1620: Feminism & The Disposable Male, MGTOW by Karen Straughan

Welcome to the Creating wealth show with Jason Hartman. You're about to learn a new slant on investing, some exciting techniques and fresh new approaches to the world's most historically proven asset class that will enable you to create more wealth and freedom than you ever thought possible. Jason is a genuine, self made multimillionaire who's actually been there and done it. He's a successful investor, lender, developer and entrepreneur who's owned properties in 11 states, had hundreds of tenants, and been involved in thousands of real estate transactions. This program will help you follow in Jason's footsteps on the road to your financial Independence Day. You really can do it. And now, here's your host, Jason Hartman with the complete solution for real estate investors.

Welcome to episode 1621620 today 1. We have the cure. Oh, actually, we don't have the cure. We have the reason for why so many people in the world are so lonely. You know, the British government, as we talked about before we reported on this, what was it, maybe two years ago, they appointed a ministry, a Minister of loneliness. It is such an epidemic problem. There are similar problems in the United States and around the world, especially in westernized countries, because westernized countries have a disease and it is a disease that is spreading like a cancer. It is making people depressed, lonely, unhappy. And I believe, as I have reported on in the past, that it is by design, by design for none other than greedy monetary reasons. Well, I've told you before about how it is much better for consumer products companies to have people never marry or to have them divorce. Actually, it's best for consumer product companies to have people marry and then divorce. It is best for the government to have people marry and then divorce. In fact, it's even better for all of these big corporations and governments to have people marry and divorce multiple times. So if you wanted to stimulate the economy, if you wanted to double the size of your market, if you are a consumer products company, if you sell toasters, coffee makers, sofas, beds, whatever it is, you would be much better off having people be single than married. Because if they're married, they only need one of all of those products because they will share them in one household. But if they are single, they double the size of their market. And why might you say would the government be in on this? Well, the government has a very vested interest in keeping the economy running, keeping the economy going. And guess what? More consumption means more economic growth. Now, the only people that should be, but don't seem to be very concerned about this are the people on the political left, because it's terrible for the environment to have two of everything. Two toasters, two coffee makers, two TV sets, or at least double the number. You know, people probably have a few TV sets in their home and so say they have two TVs, typically. And if you're married, you have two TVs, and if you're single, you now have four TVs. If two people are single instead of married, right, they got two sofas, two beds, two coffee makers, two toasters, four television sets, and double of everything else. So they've doubled the size of their market and they have increased the consumption base dramatically. So there is a very vested interest for the powers that be to sow the seeds of discontent. To sow the seeds of. Maybe you saw that movie years ago. It was kind of a scary movie. I saw it with my girlfriend at the time, Elizabeth. And I remember that was when I lived in Newport Coast. We went to the movie and, you know, I was kind of shaken up about this movie afterwards. It was. It was a little scary. It was called Devil's Advocate. Did you see that movie? And do you remember the line he says, he says, the devil says, as soon as you move to the city, you were trying to better deal your spouse, Right. Sow the seeds of discontent to find a better deal than the deal you have. Right. The spouse that you have. And so this is what Madison Avenue has been doing for decades. It's what the corporatocracy has been doing for decades, and it's what the government has been doing for decades. Started and got its big foothold in none other than the 60s.

Yes, the 60s. That was the massive change for everybody. And that was when Madison Avenue was just really, really booming. And it was when all of this cultural change was going on. The divided country, the Gloria Steinem with her famous line. What did Gloria Steinem say? Well, she said a lot of things, but one of the things she said is, a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.

Actually, that was the wrong sound effect. I meant to do this. Let's try it again. Gloria Steinem said, a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle. Yeah. So there you go. And the world changed on these statements. And guess what else happened? The corporatocracy got bigger, it got richer, it got more powerful. And the government got a whole bunch of X economic stimulation. And we saw one parent or single parent, families with kids, and only one parent present. And then we had a whole series of movies and TV shows. Kramer versus Kramer way back in the 70s and all the rest. And War of the Roses, which by the way, is an excellent movie about a house. They have a beautiful house and this couple's trying to kill each other in this beautiful house that they, they made War of the Roses. So not to make light of it though, all of this massive cultural change pushed by the media, by Madison Avenue, by the corporatocracy, by the government, and the most successful method of genocide. Yeah, that's right, that has probably ever existed. The massive reduction in the birth rate of educated people. Because guess what? Educated people are the only people that bought the lie. The dumb people didn't buy it. The basic blue collar people didn't buy it. The immigrants didn't buy it. But the educated people that were behind the cultural shift of the 60s, they bought at hook, line and sinker. And since then, tens of millions of people in the US have been lonely, depressed, using massive amounts of psychiatric drugs like Prozac and Lexapro and all this poison, putting it into their system and all sorts of other things. It's just been a huge cultural shift. So our guest will talk about it today. This is a 10th episode show where we go off topic and talk about something of general interest. But doesn't it amaze you how it always comes back to the money? The money, like Deep Throat in Watergate said, no, get your mind out of the gutter. Not that one. Deep Throat, not the famous movie or infamous movie, the Watergate character, he said, follow the money, follow the money. So always follow the money and you'll find your answer. There's a big movement behind this and it is a movement to keep people single. And we've seen marriage rates decline massively. We've seen birth rates decline massively. Look at Western Europe going extinct. Look at Japan going extinct. Look at the US population of the baby boomers and the Gen Xers, my generation going extinct, not the immigrants. See, when you look at the US population overall, the immigrants actually have children, right? And they have higher marriage rates. But the folks that were here in the 60s behind the cultural shift, nah, they're just slowly going extinct. And so it has been a massive, massive change, but temporarily, it's much better for government and much better for the big corporations because the consumption doubles the economy. In an economy where you have 70% of the S&P 500 being consumer spending, if you want to double your market size, you gotta sell two toasters, two washers and dryers, two refrigerators, two sofas, two of everything, not just one. And the way you do it is you keep people single, or if they're married, you help them become discontent so they get a divorce. And then it's actually better if they don't stay single. It's better if they get married, get divorced, get married, get divorced again and again and again. Because then you prop up a whole wedding industry and there's more money spent and more debt incurred. And that's what it is. It's all about making people massive consumer drones and debt slaves. And that's the plan. From the top, folks, whether you believe it or not, you can just see the result of it everywhere you look. Okay, now, before we get to our guest, let's just take a moment.

We gotta take a moment for this, because it's like, folks, you can't make this stuff up. It's so insane. You can't make it up. So let's look more to the left, just like we were when we talk about the cultural disaster.

That has sickened our country for decades. And by the way, once again, I want to reiterate my advice. You must. You must watch old movies, watch old TV shows, read old books, listen to old music. The music from the 70s was the last real vestige of romantic music where men mostly were singing their heart out for women, pining over women, loving women. I mean, the lyrics to any 70s song, whether it be John Denver or, you know, the Bee Gees or any of them, I mean, there's so much of it, right? And then women actually loved men back then, too. My favorite, Karen Carpenter. The late Karen Carpenter. The most incredible human voice possibly to ever walk the earth. What a sad story. Karen Carpenter left us way too soon. I mean, her voice, like my friend Scott says, it's like melted butter. It's just her voice is incredible. And folks, that was before Auto Tune, okay? The voices nowadays, they're all corrected with computers and software and technology. Back then, you were actually listening to the singer, okay? And so it all changed. Massive shift. It lingered on. And then in the 90s, it all. 1990 was the peak of civilization. The culture war was over. That's the real turning point. That's when it ended. All the music got really ugly and disgusting and vile and. Hey, do I sound like an old person? Well, I am a little older, so, yeah, I guess I'm sounding older. So I'm the stodgy old guy. Okay, go ahead. Yes, I am. But that's what happened, folks. It's the culture war. Like I said yesterday on the live stream, the culture war is over and the good people lost. But it's still an amazing time to be alive because we got all this great technology, this super high standard of living. Even in the midst of dire circumstances, people still have actually quite a high standard of living, mostly. So it's a very divided thing and it makes it hard to evaluate. It really does. But psychologically and culturally.

The Western world is very, very sick. Advanced countries are very, very sick. The prescription drug usage, the depression, the loneliness. I mean, it's just beyond the beyond. So I hope to awaken you to some of this stuff and our guest today will also. Okay, let's get on with our 10th episode guest. Remember, this is a 10th show. Tomorrow we'll be back with a regular show and I should make the announcement for next year. Starting in the new year, we're going back to three episodes per week, folks. Monday, Wednesday, Friday, we'll have five episodes per week until the end of the year. And then we are going back to our Monday, Wednesday, Friday schedule to have a little more time and resources to put into our YouTube content. If you aren't subscribing to us on YouTube, please make sure you do, because we are really planning to up the quality of our YouTube content dramatically in the new year, and you're gonna love it. So there you go. All right, let's get to our 10th episode guest. This one's gonna be controversial. Here it is.

It's my pleasure to welcome Karen Straughan to the show. She is a critic of political feminism and an advocate for men's rights. She is based in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, and she is the mother of three children. And she is best known for her infamous YouTube channel, Girl Writes. What? Karen, welcome. How are you?

I'm good, I'm good. How are you?

Good. It's good to have you on. So tell us what's going on in the political arena vis a vis feminism. I think that's a hotly charged word, and I think it's a very misunderstood word. I think a lot of women and men would call themselves feminist, but not really. People have very different definitions of that. Maybe you can help us by understanding it or defining it first.

Oh, well, you know, as Naomi Wolf once told me, there are a million different feminisms, so, you know, you can't really pin it down. I've described dealing with feminism as sword fighting a fart. You're just never going to be able to pin it down. But I'm very critical of academic feminism and political feminism. So I look at it and I look at the body of theories that are based on a lot of really biased research, if you can even call it research. And then that has sort of been promulgated within academia since the 1970s. And then the advocacy of political feminist lobby groups that really don't embrace the dictionary definition of feminism, which is just equal rights for men and women, that I think is really. Feminism isn't all bad. There are some feminist icons. They don't tend to be spoken about much in feminist circles because maybe because they are true egalitarians like the late Karen Decrow, but the body of theories and the political activism and the broader effects on society and, you know, sort of how feminism sort of declared war against men as a class back in 1848. And men, I think, over the last 20 years or so are starting to wake up and realize that war has been declared against them and they're starting to push back a little bit.

Yeah, well, you know, I recently finished the book Men on Strike. I'm sure you're familiar with that.

Oh, yes, Helen Smith. She's a sweetie.

Yeah. Yeah. And, you know, interestingly, you know, you're obviously female. She's female. You know, they're writing about this because it's really quite damaging to women, oddly, you know, it's kind of counterintuitive. You have to think full circle on what happens here. But maybe I'll ask you, do you think feminism has hurt women? And if so, how? Tell us about that.

Oh, I think it's hurt everybody. It's hurt women in terms of. If you look at sort of the feminist prescription for a good life for a woman, it's, you know, you go, you get your career, you work, you stay single until your 30s, and then you settle down and do IVF because you can no longer conceive naturally. And it's just the timeline that they're proposing that women should follow is kind of backwards. You know, I've always been of the opinion that you have your children young when they're. When you are healthiest and most able to conceive and carry a child, and when your children are most likely to be healthy and not have complications and, you know, problems like down syndrome and things like that, that's how you do that. And then you. When your kids are in school, you go and you pursue a career That's. That's probably the better life path when you consider all of the things together. But it's really stuck a wedge in between men and women. It sort of set them out as competitors and adversaries. Rather than partners. And this is one of the saddest things is, you know, like I look at men as fellow travelers on the journey, right. You know, we are. We are supposed to be in partnership with each other. We're supposed to have a cooperative relationship. We're supposed to be rivals at best, nations at war at worst. But that seems to be how these, you know, sort of branches, the important branches of feminism, the branches of feminism that. Or the areas of feminism that have influence on society, on the media, on politics, on all of that, that's how they want men and women to be defined. And then on top of that, they selectively choose their data. So there was this interesting. I went and I looked at the World Monetary Fund or something like that.

The International Monetary Fund? The imf?

No, no, the World Economic Forum, I believe.

Yeah. From Davos. They meet in Davos, Switzerland. Yeah.

They come up with this gender equality or gender gap index every year or two. And one of the things that's most interesting about how they measure gender equality is the best score you can get on any metric is a perfect one. And if you are not equal, then you get less than 1. But the way they measure it, and they actually say this in their introductory preamble, is if men are ahead of women on some metric, then you get a score of less than 1 on that metric. But if women are ahead of men, such as in post secondary enrollment or life expectancy or whatever, you actually still get a perfect one. So if, you know, according to how they measure things in that index, if no men went to university ever, and men were suffering and were behind, falling behind women at every single metric, a country would still get a perfect one. They'd be considered perfectly equal. So this is kind of what I try to put point at and draw people's attention to.

Yeah, that's interesting. There are theories which seem to have some good validity that pitting the genders against each other and increasing the divorce rate or reducing the marriage rate, that's a pretty good deal. When you have an economy, if you're part of the corporatocracy, right. If you're these big companies that sell every sort of consumer goods you can possibly imagine. When you have an economy that is 70% consumption like the US is, and if you get people to not partner up, or if they're partnered, if you drive a wedge in between them, so they split up, heck, you can sell them two sofas, two houses, two coffee makers. Two of everything, right?

Two refrigerators. Yeah.

Oh, yeah, two refrigerators. Two sets of washers and dryers. You double the size of your consumer market. Like it's a huge deal, right?

Absolutely, absolutely. And it's not like that they can just, if they have kids, it's not like they can just move into, you know, studio apartments and do it that way because, you know, if dad wants any kind of visitation with the kids, overnight visits with the kids, he needs to have a two bedroom house or a three bedroom house. He can't just have a studio apartment. And so you're literally having. I wouldn't say it's twice the consumption.

You're right, it's much more than twice the consumption because you've got to have a bigger house. You've got to have not only two beds, one for you and one for your ex or the person you never married. Right. But you've also got to have double sets of beds for the kids at each house. Right? Yeah.

Yes. And you know, like there was. I forget who it was. I saw it on a documentary called Demographic Winter. I would actually highly recommend anybody to watch that. But there was a researcher who said that if we lived today the way we lived in the 1970s, say with the marriage rates and the intact family rates and all of those, there'd be like 300 billion gallons of fresh water preserved, saved in the US every year. Right. It is like it's not just consumer goods, it's using natural resources. I mean, you're burning gas to heat two houses. Natural gas to heat two houses.

Right. So oddly, this is terrible for the environment.

From the left, which is a big advocate of feminism. It just recalls the idea of. I think it was Gloria Steinem who said, a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle. Right. And this is just so untrue. Both genders need each other. People couple up. It's happened that way throughout history. And this narrative has just tried to destroy that whole idea, that whole happy idea of traditional family life.

Well, now you're seeing men finally taking a stand and saying, well, a man needs a woman like a bicycle needs a fish.

Yeah. Yeah. Well, there's a name for that. It's called mgtow. Men going their own way. And it's a sad state of affairs that, like the title of that book, many men really have gone on strike, you know, because.

And it's, it's not even. A lot of them aren't even consciously taking a stand and saying, you know, I'm not going to pair up, I'm not going to do that. I'm not going to do what I'm told a lot of them are just losing interest, losing motivation. There's no incentive for them to perform above minimum capacity. They don't see marriage even if they wanted or want to get together with somebody. It's just, it seems like too much bother. It's, you know, it's easier to just kind of live in mom's basement and play video games and watch porn than it would be to actually jump through the hoops that and the increasingly confusing hoops that women and society are putting in front of them. Like one of the most amazing statistics that I heard recently on CBC Radio, no less, which is generally a very left leaning, feminist centric broadcaster. But.

One of the panelists said, well, 35% of working age men under age 25 in Canada don't have jobs. They're not working.

Yeah, no, I mean, it's odd that you get the, the radical left complaining. The radical left, especially females complaining about these things because women are surpassing men in like every category you can imagine. You know, college, it's like 56% versus 44 or it might even be worse than that. Forgive me, my statistics are probably out of date, so just correct me in graduate school. It's the same thing in careers in like every category, women, earnings.

If you're single and childless and under age 30 or 35, women are now earning 8% more than their same age male peers. So, you know, you're sort of looking at it and you think, how can.

This be portrayed as some oppressed class? It's just the complete opposite is true.

Well, and on top of that. Well, I wouldn't say men are an oppressed class. I think that men.

No, I'm saying women. I'm saying how can they portray women as being this oppressed class? Certainly, I don't deny that that, you know, may have been true or probably was true in the past. I'm just talking about today. It's just, it's just completely flipped. And I guess, you know, I guess they're getting even maybe, you know, that's the, that's the vibe.

So that's really, it's really sad to see that, you know, and it does seem to be, you know, that a lot of, you know, and I, I interact with a lot of sort of Internet feminists and many of them are highly educated in feminist philosophy and stuff. And they really do seem to have a vengeful streak. It's women's turn to be on top now and it's your turn to suffer all the depredations that we believe women suffered in the past because of men and all of this. Right. And it really does seem to be sort of a vengeful, spiteful.

Oh no, there's no question about that. It's awful. You know, had a few encounters on Facebook with that type of just hateful, complete intolerance. You can't even have a discussion. It's absurd.

Oh, it's really eye opening when you actually say, you know, there are 14 year old boys who were statutorily raped by adult women who are paying child support out of their paper route. Right. Because even though she went to prison for that, even though she went to prison for that, right. She gave custody of the kid, temporary custody to her sister, she got out of prison, she got custody back and then she went on welfare and the government forced that child support out of that boy.

That is absolutely. That would never happen the other way around.

And the courts say doesn't matter. Doesn't matter.

Well, the courts, it even gets worse than that. The courts have forced men to pay child support for kids that aren't even theirs, that they basically thought were theirs. And this is much more common than people think. By the way, there are many married and divorced men or just cohabitating men who are raising kids that aren't their genetic children. You know, they did a DNA test and they're absolutely shocked. And the courts say, tough, it doesn't matter.

Yeah, it doesn't matter. Doesn't matter. And you know, and the thing is too, right, you know, if, I mean.

In a normal civil situation, the woman who portrayed that lie would be certainly liable for fraud, a massive fraud and liable for damages and you know, probably criminal fraud. I mean, that's just incredible that someone would do something like that.

It doesn't matter. And then you have feminists saying, you know, DNA is not the end all and be all and you know, really, DNA doesn't make a father, right? And I'm thinking, okay, so there was this, there was this woman in France, I believe, who accidentally went home with the wrong baby and raised that baby for 16 years and was a mother to that child, right? And then found out through some medical emergency or something that this is not my child. And she sued and she got millions of dollars, millions of dollars in damages from the hospital over that mess up. And so if you think that DNA isn't the end all and be all right, what if you were to go into, you know, you want, you are going to go, you're going to take fertility treatments, you're going to have your eggs harvested, you're going to do in vitro fertilization, you're going to go through all of that, right? And then what if you found out that your female fertility doctor substituted her eggs for yours and implanted them in you? How would you feel? Would you feel wronged? If you would not feel wronged in that situation, then don't say DNA isn't the end all and be all. If DNA wasn't the end all be all, you'd just adopt a newborn. You wouldn't harvest your eggs.

Right. And speaking of egg harvesting, it is absolutely just weird, if not unconscionable, that these greedy big, especially tech companies, left leaning big tech companies are offering these egg storage and harvesting for their female employees. They're just greedy. They just want them working as corporate slaves. It's absolutely, I mean, what do you think about that? I think it's weird. At the very least, if not much worse.

I think it's foolish of women to decide that, you know, how my life plan is going to be. I'm going to work until I'm 35, right. And then I'm going to do IVF with my harvested eggs. IVF is or 35.

Even older. Much older sometimes.

Oh yeah. But I mean, IVF is one of those things that I was considering doing that when I first was together with the man I'm with now about 10 years ago because I had my tubes tied and he's had a vasectomy. And we were thinking about a child. And if you get the surgeries reversed, it's c only very small chance that you're gonna conceive naturally anyway. And so we were thinking about it, we're tossing around the idea and it's like $10,000 a pop to do that.

Oh yeah. I think it's more in the US by the way.

Oh, probably, probably. And so we're thinking about it and thinking about it and we'd be like. And I said, I've always been one of those women that I borrow somebody's brush and I end up pregnant. So yeah, yeah, I touched somebody's baby and then the next day I was knocked up. So I kind of looked at it like, okay, so I wouldn't want to just implant one embryo because what if it didn't take? And then it's another $10,000. But if we implanted five, all five would take because that's just how it would work with me. That's just, you know, so I was just like, you know, I'm I'm just not. And I, I would not do a selective abortion. I would not do a selective termination of, of, you know, three fetuses.

Right, right. Yeah. And that's a, that's a whole nother discussion. We, you know, we've already offended enough people today. We won't get into. Let's not go, let's not touch the abortion. One note today, just me.

I would not do that. I would not be able to do that.

Got it, Got it. Okay, so what do you say to this school of thought? It's interesting how we talked a few minutes ago about the negative impact on the environment of splitting people up or keeping them from getting together in the first place. It's much more environmentally friendly for people to be coupled up living in one house, having one set of everything that they share than it is for them to be separated in two houses having two sets of everything, plus even more if they have children, as we discussed. So that is bad. Feminism is bad for the environment. We've determined that. Okay, but what about the idea on the sort of the flip side, but related nonetheless of, you know, some would say that feminism is a conspiracy to reduce the birth rate, especially among educated people, because uneducated people, you know, they don't care about feminism. Okay. The only people that really talk about it are these sort of elite class or, you know, at least college educated people. Right. You know, this takes hold in this very left leaning, intolerant university environment. That's where it really, really takes hold. And of course, the, you know, zero career path of, you know, making it your major.

I've never seen a job posting for, you know, we need a feminist studies major to work at our company.

Who's hiring for that?

But what do you say to that? That's sort of the flip side of the argument, isn't it?

Well, I think there are all kinds of conspiracy theories. You know, that the CIA funded feminism and the Rockefellers funded feminism. And they sort of.

The Rockefellers are definitely population reduction folks.

Yeah, they funded the women's lib. And part of the reason was that they wanted to get women out in the workforce because they would be able to be taxed and have disposable income to purchase consumer goods and all of that.

So one more. Let me just interject on that one and then go on. Feminism is a great deal for governments because it increases the size of the economy. Okay. It's a great deal for corporations. It increases the size of the workforce, it increases the consumption. We've determined that.

Okay, go Ahead drives wages down.

Yeah, it drives wages down because there's more competition for a limited number of jobs. The pie expands, but you know, it's double the workers. Right, go ahead.

Yeah. And but also that it would put. Kids would end up being parented by the state. Right. That was really what, you know, you get them into schools, you get them into daycares, you get them into all these kinds of state regulated places and then you can actually program the kids and sort of take over the parenting function from the parents.

Right, yeah, that brave new world type of idea.

Yeah, yeah. And you know, like, I don't know, I think that it would have happened regardless of any kind of nudges by the Rockefellers or the CIA or the globalists or the population reductionists. Right. I mean, we're seeing the moment that women got any kind of control over their fertility and any kind of economic independence from men sort of en masse. And you can look at this in developing nations as well, right? Birth rates are going down across the globe, right?

Oh yeah.

It's not just here. We're just.

Read a book called Empty Planet and I believe it's a UN study. Okay. This is from the left leaning liberal United Nations. Okay. And it's a UN study saying that in 50 years, 100 years, there's just not going to be many people left. And you can see this look at Western Europe, Russia, Japan, I mean they will simply not exist. You can't have a country or even a region or even a race without people.

Agreed. And you look at it too, because birth rates are falling even in developing countries and second and third world countries. I guess we used to say developing countries.

Be politically correct. Yes, go ahead.

But you're looking at birth rates declining there. And then you're also looking at. This is one of the real knock on effects of our declining birth rates here is we have to import people from countries that are still growing. But so much of that, you know, you end up with father absence in those countries, you end up with brain drain. And father absence has all kinds of, as Warren Farrell probably told you, negative effects on children. Oh, sure. And then you have brain drain in those countries. So we're taking, you know, because we want to be equal and feministy and you know, when 56% of our medical students right now are women, you know, well, women only put in between 50% and 75% of the actual doctoring over their lifetimes that men do. So we need.

Because they leave the workforce to have children. Is that what you mean?

Yeah, they leave the workforce to have children. They often don't specialize. So we're lacking in specialists, and they'll go into family practice or pediatrics, and that's generally where women tend to go. So we're lacking in specialists who are surgeons and, you know, enterologists and immunologists and stuff like that. But you also look at those countries where we're poaching doctors from because we need doctors and women aren't following through. They leave the workforce to have kids. When they come back, they rarely come back full time. Right. So you're just, literally, you're just getting less out of female doctors than you are out of male doctors. And then we poach doctors from countries where access to healthcare is so limited.

And we hurt those countries. Yeah, it's terrible.

We're exploiting these countries for our own convenience. And you could even see this with some of the Brexit rhetoric with the Remainers. Right. Well, if the Poles and the Romanians can't stay, who's gonna pour our coffee?

It's unbelievable. That's so ridiculous. Those kinds of statements are just intellectually stupid, if any. I mean, I mean, you know, people in the US say, well, you know, if we didn't allow all this illegal immigration from Mexico, you know, who would pick the strawberries? I don't know. You know, they used to have strawberries in the 50s and the 40s and the 30s. And, you know, we didn't have this problem back then. You know, it's like.

This is such a snobby argument. It's ridiculous.

It is. You know, who'd pick the strawberries? Teenagers.

Yeah.

You know, when I was a teenager, I had friends who used to be, they were called chicken pickers. And so you'd have a chicken farm and these were like sort of not quite free range chickens, but they weren't raised in boxes. And so they were, you know, kind of packed into a pen and they'd have to be loaded onto, into the crates to, you know, the wire crates to go on the trucks to go to slaughter. And, and if you were really good at it, you know, you could grab three chickens by the legs in each hand. You'd be covered in scratches at the.

End of the day.

But it was a job for teenagers, right?

Yeah, yeah. Hey, you know, my white mother used to clean houses. Okay. And you know, they say, well, who's going to clean the houses if you don't let the illegals in? Well, how about people pay a fair wage to get their house cleaned to a person that is here illegally.

I mean, my white. My white best friend, teens, houses and banks and schools and daycares.

And I know these arguments just are nonsensical and they're really elitist, snobby, look down your nose arguments. Oh, I mean, you know, we've got to let these. We've got to let these lesser people in so we can basically exploit them cheaply. I mean, that's the most ridiculous.

That's right. We need the brown people. Who's the racist? We need the brown people to do all the crap work that we don't want to.

The leftists are the racist. Clearly unbelievable. But. Okay, well, finish the point, though. We got on a little tangent and I want to ask you one more thing, and we'll wrap it up just about the general culture.

The point being that I don't think that there needed to be any kind of massive conspiracy on the part of government or these big international organizations. I think that feminism really dovetails with a lot of our innate psychology. It's a very easy narrative to believe that. That women are vulnerable to harm and that men can be bad actors. It's very easy for us to believe that.

And that's certainly been true with individual cases and at times in history. There's no question about that. So that's why it's easy to believe, right?

Well, no, it's easy to believe, I think, because of. For biological reasons, you know, women having. I mean, you can go on my channel and explore some of this, but we are very, very, very keyed into the idea of women being harmed. We want to protect women. I think that that's a natural, innate thing that's been in us for millions of years.

Right? As it should be.

And we don't so much, you know, like when men are absorbing violence and hostility, I mean, that's their role.

That's their role in the world, right? Is to be the people who stand in between women and the violence and hostility of the world, right? Between women and children and the rest of the hostile n. So, I mean, we sort of have this idea that, well, when we see a woman being harmed, it really sticks out to us. When we see a man being harmed, it's just business as usual. And so I think that that really has been the major propeller or propellant of the feminist narrative. The reason why it's so easy to believe. The reason why it just kind of. It just feels right to us. It feels like, yeah, you know, they're right about that is because of our. The differences in how we perceive men and women and their roles and feminism has actually exploited. I mean, they say that they want to upend gender roles, they want to get rid of gender roles, but really they have exploited. Exploited our innate views of men and women and their roles in order to extract all kinds of privileges and benefits for women and. And marginalize men to the point where there's a significant portion of them who are just walking away from any kind of feeling of duty or obligation to society.

And there are many examples of that. It used to be women and children first, and that concept was automatic in society throughout history. You didn't need to legislate it. It was the way they got off the Titanic, and it was the way of the world, and people would naturally do that. But now men are going on strike and they're just saying, look, I'm gonna save myself. I don't care, you know, and that's a sad state of affairs.

So maybe they're saying, what have you done for me lately?

Exactly.

And, you know, like, this is supposed to be a reciprocal relationship, right?

Yeah, yeah. No, absolutely. And it should be reciprocal. You're absolutely right. So speaking of that, and maybe we'll wrap up on this question. So maybe my listeners don't know, but I am a huge fan of many kinds of music. But what I like especially is I like the 1970s singer, songwriters music, and that music from the Carpenters to England, Dan and John Ford Coley to everything else. The artist. I can't even think of all of that music. John Denver, whatever. Right? It's Roman romantic, it's sweet, it's caring. It's where men are professing their love toward women and how they want to do everything for them and make their lives about the women, you know, that they're. That they're fond of. Right. And now you look at the disgusting music, you know, between hip hop and rap that is so anti women, and it's so odd to me. It makes no sense whatsoever that the left embraces this type of junk. It's awful. And they seem to say and believe the opposite thing, but the culture war has just been the completely opposite way. So the question of the day is, don't you think women had a better deal back then when men would give their lives for them or, you know, that profess their love to them and serenade them? Nobody. No, men don't do that anymore.

Well, you know, this might be one of the reasons for the paradoxical decline in female happiness. Right. So for, you know, before we. From the Beginning of when we started measuring people's satisfaction with their lives, women always reported a higher level of satisfaction with their lives than men until the two lines intersected in the mid-70s and started to go in opposite directions. So women have been becoming less happy since the mid-70s, and men have been, you know, they've had a slight incline, but not significantly. And I think what you're seeing is you're seeing a lot of. A lot of it has to do with expectations being too high. You know, if you go on OkCupid and Tinder did some research that was quite revealing. OkCupid asked men and women to rate the profiles of the opposite sex. Just a random set of profiles and men's bell curve rating. Women looked pretty much like your normal bell curve in terms of, you know, the average was the average, right? They rated women average, and they fell in the average. And then there were attractive women and unattractive women on the tail ends, right? But women rated 80% of men on the site as less than average in attractiveness. So, like, they broke math, they broke mathematical law. 80% of men were less than average in attractiveness. And when they go. When you go on Tinder, it's even. Because that's for casual sex, not relationships. It's even more stark, right? Men swipe right on or approve of about 60% of the profiles of women that they come across, and women swipe right on only 5% of men's profiles. So according to women, only 5% of men are fit for casual sex, and only 20% of men are above average. Right? And so I think that what we're seeing is because this is a free sexual marketplace. We've never actually had a free sexual marketplace before. And there were even after divorce and even after, you know, premarital sex, you know, would not get you totally stigmatized. Even when shacking up. Shacking up had become a thing, you still had a certain amount of social disapprobium.

In terms of approving of casual sex, approving of serial monogamy, and things like that. But now we have this completely free marketplace, and we're seeing 80% of men being squeezed out because of women's expectations. And so it's almost like we're going back to a harem system of doing things. And that's where we came from between 2 and 6 million years ago was, you know, the system of chimpanzees, the system of baboons, where, you know, you have excess males. 80% of males have no prospects whatsoever, and 20% of males sire all the offspring and get all the, get all the booty. So we're kind of heading back there in a way. And I think that part of women's unhappiness is that they have this expectation that because they could have sex with that hot guy that they could be able to form a long term relationship with him. And no, that's just not going to be the case. Right. He's. Unless, I guess, unless we, you know, reinstate polygamy as, you know, an option. And I mean they're kind of movements in that direction in terms of polyamory and multiple marriages and things like that.

It's crazy. I don't even know if this is unintended consequences, but it's certainly messed up, I'll tell you that much. It really is.

It's certainly going to lead us into all like, because we never predicted that we'd have generations, three generations of damaged children when we brought in no fault divorce. Right. We never thought that that was going to be one of the effects. We thought, oh well, you know, if you're unhappy married, you know, then don't be married. So I think that we never really have a good predictive ability to just kind of, you know, look at what are the, what are the knock on effects going to be of these decisions of how we're doing things? And so we end up, and often by the time we've realized that something's a problem because it's become a big enough problem amplified over time, and then we trace, we reverse engineer the causality and find out what caused it, it's often way too late to reverse course. I mean, we're used to these norms now. Women aren't going to give up no fault divorce. It's too beneficial to them. It's never going to happen.

And that will make the marketplace smaller. It's like you raise minimum wage and guess what, you just increased unemployment at the same time. And that's sort of exactly the market dynamic that's happening here. Give out your website or your YouTube channel or whatever you want people to know so they can find your work.

Am I allowed to swear? Well, are you FCC regulated?

Yeah, we are not FCC regulated, but.

If there's cussing, we could get a adult rating, I'll put it that way.

Oh, well, okay, so I'll just say My blog is owningyoursh1t.blogspot.com. how's that?

Okay. Well, that's pretty light. I think people get it.

Yeah.

My YouTube channel is Girl Writes what I have a lot of different presentations that I've given that are up all over YouTube. So if you just put my name in the search bar, Karen Strawn speech or Karen Straughn presentation, you should be able to find lots and lots of stuff up there on YouTube that's not necessarily going to be on my channel.

Karen, Spell your last name for the listeners, though.

S T R A U G H A N. Good stuff, Karen.

It was great having you. Thank you for sharing some of this information with us. And let's hope the world wakes up and recovers from these crazy culture wars. The fact is, at the end of the day, everybody needs each other and we're all in this together. And maybe the COVID crisis has shown us that to some extent, for sure. But beyond this, we need each other. We need to treat each other nicely and in a welcoming fashion. You know, this is not a war. Why are people treating things like there's a war? There's not a war here or there shouldn't be.

Yeah, agreed.

Yeah, Good. Good stuff. Okay, thanks again for joining us.

Thank you. Take care.

Thank you so much for listening. Please be sure to subscribe so that you you don't miss any episodes. Be sure to check out this show's specific website and our general website, hartmanmedia.com for appropriate disclaimers and terms of service. Remember that guest opinions are their own. And if you require specific legal or tax advice or advice in any other specialized area, please consult an appropriate professional. And we also very much appreciate you reviewing the show. Please go to itunes or Stitcher Radio or whatever platform you're using and write a review for the show. We would very much appreciate that. And be sure to make it official and subscribe so you do not miss any episodes. We look forward to seeing you on the next episode.