 70 percent bs based more on style and cleverness than on substance. Some good insights but not nearly as coherent as it seemed at first. Ah, well. Decades ago. Sorry to force my memories on you. Thanks. Mike
Satre married a woman after he pinky swore with Simone that he would never marry (her or anyone else), and Simone just didn't know what to do. Dude said, "Thanks for all the sex. Byeee."
Janice used the term “enculturate” here, and this is a perfect example of why I need UA-cam videos like this in my life. I’m the kind of person who likes to discuss these things in everyday conversation (in other words: Asperger’s) and whenever I use the word “enculturate” or “enculturation” people look at me funny. Janice just drops it in with no fuss. A further example: the first time I typed it, it took three attempts before I could get autocorrect to back off.
I wish we could go back to purple prose. People used grandiloquent vocabulary like they were hitting the auto-word middle button of a smart phone, but it was nonetheless cohesive. Other people: All'a'y'all. Me: All and sundry.
In 1935 beauvoir and sartre visited nazi Gerrmany. They had nothing to object. Later on sartre became the most vivid supporter of stalin. That is the political extrem beauvoir is writting out of.
I had a feminist professor at my conservative Christian university. She would use class time to literally cry over things like female foot-binding in China. But oopsey-doopsey, she completely forgot about all the men killed in warfare over the eons. This kind of thing takes people off guard and now it sounds strange to push back against this kind of thinking.
I pity your experience, I'd have been furious. There is no western equivalent to foot binding. And even in the Middle Ages men facing death in war saw it as no more than women faced in childbirth.
@@blugaledoh2669 Women only fight in war war because feminists demand the do. They traditionally didn't fight. Only in lost wars did women suffer which made the men fight harder.
That was such an intelligent, well presented, and articulative conversation. Fantastic guest. I like how tammys podcasts arent a full production project. Its more like shes posting her notes. Theres little (if any) directing or editing. Which is refreshing, because i could do this too! For myself! Its a shame that worrying about final production quality would prevent me from having fasinating conversations to start with. Its nice to see an example of "keep it simple" that is still worth "keeping"
This interview, along with the mentioned one with Mary Harrington, touches important points about modern feminism and its shortcomings regarding the very real lives of women, children and also men. However, it is important to be aware not only of the blind spots of Simone de Beauvoir and the second wave of feminism she helped inspire and theorize but also of their critcs (like notably the two women involved in this dialogue). As a human, woman, mother and feminist, I find myself often very torn between the two views or thought currents that Mary Harrington postulates as "feminism of care" and "feminism of freedom (or of rights)" and don't really understand why we cannot have a feminism of care and freedom, being as they are both extremely important either to our personhood and to our families and comunal systems. When I became a mother (to two boys, no less), I felt profoundly hurt and heartbroken by the marxist radical feminism I was brought up in because it completely overlooked the challenges, specificities and demands of mothers and of our children and the challenges they posed to the idealized unisex lifestyle of modernity, to emancipation, in short. There was the underlying sense (seldom overtly spoken but always present in the attitudes towards women that were also mothers) that pregnancy, breastfeeding, attending to children and all those feminine (though not necessarily feminist) endeavours were really an embarassement if not an outright betrayal to the cause of feminism, hence to all women. That "repugnance" towards motherhood and maternal feminity was everywhere, including within myself, to the extent that my feelings towards becoming a mother were very much ambivalent - and that was very hard to navigate indeed! I felt like an embarassement, a traitor, an untouchable, almost an outlaw. Completely invisible and unheard. So, for the reactionaries, a single mother was a shame, but for the progressives any mother was a shame (particularly if married). So one is damned if you do and damned if you don't, there's no getting it right, is there? However. However, it is, I think, intelectually dishonest to demonize feminists, ignore the imense benefits the women's movement brought about either to men, women and children, to deny the widespread repression, suppression and oppresion of women and to pretend that those radical positions of second wave feminists just fell out of the sky, like there were no valid motivations for opposing the stuctures of societies as they were. I am Portuguese and my husband is Italian. In my country, up until 1975 (I was born in 1977), women still could not vote, work outside of the home, travel abroad or marry without a male relative's authorization. Female teachers and nurses were not allowed to marry (it would be disgraceful for their husbands to have wives that had to spend that many hours outside the home and could therefore not attend properly to husbands and children). The honour homicide was still comprised in the law, meaning that husbands could murder their wives based in the mere suspect of adultery. In my husband's country, up untill 1978 women could be compulsively commited to a "manicomio" (mad-house) for getting pregnant outside of a marriage or merely for talking back at their fathers, brothers, husbands or really for any kind of non submissive behaviour. So, patriarcal, masculine oppression was (and still is in many parts of the world) an extremely real thing in the world Simone de Beauvoir lived in. She did not need a bias to theorize an opposition to male domination, she only needed to be a traumatized woman living in 1940's France. Thank you for the discussion though. I learned some things and for that I am grateful. Yours truly, Gabriela Santos.
Please fix and credit Janice Fiamengo . Can you please facilitate a public debate between Janice Fiamengo & Jennifer Bilek, in my opinion it would make many lies obvious to people. Thank you for this interview
@@patricksullivan1827 Nah you missed the point. Janice would pick every calculated lie by Bilek apart one by one with out a nasty word at all. Most peoples lies are easy to tear apart without visuals but i get that you like them.
@@non_ideological_transexual7414 we have such an lack of attention span , and even politicians are sources of misinfo... They only need to fool enough people at election time... People with university degrees are the new laymen... So it's sort of a show don't tell solution... But I also hear what your saying as well .. whatever works.. at this point public discourse can't even handle legitimate criticisms to basic problems... Like infographics for airports ,- we could make social orientation maps.... Perhaps a pipe dream!
I hid this at the bottom of the comments, because UA-cam keeps warning that they will block my comments. I don't need some Feminist flagging me. However, I'd like to point out that in Mary Wollstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792). She said that if women were educated, they would be less promiscuous. Let's briefly Deconstruct this. It more than implies that common working class and poorer uneducated women were understood to be promiscuous by the educated classes. Well, women are highly educated today and it's only gotten worse. We've seen this experiment, and it definitely didn't work. Funny, Ada Lovelace (1815-1852) though wealthy and a highly educated inventor was a strumpet of the most scandalous variety who gambled her fortune away by all accounts. When I see how many billionaires are finding out, how many kids are NOT theirs with "educated" wives. I see no relationship between education and promiscuity. I also hear Feminists saying that there should be more homeless men. I have a Marxist interpretation of gender relations today. Marx's definition of a Proletarian is someone who only has their Labor Power to sell. However, though women can also sell their Labor Power as anyone. Women also have Sexual Power to sell too. Therefore, like those who have college degrees to sell as well. Women are not proletarians but are naturally petty bourgeois, with decidedly petty bourgeois interests. I was raised by my very Feminist grandmother. After being very depressed and suicidal in a "no win, damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario. I finally decided that I deserve to live. And I threw all her Bourgeois Feminist garbage out of my head. Since, all of the leaders of the Soviet Union had college degrees. I see Soviet Socialism as an example of Petty Bourgeois Socialism. The butchering of children. I call it the celebration, indoctrination, and Petty-bourgeois Feminist encouragement of self-hatred by self-genital mutilation.
So many women have bought into their own delusions of me me me because of the feminist anger. I worry for my sons - hoping they find women that have not been damaged by this horrible ideology of man hatred.
From experience, I can tell you that toxic feminism can destroy what is good and loving in a relationship. If a man is bullied and belittled, it is time to run.....and not look back. The weaker sex is not weak at all when it comes to destructive feminism which to my mind is simply ordinary narcissism.
When I was around 10 yrs old we went to a bday party, and the maid’s 18yr old son got sent to the store to buy more sodas and on the way back he got picked up by police, and sent to military service academy. This happened in South America, late 80s. I remember being so scared that at any time I could just be picked up and sent away to the military. I also remember when boys turn 18 and win the lottery to serve they have to get that ugly army haircut, so when enlisting time comes around everyone knows cause u see boys walking around w bald heads, and it kinda becomes like a joke. everyone has a laugh that boys have to go through that, even the boys themselves start finding ways to laugh at it. For ex. If there’s a boy that’s too vein, or just has really nice hair, people will make it a point to give him that ugly haircut, almost like that Jackass prank where camera guy sneaks around buzzing guys heads.
@@lmr1049 your comment is cringe and embarrassing. Feel free to share with us why you believe so. my reasoning for your common being cringe is that it’s always cringe to say something is cringe without explaining why.
We men do have a way to defend ourselves. We walk away. What a lot of women don't get yet is that when we are done, we are done. We will enjoy our lives alone doing projects. The peace is something we wont sacrifice once we have it.
But women do that too 😅 walk away, stay away, do their thing, not wanting to sacrifice their peace once they have it I do agree partly though At this point, I think there are many women who forget that men are human beings I think they're both being dehumanized and looked at more like they're potential ressources than living beings
@@LeJa-ks1vcit's also how they've groomed an entire generation of men and women that they don't need each other. A healthy society sees men and women as complimentary to each other and not as adversaries.
@@LeJa-ks1vcsure, but the real reason men walking away is a major problem is that our way of life needs vast amount of physical labour and skill / knowledge to maintain. That’s what men contribute. If enough men check out, eventually there won’t be any petrol at the pump, public transport, or even water in your kitchen tap. I promise you in the nicest possible way that women won’t be walking away anywhere at that point.
@@fifthpint4571 "if enough men check out"? 😅 what kind of fantasy world are you living in? If enough nurses check out we could all rather shoot ourselves + family when sick - also not gonna happen any time soon If - when - could be - should be - would be For f sake, stop dreaming and start doing something helpful and productive
Men have found "that place" to be alone with other men... it's ALONE. The "man cave" was so insulting when it got coined. As if the man isn't allowed to find a normal room in the house he's paying for that he could call his space. It had to be in the basement, or the unheated garage because yeah, men are SOOO powerful. We are benevolent creatures from birth. We have always known we can not create life, only assist it's thriving. Glad you ladies are having these unpopular conversations.
In the 14th century men had exciting careers as astronauts and volcanologists. Women had to stay home raising babies and watching soap operas. It was so unfair!
As a young child i realised that having my own family wasn't for me, the burden of three younger sibling on me was extremely stressful and something i wouldn't choose for myself. However i have had many friends with children that i have supported and had much joy in watching and being a part of the young life developing. Motherhood is the foundation of society.
Provide and protect the special relationships some women enjoy with men. There is almost inevitably a type of condescension involved even if there is also benevolence. Women are obviously secondary in most these relationships.
That is quite the philosophy of resentment. It definitely has some Echoes of the Marxist style and basic premise in it of exploiting the emotional content of class resentment. It's also amazing how much of the trans ideology is actually founded in these feminist ideas. I had been saying for a while now that trans invasion of women's spaces and co-opting of women's identity was very much a self-own. That was just based on practical observation, but it's clear that it was actually the weapons women created as part of the feminist movement that are currently causing this female crisis. And of course all such philosophies ultimately trace back to a constructivist view of society and a relativist conception of truth. But that's basically everything since the 1800s.
However, I'd like to point out that in Mary Wollstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792). She said that if women were educated, they would be less promiscuous. Let's briefly Deconstruct this. It more than implies that common working class and poorer uneducated women were understood to be promiscuous by the educated classes. Well, women are highly educated today and it's only gotten worse. We've seen this experiment, and it definitely didn't work. Funny, Ada Lovelace (1815-1852) though wealthy and a highly educated inventor was a strumpet of the most scandalous variety who gambled her fortune away by all accounts. When I see how many billionaires are finding out, how many kids are NOT theirs with "educated" wives. I see no relationship between education and promiscuity. I also hear Feminists saying that there should be more homeless men. I have a Marxist interpretation of gender relations today. Marx's definition of a Proletarian is someone who only has their Labor Power to sell. However, though women can also sell their Labor Power as anyone. Women also have Sexual Power to sell too. Therefore, like those who have college degrees to sell as well. Women are not proletarians but are naturally petty bourgeois, with decidedly petty bourgeois interests. I was raised by my very Feminist grandmother. After being very depressed and suicidal in a "no win, damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario. I finally decided that I deserve to live. And I threw all her Bourgeois Feminist garbage out of my head. Since, all of the leaders of the Soviet Union had college degrees. I see Soviet Socialism as an example of Petty Bourgeois Socialism. The butchering of children. I call it the celebration, indoctrination, and Petty-bourgeois Feminist encouragement of self-hatred by self-genital mutilation.
Interesting enough, when I googled Beauvoir while listening I read that she had signed a petition in 1977 against a law which forbid sex with underage (under 15) children.
@@LeJa-ks1vc Yeah, some feminists actually cared about the rights and autonomy, and empowerment of young people. Judith Levine still carries the torch.
Please invite Sheila Jeffreys, she is a historian of the women's movement and can explain the background of what particular feminist ideas where a reaction against and the myriad of ways in which particular thinkers also were and are misrepresented.
Why ? Sheila Jeffreys is one of the worst femminst "theorists" that misassign causes to things so that the underlying causes of many things are never addressed where women's blame is rightly pointed. Lesbians should have Zero say in the formation of heterosexual culture and how it is ordered especially poisonous radical feminists that deny basic science about humans like her. Do you you think i should have a say in how men should be men ? That would be INSANE, I am an OUTLIER & so is Sheila Jeffreys. At least i recognize average sex differences do not deny science , Radical feminists are the WORST of all feminists in that regard. Feminists lie about feminism and the history of it that is why Janice Fiamango ,Carrie Gress ,Racheal Wilson others are doing the research and EXPOSING LIES.😆
If you're looking for an eye-opening treatment of the creepy spirituality behind 1960s feminism, Carrie Gress has done a massive amount of work. Her book The Anti-Mary Exposed is very good; very Catholic, too.
This is interesting 🤔 Simone was rare. Radical. Im sure living in those times made her bitter! It's almost as if she wanted to be able to imagine herself outside of the prescribed roles she had no interest in.
Perversion by any name or means leads to an unhappy life without meaning. I appreciate your informed conversation, but choose to spend my time and mind on that which is good, uplifting, meaningful, and thrilling. Though I recognized that one must have some knowledge to know what does not inhabit the value of goodness and grace.
I wince a bit when I reread some of Simone de Beauvoir because it's naturally dated, but being older than Dr Fiamengo and half French, I have seen families who were de Beauvoir's contemporaries. They were very loving families but I can see a bit where she was coming from. There's a danger in comparing our lives now with those of de Beauvoir's in France.
I completely agree with some statements against Simone, but let's not put men on a pedestal... I don't understand this "either or" need... it's never "either, or" it's almost always a "both and..." plus let' not forget, God gave patriarchy as a punishment the restored world should see equality between men and women if feminism is seen as a movement to reach that equality and by that I mean a world where we both fit in, not a world where a woman needs to be like a man, if feminity would be an action to restore equality then yes I am 100% on board but I believe some people see feminism as a way to say women are better than men when in reality... we could both be better...
I think we need to consider the importance of feminism for women that are "undesirable". If no man is coming to her rescue she does need the agency to thrive on her own. I hate feminism but I've been tinkering with this caveat.
I hear Black people reject the myth of safety and solidarity among Black people, though whenever an incident is publicized about a White person winning a sports award, or some type of win in the arts or music, or any disagreement or fight, in that case, many Blacks line up in racial solidarity even beyond a sensible argument. I'm thinking of the discussion around Caitlin Clark winning achievements over some Black WNBA players _because she's White_ as being more important than her talent and popularity with huge crowds paying money to watch her play. On the other hand, little solidarity in a constructive sense. I've heard the same for a woman who built an all-female business corporation. In place of harmony, she found gossip, jealousy, preening, pointless social competition, sexual fawning over a few male visitors, plus abusive entitlement by a few "Queens" who failed to do work for which they were responsible or dumped their work on other women. Jewish community in-fighting is legendary, but Jews may be somewhat more drawn together in actual solidarity, end setting aside differences, over the necessities of survival and success.
I mentioned to a friend at my place just before how i was watching this video, and spoke of de Beauvoir's existentialism and so called "authenticity. my friend told a story of someone he knew who had such a phase - it was typified by being at an outdoor concert by a major Italian symphony orchestra, and this guy BOOED so that is all "authenticity" in this context is - loutish, boorish and 304ish self indulgence. i have watched 23 minutes and, not impugning you in any way, that is enough for me to see that rejecting the thought of and life de Beauvoir correct and necessary is. to me she was a spoiled and embittered child who thought rebelling was worth anything , and being rather clever built an intellectual edifice to justify this self indulgence. of course she would never have been happy i will admit however that i have always detested existentialism . . . .
There is a lot of loaded/coded meaning in much of what passes for the liberal lexicon today. I find the idea of Marxism as somehow belonging to the left wing of liberalism particularly preposterous. Marxism is NOT left of centre, it is not liberal at all and applying Left-Right descriptors to it is deceiving. National Socialism grew out of Marxism, both are anti liberal, but both maintained they were the inevitable conclusion of liberalism and presaged it's extinction. The idea of equality is another of these bug bears of mine. Equality between people can never be achieved. The Magna Carta forced King John to concede that people should be treated under the same laws, and that those laws should be applied to everyone. BUT, the idea that anyone is the equivalent of anyone else reduces the human being down to a digit. This idea of equality is particularly egregious to the treatment and regard in which the sexes are held. It seems obvious to me that the current obsession with the idea of "trans" and thr "Queering" of social norms is inevitably going to mean men will dominate and oppress women because men are on the whole larger, faster and stronger. Without social conventions the relationship between every individual must be negotiated from first principles and society will fall apart. Accommodations for women, and recognition of their particular status is the only way a society can flourish. Men need to display and provide consideration for the particular roles and abilities women bring to society. Just as the particular qualities of men should be recognised. Vive la difference.
16:0016:00 It seems as if de Beauvoir had a little of the Ghislaine Maxwell, i.e. the killer instinct, like the 1:21:03 lioness who provides for the lazy lion in exchange for attention or recognition. Maybe she started drinking or drank to drown her resentment. I have heard that in spite of her views on women being deprived of freedom from falling victim to traditional feminine roles, that she was never able to extricate herself from Sartre, who valued her as an intellectual companion, but who she might have been better off leaving, had she been able to end the relationship. However, being a public couple, they were able to preserve the mystique of their ,,special union,, until the news broke some time after they had died that, romantically speaking, it was far from a ,,bed of roses,, especially for her.
1:21:03 None the less Maxwell, for all we know, may have taken a few pages out of ,,The Second Sex,, de Beauvoirs ground breaking book, and felt she was just doing a favour to those girls, exposing them to a more ,,lib,, view of life, both self justifying and otherwise gratifying to herself and supposedly to them, as well. At least that is how she came across at her trial. That she had just done these young ladies a favour.
@@patricksullivan1827What the hell are you on about? Trump probably won't be re-elected, but your country will be decimated in the process. Be very careful what you wish for.
Alrlatl is a hunting tool women invented to throw spears with more speed, compromislzing their lack of muscle power. Women have always been hunters, but in stead of muscles, they used brainpower. Know your history and don't come across like a fool again!
There is absolutely no evidence that women invented or used the atlatl, or spear thrower, which has been invented dozens of times over in many cultures. In every premodern culture where the atlatl is still used, it is used by men. When depicted in cave art, it is depicted as being used by men. The decorated atlatl we have discovered from the neolithic era all have decorations associated with masculinity cults. The only person claiming women use the atlatl to hunt is Michelle Bebber, and her only evidence is that women who use an atlatl can come close to negating the natural advantage of a man throwing a spear unassisted. However, a woman using a atlatl is still completely outperformed by a man using an atlatl. The spear thrower was almost certainly invented by men looking to extend the range and power of their spears to allow for hunting larger game. Bebber's theory that women hunted alongside men is based on zero physical evidence and _wild_ speculation from absolutely spurious reasoning. It's junk science of the worst kind, and _Scientific Reports_ only damaged their reputation by publishing it.
I’m pretty sure two women who are already happily married for decades need not feel the need to impress other men as a means for them to be considered as ‘pick me’ girls. How about you try to grow up a little, listen closely, maybe learn something and just try respecting the wisdom these women now have to share with the world.
Not belittling what a girl goes through at puberty but a boy has his own struggles. The penis is constantly going up and down with absolutely zero stimulation. You spend so much time trying to stealthily readjust things down there hoping no one notices and fearing a random erection popping up in a situation where it can’t be hidden. We all have struggles. We need to understand that they are different but one is a victim because we’re all in it together
It would be very interesting to watch you have Alison Tielman from the Honey badger brigade as a guest. Also Paul Elam would be as much interesting as a guest.
Thank you for explaining a better evolutionary reason for male strength and testosterone. Not because men have always been stronger that they went out to hunt, but because women were more important due to their ability to have children that the men were sent out to hunt. Then, the stronger men were more successful at hunting and so evolved the sexual difference by testosterone. I'd never managed to combine the importance of childbirth to societies with the reason that women were NOT sent out to hunt elephants in the jungle. I always thought it was due to the male's strength, but now you've put it the other way phylogenically. Men evolved bigger and stronger BECAUSE they were sent out to hunt dangerous beasts, and the reason for that was that without women in the tribe to have babies, the tribe was doomed. According to natural selection, that would have happened more often than not before our ancestors worked out the best way to keep their shows on the roads.
@@fifthpint4571 It's past history. Other than that, your replies, while a nice surprise after so long since the video that I can't remember much of it at all, are non-specific regarding you disagreement. Have you studied evolutionary biology and read Darwin's Origin? I don't have any basis to discuss this with you because you have not mentioned any reasonable explanation for your point. I hope you can understand that I don't mean to insult, but what specifically is it that you do not understand?
@@Wit_Shunter my key point is that I have not seen any evidence to suggest that males developed testosterone as a primary regulating hormone as a result of hunting, and females „developed” into females (with all secondary and tertiary characteristics) as a result of staying at home and child bearing. It is considerably more likely that males opted for the best possible use of their abilities to benefit the kinship group, rather than activities shaping our bodies to this degree (producing radically different hormones). This is what we also see in virtually all mammals fossils (including humans) - dymorphism goes back as far as we are able to see. I simply don’t know where your theory came from because it does sound rather fanciful and I would like to understand what prompted it. Thanks
Wonderful interview. Janice is an absolute rock star. Sharp and articulate.
Great convo, thank you ladies for shedding more light on this feminist sex cult 🙏
Thank you very much for your conversation. I am lucky enough to have been married to a lovely woman for over 50 years but view the prospects for my grandsons with pessimism so different from the optimism I had at their age. Thank you for speaking out about the pernicious effects of feminism. And to put words in your mouths, there is such a thing as toxic feminism and women have powers that aren’t widely acknowledged but which men know the effects of. Your balance is much to be admired.
Great stuff! Janice is fantastic and Tammy is one of the best interviewers out there. Two brilliant, circumspect, compassionate women. ❤
Mary?
@@stvbrsn Whoops, I had just listened to an interview with Mary Harrington lol
I'll edit. Thanks!
@@rebeccapenders5050 lol. No worries, only after I replied to your comment did I notice some other comments reflecting that this video was originally uploaded with Mary Harrington’s name on it (which was fixed before I even got here). Kind of ironic and funny. Cheers!
Janice is fantastic.
Wonderful talk. Janice is amazing and I hope you have her back.!
We've all got Janice's back 😉
I read le deuxième sex in french in a swiss college. At the time I found her book a tedious read, and that was before I found out about her complicated and unhealthy, abusive relationship with Jean Paul Sartre.
As part of my PhD hurdles, I read parts (my choice which) of de Beauvoir in French. In the French style of the time, she is not a bad writer. I could actually understand her a lot of the time. French has more potential for reflexive constructions than English. French writers love to take advantage of that. This reflects back on that and that reflects back on this. Which turned out to be part of the problem. After I sorted out the cleverness and reflexivity, I realized it was about 70 percent bs based more on style and cleverness than on substance. Some good insights but not nearly as coherent as it seemed at first. Ah, well. Decades ago. Sorry to force my memories on you. Thanks. Mike
Satre married a woman after he pinky swore with Simone that he would never marry (her or anyone else), and Simone just didn't know what to do. Dude said, "Thanks for all the sex. Byeee."
I once heard something to the effect of, "most philosophical arguments are just people working through their childhood neuroses".
Janice used the term “enculturate” here, and this is a perfect example of why I need UA-cam videos like this in my life.
I’m the kind of person who likes to discuss these things in everyday conversation (in other words: Asperger’s) and whenever I use the word “enculturate” or “enculturation” people look at me funny.
Janice just drops it in with no fuss. A further example: the first time I typed it, it took three attempts before I could get autocorrect to back off.
I wish we could go back to purple prose. People used grandiloquent vocabulary like they were hitting the auto-word middle button of a smart phone, but it was nonetheless cohesive.
Other people: All'a'y'all.
Me: All and sundry.
In 1935 beauvoir and sartre visited nazi Gerrmany. They had nothing to object. Later on sartre became the most vivid supporter of stalin. That is the political extrem beauvoir is writting out of.
Thank you so much for this continuing series with Janice, Tammy! I appreciate it so much. I don't miss a single discussion between you two.
Yes it is much needed , Jordan is too much of a feminist to do this 🤭
The title is incorrect - this is Janice Fiamango, not Mary Harrington
This was excellent and I learned so much. Thank you, dear Mrs. Peterson and dear Mrs. Fiamengo.
I had a feminist professor at my conservative Christian university. She would use class time to literally cry over things like female foot-binding in China. But oopsey-doopsey, she completely forgot about all the men killed in warfare over the eons. This kind of thing takes people off guard and now it sounds strange to push back against this kind of thinking.
I pity your experience, I'd have been furious. There is no western equivalent to foot binding. And even in the Middle Ages men facing death in war saw it as no more than women faced in childbirth.
Well tbf women are also killed in war.
@@blugaledoh2669 Women only fight in war war because feminists demand the do. They traditionally didn't fight. Only in lost wars did women suffer which made the men fight harder.
@@blugaledoh2669 sadly, not as much.
@@AmanSingh-nt3ll depends I suppose
That was such an intelligent, well presented, and articulative conversation. Fantastic guest.
I like how tammys podcasts arent a full production project. Its more like shes posting her notes. Theres little (if any) directing or editing. Which is refreshing, because i could do this too! For myself! Its a shame that worrying about final production quality would prevent me from having fasinating conversations to start with. Its nice to see an example of "keep it simple" that is still worth "keeping"
This interview, along with the mentioned one with Mary Harrington, touches important points about modern feminism and its shortcomings regarding the very real lives of women, children and also men. However, it is important to be aware not only of the blind spots of Simone de Beauvoir and the second wave of feminism she helped inspire and theorize but also of their critcs (like notably the two women involved in this dialogue). As a human, woman, mother and feminist, I find myself often very torn between the two views or thought currents that Mary Harrington postulates as "feminism of care" and "feminism of freedom (or of rights)" and don't really understand why we cannot have a feminism of care and freedom, being as they are both extremely important either to our personhood and to our families and comunal systems.
When I became a mother (to two boys, no less), I felt profoundly hurt and heartbroken by the marxist radical feminism I was brought up in because it completely overlooked the challenges, specificities and demands of mothers and of our children and the challenges they posed to the idealized unisex lifestyle of modernity, to emancipation, in short. There was the underlying sense (seldom overtly spoken but always present in the attitudes towards women that were also mothers) that pregnancy, breastfeeding, attending to children and all those feminine (though not necessarily feminist) endeavours were really an embarassement if not an outright betrayal to the cause of feminism, hence to all women. That "repugnance" towards motherhood and maternal feminity was everywhere, including within myself, to the extent that my feelings towards becoming a mother were very much ambivalent - and that was very hard to navigate indeed! I felt like an embarassement, a traitor, an untouchable, almost an outlaw. Completely invisible and unheard. So, for the reactionaries, a single mother was a shame, but for the progressives any mother was a shame (particularly if married). So one is damned if you do and damned if you don't, there's no getting it right, is there?
However.
However, it is, I think, intelectually dishonest to demonize feminists, ignore the imense benefits the women's movement brought about either to men, women and children, to deny the widespread repression, suppression and oppresion of women and to pretend that those radical positions of second wave feminists just fell out of the sky, like there were no valid motivations for opposing the stuctures of societies as they were. I am Portuguese and my husband is Italian. In my country, up until 1975 (I was born in 1977), women still could not vote, work outside of the home, travel abroad or marry without a male relative's authorization. Female teachers and nurses were not allowed to marry (it would be disgraceful for their husbands to have wives that had to spend that many hours outside the home and could therefore not attend properly to husbands and children). The honour homicide was still comprised in the law, meaning that husbands could murder their wives based in the mere suspect of adultery. In my husband's country, up untill 1978 women could be compulsively commited to a "manicomio" (mad-house) for getting pregnant outside of a marriage or merely for talking back at their fathers, brothers, husbands or really for any kind of non submissive behaviour.
So, patriarcal, masculine oppression was (and still is in many parts of the world) an extremely real thing in the world Simone de Beauvoir lived in. She did not need a bias to theorize an opposition to male domination, she only needed to be a traumatized woman living in 1940's France.
Thank you for the discussion though. I learned some things and for that I am grateful.
Yours truly,
Gabriela Santos.
Fascinating!
Great conversation. Janice is on another level of articulation that’s such a pleasure to absorb ❤
Please fix and credit Janice Fiamengo . Can you please facilitate a public debate between Janice Fiamengo & Jennifer Bilek, in my opinion it would make many lies obvious to people.
Thank you for this interview
Moreover - some kind of infographic presentation. 😮 That's the real solution to "misinformation"
@@patricksullivan1827 Nah you missed the point. Janice would pick every calculated lie by Bilek apart one by one with out a nasty word at all. Most peoples lies are easy to tear apart without visuals but i get that you like them.
@@non_ideological_transexual7414 we have such an lack of attention span , and even politicians are sources of misinfo... They only need to fool enough people at election time... People with university degrees are the new laymen... So it's sort of a show don't tell solution... But I also hear what your saying as well .. whatever works.. at this point public discourse can't even handle legitimate criticisms to basic problems... Like infographics for airports ,- we could make social orientation maps.... Perhaps a pipe dream!
Thank you, Tammy. Love listening to Janice speak.
Great!
love you guys, hanging on every word
Simone de Beauvoir sounds like the worst kind of person to take seriously.
Her and Sartre were essentially ghouls. Agents of evil, both. It’s genuinely tough to find anything good to say about either of them.
Awesomeness !!!
I hid this at the bottom of the comments, because UA-cam keeps warning that they will block my comments. I don't need some Feminist flagging me.
However, I'd like to point out that in Mary Wollstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792). She said that if women were educated, they would be less promiscuous.
Let's briefly Deconstruct this. It more than implies that common working class and poorer uneducated women were understood to be promiscuous by the educated classes. Well, women are highly educated today and it's only gotten worse. We've seen this experiment, and it definitely didn't work. Funny, Ada Lovelace (1815-1852) though wealthy and a highly educated inventor was a strumpet of the most scandalous variety who gambled her fortune away by all accounts. When I see how many billionaires are finding out, how many kids are NOT theirs with "educated" wives. I see no relationship between education and promiscuity.
I also hear Feminists saying that there should be more homeless men.
I have a Marxist interpretation of gender relations today. Marx's definition of a Proletarian is someone who only has their Labor Power to sell. However, though women can also sell their Labor Power as anyone. Women also have Sexual Power to sell too. Therefore, like those who have college degrees to sell as well. Women are not proletarians but are naturally petty bourgeois, with decidedly petty bourgeois interests.
I was raised by my very Feminist grandmother. After being very depressed and suicidal in a "no win, damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario. I finally decided that I deserve to live. And I threw all her Bourgeois Feminist garbage out of my head.
Since, all of the leaders of the Soviet Union had college degrees. I see Soviet Socialism as an example of Petty Bourgeois Socialism.
The butchering of children. I call it the celebration, indoctrination, and Petty-bourgeois Feminist encouragement of self-hatred by self-genital mutilation.
Looking forward to hearing this
So many women have bought into their own delusions of me me me because of the feminist anger. I worry for my sons - hoping they find women that have not been damaged by this horrible ideology of man hatred.
From experience, I can tell you that toxic feminism can destroy what is good and loving in a relationship. If a man is bullied and belittled, it is time to run.....and not look back. The weaker sex is not weak at all when it comes to destructive feminism which to my mind is simply ordinary narcissism.
When I was around 10 yrs old we went to a bday party, and the maid’s 18yr old son got sent to the store to buy more sodas and on the way back he got picked up by police, and sent to military service academy. This happened in South America, late 80s.
I remember being so scared that at any time I could just be picked up and sent away to the military.
I also remember when boys turn 18 and win the lottery to serve they have to get that ugly army haircut, so when enlisting time comes around everyone knows cause u see boys walking around w bald heads, and it kinda becomes like a joke. everyone has a laugh that boys have to go through that, even the boys themselves start finding ways to laugh at it. For ex. If there’s a boy that’s too vein, or just has really nice hair, people will make it a point to give him that ugly haircut, almost like that Jackass prank where camera guy sneaks around buzzing guys heads.
You should interview Rachel Wilson, author of Occult Feminism. She goes so much deeper than this.
Just finished the audiobook and started round two. It truly is next level. 💪GOD Wins🙏
Rachel Wilson is cringe and embarrassing.
Tell us why.@@lmr1049
@@lmr1049 your comment is cringe and embarrassing. Feel free to share with us why you believe so. my reasoning for your common being cringe is that it’s always cringe to say something is cringe without explaining why.
Curious comment. I just suggested to Rachel Wilson to look into the works of Janice Fiamengo! Perhaps, soon, they will cross paths.
Are we awake now🕊
We men do have a way to defend ourselves. We walk away. What a lot of women don't get yet is that when we are done, we are done. We will enjoy our lives alone doing projects. The peace is something we wont sacrifice once we have it.
But women do that too 😅 walk away, stay away, do their thing, not wanting to sacrifice their peace once they have it
I do agree partly though
At this point, I think there are many women who forget that men are human beings
I think they're both being dehumanized and looked at more like they're potential ressources than living beings
@@LeJa-ks1vcit's also how they've groomed an entire generation of men and women that they don't need each other. A healthy society sees men and women as complimentary to each other and not as adversaries.
@@LeJa-ks1vcsure, but the real reason men walking away is a major problem is that our way of life needs vast amount of physical labour and skill / knowledge to maintain. That’s what men contribute. If enough men check out, eventually there won’t be any petrol at the pump, public transport, or even water in your kitchen tap. I promise you in the nicest possible way that women won’t be walking away anywhere at that point.
@@fifthpint4571 "if enough men check out"? 😅 what kind of fantasy world are you living in?
If enough nurses check out we could all rather shoot ourselves + family when sick - also not gonna happen any time soon
If - when - could be - should be - would be
For f sake, stop dreaming and start doing something helpful and productive
Men have found "that place" to be alone with other men... it's ALONE. The "man cave" was so insulting when it got coined. As if the man isn't allowed to find a normal room in the house he's paying for that he could call his space. It had to be in the basement, or the unheated garage because yeah, men are SOOO powerful. We are benevolent creatures from birth. We have always known we can not create life, only assist it's thriving. Glad you ladies are having these unpopular conversations.
In the 14th century men had exciting careers as astronauts and volcanologists. Women had to stay home raising babies and watching soap operas. It was so unfair!
😂😂😂, truly had a great laugh.
As a young child i realised that having my own family wasn't for me, the burden of three younger sibling on me was extremely stressful and something i wouldn't choose for myself.
However i have had many friends with children that i have supported and had much joy in watching and being a part of the young life developing. Motherhood is the foundation of society.
The hand that rocks the cradle rules the word. That's powerful not inferior.
Provide and protect the special relationships some women enjoy with men. There is almost inevitably a type of condescension involved even if there is also benevolence. Women are obviously secondary in most these relationships.
That is quite the philosophy of resentment. It definitely has some Echoes of the Marxist style and basic premise in it of exploiting the emotional content of class resentment. It's also amazing how much of the trans ideology is actually founded in these feminist ideas. I had been saying for a while now that trans invasion of women's spaces and co-opting of women's identity was very much a self-own. That was just based on practical observation, but it's clear that it was actually the weapons women created as part of the feminist movement that are currently causing this female crisis. And of course all such philosophies ultimately trace back to a constructivist view of society and a relativist conception of truth. But that's basically everything since the 1800s.
However, I'd like to point out that in Mary Wollstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792). She said that if women were educated, they would be less promiscuous.
Let's briefly Deconstruct this. It more than implies that common working class and poorer uneducated women were understood to be promiscuous by the educated classes. Well, women are highly educated today and it's only gotten worse. We've seen this experiment, and it definitely didn't work. Funny, Ada Lovelace (1815-1852) though wealthy and a highly educated inventor was a strumpet of the most scandalous variety who gambled her fortune away by all accounts. When I see how many billionaires are finding out, how many kids are NOT theirs with "educated" wives. I see no relationship between education and promiscuity.
I also hear Feminists saying that there should be more homeless men.
I have a Marxist interpretation of gender relations today. Marx's definition of a Proletarian is someone who only has their Labor Power to sell. However, though women can also sell their Labor Power as anyone. Women also have Sexual Power to sell too. Therefore, like those who have college degrees to sell as well. Women are not proletarians but are naturally petty bourgeois, with decidedly petty bourgeois interests.
I was raised by my very Feminist grandmother. After being very depressed and suicidal in a "no win, damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario. I finally decided that I deserve to live. And I threw all her Bourgeois Feminist garbage out of my head.
Since, all of the leaders of the Soviet Union had college degrees. I see Soviet Socialism as an example of Petty Bourgeois Socialism.
The butchering of children. I call it the celebration, indoctrination, and Petty-bourgeois Feminist encouragement of self-hatred by self-genital mutilation.
That's a great comparison about the little kids and the power point.
There is nothing more creative than growing a little in your body!
So if you are looking for bad ideas that can destroy individuals and societies, read Simone de Beauvoir?
I would also like to hear how the transgender craze and sexualizing of children is the result of 1970's feminism.
Interesting enough, when I googled Beauvoir while listening I read that she had signed a petition in 1977 against a law which forbid sex with underage (under 15) children.
@@LeJa-ks1vc Good sleuthing!
sexualization is, in itself, a feminist concept.
It's a logical conclusion of ideas like free love and gender as a social construct.
@@LeJa-ks1vc Yeah, some feminists actually cared about the rights and autonomy, and empowerment of young people. Judith Levine still carries the torch.
I've heard of a meta analysis of the gender violence literature that finds parity. Can't find it or remember where I heard of it. Anyone got any info?
Please invite Sheila Jeffreys, she is a historian of the women's movement and can explain the background of what particular feminist ideas where a reaction against and the myriad of ways in which particular thinkers also were and are misrepresented.
Why ? Sheila Jeffreys is one of the worst femminst "theorists" that misassign causes to things so that the underlying causes of many things are never addressed where women's blame is rightly pointed. Lesbians should have Zero say in the formation of heterosexual culture and how it is ordered especially poisonous radical feminists that deny basic science about humans like her. Do you you think i should have a say in how men should be men ? That would be INSANE, I am an OUTLIER & so is Sheila Jeffreys. At least i recognize average sex differences do not deny science , Radical feminists are the WORST of all feminists in that regard. Feminists lie about feminism and the history of it that is why Janice Fiamango ,Carrie Gress ,Racheal Wilson others are doing the research and EXPOSING LIES.😆
It’s summer already in Canada???
the philosopher Carrie Gress would be a great guest
I'm going to interview Carrie Gress. Thank you
@@TammyPetersonPodcast oooh, I can’t wait
@@TammyPetersonPodcastGreat! 👍🏻
If you're looking for an eye-opening treatment of the creepy spirituality behind 1960s feminism, Carrie Gress has done a massive amount of work. Her book The Anti-Mary Exposed is very good; very Catholic, too.
This is interesting 🤔 Simone was rare. Radical. Im sure living in those times made her bitter! It's almost as if she wanted to be able to imagine herself outside of the prescribed roles she had no interest in.
Perversion by any name or means leads to an unhappy life without meaning. I appreciate your informed conversation, but choose to spend my time and mind on that which is good, uplifting, meaningful, and thrilling. Though I recognized that one must have some knowledge to know what does not inhabit the value of goodness and grace.
Come back to Ottawa, Janice.
I wince a bit when I reread some of Simone de Beauvoir because it's naturally dated, but being older than Dr Fiamengo and half French, I have seen families who were de Beauvoir's contemporaries. They were very loving families but I can see a bit where she was coming from. There's a danger in comparing our lives now with those of de Beauvoir's in France.
this simone, i read sonmewherr that she dated another famous french philosopher.but they had a weird relationship with multiple lovers.
I completely agree with some statements against Simone, but let's not put men on a pedestal... I don't understand this "either or" need... it's never "either, or" it's almost always a "both and..." plus let' not forget, God gave patriarchy as a punishment the restored world should see equality between men and women if feminism is seen as a movement to reach that equality and by that I mean a world where we both fit in, not a world where a woman needs to be like a man, if feminity would be an action to restore equality then yes I am 100% on board but I believe some people see feminism as a way to say women are better than men when in reality... we could both be better...
Janice's series addresses some male feminists from the 1800s
26:05 she also doesn't recognize that it goes both ways. Men also don't recognize themselves as a different class from women.
I think we need to consider the importance of feminism for women that are "undesirable". If no man is coming to her rescue she does need the agency to thrive on her own. I hate feminism but I've been tinkering with this caveat.
I hear Black people reject the myth of safety and solidarity among Black people, though whenever an incident is publicized about a White person winning a sports award, or some type of win in the arts or music, or any disagreement or fight, in that case, many Blacks line up in racial solidarity even beyond a sensible argument.
I'm thinking of the discussion around Caitlin Clark winning achievements over some Black WNBA players _because she's White_ as being more important than her talent and popularity with huge crowds paying money to watch her play.
On the other hand, little solidarity in a constructive sense.
I've heard the same for a woman who built an all-female business corporation. In place of harmony, she found gossip, jealousy, preening, pointless social competition, sexual fawning over a few male visitors, plus abusive entitlement by a few "Queens" who failed to do work for which they were responsible or dumped their work on other women.
Jewish community in-fighting is legendary, but Jews may be somewhat more drawn together in actual solidarity, end setting aside differences, over the necessities of survival and success.
I mentioned to a friend at my place just before how i was watching this video, and spoke of de Beauvoir's existentialism and so called "authenticity.
my friend told a story of someone he knew who had such a phase - it was typified by being at an outdoor concert by a major Italian symphony orchestra, and this guy BOOED
so that is all "authenticity" in this context is - loutish, boorish and 304ish self indulgence.
i have watched 23 minutes and, not impugning you in any way, that is enough for me to see that rejecting the thought of and life de Beauvoir correct and necessary is.
to me she was a spoiled and embittered child who thought rebelling was worth anything , and being rather clever built an intellectual edifice to justify this self indulgence.
of course she would never have been happy
i will admit however that i have always detested existentialism . . . .
Hmmmm…sounds to me like Mlle. de Beauvoir grew up in a dysfunctional alcoholic family. 😢
There is a lot of loaded/coded meaning in much of what passes for the liberal lexicon today.
I find the idea of Marxism as somehow belonging to the left wing of liberalism particularly preposterous.
Marxism is NOT left of centre, it is not liberal at all and applying Left-Right descriptors to it is deceiving.
National Socialism grew out of Marxism, both are anti liberal, but both maintained they were the inevitable conclusion of liberalism and presaged it's extinction.
The idea of equality is another of these bug bears of mine.
Equality between people can never be achieved.
The Magna Carta forced King John to concede that people should be treated under the same laws, and that those laws should be applied to everyone.
BUT,
the idea that anyone is the equivalent of anyone else reduces the human being down to a digit.
This idea of equality is particularly egregious to the treatment and regard in which the sexes are held.
It seems obvious to me that the current obsession with the idea of "trans" and thr "Queering" of social norms is inevitably going to mean men will dominate and oppress women because men are on the whole larger, faster and stronger. Without social conventions the relationship between every individual must be negotiated from first principles and society will fall apart.
Accommodations for women, and recognition of their particular status is the only way a society can flourish.
Men need to display and provide consideration for the particular roles and abilities women bring to society.
Just as the particular qualities of men should be recognised.
Vive la difference.
Marxism is anti-class liberationism. Liberalism is anticollectivist liberationism. In that way these belong to the same cultural historical tradition.
16:00 16:00 It seems as if de Beauvoir had a little of the Ghislaine Maxwell, i.e. the killer instinct, like the 1:21:03 lioness who provides for the lazy lion in exchange for attention or recognition. Maybe she started drinking or drank to drown her resentment.
I have heard that in spite of her views on women being deprived of freedom from falling victim to traditional feminine roles, that she was never able to extricate herself from Sartre, who valued her as an intellectual companion, but who she might have been better off leaving, had she been able to end the relationship.
However, being a public couple, they were able to preserve the mystique of their ,,special union,, until the news broke some time after they had died that, romantically speaking, it was far from a ,,bed of roses,, especially for her.
Beaufort would have been appalled by the deeds of gm enslaving and using Women and giirls.
1:21:03 None the less Maxwell, for all we know, may have taken a few pages out of ,,The Second Sex,, de Beauvoirs ground breaking book, and felt she was just doing a favour to those girls, exposing them to a more ,,lib,, view of life, both self justifying and otherwise gratifying to herself and supposedly to them, as well.
At least that is how she came across at her trial. That she had just done these young ladies a favour.
@janeproctor5542 Wasn't ground breaking more of dirt worthy. Pushing the belief of social construct immediately discredit herself
Tammy like her husband are grifters. I hope they find peace.
I hope you don't get trump elected again!
@@patricksullivan1827What the hell are you on about?
Trump probably won't be re-elected, but your country will be decimated in the process. Be very careful what you wish for.
Alrlatl is a hunting tool women invented to throw spears with more speed, compromislzing their lack of muscle power. Women have always been hunters, but in stead of muscles, they used brainpower. Know your history and don't come across like a fool again!
I'm sorry, that's just funny! 😂
There is absolutely no evidence that women invented or used the atlatl, or spear thrower, which has been invented dozens of times over in many cultures. In every premodern culture where the atlatl is still used, it is used by men. When depicted in cave art, it is depicted as being used by men. The decorated atlatl we have discovered from the neolithic era all have decorations associated with masculinity cults.
The only person claiming women use the atlatl to hunt is Michelle Bebber, and her only evidence is that women who use an atlatl can come close to negating the natural advantage of a man throwing a spear unassisted. However, a woman using a atlatl is still completely outperformed by a man using an atlatl. The spear thrower was almost certainly invented by men looking to extend the range and power of their spears to allow for hunting larger game.
Bebber's theory that women hunted alongside men is based on zero physical evidence and _wild_ speculation from absolutely spurious reasoning. It's junk science of the worst kind, and _Scientific Reports_ only damaged their reputation by publishing it.
picke me boomers
Try to come up with an actual argument.
I’m pretty sure two women who are already happily married for decades need not feel the need to impress other men as a means for them to be considered as ‘pick me’ girls. How about you try to grow up a little, listen closely, maybe learn something and just try respecting the wisdom these women now have to share with the world.
Maga trump lover!
Men could not vote also unless they owned property.
Not belittling what a girl goes through at puberty but a boy has his own struggles. The penis is constantly going up and down with absolutely zero stimulation. You spend so much time trying to stealthily readjust things down there hoping no one notices and fearing a random erection popping up in a situation where it can’t be hidden. We all have struggles. We need to understand that they are different but one is a victim because we’re all in it together
It would be very interesting to watch you have Alison Tielman from the Honey badger brigade as a guest. Also Paul Elam would be as much interesting as a guest.
Such a good episode!
Thank you Tammy. Please have more of Janice Flamengo. I have learned so much from your videos with her. And thank you for all your videos.
Comment
Thank you for explaining a better evolutionary reason for male strength and testosterone. Not because men have always been stronger that they went out to hunt, but because women were more important due to their ability to have children that the men were sent out to hunt. Then, the stronger men were more successful at hunting and so evolved the sexual difference by testosterone.
I'd never managed to combine the importance of childbirth to societies with the reason that women were NOT sent out to hunt elephants in the jungle. I always thought it was due to the male's strength, but now you've put it the other way phylogenically. Men evolved bigger and stronger BECAUSE they were sent out to hunt dangerous beasts, and the reason for that was that without women in the tribe to have babies, the tribe was doomed. According to natural selection, that would have happened more often than not before our ancestors worked out the best way to keep their shows on the roads.
I’d be interested in seeing any evidence for that theory
@@fifthpint4571 Look in the mirror.
@@Wit_Shunter what I see is evidence for lots of possible theories. What makes your theory correct?
@@fifthpint4571 It's past history. Other than that, your replies, while a nice surprise after so long since the video that I can't remember much of it at all, are non-specific regarding you disagreement. Have you studied evolutionary biology and read Darwin's Origin? I don't have any basis to discuss this with you because you have not mentioned any reasonable explanation for your point. I hope you can understand that I don't mean to insult, but what specifically is it that you do not understand?
@@Wit_Shunter my key point is that I have not seen any evidence to suggest that males developed testosterone as a primary regulating hormone as a result of hunting, and females „developed” into females (with all secondary and tertiary characteristics) as a result of staying at home and child bearing.
It is considerably more likely that males opted for the best possible use of their abilities to benefit the kinship group, rather than activities shaping our bodies to this degree (producing radically different hormones). This is what we also see in virtually all mammals fossils (including humans) - dymorphism goes back as far as we are able to see.
I simply don’t know where your theory came from because it does sound rather fanciful and I would like to understand what prompted it. Thanks
Great guest!
Iam a feminist. However, the movement is most diverse, and CAN become most twisted!!!